I’m not sure why the need for these aggressive comments and the ones that relate to advanced metrics/modern models. I agree with Chase about the viability of this model that takes into account more variables than any other and paints a picture of how every single school has used non-garbage possessions on offense and defense to create winning margins. No other model looks at so many variables. It is literally impossible for an eye test to take in so many variables into account.
I’m not sure if you’re an ND alum or not, but it seems strange to seem so close-minded about new ways of measuring how good a team is. Seems like going through ND’s undergrad program would open you up to looking at things differently than you’re used to and be open to that new paradigm. This model does NOT say team A will beat team B because one is ranked higher than the other in F/+, but rather that team A has done X per possession on offense and done Y per possession on defense against certain types of defenses, at home, on the road, adjusted for luck, etc. It paints the not complete picture of what a team has done. I work with data analytics professionally now and appreciate the depth of the model. I’m not sure what you do for work, but every industry now wants data, data, data, and the more of it, the better; any opinion not based on data is blown out the meeting room.
I disagree with Chase about where the program is and about what Kelly’s role in taking us further is. To be honest, I’m not sure. I was a freshman in 2007 when we were awful and became a laughingstock, and so I appreciate what Kelly has built. I also realize that we’re not at the level of the elite teams, but also realize we never may be given the limitations of whom we can recruit.
In any case, Go Irish.
