Mountaineers Favored to Win Last 5 Games, According to ESPN

[Soaring Eagle 74]

Based on the ESPN Football Power Index Rankings, the expected outcomes are:

72.8% chance of beating Texas Tech
78.1% chance of beating Texas
96.6% chance of beating Kansas
85.5% chance of beating Iowa State
61.1% chance of beating Kansas State

 

[MenoMosso]

When we were 3-0 we were predicted to win all of our remaining games. Things are a little different now with injuries and confidence levels of players. Every game would seem to be a toss up with how we have been playing.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

72.8% chance of beating Texas Tech
78.1% chance of beating Texas
96.6% chance of beating Kansas
85.5% chance of beating Iowa State
61.1% chance of beating Kansas State

That's not the same as saying we are favored to win all the games consecutively.

Given those numbers the probability of winning them 5 in a row is only about 28.6%.

 

[Soaring Eagle 74]

72.8% chance of beating Texas Tech
78.1% chance of beating Texas
96.6% chance of beating Kansas
85.5% chance of beating Iowa State
61.1% chance of beating Kansas State

That's not the same as saying we are favored to win all the games consecutively.

Given those numbers the probability of winning them 5 in a row is only about 28.6%.

 

[Soaring Eagle 74]

I think you're oversimplifying with your application of statistics. The sample population is much too small for what you're trying to do and the games aren't independent, as would be the case with a roll of the dice. We're not playing each of these teams 100 times this season.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

I think you don't understand why I didn't construct the model with each game being 50:50. I also don't think you understand the difference between statistical probabilities of events and the reliability of surveys. Nor do you seem to know what independent means. Finally, you don't seem to get the significance of "consecutively," even though I stressed it.

As I said in the other thread, where I used my own (rounded off and a little different numbers but fairly close) "win likelihood" numbers, reasonable people can disagree about about the somewhat arbitrary values used, but reasonable people can't argue math doesn't work.

 

[WVex-pat in GA]

Who from ESPN will be suiting up for us? I think Herbstriet is out of eligibility .

 

[countryroads89]

I think you're oversimplifying with your application of statistics. The sample population is much too small for what you're trying to do and the games aren't independent, as would be the case with a roll of the dice. We're not playing each of these teams 100 times this season.

His application of statistics is exactly correct. Using the probability of winning for each individual game, the probability of winning all 5 remaining games is about 0.287.

 

[Soaring Eagle 74]

I think you don't understand why I didn't construct the model with each game being 50:50. I also don't think you understand the difference between statistical probabilities of events and the reliability of surveys. Nor do you seem to know what independent means. Finally, you don't seem to get the significance of "consecutively," even though I stressed it.

As I said in the other thread, where I used my own (rounded off and a little different numbers but fairly close) "win likelihood" numbers, reasonable people can disagree about about the somewhat arbitrary values used, but reasonable people can't argue math doesn't work.

 

[Soaring Eagle 74]

I think you don't understand why I didn't construct the model with each game being 50:50. I also don't think you understand the difference between statistical probabilities of events and the reliability of surveys. Nor do you seem to know what independent means. Finally, you don't seem to get the significance of "consecutively," even though I stressed it.

As I said in the other thread, where I used my own (rounded off and a little different numbers but fairly close) "win likelihood" numbers, reasonable people can disagree about about the somewhat arbitrary values used, but reasonable people can't argue math doesn't work.

It's obvious you have only a superficial knowledge of probability and statistics and their application. There are far to many variables to accurately predict the outcome of any given football game. If you could estimate the probability for wins in college football, you wouldn't be wasting your time on bitch boards like this one, you be raking in billions in Las Vegas.

By the way, your math doesn't work because it's misapplied.

ESPN has constructed some sort of ranked correlation model to make predictions for entertainment purposes. I referenced their predictions, I don't endorse them.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

It's obvious you are trying to discuss things above your pay grade and thinking you sound intelligent are making an ass of yourself.

Math is math is math.

No one is saying mathematical probabilities are determinative. I set forth the mathematical probability we win 5 in a row based on certain assigned percentages. It's junior high math which you apparently don't understand.

The point which also totally eludes you is that just because we might be expected to win any single game in isolation does not mean we would be expected to win all five in a row. THEREFORE DOING SO IS IMPROBABLE.

I'm not using the stats to predict any of the games. I'm making a point that the person who started the thread failed to provide context in which to view the ESPN numbers.

I swear I hope the dumb people here do not have degrees from WVU and if they do, please keep it to themselves.

 

[VaultHunter]

This cannot be correct. I thought the WVU program was at an all-time low?

Why would a football team with 4 losses to top 15 teams be favored to win its next 5 against teams that are not in the top 25?

Silly college football "experts" and their facts and knowledge

 

[Orlaco]

When we were 3-0 we were predicted to win all of our remaining games.

CONGRATS !!

.....you just won BS post of the day.

---------

That's my way of not simply referring to you as a dolt.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

Y'all do realize that if you like Dana, the last thing you should be arguing is that we should win all the remaining games, don't you?

My pointing out that it is statistically unlikely that a team the "experts" favor by those percentages in each individual game will win all 5 a row actually (a) provides "cover" if we don't; and (b) makes it more impressive if we do.

As I have said, the last thing in the world I would want if I was Dana would be for my most vociferous advocates to include such a high concentration of the most astoundingly stupid people in our fan base.

 

[MenoMosso]

CONGRATS !!

.....you just won BS post of the day.

---------

That's my way of not simply referring to you as a dolt.

:cool2::sunglasses:

 

[AZeer]

Let's just win one in a row. I just don't see us out scoring TT, but then again TT's defense looks on a par with ours.

 

[GoWVU]

I just don't see us out scoring TT, but then again TT's defense looks on a par with ours.

The Red Raider D is one of the worst in America. If we can't start cranking out the points again on TT, then it really is time to panic.

The first-half offensive outputs we've had in recent weeks isn't going to cut it...7 pts v. OU, 0 pts v. OSU (2 by the defense), 17 pts v. Baylor (good), and 10 pts v. TCU. Another one of those this Saturday and we could be buried too deep by halftime for a hot finish to matter. You know Tech is going to score plenty.

 

[GoWVU]

Lo and behold...

Noon

Texas Tech at West Virginia: ESPN’s FPI gives West Virginia a 28.9 percent chance of winning out, the highest percentage in the Big 12. The home game against Texas Tech is West Virginia’s chance to prove it still has a quality team, just not a championship-level one. If the Mountaineers hope to prevail, limiting negative plays is key after West Virginia averaged 11.5 negative yardage plays per game in its first four Big 12 contests. Patrick Mahomes is the key for Tech, entering the game with a 6-to-9 touchdown-to-interception ratio in games outside of Lubbock, Texas. So Mahomes will want to show he can star on the road the way he has at home, where he has a 19-to-3 ratio in 2015.

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

That's a pretty fair nutshell assessment. It sort of describes what we need to defensively under what Tech needs to avoid offensively. In addition to getting turnovers we need to limit their big plays. When we don't shoot ourselves in the foot, we should score. Tech's defense is awful.

I'd like to see us run the ball and control the clock. It's time we figure out we don't have a high powered offensive machine and realize the benefits of giving the defense more rest and better
field position. That might not be as exciting as playing fast and going for broke all the time but it's smarter football.

Anyone who thinks this is not a must win game, has to just reject the existence of such things. We have to beat the weaker teams at home, especially when we are already 3-4 and have a four game losing streak.

 

[GoWVU]

It's time we figure out we don't have a high powered offensive machine and realize the benefits of giving the defense more rest and better
field position. That might not be as exciting as playing fast and going for broke all the time but it's smarter football.

The Baylor/KSU game last night was a textbook example. Every low-tech opponent against a high-powered favorite says a variation of the same thing: "We want to run the ball and control the clock to limit their possessions." None of them ever actually DO it, though--and I'm not talking about whether they can run it effectively, but the planning of how to bleed that down isn't thorough enough.

Holgorsen might have the same gameplan, but we'd still be snapping the ball up at 18, 20, 25 seconds left on the play clock. Snyder actually went all the way with the idea, which nobody else does. Right from the first possession, the Wildcats were snapping it with 1 second, 3 seconds, 6 seconds...just enough variation so the defense couldn't simply time the snap, but basically running it all the way down on most every play.

What a masterful gameplan he had last night. A few player-execution mistakes were all that stood between them and a real shot at the upset. Even so, it was very enjoyable to watch.

Anyone who thinks this is not a must win game, has to just reject the existence of such things. We have to beat the weaker teams at home, especially when we are already 3-4 and have a four game losing streak.

No kidding, this TT game might have Holgorsen's entire tenure at WVU hanging in the balance...and, yes, we are doing an absolutely terrible job winning at home since joining this league. Currently, we have a worse conference home record (5-10) than we do on the road (6-10).

This program isn't ever going to get turned around until it starts being a far, far tougher out in Morgantown. That problem extends back across multiple coaches. (Oddly, it's probably the only thing Stewart did well.)

This year's home schedule was set up perfectly to go 6-1 or 7-0. Holgorsen still has a chance to do that, and tomorrow figures to be the toughest remaining obstacle.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

He did have a good gameplan. (although both ints came when he deviated from the conservative approach and took a risky gamble and they might have been the difference).

I always get a chuckle out of people who say you have to go high speed, spread in the Big 12 and that teams like Bama and OSU couldn't match-up, or that highly successful coaches from other conferences would "get smoked." When you look at the Big 12's OOC record over the years, it's obvious that is not the case.

It's probably more the case that it's easier for most of the teams to defend what they are used to defending -- especially when the opponents don't have great QBs and receivers.

Obviously, we can't run Howard the way KSU runs Huebner and we have not shown much proficiency at the read option but I'd like to see Smallwood get 25+ carries. If KSU can hold Baylor to 31, we ought to be able to hold TTU down enough to outscore them.

 

[GoWVU]

Obviously, we can't run Howard the way KSU runs Huebner and we have not shown much proficiency at the read option but I'd like to see Smallwood get 25+ carries.

That got me wondering when the last time was that a WVU player had 25+ carries in a game, because it seemed like it had been awhile.

The most recent was Shell, who had 27 carries for 98 yards in the 2014 Maryland game. Before that, Buie had consecutive games of 25-82 v. Baylor in 2012 and then 31-207 the following week at Texas. The only other time under Holgorsen was Garrison in 2011 who ran for 32-291 against Bowling Green. Neither Buie nor Garrison is doing much on the ground these days with their new schools, which is interesting.

Shell at Maryland was the lone occasion it happened in the last 40 games, after occurring 3 times in Dana's first 18 games. So as Holgorsen steadily has gotten more run-heavy with his offense here, the instances of putting the workload primarily on one player have become more scarce.

 

[dogeered_again]

72.8% chance of beating Texas Tech
78.1% chance of beating Texas
96.6% chance of beating Kansas
85.5% chance of beating Iowa State
61.1% chance of beating Kansas State

That's not the same as saying we are favored to win all the games consecutively.

Given those numbers the probability of winning them 5 in a row is only about 28.6%.

Please share with us the algorithm you used statistically to come up with that number!

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

Dear, Dumbass, I mean dogbrain, look at the first post in the thread.

Also note my later post where I wrote: "reasonable people can disagree about the somewhat arbitrary values used, but reasonable people can't argue math doesn't work."

 

[countryroads89]

Please share with us the algorithm you used statistically to come up with that number!

His number is correct. I verified it and the article cited in this thread verified it. It's this complicated thing called arithmetic.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

Well, only 22 for Smallwood not 25+, but Shell played his best game, so I can see Smallwood getting a few less.

Howard is quoted as saying he checked into the inexplicible passes in the final drive, so that's not really a gameplan issue so much as a failure to make sure your QB doesn't decide to be stupid with the game still on the line.

I guess we just can't stand to be "boring" even when it's working so we just had to add a little drama at the end.

The D played well, especially Dillon.

 

[GoWVU]

Howard is quoted as saying he checked into the inexplicible passes in the final drive, so that's not really a gameplan issue so much as a failure to make sure your QB doesn't decide to be stupid with the game still on the line.

Where did you see that quoted, Drifter?

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

It was in the Gazette this morning.

 

[GoWVU]

Wow, just wow. Not too encouraging when his mental awareness of the game situation is that poor.

 

[Soaring Eagle 74]

Please share with us the algorithm you used statistically to come up with that number!

Just something he stole from ESPN. Simple multiplication. Considering the probabilities developed by ESPN are subjective, I'd say the probability their probabilities are accurate is extremely low.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

Moron: Someone who is not a moron would notice I provided the probability of winning 5 in a row, using the numbers, you, THE MORON, posted . You, THE MORON, borrowed the numbers.

I just did the junior high math, MORONS don't understand. Neither ESPN nor I own math, so even though I posted it before ESPN does not mean they borrowed it from me.

All it means is you are still a MORON.

 

[Low Mountains Drifter]

Did you see where Smallwood described his reaction and that of the linemen?

It's kind of amazing the QB, who has played a good bit of ball by now, is the one person on the field incapable of understanding the situation.

At least he makes up for this lack of football IQ with a great arm and superior athleticism. The position might be a severe weakness otherwise.

 

[countryroads89]

Update: Using the numbers provided by ESPN and stated in the OP, our probability of winning out just went up to 0.394, or for those of you that don't understand statistics, the chance of us winning out is 39.4%.