|
|
Post by cardrock on Oct 9, 2018 19:53:56 GMT -6
After 6 weeks:
62 Buffalo +6 (from last week)
76 Toledo -7
77 WMU +5
79 Miami +16
82 EMU +2
84 NIU +12
94 Ohio -5
109 BSU -2
116 Akron -3
117 CMU +3
121 Kent State +1
128 Bowling Green (no change from last week)
|
|
|
|
Post by chirpchirpcards on Oct 10, 2018 4:01:28 GMT -6
The S&P 500 now trades in college football stocks!? I'ma need to get in on this!
|
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Oct 10, 2018 6:11:29 GMT -6
The S&P 500 now trades in college football stocks!? I'ma need to get in on this! I was thinking along the same lines. |
|
|
|
Post by bsu0 on Oct 10, 2018 9:05:43 GMT -6
Don't bet the farm on eighteen year old kids...wait till they are 21 and in the NBA...Now that makes sense
|
|
|
|
Post by cardrock on Oct 10, 2018 9:44:14 GMT -6
130-team S&P+ rankings: Michigan is once again a top-5 teamhttps://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/10/7/17947954/ncaa-football-rankings-2018-week-7
Trying to attach the link for the full list.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Oct 10, 2018 10:17:54 GMT -6
www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaaNever quite convinced about their methodology, he assumes the teams that win close games in probability terms for pyrhagorean rating are "lucky" and overrated. Adjusts them down essentially. Assumes they won all the 50-50 chances for example, and that is not a stable basis to fully count their success, AND assumes he has correctly idendified the play odds. Can be true, but sometimes means they are tough and just make big plays when needed. Or very good and played most of the game in a fog and then bore down, or any number of other factors. So is it really better to try to incorporate that?
|
|
|
|
Post by cardrock on Oct 11, 2018 9:48:11 GMT -6
I figure, everyone’s got one, opinion, some get paid to publish theirs.
|
|
