[CornFed]

I also think you copied someone else's summary under my name.  Would you please check it?

Actually, come to think of it, it's better than what I actually wrote.  Dang!

[CornFed]

I also think you copied someone else's summary under my name.  Would you please check it?

Actually, come to think of it, it's better than what I actually wrote.  Dang!

[Rally]

Wow, no need to ask this year whether there is interest on doing the game again!

Hi again all.
I just got back from a few months in Europe (where, yes, they also have internet, but I was more busy), and I'd be happy to compile the results again. Though I see that PrinceLightfoot has already put together a beautiful table  ;)

My c++ code is based on a class that takes a text file similar to that table, with the results of each week, and implements the scoring system described here. Basically, |PredStanford-RealStanford| + |PredRival-RealRival| with a few details.

The one thing that I wouldn't do again were the comments as tiebreakers. To make the table readable, I first had to summarize them, and then manually tell the code which comment was closer to reality (it'd be a great PhD thesis to teach c++ to read a few articles summarizing the game, and pick the best comments based on that).

Apart from that, there were some gripes with the scoring system (we started with using only the spread, and changed midway to use those absolute differences), but I think is more or less ok.

If anybody prefers to take of this, I'm happy as well.
My prediction for this week is 35-9, an unsatisfying win where the defense is decent but lots of missed opportunities in offense. More yards will be earned through the air, than rushing.

Welcome back!

[Rally]

Wow, no need to ask this year whether there is interest on doing the game again!

Hi again all.
I just got back from a few months in Europe (where, yes, they also have internet, but I was more busy), and I'd be happy to compile the results again. Though I see that PrinceLightfoot has already put together a beautiful table  ;)

My c++ code is based on a class that takes a text file similar to that table, with the results of each week, and implements the scoring system described here. Basically, |PredStanford-RealStanford| + |PredRival-RealRival| with a few details.

The one thing that I wouldn't do again were the comments as tiebreakers. To make the table readable, I first had to summarize them, and then manually tell the code which comment was closer to reality (it'd be a great PhD thesis to teach c++ to read a few articles summarizing the game, and pick the best comments based on that).

Apart from that, there were some gripes with the scoring system (we started with using only the spread, and changed midway to use those absolute differences), but I think is more or less ok.

If anybody prefers to take of this, I'm happy as well.
My prediction for this week is 35-9, an unsatisfying win where the defense is decent but lots of missed opportunities in offense. More yards will be earned through the air, than rushing.

Welcome back!

[Sea Loon]

Stanford 30, UCD 16.

[Sea Loon]

Stanford 30, UCD 16.

[ahuang06]

38-7 - good guys!

[ahuang06]

38-7 - good guys!

[CrazedZooChimp]

Wow, no need to ask this year whether there is interest on doing the game again!

Hi again all.
I just got back from a few months in Europe (where, yes, they also have internet, but I was more busy), and I'd be happy to compile the results again. Though I see that PrinceLightfoot has already put together a beautiful table  ;)

My c++ code is based on a class that takes a text file similar to that table, with the results of each week, and implements the scoring system described here. Basically, |PredStanford-RealStanford| + |PredRival-RealRival| with a few details.

The one thing that I wouldn't do again were the comments as tiebreakers. To make the table readable, I first had to summarize them, and then manually tell the code which comment was closer to reality (it'd be a great PhD thesis to teach c++ to read a few articles summarizing the game, and pick the best comments based on that).

Apart from that, there were some gripes with the scoring system (we started with using only the spread, and changed midway to use those absolute differences), but I think is more or less ok.

If anybody prefers to take of this, I'm happy as well.
My prediction for this week is 35-9, an unsatisfying win where the defense is decent but lots of missed opportunities in offense. More yards will be earned through the air, than rushing.

Welcome back Gauss!  I think there had been some talk that trying to include the spread as a factor as well might be good.  The thought being that if the final score of a game is 35-3, a prediction of 42-10 seems to more accurately reflect the result subjectively than a prediction of 23-3, which with the current method is the closer score.  I guess you could maybe just add a third factor to the total error which would the the (Predicted spread - Real spread).  Probably not necessary though.

[CrazedZooChimp]

Wow, no need to ask this year whether there is interest on doing the game again!

Hi again all.
I just got back from a few months in Europe (where, yes, they also have internet, but I was more busy), and I'd be happy to compile the results again. Though I see that PrinceLightfoot has already put together a beautiful table  ;)

My c++ code is based on a class that takes a text file similar to that table, with the results of each week, and implements the scoring system described here. Basically, |PredStanford-RealStanford| + |PredRival-RealRival| with a few details.

The one thing that I wouldn't do again were the comments as tiebreakers. To make the table readable, I first had to summarize them, and then manually tell the code which comment was closer to reality (it'd be a great PhD thesis to teach c++ to read a few articles summarizing the game, and pick the best comments based on that).

Apart from that, there were some gripes with the scoring system (we started with using only the spread, and changed midway to use those absolute differences), but I think is more or less ok.

If anybody prefers to take of this, I'm happy as well.
My prediction for this week is 35-9, an unsatisfying win where the defense is decent but lots of missed opportunities in offense. More yards will be earned through the air, than rushing.

Welcome back Gauss!  I think there had been some talk that trying to include the spread as a factor as well might be good.  The thought being that if the final score of a game is 35-3, a prediction of 42-10 seems to more accurately reflect the result subjectively than a prediction of 23-3, which with the current method is the closer score.  I guess you could maybe just add a third factor to the total error which would the the (Predicted spread - Real spread).  Probably not necessary though.

[needle]

Underappreciated 45
Undermanned 6

Michael Rector improves on his 30.8 ypc average and is one of five different Cardinal to score a TD.

[needle]

Underappreciated 45
Undermanned 6

Michael Rector improves on his 30.8 ypc average and is one of five different Cardinal to score a TD.

[Kathy]

Stanford 34
Davis 7

[Kathy]

Stanford 34
Davis 7

[PrinceLightfoot]

Wow, no need to ask this year whether there is interest on doing the game again!

Hi again all.
I just got back from a few months in Europe (where, yes, they also have internet, but I was more busy), and I'd be happy to compile the results again. Though I see that PrinceLightfoot has already put together a beautiful table  ;)

My c++ code is based on a class that takes a text file similar to that table, with the results of each week, and implements the scoring system described here. Basically, |PredStanford-RealStanford| + |PredRival-RealRival| with a few details.

The one thing that I wouldn't do again were the comments as tiebreakers. To make the table readable, I first had to summarize them, and then manually tell the code which comment was closer to reality (it'd be a great PhD thesis to teach c++ to read a few articles summarizing the game, and pick the best comments based on that).

Apart from that, there were some gripes with the scoring system (we started with using only the spread, and changed midway to use those absolute differences), but I think is more or less ok.

If anybody prefers to take of this, I'm happy as well.
My prediction for this week is 35-9, an unsatisfying win where the defense is decent but lots of missed opportunities in offense. More yards will be earned through the air, than rushing.

Welcome back, Gauss! That chart is all you - I just changed inputs :)

[PrinceLightfoot]

Wow, no need to ask this year whether there is interest on doing the game again!

Hi again all.
I just got back from a few months in Europe (where, yes, they also have internet, but I was more busy), and I'd be happy to compile the results again. Though I see that PrinceLightfoot has already put together a beautiful table  ;)

My c++ code is based on a class that takes a text file similar to that table, with the results of each week, and implements the scoring system described here. Basically, |PredStanford-RealStanford| + |PredRival-RealRival| with a few details.

The one thing that I wouldn't do again were the comments as tiebreakers. To make the table readable, I first had to summarize them, and then manually tell the code which comment was closer to reality (it'd be a great PhD thesis to teach c++ to read a few articles summarizing the game, and pick the best comments based on that).

Apart from that, there were some gripes with the scoring system (we started with using only the spread, and changed midway to use those absolute differences), but I think is more or less ok.

If anybody prefers to take of this, I'm happy as well.
My prediction for this week is 35-9, an unsatisfying win where the defense is decent but lots of missed opportunities in offense. More yards will be earned through the air, than rushing.

Welcome back, Gauss! That chart is all you - I just changed inputs :)

[82lsju]

Stanford wins 42-10.

[82lsju]

Stanford wins 42-10.

[Extra Point]

Stanford 38
Aggies 10

[Extra Point]

Stanford 38
Aggies 10

[Mick]

Cardinal, 66-0.  That's right, I said it.

[Mick]

Cardinal, 66-0.  That's right, I said it.

[Rally]

Cardinal, 66-0.  That's right, I said it.

From your lips to God's ears, Mick, but it's not going to happen.

[Rally]

Cardinal, 66-0.  That's right, I said it.

From your lips to God's ears, Mick, but it's not going to happen.

[Brannerite]

Stanford 38
UCD 13

[Brannerite]

Stanford 38
UCD 13

[GoAgs72]

I have said before that a win for UC Davis is if we lose by less than 30 points. This Stanford team is much, much better than 2005 and the Aggies may have lost a step or two. Since we have lost the last several years by about 50 points to Fresno State and the team just north of Oakland, I would not be surprised if we have a similar result. We will have fun regardless with hopefully a lot of fans, the Cal_Aggie Marching Band-uh and a chance to see which new starter we get at QB.

[GoAgs72]

I have said before that a win for UC Davis is if we lose by less than 30 points. This Stanford team is much, much better than 2005 and the Aggies may have lost a step or two. Since we have lost the last several years by about 50 points to Fresno State and the team just north of Oakland, I would not be surprised if we have a similar result. We will have fun regardless with hopefully a lot of fans, the Cal_Aggie Marching Band-uh and a chance to see which new starter we get at QB.

[JohnR34231]

This Stanford team is much, much better than 2005

Now you've done it, started a flame war. Don't try to tell us our coach knows how to call plays or our quarterback knows how to throw! We know better.

Not only that.
In the immortal words of the Delt House (Faber, not Stanford).
They can't criticize our coach and QB.
Yeah, only we can do that to our coach and QB.

[JohnR34231]

This Stanford team is much, much better than 2005

Now you've done it, started a flame war. Don't try to tell us our coach knows how to call plays or our quarterback knows how to throw! We know better.

Not only that.
In the immortal words of the Delt House (Faber, not Stanford).
They can't criticize our coach and QB.
Yeah, only we can do that to our coach and QB.

[gocard14]

I'll throw my hat into the ring.  I see a Stanford victory, 38-10.  We have an ugly series or two on offense but pick up steam quickly. We let off the gas early and UCD scores on our backups.

[gocard14]

I'll throw my hat into the ring.  I see a Stanford victory, 38-10.  We have an ugly series or two on offense but pick up steam quickly. We let off the gas early and UCD scores on our backups.

[Treebound]

Farm Boys 42
Viticulturalists 13

No Fault Walt -  negative 108, I wonder what he and Ted think about Stanford at the top of upper right quadrant?!

[Treebound]

Farm Boys 42
Viticulturalists 13

No Fault Walt -  negative 108, I wonder what he and Ted think about Stanford at the top of upper right quadrant?!

[needle]

Apologies if this was posted elsewhere in this 7-page thread, but speaking of Walt and the 2005 game against UC-Davis:

"I remember panic,'' said Husak, the former Cardinal quarterback who was working as an offensive assistant that season. "It started with the head coach (Walt Harris), and it spread.''

http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_264...-2005-loss

[needle]

Apologies if this was posted elsewhere in this 7-page thread, but speaking of Walt and the 2005 game against UC-Davis:

"I remember panic,'' said Husak, the former Cardinal quarterback who was working as an offensive assistant that season. "It started with the head coach (Walt Harris), and it spread.''

http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_264...-2005-loss

[pefloresjr]

I didn't participate in the first game prediction last year because I was afraid it was bad karma.  Seeing how much fun it was, I got over it and played the rest of the way.  I'm jumping in from the start this year.  My goal this year is the same as last year, beat the pac-12 bloggers and, just for fun, beat Garvin and make him buy me a beer. 

Nerd Nation - 44
Mustaggies - 10

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

I didn't participate in the first game prediction last year because I was afraid it was bad karma.  Seeing how much fun it was, I got over it and played the rest of the way.  I'm jumping in from the start this year.  My goal this year is the same as last year, beat the pac-12 bloggers and, just for fun, beat Garvin and make him buy me a beer. 

Nerd Nation - 44
Mustaggies - 10

Cheers,
Pete F.

[yvonne]

The Pac-12 blog may not be doing score predictions this year. The blog has added three additional writers, and appears to simply be posting the logo of the projected winner along with a brief blurb from one of them.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/...redictions

[yvonne]

The Pac-12 blog may not be doing score predictions this year. The blog has added three additional writers, and appears to simply be posting the logo of the projected winner along with a brief blurb from one of them.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/...redictions