BobChalmers Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 11 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I mean, that's kind of true of most of these pundits, is it not? so what makes Freelund stand out to you? To me she stands out because she's supposed to be delivering some (mysterious) mathematical analysis based on some (mysterious) model she has, that we are left to assume has some sound basis behind it.
oldmanfan Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 I think she has a lot of education in statistical methods, and that her difficulty in predicting outcomes is a testimony to the complexity of NFL play. 1
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 2 minutes ago, BobChalmers said: To me she stands out because she's supposed to be delivering some (mysterious) mathematical analysis based on some (mysterious) model she has, that we are left to assume has some sound basis behind it. Hmmmmmmm isn't that what most of the various sites and pundits are claiming? ESPN with total QBR? PFF with all the stuff they claim goes into their ranking? 538?
JMF2006 Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 4 minutes ago, BobChalmers said: To me she stands out because she's supposed to be delivering some (mysterious) mathematical analysis based on some (mysterious) model she has, that we are left to assume has some sound basis behind it. But can she pick the powerball #'s
BobChalmers Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Hmmmmmmm isn't that what most of the various sites and pundits are claiming? ESPN with total QBR? PFF with all the stuff they claim goes into their ranking? 538? She stands out as being a (purported) statistical modeler compared to the endless stream of subjective talking heads on her host NFLN. She stands out separately from the modelers you mention on other outlets in that her results are so very terrible. Edited September 13, 2019 by BobChalmers
Andrew Son Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 Analytics suck for football. Way too many variables. It's a much better tool for baseball, which is basically a bunch of one on one match-ups.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 4 minutes ago, BobChalmers said: She stands out as being a (purported) statistical modeler compared to the endless stream of subjective talking heads on her host NFLN. She stands out separately from the modelers you mention on other outlets in that her results are so very terrible. I dunno, have you done a head to head? You sure their results aren't just as terrible? 1
BUFFALOKIE Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 1 hour ago, LabattBlue said: If she repeatedly used the term BillsMafia, but still sucked at predictions, would that make her more likeable? ? Anyone, especially professional "journalists" who repeatedly uses "Bill's Mafia", is a ***** Tool.
Jay_Fixit Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 1 hour ago, Gugny said: Why do you think women shouldn't be able to analyze football and/or make predictions??? Exactly. So much hate towards women.
Doc Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 1 hour ago, JMF2006 said: Does .4 mean we lead for 1/4 of game 7 or almost a full 1/2 Don't know, but the 6 means she's a doofus.
GunnerBill Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 2 hours ago, DCbillsfan said: She's terrible. She's overly stat minded and doesn't offer anything else that's not stat minded. I usually turn her off. I listen to almost anyone else except her and Colin Cowherd. AND Mike Schopp. You do realise her job is to only look at stats, right? 1
DuckyBoys Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 I'm jealous she has a job covering football with her nonsense
DCbillsfan Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 29 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: You do realise her job is to only look at stats, right? Well she needs to look at different stats because she's terrible.
Happy Posted September 13, 2019 Posted September 13, 2019 (edited) Freelund and her segment on NFLN has been discussed a couple of months ago. She's not much different than any other expert (analytic, coach, retired pro, etc) who makes predictions on any other network. I mean, I'd rather watch her than Michael Irvin. Amirite? Edited September 13, 2019 by Happy Gilmore
RaoulDuke79 Posted September 14, 2019 Posted September 14, 2019 Her nose is kind of big, but I'd still smash.
Just Joshin' Posted September 14, 2019 Posted September 14, 2019 12 hours ago, Bills2ref said: She is absolutely horrendous. Her predictions are the worst I’ve ever seen. I guess analytics can’t predict any better than throwing darts at a board. But analytics sounds a lot better than guessing.
JoPoy88 Posted September 14, 2019 Posted September 14, 2019 7 minutes ago, Just Joshin' said: But analytics sounds a lot better than guessing. She’s a very smart person as far as the math goes. However... you’re right her models and subsequent predictions haven't been great. She’s not “guessing” her models may just be trash.
GunnerBill Posted September 14, 2019 Posted September 14, 2019 8 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said: She’s a very smart person as far as the math goes. However... you’re right her models and subsequent predictions haven't been great. She’s not “guessing” her models may just be trash. The problem with mathematical models is they are very reliant on prior performance. And the NFL is such an 'any given sunday' league. Her job isn't necessarily to be right. It is to apply a mathematical model to predictions as a contrast against the 3 guys on the panel applying more traditional NFL thinking. 1
Recommended Posts