Predictor Week 5

L

LegendaryGT

Dodd-Like
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
62,557
Predictor said:
GT vs UNC
Week 5 of 2015

GT - Offense
Yardage: 450 ypg
Performance: 37 (higher is better)
Scoring: 44
Efficiency: 10 (lower is better)
Performance: 50 (higher is better)
GT - Defense
Yardage: 289 ypg allowed
Performance: 69 (higher is better)
Scoring: 20
Efficiency: 14 (higher is better)
Performance: 3 (higher is better)

UNC - Offense
Yardage: 496 ypg
Performance: 53 (higher is better)
Scoring: 38
Efficiency: 12 (lower is better)
Performance: 20 (higher is better)
UNC - Defense
Yardage: 340 ypg allowed
Performance: 15 (higher is better)
Scoring: 14
Efficiency: 23 (higher is better)
Performance: 91 (higher is better)

Prediction:

Pure statistical: GT 26 (458 yards), UNC 24 (310 yards)
GT best case: GT 40 (551 yards), UNC 10 (142 yards)
UNC best case: GT 14 (372 yards), UNC 40 (444 yards)

GT talent: 5051
UNC talent: 7429
GT talent of schedule: 4549
UNC talent of schedule: 3545

Suggested talent adjustment: 13% towards UNC best case
Final: GT 24 (446 yards), UNC 26 (328 yards)
Click to expand...

So the predictor can't see failed blocks, and this is what you get. We held Duke below 300 yards, while outgaining and outscoring every opponent they've played so far. We must be pretty good. :hsughcry:

It thinks we're going to win the statistical battle because it still loves our defense, but lose the game because of turnovers and poor field position. I think it's overrated our offense a bit because of our blowouts against tiny weak teams at the beginning of the year, but then again UNC is getting credit for their tiny weak teams as well.

I made a small adjustment to the talent adjustment logic, it now puts more emphasis on who you've played than it did before, as a result. Next week I will probably be able to start removing FCS games, and get down to making bad predictions for better reasons.

EDIT: Excluded all FCS data, things are starting to look a little more rational.

Predictor said:
GT vs UNC
Week 5 of 2015

GT - Offense
Yardage: 406 ypg
Performance: 13 (higher is better)
Scoring: 35
Efficiency: 11 (lower is better)
Performance: 36 (higher is better)
GT - Defense
Yardage: 309 ypg allowed
Performance: 50 (higher is better)
Scoring: 24
Efficiency: 12 (higher is better)
Performance: -15 (higher is better)

UNC - Offense
Yardage: 462 ypg
Performance: 28 (higher is better)
Scoring: 30
Efficiency: 15 (lower is better)
Performance: -1 (higher is better)
UNC - Defense
Yardage: 379 ypg allowed
Performance: -2 (higher is better)
Scoring: 15
Efficiency: 24 (higher is better)
Performance: 100 (higher is better)

Prediction:

Pure statistical: GT 19 (422 yards), UNC 20 (298 yards)
GT best case: GT 27 (446 yards), UNC 14 (210 yards)
UNC best case: GT 10 (389 yards), UNC 32 (398 yards)

GT talent: 5051
UNC talent: 7429
GT talent of schedule: 6065
UNC talent of schedule: 7091

Suggested talent adjustment: 34% towards UNC best case
Final: GT 16 (411 yards), UNC 24 (332 yards)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I'll never forgive the predictor for Notre Dame. NEVER.
 
Forgot to add: further games by request. Here's the predictor poll, enjoy.

Predictor Poll said:
#1: ('ALA', [124, 1, 0, 16658])
#2: ('FSU', [124, 1, 0, 4773])
#3: ('BC', [121, 4, 0, 4907])
#4: ('UGA', [120, 5, 0, 6903])
#5: ('CLEM', [120, 5, 0, 5107])
#6: ('OSU', [120, 5, 0, 3404])
#7: ('MICH', [120, 5, 0, 3325])
#8: ('MISS', [118, 7, 0, 6480])
#9: ('LSU', [116, 9, 0, 6598])
#10: ('OKLA', [115, 10, 0, 3450])
#11: ('WVU', [113, 12, 0, 3446])
#12: ('USC', [112, 13, 0, 4222])
#13: ('TENN', [111, 14, 0, 4154])
#14: ('UNC', [111, 14, 0, 3870])
#15: ('GT', [109, 16, 0, 9130])
#16: ('STAN', [109, 16, 0, 4202])
#17: ('FLA', [109, 16, 0, 2844])
#18: ('ND', [109, 16, 0, 2636])
#19: ('NW', [106, 19, 0, 1844])
#20: ('DUKE', [104, 21, 0, 2512])
#21: ('WIS', [104, 21, 0, 2055])
#22: ('MIA', [102, 23, 0, 3359])
#23: ('UCLA', [102, 23, 0, 2271])
#24: ('WASH', [101, 24, 0, 2639])
#25: ('CAL', [100, 25, 0, 3314])
Click to expand...

EDIT: Revised with no FCS data:

Predictor Poll said:
#1: ('ALA', [123, 1, 0, 13840])
#2: ('WVU', [122, 2, 0, 5274])
#3: ('MICH', [121, 3, 0, 3867])
#4: ('OSU', [119, 5, 0, 193562])
#5: ('FSU', [119, 5, 0, 3648])
#6: ('CLEM', [118, 6, 0, 4779])
#7: ('USC', [117, 7, 0, 6158])
#8: ('OKLA', [117, 7, 0, 4093])
#9: ('MISS', [114, 10, 0, 7701])
#10: ('UNC', [114, 10, 0, 4168])
#11: ('FLA', [113, 11, 0, 3996])
#12: ('BAY', [112, 12, 0, 5520])
#13: ('STAN', [111, 13, 0, 5988])
#14: ('LSU', [110, 14, 0, 10971])
#15: ('UGA', [110, 14, 0, 9103])
#16: ('TENN', [110, 14, 0, 6359])
#17: ('ND', [110, 14, 0, 3759])
#18: ('WIS', [106, 18, 0, 2531])
#19: ('TAMU', [105, 19, 0, 5417])
#20: ('NW', [105, 19, 0, 2287])
#21: ('UTAH', [103, 21, 0, 3466])
#22: ('BC', [102, 22, 0, 1082])
#23: ('GT', [101, 23, 0, 5910])
#24: ('MIA', [99, 25, 0, 4243])
#25: ('UCLA', [99, 25, 0, 2667])
Click to expand...

#36: ('DUKE', [86, 38, 0, 1819])
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I think you should try coit's random number predictor. It might be more accurate.
 
ContactBuzz said:
Go ahead and predict the remainder of the schedule.
Click to expand...

GT 10 (105 yards), CLEM 27 (341 yards)
GT 51 (332 yards), PITT 16 (168 yards)
GT 6 (144 yards), FSU 27 (339 yards)
GT 77 (511 yards), UVA 21 (219 yards)
GT 58 (468 yards), VT 23 (258 yards)
GT 30 (329 yards), MIA 24 (233 yards)
GT 25 (299 yards), UGA 41 (373 yards)

6-6, including the predicted loss to UNC.

EDIT: Revised for no FCS data

GT 16 (231 yards), CLEM 27 (336 yards)
GT 20 (171 yards), PITT 9 (142 yards)
GT 8 (184 yards), FSU 17 (228 yards)
GT 59 (463 yards), UVA 24 (246 yards)
GT 57 (437 yards), VT 27 (270 yards)
GT 37 (392 yards), MIA 29 (273 yards)
GT 38 (336 yards), UGA 47 (386 yards)

So no huge change there.
 
Last edited:
If we put 58 points on Bud Foster & the Hokies on National TV, Frank Beamer might not get back on the plane back to Blacksburg.
 
coldbeer said:
If we put 58 points on Bud Foster & the Hokies on National TV, Frank Beamer might not get back on the plane back to Blacksburg.
Click to expand...

That defense can only do so much, and it's not quite as good as everyone expected it to be. VT is a multiple-turnovers per game type of team, and it's killing their defensive scoring efficiency. That, and they are giving up almost 400 ypg despite having played Furman and Purdue. The predictor actually likes their offense more than their defense, hilariously.

That said, I agree. Those are some pretty outlandish numbers from where I'm sitting right now. If we had last year's team, I wouldn't blink at it.
 
Bump because I'm bored. I took out FCS games and recalculated stuff, here are some fun predictions:

Predictor said:
BAY vs TTU
Week 5 of 2015

BAY - Offense
Yardage: 719 ypg
Performance: 74 (higher is better)
Scoring: 63
Efficiency: 11 (lower is better)
Performance: 6 (higher is better)
BAY - Defense
Yardage: 328 ypg allowed
Performance: 47 (higher is better)
Scoring: 19
Efficiency: 17 (higher is better)
Performance: 19 (higher is better)

TTU - Offense
Yardage: 605 ypg
Performance: 56 (higher is better)
Scoring: 52
Efficiency: 11 (lower is better)
Performance: 12 (higher is better)
TTU - Defense
Yardage: 518 ypg allowed
Performance: -9 (higher is better)
Scoring: 33
Efficiency: 15 (higher is better)
Performance: 9 (higher is better)

Prediction:

Pure statistical: BAY 76 (969 yards), TTU 43 (415 yards)
BAY best case: BAY 90 (1293 yards), TTU 30 (229 yards)
TTU best case: BAY 65 (754 yards), TTU 65 (574 yards)

BAY talent: 5970
TTU talent: 6795
BAY talent of schedule: 2863
TTU talent of schedule: 5070

Suggested talent adjustment: 30% towards TTU best case
Final: BAY 73 (904 yards), TTU 50 (463 yards)
Click to expand...

It takes the over, here, even though it's a record high.

Predictor said:
BC vs DUKE
Week 5 of 2015

BC - Offense
Yardage: 255 ypg
Performance: -24 (higher is better)
Scoring: 8
Efficiency: 30 (lower is better)
Performance: -77 (higher is better)
BC - Defense
Yardage: 196 ypg allowed
Performance: 118 (higher is better)
Scoring: 14
Efficiency: 14 (higher is better)
Performance: 17 (higher is better)

DUKE - Offense
Yardage: 366 ypg
Performance: -1 (higher is better)
Scoring: 27
Efficiency: 13 (lower is better)
Performance: 5 (higher is better)
DUKE - Defense
Yardage: 296 ypg allowed
Performance: 34 (higher is better)
Scoring: 15
Efficiency: 19 (higher is better)
Performance: 33 (higher is better)

Prediction:

Pure statistical: BC 4 (154 yards), DUKE 1 (21 yards)
BC best case: BC 7 (221 yards), DUKE -3 (-42 yards)
DUKE best case: BC 3 (106 yards), DUKE 14 (190 yards)

BC talent: 4933
DUKE talent: 4312
BC talent of schedule: 7475
DUKE talent of schedule: 4096

Suggested talent adjustment: 39% towards BC best case
Final: BC 5 (181 yards), DUKE 0 (-3 yards)
Click to expand...

A field goal and a safety. Negative yardage. That's SEC style dominance right there.

Predictor said:
ALA vs UGA
Week 5 of 2015

ALA - Offense
Yardage: 463 ypg
Performance: 50 (higher is better)
Scoring: 35
Efficiency: 12 (lower is better)
Performance: 29 (higher is better)
ALA - Defense
Yardage: 278 ypg allowed
Performance: 53 (higher is better)
Scoring: 17
Efficiency: 15 (higher is better)
Performance: 34 (higher is better)

UGA - Offense
Yardage: 466 ypg
Performance: 39 (higher is better)
Scoring: 44
Efficiency: 10 (lower is better)
Performance: 33 (higher is better)
UGA - Defense
Yardage: 311 ypg allowed
Performance: 10 (higher is better)
Scoring: 16
Efficiency: 19 (higher is better)
Performance: -7 (higher is better)

Prediction:

Pure statistical: ALA 42 (491 yards), UGA 21 (298 yards)
ALA best case: ALA 60 (647 yards), UGA 12 (182 yards)
UGA best case: ALA 34 (413 yards), UGA 38 (395 yards)

ALA talent: 14716
UGA talent: 11371
ALA talent of schedule: 4841
UGA talent of schedule: 5719

Suggested talent adjustment: 24% towards ALA best case
Final: ALA 46 (529 yards), UGA 19 (269 yards)
Click to expand...

If it does nothing else, it hates Georgia. Can't fault it for that.

Predictor said:
CLEM vs ND
Week 5 of 2015

CLEM - Offense
Yardage: 386 ypg
Performance: 27 (higher is better)
Scoring: 30
Efficiency: 12 (lower is better)
Performance: 9 (higher is better)
CLEM - Defense
Yardage: 289 ypg allowed
Performance: 47 (higher is better)
Scoring: 13
Efficiency: 21 (higher is better)
Performance: 73 (higher is better)

ND - Offense
Yardage: 520 ypg
Performance: 19 (higher is better)
Scoring: 41
Efficiency: 12 (lower is better)
Performance: 0 (higher is better)
ND - Defense
Yardage: 349 ypg allowed
Performance: 9 (higher is better)
Scoring: 19
Efficiency: 17 (higher is better)
Performance: 36 (higher is better)

Prediction:

Pure statistical: CLEM 20 (413 yards), ND 14 (302 yards)
CLEM best case: CLEM 30 (466 yards), ND 11 (224 yards)
ND best case: CLEM 11 (331 yards), ND 18 (368 yards)

CLEM talent: 10803
ND talent: 11024
CLEM talent of schedule: 3540
ND talent of schedule: 6091

Suggested talent adjustment: 27% towards ND best case
Final: CLEM 17 (390 yards), ND 15 (320 yards)
Click to expand...

It seems to have factored in hurricane Joaquin somehow...

Predictor said:
MISS vs FLA
Week 5 of 2015

MISS - Offense
Yardage: 499 ypg
Performance: 54 (higher is better)
Scoring: 47
Efficiency: 10 (lower is better)
Performance: 22 (higher is better)
MISS - Defense
Yardage: 416 ypg allowed
Performance: -7 (higher is better)
Scoring: 24
Efficiency: 16 (higher is better)
Performance: 11 (higher is better)

FLA - Offense
Yardage: 405 ypg
Performance: -15 (higher is better)
Scoring: 33
Efficiency: 12 (lower is better)
Performance: 19 (higher is better)
FLA - Defense
Yardage: 290 ypg allowed
Performance: 54 (higher is better)
Scoring: 18
Efficiency: 15 (higher is better)
Performance: 21 (higher is better)

Prediction:

Pure statistical: MISS 26 (372 yards), FLA 26 (388 yards)
MISS best case: MISS 38 (507 yards), FLA 24 (350 yards)
FLA best case: MISS 17 (225 yards), FLA 31 (433 yards)

MISS talent: 8889
FLA talent: 11297
MISS talent of schedule: 7861
FLA talent of schedule: 5316

Suggested talent adjustment: 1% towards MISS best case
Final: MISS 26 (374 yards), FLA 26 (387 yards)
Click to expand...

Enjoy.
 
Who is having the worst year...The Predictor OR the Georgia Tech football team?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top