Bowl practice overrated

[chum1]

62% of teams that made a bowl in 2004 also made a bowl in 2005.

This means that 38% of 2004 bowl teams failed to make a bowl in 2005.  The extra practice they got in 2004 did not help them make a bowl in 2005.

It also means that 38% of 2005 bowl teams made a bowl despite not having extra practice in 2004.

It is entirely reasonable to assume that many of the repeat bowl teams would have made a bowl in 2005 had they not had extra practice in 2004 (suppose they were on probation in 2004, for example).  These are the teams that were good enough in 2005 that extra practice in 2004 was not a deciding factor in whether or not they made a bowl in 2005. 

Given that only half of the 35 repeat bowl teams fit the above description, the following are true:

Having extra practice in 2004 did not help 54% of 2004 bowl teams to make a bowl in 2005.

Not having extra practice in 2004 would not have kept 54% of 2005 bowl teams from making their bowl in 2005.

[ksu_FAN]

Those are interesting statistics. 

I still would contend in our particular case 15 practices and another game would be better than 0, especially when still transitioning to a new program.  IMO, a bowl game would benefit this team a lot.

[chum1]

It’s very counterintuitive to think that extra practice wouldn’t help our team.  Assuming that something like those figures is correct, though, after you throw out the best teams (bowl locks) and the worst teams (no-bowl locks), the teams in the middle seem to have a fifty-fifty shot at making a bowl.  And that’s where our team is right now – in the middle.  Maybe the practice would help.  But maybe it wouldn't.

[michigancat]

How do the recruiting classes of bowl teams compare to the recruiting classes of non-bowl teams in any given year?

[catsfan20012002]

I look no further then when we went to the Fiesta Bowl vs. Syracuse. We struggled all season and then came out and blew their doors down in the bowl game. That propelled us into our National Championship run in 1998. 

[chum1]

Struggled in 1997?

http://www.kstatesports.com/SportSelect.dbml?SPSID=3061&SPID=212&DB_OEM_ID=400&KEY=&Q_SEASON=1997

[fatty fat fat]

1997 was a disaster.

[ksu_FAN]

We're all hoping that we get to see a season like 1997 again someday.

[FBWillie]

did you compare those #'s with the amount of retuning players... I can see why 10 starting seniors getting extra practice wouldn't help next year.

[ksu_FAN]

Regardless, I'm tired of NOT seeing the Cats in a bowl game.  Its amazing how much you take it for granted when you go 10 years in a row.  I don't care if we're 6-6 and playing in the Texas Bowl, I just want to see the Cats go bowling again. 

[coitus]

you don't need bowl practices when you practice smart.

or, shall I say, pracsmrt.

[JR Ewing]

LMFAO at this "analysis."  Ask Ron Prince if he thinks the extra practices would help.  Or, if you prefer, ask Bill Snyder. 

[chum1]

LMFAO at this "analysis."

Please tell me where I went wrong.

[fatty fat fat]

LMFAO at this "analysis."

Agreed. GBR.

[Houstoncat93]

LMFAO at this "analysis."

Please tell me where I went wrong.

Mistake 1 - clicking on "new topic"
Mistake 2 - clicking on "post"
Mistake 3 - drawing conclusions that are opposite of the data you posted.

Bottom line is that more practice helps.  Granted it isn't the only thing that matters but it does help your program.

[chum1]

drawing conclusions that are opposite of the data you posted.

How so?

[swish1]

drawing conclusions that are opposite of the data you posted.

How so?

not to say that you are wrong but i believe he means the fact that more teams with the extra practice time made a bowl game the following year as well.

[chum1]

drawing conclusions that are opposite of the data you posted.

How so?

not to say that you are wrong but i believe he means the fact that more teams with the extra practice time made a bowl game the following year as well.

If so, I already alluded to a natural response.  For many of the repeat bowl teams, factors other than bowl practice would have allowed them to repeat had they not had the extra practice.  As mentioned above, strong recruiting is probably one of these factors.  When you take these teams out of the equation, you're left with less than a majority of bowl teams that actually benefited (by making two bowls instead of just one) from the extra practice.

[Racquetball_Ninja]

You know what's overrated... PRACTICE!

[Skycat]

How about that.  Now give us an analysis of the percentage of non-bowl teams that become bowl teams the following year, and the percentage that don't.  Feel free to draw whatever conclusions that you like.

[chum1]

How about that. Now give us an analysis of the percentage of non-bowl teams that become bowl teams the following year, and the percentage that don't. Feel free to draw whatever conclusions that you like.

What, exactly, are you taking issue with?