State was the third least penalized team in the SEC last year.
- Thread starter Rayburn8
- Start date
Obviously not much correlation between this stat and the only stat that counts. Bama is at the top of both statistical categories but then any correlation breaks down with teams near the top that have not done much the last 5 years in UK & UT and teams near the bottom who have had some success like UGA and LSU.
I think this stat is much more important for teams that can compete but have less overall talent than the big boys so its a step in the right direction for us. Also, it doesn't do much to dispel the stereotype of bama historically getting preferential treatment from the zebras.
I think this stat is much more important for teams that can compete but have less overall talent than the big boys so its a step in the right direction for us. Also, it doesn't do much to dispel the stereotype of bama historically getting preferential treatment from the zebras.
Not many penalties. 4-1 in one possession games. We overachieved last year to get to 6-6. All the wooly ones around here might consider what happens if those stats break the other way for us in 2014.
Those statistics aren't "luck statistics." We didn't overachieve at all. We lost at least one that we should've won, and it would've been a big one. We didn't get any breaks going our way, that's for damn sure, if that's what you are insinuating.
Every team from Alabama to UAB can expect to go somewhere around .500 in one possession games. That's a stat you can take to the bank. We went 4-1. Don't look for that to continue.
No, that's a stat you pulled out of your ***. It may very well be that State has one-possession games go against them next year, but it won't be because it's a statistical likelihood. It will be because they made a play or didn't make a play when they had to.
Hmmm..wonder what our record is vs bama, LSU, and Auburn in 1 possession games?
Granted we haven't had that many but seems like we have come up on the wrong side more times that not in such games.
Granted we haven't had that many but seems like we have come up on the wrong side more times that not in such games.
Last 5 years:
Bama - 6-5 in 1 possession games
UAB - 9-14 in 1 possession games
MSU - 12-7 in 1 possession games
As a general rule, over time teams will trend towards .500 in close games. So far, Mullen has won a very high percentage of those games. I think 1 reason is that we have played several teams that we should beat easily a lot closer than we should have. We're 6-5 against SEC teams in 1 possession games and 6-1 against weaker non-conference teams.
Bama - 6-5 in 1 possession games
UAB - 9-14 in 1 possession games
MSU - 12-7 in 1 possession games
As a general rule, over time teams will trend towards .500 in close games. So far, Mullen has won a very high percentage of those games. I think 1 reason is that we have played several teams that we should beat easily a lot closer than we should have. We're 6-5 against SEC teams in 1 possession games and 6-1 against weaker non-conference teams.
Pulled it out of my *** huh?
From 2008-2012 these four teams played the most games decided by one possession (their record in parentheses):
Connecticut (17-17)
Louisville (16-17)
Maryland (16-13)
Northwestern (19-16)
That's 127 games (roughly 10 seasons' worth of close games) so not a small sample size. The record of those teams was 68-63. 53% chance to win.
From 2008-2012 these four teams played the most games decided by one possession (their record in parentheses):
Connecticut (17-17)
Louisville (16-17)
Maryland (16-13)
Northwestern (19-16)
That's 127 games (roughly 10 seasons' worth of close games) so not a small sample size. The record of those teams was 68-63. 53% chance to win.
Which is my point...the stat is pretty meaningless. We didn't overachieve because we were beating teams we should have beaten (and probably worse than by one possession). He was hinting that winning those games were akin to catching breaks, and that won't continue. The only way it won't continue is if we beat our OOC opponents like we are supposed to, and then you'll see that SEC record come back closer to .500.
It's just silliness to say we should expect to be no better than an 8 win team this year because we got lucky in one possession games last year. It's stupidity.
By definition, there is some luck to winning 1-possession games. Any 1 play out of well over 100 can change the outcome of the game. Auburn got a lucky bounce of a deflected pass back to the QB. We got a lucky (for us) missed chip shot FG by the Mississippi kicker. Any fluke play can change the game. And fluke plays are going to trend towards 50-50 over time.
You are the only one saying this. Go back and read the thread.
I said we were lucky to have won 6 games last year. We were, in fact, lucky to have won 6 considering we won 80% of our one possession games.
You obviously didn't do well on the reading portion of the ACT.
I see
what you're saying, but weren't we favored in 3 of those 4 one-possession games that we won (if not all 4, can't remember OM)? If that's the case, I don't consider that luck. Again, I understand the whole "expect to win 50% of close games" thought. I just think that it goes a little deeper than this broad generalization.
what you're saying, but weren't we favored in 3 of those 4 one-possession games that we won (if not all 4, can't remember OM)? If that's the case, I don't consider that luck. Again, I understand the whole "expect to win 50% of close games" thought. I just think that it goes a little deeper than this broad generalization.
Pretty sure we weren't favored in the Egg Bowl. And you're right. Records will trend towards .500 in close games, but you'll still win more than half of the close games against teams you're clearly better than (like Bowling Green and Kentucky) and less than half of the close games against teams you're not as good as. Obviously, we were a little lucky to win the Ark and UM games just like we were a little unlucky to lose the Auburn game. But overall, we should have been a 5-6 win team last year and that's exactly what we were.
All teams combined will obviously be .500 in one possession games since we do not have ties. The more one possession games you play, you might expect the record to tend toward .500, but my guess is that if you plotted all teams' records in games decided by one possession over the past five years, the distribution would be very wide.
I'm not sure how the spread before a game is played is relevant when it's the 4th quarter and one big play either way will swing the game. Kentucky was one great open field tackle away from beating us. We were lucky to have won. The spread was irrelevant when Market stopped that ball carrier.
If you want to talk about this coming year and our expectations, I think you've got to factor in the fact that we went 6-6 with almost every break going our way in close games. If we don't make that tackle against UK or the 4th quarter of Bowling Green, Ole Miss, or Arkansas plays out just slightly differently we're staring at 4-8. Of course we also could've beaten Auburn. But if we go 3-2 or 2-3 in those games the season looks a lot different. Our expectations for this year are probably different. We might even have a different head coach (that's certainly up for debate).
Are we a 6-6 team looking to take the next step or did we overachieve last year and headed toward a big letdown (for those that think 10 wins is around the corner)? I think we overachieved and we should temper our expectations for 2014. But that's not going to be popular on a board where most think we're going to be some kind of unstoppable force this year. Hope I'm wrong. Would love every minute of it.
If you want to talk about this coming year and our expectations, I think you've got to factor in the fact that we went 6-6 with almost every break going our way in close games. If we don't make that tackle against UK or the 4th quarter of Bowling Green, Ole Miss, or Arkansas plays out just slightly differently we're staring at 4-8. Of course we also could've beaten Auburn. But if we go 3-2 or 2-3 in those games the season looks a lot different. Our expectations for this year are probably different. We might even have a different head coach (that's certainly up for debate).
Are we a 6-6 team looking to take the next step or did we overachieve last year and headed toward a big letdown (for those that think 10 wins is around the corner)? I think we overachieved and we should temper our expectations for 2014. But that's not going to be popular on a board where most think we're going to be some kind of unstoppable force this year. Hope I'm wrong. Would love every minute of it.
I guess
I'm just looking at it for the simple fact that we beat a team that we were supposed to beat.
I'm just looking at it for the simple fact that we beat a team that we were supposed to beat.
It is relevant because it indicates who the better team is, and when the game is on the line, the better team typically makes the plays to win. Now obviously, that doesn't apply to games with a 3 point line.......but when you look at one possession games with the home team heavily favored (see our games with Bowling Green and UK), you will probably find that the home favorite wins a substantial majority of those games. I know that under Mullen, we have won 100% of the one possession games in which we were heavily favored.
The reason we made the tackles against UK and Bowling Green (and will make them a good bit more than 50% of the time) is that they're UK and Bowling Green. Against UM and/or Arkansas, yes, that would typically be a toss-up (or worse for us against Arkansas), because you've got roughly equally talented teams and it's much more likely they have a player break that last tackle. If you want to question this years team based on UK and Bowling Green, the question is why we let so many mediocre or worse teams hang in until the end and have they corrected the problem. I'd say the problem was that we didn't have an identity and we also used personnel poorly. Hopefully we've fixed both problems.
Actually no. They typically do that about 50% of the time. You missed the whole point. Congrats.
While I mostly agree with you on this, you're wrong about one thing. The better team does usually win a close game, not as often as it wins overall, but still more like 60-70% of the time. For us, we lost a close game to a better team (AU), beat 3 worse teams (BG, KY, & Ark), and beat a roughly equal team. In our case, it more a case of us underperforming in a few games than getting particularly lucky.
I'm on
my phone, away from a computer and unable to check, but what are our numbers under Mullen in games where we are favored? Just curious.
my phone, away from a computer and unable to check, but what are our numbers under Mullen in games where we are favored? Just curious.
Last edited:
You're missing the point. Teams typically win around 50% of their one possession games because usually if two teams are in a one possession game, it's because the teams are pretty equal. But when a team is only in a one possession game because they are underachieving, they will usually keep it together at the end of the game, especially in a sport like football (as opposed to basketball), where underperforming is more likely to be caused by lack of energy as opposed to playing tight. When two teams are not equal, the difference is not just going to be how a fumble bounces or whether a receiver comes up with a catch that he's 50/50 to make; it's often going to be superior athletes making superior plays. In all of Mullen's years here, the only game I can remember where it's even arguable we lost a close game to a team we were better than was Houston. We've underperformed a lot of games (La tech, UAB, UK, Vandy, etc.) to only lose one game when you claim they are 50/50 propositions.
If I am not mistaken, the only game that we have lost when we were favored was to Auburn in 2011.
I don't think it's luck because many of those one possession games were caused by our awful kicking situation. If we could kick field goals, it wouldn't have been a one possession game.