Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
St ansgar was without a starting linebacker, 2nd most tackles on team and one of their better running backs (same person), but sibley definitely put up a good fight. Apparently their losses were by a total of 9 points, (don't quote me on that) Definitely appeared better than their record would indicate.Woodbury rolled North Union
STA has a close one with *checks notes* Sibley Ocheyedan
WH up 38-22 late over LGC
North But loses 17-0 to Starmont
No way the state puts the 1,3,5 ranked teams in the same pod. Be no point to the rankings if they didSt. Ansgar vs Lake Mills
Wapsie Valley vs West Hancock
Woodbury Central vs MMCRU
Akron Westfield vs Logan-Magnolia
Lisbon vs Maq Valley
Starmont vs East Buch
Madrid vs Central Dec
ACGC vs Lynnville-Sully
If I'm the state I'm not giving a district runner-up a pod. Geographically this makes sense.No way the state puts the 1,3,5 ranked teams in the same pod. Be no point to the rankings if they did.
If your referring to WH your not giving them a pod they will have to travel to a number 1 as all 1 seeds won last night. The question is if the state considers them a top 4 overall seed based on the rankings what two 1 seeds will pod together with them. I could honestly see them go east and play either starmont or wapsie Valley and still be out of the Stansger pod.If I'm the state I'm not giving a district runner-up a pod. Geographically this makes sense.
WH cant be a 1 as all the #1 seeds won. They may be the best team in whatever pod they are in but wont be a numner one they just have to play a number one.My guess is the following will be #1 in the following Pods.
NW - West Hancock
NE - St Ansgar
SE - Madrid
SW - Woodbury Central
No show this week?DISCLAIMER: We are WH homers but Jay and Kevin watch Class A football very closely and know their stuff. We try to keep it very unbiased.
Enjoy!
Recording at 4:30 today! BcMoore is joining us!No show this week?
Recording at 4:30 today! BcMoore is joining us!
So THAT's BC Moore?!?!?!Playoff Episode #2 with BCMoore! DISCLAIMER: We are West Hancock homers. We will always pick WH to win. Not bulletin board material! BCMoore did a great job explaining his program and formulas with us
I am quoting on it though MMCRU won 42-0 @ Sibley a few weeks ago.St ansgar was without a starting linebacker, 2nd most tackles on team and one of their better running backs (same person), but sibley definitely put up a good fight. Apparently their losses were by a total of 9 points, (don't quote me on that) Definitely appeared better than their record would indicate.
So after a few days to see, whets your take on Starmont and your Pod?The legend himself Doc!
I'm the last one you want giving expertise on these things. The other three guys are better than that. I'm predicting WH victories but that's because I'm a WH homer and supporter! Should and could be some good games!So after a few days to see, whets your take on Starmont and your Pod?
There is a strength of schedule rating given, but it did not seem that SOS was used as a discriminating factor in the rankings but only the regression model. One could surmise SOS is a major data point when trying to prognosticate pecking order by rank, no? Or did I misinterpret something?Playoff Episode #2 with BCMoore! DISCLAIMER: We are West Hancock homers. We will always pick WH to win. Not bulletin board material! BCMoore did a great job explaining his program and formulas with us
In the regression it inherently takes into account the strength of schedule. Close games with higher ranked teams or quality wins over high ranked teams results in a higher rank.There is a strength of schedule rating given, but it did not seem that SOS was used as a discriminating factor in the rankings but only the regression model. One could surmise SOS is a major data point when trying to prognosticate pecking order by rank, no? Or did I misinterpret something?
Okay. Do not remember them stating that strength of schedule was actually in the regression used. What I thought I heard was scores were what was used in the regression and blowouts were taken out so as not to skew. Regression was "score based". If I missed comments about SOS being represented in the rankings as well then I just missed it.In the regression it inherently takes into account the strength of schedule. Close games with higher ranked teams or quality wins over high ranked teams results in a higher rank.
You are correct in that it was not stated. My understanding of the way Mr. Moore is using regression is that basically he takes the scores of all matchups and solves for the rankings that minimize the variance between the model expectation (ie relative rank) and actual scores. For instance, one would expect victories between similarly ranked teams to be relatively narrow and superior ranked teams to be blowouts. The "strength of schedule" then becomes a comparison of the ranks of all the respective opponents - so it is an output of the model rather than an input to the model. I would be curious though to know whether the model gives more weight to later season games versus early season games. For instance, a +3 TD finish over a 15th ranked team last week I would think would be more impactful than the same win in week 2 because teams improve throughout the season or deal with injury. Also, I am surprised that he "throws" out the large spread games as data points as opposed to "capping" them. Most teams are going to start putting in the subs once they have a 28 - 35 point lead or maybe the last drive or two with a 14 - 21 point lead. Its still a meaningful input just probably loses meaning whether it is a 60-point spread or 35. Obviously, weather is always an impact in reality, however, not sure how a model would systematically use this information, particularly given the only inputs he is gathering is score, not offensive style or anything like that.Okay. Do not remember them stating that strength of schedule was actually in the regression used. What I thought I heard was scores were what was used in the regression and blowouts were taken out so as not to skew. Regression was "score based". If I missed comments about SOS being represented in the rankings as well then I just missed it.
And/or also void of direct and/or indirect crossover of common opponents.You are correct in that it was not stated. My understanding of the way Mr. Moore is using regression is that basically he takes the scores of all matchups and solves for the rankings that minimize the variance between the model expectation (ie relative rank) and actual scores. For instance, one would expect victories between similarly ranked teams to be relatively narrow and superior ranked teams to be blowouts. The "strength of schedule" then becomes a comparison of the ranks of all the respective opponents - so it is an output of the model rather than an input to the model. I would be curious though to know whether the model gives more weight to later season games versus early season games. For instance, a +3 TD finish over a 15th ranked team last week I would think would be more impactful than the same win in week 2 because teams improve throughout the season or deal with injury. Also, I am surprised that he "throws" out the large spread games as data points as opposed to "capping" them. Most teams are going to start putting in the subs once they have a 28 - 35 point lead or maybe the last drive or two with a 14 - 21 point lead. Its still a meaningful input just probably loses meaning whether it is a 60-point spread or 35. Obviously, weather is always an impact in reality, however, not sure how a model would systematically use this information, particularly given the only inputs he is gathering is score, not offensive style or anything like that.
You need to scroll down a little bit on the fumble link to see the video.Man MMCRU got absolutely robbed tonight. Had a clear touchdown to tie the game up as time expired that was called incomplete. They also recovered a CLEAR AS DAY Fumble when the game was 14-7. WC ended up scoring a TD to make it 21-7 a few plays later. I know officiating is tough to come by these days, but you still hate to see officials decide the outcome of a playoff game like that. Tip of the cap to both teams on an absolute battle tonight.
I do see a bobble. Ws and Ls are razor thin. Wow.
Tough call either way let alone for high school officials in a huge situation. Not sure the right call here.