Ducks

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Fairly-Hard said:
Talking about winning percentage. Not amount of games.
Click to expand...

it's possible they somehow weighted it for football's fewer games

my guess is they totaled all the wins and losses in both sports and derived the winning percentage

Dana Altman has been the HC at Oregon since 2010 and his winning percentage is .706 (300-125). In the same time frame the Duck football team is 117-40 (.745). Total wins and losses for both is 417-165 (.717)
 
Last edited:
wizenheimer said:
it's possible they somehow weighted it for football's fewer games

my guess is they totaled all the wins and losses in both sports and derived the winning percentage

Dana Altman has been the HC at Oregon since 2010 and his winning percentage is .706 (300-125). In the same time frame the Duck football team is 117-40 (.745). Total wins and losses for both is 417-165 (.717)
Click to expand...
Why?
Why not just take the teams winning percentage the way it stands? Basketball is basketball and football is football?
 
Fairly-Hard said:
Why?
Why not just take the teams winning percentage the way it stands? Basketball is basketball and football is football?
Click to expand...

lol....you need to ask the author of that tweet

it does show which schools have had the most success in the two major income generating sports
 
wizenheimer said:
lol....you need to ask the author of that tweet

it does show which schools have had the most success in the two major income generating sports
Click to expand...
It doesn’t say anything about weighing anything.
If your teams winning percentage in football is .750 and your basketball team is also .750 you have a combined average of .750.
Seems pretty simple to me.
If one is .400 and the other is .600 you have a combined.500.
Your probably right though. Stats dudes hate things being that easy.
 
Fairly-Hard said:
It doesn’t say anything about weighing anything.
If your teams winning percentage in football is .750 and your basketball team is also .750 you have a combined average of .750.
Seems pretty simple to me.
If one is .400 and the other is .600 you have a combined.500.
Your probably right though. Stats dudes hate things being that easy.
Click to expand...

I showed you how they arrived at those percentages
 
1663014103396.thumb.png.014e7f3b184078c27aba6890d9557282.png
 
If OR & WA are invited to B10 is it for sports. If so, those non revenue generating teams will be flying 5K mile round trips every week.
 
Hoopguru said:
If OR & WA are invited to B10 is it for sports. If so, those non revenue generating teams will be flying 5K mile round trips every week.
Click to expand...

not 5000 miles....they won't have road games every week. They'll be traveling half of the time, and some of that will be to LA (+Bay Area if Stanford joins too)

I think the stuff about travel is a bit overblown. Yeah, those trips of 1500-2000 miles are longer than those of 500-100 miles but that's only in air time. Most of travel is preparation, packing, loading luggage, getting to the airport, departing the airport and traveling to hotels, and checking into hotels; then going from hotels to game site. All that ancillary effort is the same if a team is traveling from Eugene to Seattle or to Ohio
 
wizenheimer said:
not 5000 miles....they won't have road games every week. They'll be traveling half of the time, and some of that will be to LA (+Bay Area if Stanford joins too)

I think the stuff about travel is a bit overblown. Yeah, those trips of 1500-2000 miles are longer than those of 500-100 miles but that's only in air time. Most of travel is preparation, packing, loading luggage, getting to the airport, departing the airport and traveling to hotels, and checking into hotels; then going from hotels to game site. All that ancillary effort is the same if a team is traveling from Eugene to Seattle or to Ohio
Click to expand...
I wasnt just talking football but all the other non revenue generating sports throughout the year?
 
Hoopguru said:
?
Click to expand...
The map you posted looks like it says(it's cut off, so am mostly guessing) that the pictures represent which team is generally the rooting interest in each county. And most of South Dakota is Stanford, which seems odd.
 
RR7 said:
The map you posted looks like it says(it's cut off, so am mostly guessing) that the pictures represent which team is generally the rooting interest in each county. And most of South Dakota is Stanford, which seems odd.
Click to expand...
Look at Arizona, Look's like U W and Texas are bigger then ASU. Which is weird, especially the UW.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
RR7 said:
Also, is that the Tulane green wave making up a chunk of new Mexico? Wtf
Click to expand...
Half of Kansas and a big chunk of Utah stanford also. Wonder how they decided this. Look at the UO in the Northeast also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RR7
RR7 said:
The map you posted looks like it says(it's cut off, so am mostly guessing) that the pictures represent which team is generally the rooting interest in each county. And most of South Dakota is Stanford, which seems odd.
Click to expand...
Looks like it's all based on responses in a Reddit thread. Apparently only Stanford grads have internet in South Dakota.
 
LOL at the Oregonian:

upload_2022-9-19_22-29-34.png

yeah, Atlanta was a neutral site
 

Attachments

  • upload_2022-9-19_22-29-34.png
    upload_2022-9-19_22-29-34.png
    11.6 KB · Views: 64
RR7 said:
Weird, what's the South Dakota-Stanford connection?
Click to expand...
Speculating... pretty sure that Oregon produces less then 10 D1 football prospects a year. With less then 1/4 the population of Oregon, no football hotbed communities and very few African Americans, I wouldn't be surprised if there was only 1 who came out of South Dakota last year. A school that lands that 1 guy owns the state. On the other hand, I went through the last 8 Stanford classes and didn't spot a single guy from South Dakota so???

According to this 247 article, maybe the state should be shaded Iowa State...

https://stacker.com/south-dakota/highest-rated-football-recruits-south-dakota-over-last-20-years

Then again, maybe I've got it all wrong and this is a reflection of fans of programs around the country?

STOMP
 
Last edited:
this guy is pretty well connected and was the one who called USC to the Big-10 over 2 months before it was announced. He has an episode on Oregon (and essentially Washington too) The guy has a bit of an obnoxious delivery and he repeats himself ...after already repeating himself:



now, I occasionally hear some things about the inner circle at the UofO. I used to hear a lot more but people move away (especially from me....except my wife dammit)

* that Oregon is being aggressive I believe. I also believe UofW is being aggressive too. For Oregon, this is being driven by Phil Knight more than anyone else, who I've been told believes the Pac-10 is essentially dead at this point

* the part about Oregon (and other schools) being unwilling to sign any restrictive, long term GOR (grant of rights) I believe too. It would not make any sense at all otherwise. The only way Oregon agrees to a long term GOR is if there is no penalty for leaving the conference and breaking the GOR. Of course, that torpedoes the Pac-12's desire to ink new media deals. The value of any Pac-12 media deal would crater if Oregon and Washington left

* the part about Oregon willing to accept way less than a full share I don't believe. They may be willing to enter at a discount that escalates to a full share in 3-5 years (like Maryland & Rutgers did). But I do not believe the UofO is being that "extremely aggressive"

* he mentions "double-dipping". That is for all of the sports besides football. What that means, for example, is if a Big-10 basketball team travels to Eugene for a game, it would be much more logical to have a short hop to Seattle for a 2nd game. Making for a very typical 2 game road trip. That works for basketball, baseball, softball, etc

* he said the UofO would build a hockey stadium and form a D-1 team. That I don't believe. Half of the schools in the current Big-10 don't have hockey teams. There's no reason for the Ducks to have one, and it's really doubtful there would be much fan support for a team
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top