Jump to content

Vista Murrieta CA vs Colquitt Co. GA


ECHS05

Recommended Posts

Just wanted to update this one...

As I made a thread showing CalPreps "Predict A Matchup" projection on this game...

It was Colquitt Co. 31, Vista Murrieta 26... VM recently moved up from #500ish at CP to #243. So its now a CA team rated at #243, vs a GA team rated at #254.

One couldnt have asked for a closer rated game at CP than Colquitt vs VM. 

But now the actual purpose of this thread... The Predict A Matchup now says ... [2017] Vista Murrieta (Murrieta, CA) 30, [2017] Colquitt County (Moultrie, GA) 28

Why does this matter? Its CalPreps 2nd most beloved state, California(behind Ohio, whom CP just overrates to a point of extreme idiocy), vs CPs most unloved state, GA. 

I just want this prediction to stay at the forefront of everyones minds until this game happens on August 26th.... so we can see which way the game goes in relation to this prediction.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, ECHS05 said:

Just wanted to update this one...

As I made a thread showing CalPreps "Predict A Matchup" projection on this game...

It was Colquitt Co. 31, Vista Murrieta 26... VM recently moved up from #500ish at CP to #243. So its now a CA team rated at #243, vs a GA team rated at #254.

One couldnt have asked for a closer rated game at CP than Colquitt vs VM. 

But now the actual purpose of this thread... The Predict A Matchup now says ... [2017] Vista Murrieta (Murrieta, CA) 30, [2017] Colquitt County (Moultrie, GA) 28

Why does this matter? Its CalPreps 2nd most beloved state, California(behind Ohio, whom CP just overrates to a point of extreme idiocy), vs CPs most unloved state, GA. 

I just want this prediction to stay at the forefront of everyones minds until this game happens on August 26th.... so we can see which way the game goes in relation to this prediction.

 

Is that CP official projection or just PAM? Also does CP know this kid tore his ACL

http://247sports.com/Player/Keyon-Ware-Hudson-88113

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Ararar said:

Is that CP official projection or just PAM? Also does CP know this kid tore his ACL

http://247sports.com/Player/Keyon-Ware-Hudson-88113

PAMs are the exact same as "Official Projections". The ONLY difference is PAMs are based on a natural field, and I do believe their Official Projections take into account where its played.

There is no other difference whatsoever. 

ALSO, CalPreps decided to wait til October 1st to do "Official Projections" so they could avoid 95% of the OOS games. Without using PAMs , CalPreps is let off the hook for essentially every meaningful OOS game... and seeing as how their official projections ARE PAMs, just without the neutral field... its the SAME THING.

The PAMs are the same thing. And based on the same thing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ECHS05 said:

PAMs are the exact same as "Official Projections". The ONLY difference is PAMs are based on a natural field, and I do believe their Official Projections take into account where its played.

There is no other difference whatsoever. 

ALSO, CalPreps decided to wait til October 1st to do "Official Projections" so they could avoid 95% of the OOS games. Without using PAMs , CalPreps is let off the hook for essentially every meaningful OOS game... and seeing as how their official projections ARE PAMs, just without the neutral field... its the SAME THING.

The PAMs are the same thing. And based on the same thing.

 

According to CP you are completely wrong .We have been over this they use a different system for their official projections as opposed to PAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Ararar said:

According to CP you are completely wrong .We have been over this they use a different system for their official projections as opposed to PAM.

They use a different system for RaTiNgS and PAMs... not PAMs and "Official Projections". He explains that sometimes if Team A is rated higher than Team B, yet Team B is projected to win... dont get worked up because the predictions use a different system than the ratings. Which is only partly true.

Please just stop. You have little to no clue what anything you are saying means.. you are just quoting, incorrectly I might add, nonsense that you dont even understand. Its obvious youve taken 0 time to understand it for yourself.

So in reality... according to CP... YOU are completely wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ECHS05 said:

Just wanted to update this one...

As I made a thread showing CalPreps "Predict A Matchup" projection on this game...

It was Colquitt Co. 31, Vista Murrieta 26... VM recently moved up from #500ish at CP to #243. So its now a CA team rated at #243, vs a GA team rated at #254.

One couldnt have asked for a closer rated game at CP than Colquitt vs VM. 

But now the actual purpose of this thread... The Predict A Matchup now says ... [2017] Vista Murrieta (Murrieta, CA) 30, [2017] Colquitt County (Moultrie, GA) 28

Why does this matter? Its CalPreps 2nd most beloved state, California(behind Ohio, whom CP just overrates to a point of extreme idiocy), vs CPs most unloved state, GA. 

I just want this prediction to stay at the forefront of everyones minds until this game happens on August 26th.... so we can see which way the game goes in relation to this prediction.

 

You ought to start your own ranking service

call it GA Preps

seriously you have the time and passion

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And just to throw it in your face a little more because that was your intent to start with, and again, you were wrong like every single other time youve typed...

"Projection" ratings are used on this screen, as opposed to the standard ratings seen on this site.  They are very much like the other ratings seen on this site, except that recent results are weighted more heavily and the "politically correct" moderately-low cutoff point at which margin of victory is no longer counted is eliminated.  Historical ratings of the teams (including head-to-head history) are a very small factor in projections.  In other words, predicting future outcomes and acknowledging to-date success are not the same thing.  Given that two different systems are used, yes, the results will be different in some cases.  You do not need to try to contact us every time you see Team A rated above Team B, but Team B predicted to beat Team A in a hypothetical or real game.  It happens.

 

As you can see, its the ratings that are different from the projections... not the PAMs and "Official Projections"... those are the exact same thing.

And , as you can see, even projections and ratings are basically the same... its just that the projections take into account a teams trajectory through their recent games.

Meaning... for example...if Team A started as a 60, and has pretty much hovered there for the past 4 games... and Team B started as a 25, but has risen to a 58 over the past 4 games... theres a good chance Team B is going to be projected to beat Team A even though Team A is still rated 2 points higher, because Team B is on an upward trajectory and it looks like they are going to surpass Team A.... even though they havent yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ECHS05 said:

Eventually even the Californians and  NOR will see the stupidity in CPs "National Ratings" and the impossibility of it. 

We'll definitely see it with more posts that don't deal with the actual ratings.

 

Or basis in reality.

 

Or have a punchline.

 

Or a super sweet melody.

You know what I'm saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ECHS05 said:

PAMs are the exact same as "Official Projections". The ONLY difference is PAMs are based on a natural field, and I do believe their Official Projections take into account where its played.

There is no other difference whatsoever. 

ALSO, CalPreps decided to wait til October 1st to do "Official Projections" so they could avoid 95% of the OOS games. Without using PAMs , CalPreps is let off the hook for essentially every meaningful OOS game... and seeing as how their official projections ARE PAMs, just without the neutral field... its the SAME THING.

The PAMs are the same thing. And based on the same thing.

 

Calpreps works on empirical evidence -- their preseason PAMs are meaningless and just based on how coaches filled out (or not) questionnaires 

bring this up to me st the end of the season and I'll talk about it

In fact don't talk anymore about THIS SEASON's CP until 10/15 -- there's a reason they wait until then and it's not ducking the big OOS games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Pops said:

Calpreps works on empirical evidence -- their preseason PAMs are meaningless and just based on how coaches filled out (or not) questionnaires 

bring this up to me st the end of the season and I'll talk about it

In fact don't talk anymore about THIS SEASON's CP until 10/15 -- there's a reason they wait until then and it's not ducking the big OOS games

Lol ... yeah I got back with all of yall recently about last season... 78% ring a bell? Something like 41-10-1...

Its not based on evidence... its based on Neds feelings... if it was based on evidence GA wouldnt be lowered after every season in which they always bring themselved up...

Nor would Ohio have HALF as many Top 1000 teams... Ohio is even more overvalued than Cali. Im doing Ohio data today after work.

 

You are one of the trolls that refused to believe that State scales exist, and can only be changed (raised or lowered) during the season by way of OOS games... and that is the problem... 

And now... all of the people that did not understand what I was posting, when i was showing you all the State Team Rating Averages... look stupid. Because THAT determines a states ceiling/potential. And can only be changed by way of OOS games... it makes states scale together... but theres simply not nearly enough for it to change, or for it to scale states together.

 

It truly good to know Ive been right this entire time, and people like Pops and NOR are coming to that realization... running out of ways to deny it/defend their idiotic position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ECHS05 said:

Lol ... yeah I got back with all of yall recently about last season... 78% ring a bell? Something like 41-10-1...

Its not based on evidence... its based on Neds feelings... if it was based on evidence GA wouldnt be lowered after every season in which they always bring themselved up...

Nor would Ohio have HALF as many Top 1000 teams... Ohio is even more overvalued than Cali. Im doing Ohio data today after work.

 

You are one of the trolls that refused to believe that State scales exist, and can only be changed (raised or lowered) during the season by way of OOS games... and that is the problem... 

And now... all of the people that did not understand what I was posting, when i was showing you all the State Team Rating Averages... look stupid. Because THAT determines a states ceiling/potential. And can only be changed by way of OOS games... it makes states scale together... but theres simply not nearly enough for it to change, or for it to scale states together.

 

It truly good to know Ive been right this entire time, and people like Pops and NOR are coming to that realization... running out of ways to deny it/defend their idiotic position.

Lol

And now you've got Gloryhole posting about berry farms...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, old_e said:

Can you update the projection a day before kick off. 

CP is just being silly. How in the world can poh ol little Broncos contend with one of jawjas finest.

How in the world can poh ol little Broncos contend with one of jawjas finest.

 

Not sure where you're getting your info.  Cause everybody with a pulse on this board...knows that Colquitt ain't nothing but a bunch of poor, tiny, little undersized and inexperienced Hawgs.  

I just hope we score.....

 

 

Rufus>>

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ECHS05 said:

And just to throw it in your face a little more because that was your intent to start with, and again, you were wrong like every single other time youve typed...

"Projection" ratings are used on this screen, as opposed to the standard ratings seen on this site.  They are very much like the other ratings seen on this site, except that recent results are weighted more heavily and the "politically correct" moderately-low cutoff point at which margin of victory is no longer counted is eliminated.  Historical ratings of the teams (including head-to-head history) are a very small factor in projections.  In other words, predicting future outcomes and acknowledging to-date success are not the same thing.  Given that two different systems are used, yes, the results will be different in some cases.  You do not need to try to contact us every time you see Team A rated above Team B, but Team B predicted to beat Team A in a hypothetical or real game.  It happens.

 

As you can see, its the ratings that are different from the projections... not the PAMs and "Official Projections"... those are the exact same thing.

And , as you can see, even projections and ratings are basically the same... its just that the projections take into account a teams trajectory through their recent games.

Meaning... for example...if Team A started as a 60, and has pretty much hovered there for the past 4 games... and Team B started as a 25, but has risen to a 58 over the past 4 games... theres a good chance Team B is going to be projected to beat Team A even though Team A is still rated 2 points higher, because Team B is on an upward trajectory and it looks like they are going to surpass Team A.... even though they havent yet.

Why did you not quote this part of CP PAM explanation? 

IMPORTANT NOTE: Please realize that we project every game nationally (from October 1st on).  This screen is intended for you to be able to project hypothetical games (games not actually being played).  If you're trying to find our official projection for a game being played this week, please go here

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ECHS05 said:

Lol ... yeah I got back with all of yall recently about last season... 78% ring a bell? Something like 41-10-1...

Its not based on evidence... its based on Neds feelings... if it was based on evidence GA wouldnt be lowered after every season in which they always bring themselved up...

Nor would Ohio have HALF as many Top 1000 teams... Ohio is even more overvalued than Cali. Im doing Ohio data today after work.

 

You are one of the trolls that refused to believe that State scales exist, and can only be changed (raised or lowered) during the season by way of OOS games... and that is the problem... 

And now... all of the people that did not understand what I was posting, when i was showing you all the State Team Rating Averages... look stupid. Because THAT determines a states ceiling/potential. And can only be changed by way of OOS games... it makes states scale together... but theres simply not nearly enough for it to change, or for it to scale states together.

 

It truly good to know Ive been right this entire time, and people like Pops and NOR are coming to that realization... running out of ways to deny it/defend their idiotic position.

Just to be clear

you are an idiot that is embarrasssing yourself if you were to stop your self-congratulations long enough to sniff the stench in the room on all of these stupid posts

i remember your 78% post and your assertion that Grayson should be +7 ahead of IMG, an undefeated team that beat them by 3 TDs

stop with the drivel 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ararar said:

Why did you not quote this part of CP PAM explanation? 

IMPORTANT NOTE: Please realize that we project every game nationally (from October 1st on).  This screen is intended for you to be able to project hypothetical games (games not actually being played).  If you're trying to find our official projection for a game being played this week, please go here

 

He ignores everything that doesn't support his preconceived conclusions 

thisnis basically what I told him and his response was an Ode to Himself

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Pops said:

Calpreps works on empirical evidence -- their preseason PAMs are meaningless and just based on how coaches filled out (or not) questionnaires 

bring this up to me st the end of the season and I'll talk about it

In fact don't talk anymore about THIS SEASON's CP until 10/15 -- there's a reason they wait until then and it's not ducking the big OOS games

Pops....I was under the impression that CP wasn't much different than most other fortune tellers.  They rely on tea leaves and dart throwing.

As far as I know...Lime Sink has the only "polling gurus" that rely on divine intervention...cause we only speak and report the Gospel.

(Smile)

 

 

Rufus>>

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...