I left off the FCS team we held to 7 as well.
Is that real? If so, thats impressive. Should be 4 since Idaho State scored a TD.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Advanced Stats and CU - 2016 Edition
- Thread starter Darth Snow
- Start date
I left off the FCS team we held to 7 as well.
Is that real? If so, thats impressive. Should be 4 since Idaho State scored a TD.
I would if I could easily find a site that easily output that per team then per opponent (season view). To do it other wise would require clicking into the game stats for each team and finding the total offense output.
I know, that's why asked you to do it. I assume my time is more valuable than yours, and I'm the unemployed one.
Your not the only one thats unemployed.
Somewhere out there is an AP stream of txt files for each game that contains game stats in a standard format. I could write a program that reads those in if we could find a source for all of them.
That's amazing. 4 teams held to their lowest yardage of the season, 2 others to the second lowest.
Can you post the data source please?
http://www.pointafter.com
http://ncaa-football-teams.pointafter.com/l/216/Colorado-Buffaloes
http://ncaa-football-teams.pointafter.com/l/211/UCLA-Bruins
http://ncaa-football-teams.pointafter.com/l/209/Arizona-State-Sun-Devils
http://ncaa-football-teams.pointafter.com/l/217/Stanford-Cardinal
http://ncaa-football-teams.pointafter.com/l/208/USC-Trojans
http://ncaa-football-teams.pointafter.com/l/214/Oregon-Ducks
http://ncaa-football-teams.pointafter.com/l/215/Oregon-State-Beavers
http://ncaa-football-teams.pointafter.com/l/160/Michigan-Wolverines
http://ncaa-football-teams.pointafter.com/l/203/Colorado-State-Rams
You'll have to go through the stats page for each team to find what I posted. I put it all in an excel file.
Thanks was hoping for something a little more analytic friendly. Maybe a json or delimited export.
This site is also good:http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/colorado/2016.html
This site is also good:http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/colorado/2016.html
I wish.
http://www.footballstudyhall.com/pages/2016-colorado-advanced-statistical-profile
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]Fun fact: Chances of not winning another game are currently at 1%. Chances of going 3-0 are 53%. Chances of going 2-1 are 38%. Yes, only 8% chance of 1-2. Model has us as double digit favorites in all remaining games. !!.
What a year.
Overall S&P rank is #12 (which is probably about where we end up in the playoff rankings, natch).
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]While our offense has continued its slow slide into being just above average (except for passing... we still have a #9 ranked passing game, but otherwise the offense is really starting to show signs of struggle - in the 70s in sack rate now), it's our defense that really is carrying us to our high overall ranking. This is a broken record at this point, but it's elite at stopping the pass and at making teams inefficient. It will give up the occasional explosive play, but long drives don't happen often, and we do a good job of limiting points once a team gets in scoring position. This isn't bend, don't break, anymore. It's, unless-you-get-lucky-you-aint-getting-****. Note the performance by D below despite the ****ty field position.
Five Factors
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]We are really good at getting turnovers. Slightly unluckier than we should be at this point. Takeaway: wins are not flukes driven by weird TOs.
Defense is also really good at stopping the run (#11).
One thing that jumped out to me: Fourth Quarter performance.
CU's offense in the 4th quarter: 108th in the nation. Third quarter isn't far behind. First and second quarters are good though.
However, CU's defense in the 4th quarter: 3d. And it's "worst" quarter is the 3d, where it is "only" ranked #19.
Special teams are #102. Yeeeeesh. The only bright spot is below - btw, JayMac's #s were really good until those fumbles, but Oliver's are eye popping:
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]For reference, USC's Adoree Jackson averages 14.7 on 15 returns and Michigan's Jabrill Peppers averages 17.1 on 15 returns. Both only have 1 TD as well.
Kick returns aren't horrible either at #50.
| Date | Opponent | Opp. S&P+ Rk | Win Probability | Proj. W-L | Proj. Margin | Proj. Score | Cumulative Proj. Wins |
| 12-Nov | at Arizona | 104 | 91% | W | 22.9 | 40.0 - 17.2 | 7.91 |
| 19-Nov | Washington State | 43 | 77% | W | 12.8 | 35.7 - 22.9 | 8.68 |
| 26-Nov | Utah | 40 | 76% | W | 12.3 | 32.8 - 20.5 | 9.44 |
What a year.
Overall S&P rank is #12 (which is probably about where we end up in the playoff rankings, natch).
| Category | Offense | Rk | Defense | Rk |
| S&P+ | 34.4 | 32 | 16.9 | 8 |
| Points Per Game | 33.7 | 40 | 17.2 | 12 |
Five Factors
| Offense | Defense | |||||
| Category | Avg. | Rk | Avg. | Rk | Nat'l Avg. | |
| EXPLOSIVENESS | IsoPPP | 1.28 | 55 | 1.28 | 84 | 1.27 |
| EFFICIENCY | Success Rate | 44.3% | 43 | 34.0% | 8 | 41.0% |
| FIELD POSITION | Avg. FP | 28.7 | 77 | 29.7 | 87 | 29.2 |
| FINISHING DRIVES | Pts. Per Trip in 40 | 4.66 | 53 | 3.56 | 17 | 4.42 |
| TURNOVER MARGIN | EXPECTED | 8.27 | 3 | Turnover Luck (PPG): -0.71 |
Defense is also really good at stopping the run (#11).
One thing that jumped out to me: Fourth Quarter performance.
CU's offense in the 4th quarter: 108th in the nation. Third quarter isn't far behind. First and second quarters are good though.
However, CU's defense in the 4th quarter: 3d. And it's "worst" quarter is the 3d, where it is "only" ranked #19.
Special teams are #102. Yeeeeesh. The only bright spot is below - btw, JayMac's #s were really good until those fumbles, but Oliver's are eye popping:
| Punt Returner | Ht, Wt | Year | Returns | Avg. | TD | Fair Catch | Fumbles (Lost) |
| Jay MacIntyre | 5'10, 190 | SO | 17 | 8.9 | 0 | 11 | 2 (2) |
| Isaiah Oliver | 6'1, 190 | SO | 9 | 16.0 | 1 | 2 | 0 (0) |
Kick returns aren't horrible either at #50.
This is quickly becoming my favorite thread.
I feel as though Peppers has more than 1 punt return TD.
King_George_XXIV_Rules
Well-Known Member
No, Shoulder2Shoulder is correct... it is only 3 TD's yielded at Folsom Field this season:
1. Idaho State [Jakori Ford 3 yd run]
2. Oregon State [NONE] - only 2 FG
3. Arizona State [Kody Kohl 5 yd reception]
4. UCLA [Darren Andrews 39 yd reception]
That's it, only 3 TD's allowed at home this season. Of course CSU scored a meaningless TD as well, but that happened at Mile High not Folsom.
He broke our hearts in so many ways.
On a happier note... once he gets a couple more returns, Isaiah is going to fit in to this group...
| Rank | Player | Cl | Pos | G | Punt Ret | Punt Ret Yds | Avg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Eddie Jackson, Alabama (Southeastern) | Sr. | DB | 8 | 11 | 253 | 23.0 |
| 2 | Brisly Estime, Syracuse (Atlantic Coast) | Sr. | WR | 9 | 11 | 205 | 18.6 |
| 3 | Jojo Natson, Akron (Mid-American) | Sr. | WR | 10 | 13 | 236 | 18.2 |
| 4 | Jesus Wilson, Florida St. (Atlantic Coast) | Sr. | WR | 7 | 9 | 155 | 17.2 |
| 5 | Jabrill Peppers, Michigan (Big Ten) | Jr. | LB | 9 | 15 | 257 | 17.1 |
| 6 | Nacarius Fant, Western Ky. (Conference USA) | Jr. | WR | 9 | 11 | 172 | 15.6 |
| 8 | Adoree' Jackson, Southern California (Pac-12) | Jr. | DB | 9 | 15 | 220 | 14.7 |
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
| 33 | Jay MacIntyre, Colorado (Pac-12) | So. | WR | 9 | 17 | 152 | 8.9 |
How accurate has this site been this season so far?
It undervalued the Buffs by a lot until the preseason expectations worked their way out of the system, but everyone did that. As a predictor, it usually beats vegas' spread around 54% of the time last I checked. It's not perfect, but it's a good way of dispassionately assessing a team.
Currently, I think it overvalues our O and is correct on our D.
does it account for trending data-- because we are not trending the right way on offense. the quality of the last 2 defenses is quite high, but i am not sure they are markedly better than either usc or michigan. also, i think wsu is on a steep upward trend in terms of performance.
i think we have a very good chance to win out, but i am curious about their methodology.
So did they predict all the outcomes correctly? Some? Just wondering how much validity the site has...I'm kind of a data nerd so like this stuff.
If it predicted all the outcomes correctly, it wouldn't be free and that guy would be a god. As for validity, it's stats. I recommend poking around the site if you really want to dive into it. Lots there.
Nice summary. That game against WSU is going to be reaaaaallllly interesting in the context of above.
UCLA, our worst game outside of USC, was still good for Phil Steele's #16 performance of the week.
http://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2016/Nov16/DBNov09.html
defense balled out that game.
Nor Cal Buff
Well-Known Member
There is no "perfect" predictor in football or any sport at least in terms of absolute outcome. There is far too much randomness in sports, ranging from variation in performance to things like tipped balls falling for incompletions in some games and for pick-6s in others. Unless a team is successful on either 100% or 0% of its plays, there will always be that variation. The other issue at play is that you have imperfect information, especially in football. We are in the latter half of the season, yet we only have a sample size of 9 games. It's enough for a decent guess at how good a team is, but it's not enough to truly judge a team's level with precision.
In reality, a perfect predictor is one that takes all available information and uses it to predict a range of outcomes with associated probabilities and those probabilities align with the win rates (e.g. teams who the predictor says will win 60% of the time win 60% of the time) over time.
BTW, it is highly doubtful that there is any publicly available metric that outperforms the closing point spread beyond simple variance. And if one does, it won't outperform that market for long because people will use it to make it the market.
In reality, a perfect predictor is one that takes all available information and uses it to predict a range of outcomes with associated probabilities and those probabilities align with the win rates (e.g. teams who the predictor says will win 60% of the time win 60% of the time) over time.
BTW, it is highly doubtful that there is any publicly available metric that outperforms the closing point spread beyond simple variance. And if one does, it won't outperform that market for long because people will use it to make it the market.
scoob
Well-Known Member
See kenpom cbb. Outperformed the market for a short time. Now basically sets the market.
Our 2nd half and fourth quarter numbers are absolutely insane.
http://www.cubuffs.com/news/2016/11/21/football-macintyres-buffs-have-learned-how-to-close.aspx
http://www.cubuffs.com/news/2016/11/21/football-macintyres-buffs-have-learned-how-to-close.aspx
40 points given up total in the fourth. That's a little more than a FG. WTF? Insane!