That's quite a bit of strawman. You'll be happy if Mertz is the highest drafted UF QB ever? Well...how generous. You move billions based on numbers. Here's a number. Mertz has the #9 QBR in the SEC. Milton is next to last. YPA: 8 vs. last. Do you accept that as representative? If so, would you declare Milton to be 2x worse than your conclusions on Mertz?
Perhaps instead of ridiculing their degree, you could post a rebuttal to the claim about stats. You may be on the right side of the debate. Why not address that? And what's wrong with a Drama degree?
Oh good grief. Nobody is ridiculing anybody’s degree. Matt’s getting all righteous about ‘living in data’ while saying things that are fundamentally flawed — no analyst with any credibility chooses only data that point in the same direction, while choosing to conveniently ignore all data that don’t agree with his preconceived conclusions. That’s laughable, so I called him on it. I got a very nebulous response claiming to be responsible for managing billions of dollars, which I’m pretty sure is more BS. LOL - he even speaks of data as a singular instead of the plural that it is. I call BS. Speaking of BS, “we should live in the data and not in our dreams”? I sense far more drama queen here than data analyst, financial advisor, or anything else technical in nature. This drove my drama remark — NTTAWWT
I look at data that is statistically significant. If the predictive data shows our offense (especially our passing game) improves I’ll be the first to be thrilled. This isn’t much different than someone being focused on batting average in baseball. Sure if that is all we know then I’d take the guy with the higher BA. But we have much, much, much, more sophisticated ways of looking at it. Football is no different
Mertz is below Milton in QBR. Mertz is also 2nd to last in the SEC https://www.espn.com/college-football/qbr/_/group/8 2 games is generally too early to draw conclusions from but Mertz has a long history of this sort of mediocre play. Milton does too. So I do feel pretty confident in saying this is who they are. The numbers will fluctuate and settle as the sample size grows but it’s hard to see any evidence that Mertz will finish in the top half of the SEC in QBR based on his history. He was right around bottom third in the Big 10 for three consecutive years. You may be mixing up QBR, the advanced stat, vs qb rating which is pretty weak. The reality is you have to account for sacks, running, game situation, opposing defense, etc.
Put young men in college uniforms in a rivalry night game in the Swamp and you have no idea what will happen. Fling all the data you want. All it does is show you're a nerd standing in front of a forest trying to analyze trees.
Yet somehow the best coached and most talented teams keep winning nattys and conference titles. The Rudy passion doesn’t put rings on fingers. And it’s absurd to think the most talented and best coached teams do not bust their tail off compared to their peers. See 2006 Florida
Fascinating! Imagine that! It clearly took a billion dollar data analyst to come to that revelation LOL
You guys truly believe a winning strategy in sports is to hope random variation lands in your favor 11 of 12 games. Imagine going into a job interview saying “We are okay with a 40% probability for victory each game. We aren’t going to try to improve that. We are going to bank on a 40% probability hitting 11 of 12 games, then in the SECCG then again in the playoffs. You only have to employ me for a 1000 years to win a Natty” You guys aren’t even a blast to the 1990s past. This is like 1800s level of analysis. It’s like Jim Carey in D&D saying “so you’re saying there’s a chance”.
What? You are saying it’s ok to have a losing strategy as long as we try hard and pray to the randomness gods.
You're right, I was going by this page which says "QBR" but must mean passer rating. Completion percent and YPA are still a big gap. Milton is well behind all league QBs as a passer, despite playing two cupcakes. Your second point is something I'm glad to hear you say. Utah isn't predictive, just like McNeese.
Nobody’s saying analytics don’t matter. We are saying only looking at the numbers like QBR after two games against vastly different opponents to come up with a conclusion is errant at best and highly dishonest at worst.
I'm all about the stats/ data over emotion. That said, it feels wrong to base any forecast about the UT game or even this season on the past 2 games. Some questions.. 1) If our kicker makes that easy kick vs Utah, would our stats look better? 2) If we don't line up with 5 GUYS in the backfield, then we have a first and goal at the Utah 7. If we score a TD there, do these stats look different. 3) If we don't have 2 #3s and don't allow that ensuing TD, what do we look like? 4) if our starting center plays- WHICH HE WILL ON SATURDAY- then maybe we don't have so many dumb false starts. 5) If our punt returner doesn't field the punt at the 3, which leads to a pick and a Utah TD, do these stats look different? My point is that we made dumb mistake after dumb mistake vs Utah. (Coaches too.) If this is who we are, then I agree the stats are relevant. But if they were just 1st game jitters, with a young team with a missing starting center on the road, then IMO they aren't predictive of the season.
Well Utah is a real game, but it’s a small sample size. Mertz has time to turn it around And Milton sucks. No debate there. He is struggling in an A++++ passing scheme. I’d rather have Mertz for sure.
What? Mertz has 3 years of weak QB play in the B10. And an analysis of CBN passing O shows it’s weak. That’s the evidence. Even if we ignore all pre 2023 stuff…we still performed poorly vs Utah. What’s wrong with saying that? It’s the truth. We are all hoping we perform well in the future. But why deny the obvious?
First game with a totally revamped offensive line and the most valuable player missing, and on the road in a pretty hostile environment. You have to somewhat understand why the line performed the way it did. If we have the same issues Saturday then you need to be concerned. I didn’t like all the miscues either but come on.
You’re not taking in the effect of the situation Napier walked into. The turnover of players and the amount of new guys playing together for the first time. All you are looking at is the outcome. Without taking into effect the variables of the situation, your data is meaningless.
