Author
Topic: OSU and reality
(Read 27705 times)

Cincydawg · « **Reply #182 on:** October 31, 2019, 10:26:33 AM »

Yeah, I understand the notion, but "fans" still want a simple "solution" to whatever ails them.

I'm the same. I just figure my "solutions" are largely impractical and probably not real solutions, plus I have no influence anyway.

I try not to get frustrated by things out of my control.

I rely on coffee to changes the things I can change, and wine to tolerate the things I cannot change.

FearlessF · « **Reply #183 on:** October 31, 2019, 10:30:39 AM »

I've been told by women that I'm much too logical

but, it helps with things out of my control

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #184 on:** October 31, 2019, 10:49:00 AM »

Quote from: CWSooner on October 30, 2019, 09:44:56 PM

You'd probably know more on this than I do, Medina, but I would guess that the Midwest in general has gotten less blue as the strength and numbers of big labor have declined.

Ohio has but only slightly until 2016 and you have to go back almost 50 years to find a Presidential election in which Ohio voted more Democratic than the nation as a whole. As noted above, Ohio has voted for the winner in 15 straight Presidential elections (starting with 1964) so the Buckeye State has, for the last ~60 years, been pretty much even with the nation as a whole. I believe that Ohio's 52 year streak of voting for the winning Presidential candidate is the longest such streak in the nation. Lately, however, Ohio has typically been slightly to the right of the national vote so it is basically just a matter of time until Ohio votes for an unsuccessful Republican candidate:

In 2016 the national popular vote was 48/46 D while Ohio was 52/43 R so Ohio was ~3-4 points to the right.
In 2012 the national popular vote was 51/47 D while Ohio was 51/48 D so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 2008 the national popular vote was 53/46 D while Ohio was 51/47 D so Ohio was ~1-2 points to the right.
In 2004 the national popular vote was 51/48 R while Ohio was 51/48 R so Ohio was close to dead on.
In 2000 the national popular vote was almost exactly even while Ohio was 50/47 R so Ohio Was slightly to the right.
In 1996 the national popular vote was 49/41 D while Ohio was 47/41 D so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1992 the national popular vote was 43/37 D while Ohio was 40/38 D so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1988 the national popular vote was 53/46 R while Ohio was 55/44 R so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1984 the national popular vote was 59/41 R while Ohio was 59/40 R so Ohio was close to dead on.
In 1980 the national popular vote was 51/41 R while Ohio was 52/41 R so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1976 the national popular vote was 50/48 R while Ohio was almost exactly even so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1972 the national popular vote was 61/38 R while Ohio was 60/38 D so Ohio was slightly to the left.
In 1968 the national popular vote was almost exactly even while Ohio was slightly to the right of that.
In 1964 the national popular vote was 61/39 D while Ohio was 63/37 D so Ohio was slightly to the left.
In 1960 the national popular vote was almost exactly even while Ohio was 53/47 R so Ohio was slightly to the right.

Note that Ohio was more Democratic than the nation as a whole in 1964 and 1972. Ohio was only slightly to the right in all of the other elections since 1960 until 2016 when Ohio was substantially more Republican than the nation as a whole.

There is a trend but it is pretty minor. From ~1960-1972 Ohio was slightly more Republican than the country twice and slightly more Democratic twice. After that Ohio became consistently more Republican but only by a VERY thin margin so that isn't much change.

If you graphed this all out for the Great Lakes States I think you'd see roughly the same thing in MN, WI, MI, and PA. They have all probably drifted slightly to the right and then moved sharply right in 2016. The interesting thing to see, going forward, will be if that right turn in 2016 is a trend that future Republican candidates can maintain or even grow (possibly taking Minnesota where Trump lost by about 1.5%) or if it is a one-time phenomena that future Democratic candidates can reverse.

Close states in 2016:
States that Tump won by <8%:

16 EV's, Michigan, Trump won by 0.23%
20 EV's, Pennsylvania, Trump won by 0.72%
10 EV's, Wisconsin, Trump won by 0.77%
29 EV's, Florida, Trump won by 1.20%
1 EV, Nebraska 2nd District, Trump won by 2.24%
11 EV's, Arizona, Trump won by 3.55%
15 EV's, North Carolina, Trump won by 3.66%
16 EV's, Georgia, Trump won by 5.13%

Note that Ohio is conspicuously absent from this list. For decades Ohio has been a swing state if not THE Swing State but in 2016 Trump won Ohio by a comfortable 8.13% margin (slightly to the right of Georgia and just left of Texas).

States that Clinton won by <8%:

4 EV's, New Hampshire, Clinton won by 0.37%
10 EV's, Minnesota, Clinton won by 1.52%
6 EV's, Nevada, Clinton won by 2.42%
2 EV's, Maine at-large, Clinton won by 2.96%
9 EV's, Colorado, Clinton won by 4.91%
13 EV's, Virginia, Clinton won by 5.32%

This really demonstrates how precarious Trump's 2016 win was. He won 102 EV's by <5% and 115 by less than 6%. Even a leftward shift of just 1% would flip the election. Meanwhile, Clinton only won 31 EV's by <5% meaning that a rightward shift wouldn't change much because there aren't many competitive states that Clinton actually won.

Assuming that the seven "faithless electors" would have voted for the candidate that won their state if it mattered:

Clinton won 232 EV's.
Trump won 306 EV's.

Won by at least 1%:

Clinton won 228 EV's by at least 1% (subtract 4 NH)
Trump won 260 EV's by at least 1% (subtract 16 MI, 20 PA, 10 WI)

Won by at least 2%:

Clinton won 218 EV's by at least 2% (subtract 10 MN)
Trump won 231 EV's by at least 2% (subtract 29 FL)

Won by at least 3%:

Clinton won 212 EV's by at least 3% (subtract 6 NV)
Trump won 230 EV's by at least 3% (subtract 1 NE 2nd)

Won by at least 4%:

Clinton won 212 EV's by at least 4% (none 3-4%)
Trump won 204 EV's by at least 4% (subtract 11 AZ, 15 NC)

Won by at least 5%:

Clinton won 203 EV's by at least 5% (subtract 9 CO)
Trump won 204 EV's by at least 5% (none 4-5%)

Won by at least 6%:

Clinton won 190 EV's by at least 6% (subtract 13 VA)
Trump won 188 EV's by at least 6% (subtract 16 GA)

The next closest states after that are Ohio (18 EV's Trump won by 8.13%) and New Mexico (5 EV's Clinton won by 8.21%).

847badgerfan · « **Reply #185 on:** October 31, 2019, 10:51:00 AM »

I don't think Urbs is a "fit" at ND. Probably not at USC either. The more I think about his coaching return (and he WILL return), the more I think he's headed for the NFL. They'll give him his own Brinks truck.

See the source image

Cincydawg · « **Reply #186 on:** October 31, 2019, 10:58:25 AM »

I thought last year that Meyer's health was in pretty bad shape, and the stress of coaching at any level is not in his best interest.

The clearest example was a time out where he was away from the team bent over with hands on knees. He looked not great at other times as well.

I also don't think he needs to coach again to secure any kind of legacy thing, to the extent that matters to him.

I think he should stay in the booth, and will, but that's a guess.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #187 on:** October 31, 2019, 10:59:33 AM »

If I were to concoct one rule (which I'm not doing), I'd say that we should avoid posting any names of politicians here.

That said, medina's breakout is as usual interesting (and apolitical as it is just facts).

ELA · « **Reply #188 on:** October 31, 2019, 11:20:39 AM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on October 31, 2019, 10:59:33 AM

If I were to concoct one rule (which I'm not doing), I'd say that we should avoid posting any names of politicians here.

That said, medina's breakout is as usual interesting (and apolitical as it is just facts).

I think there is a way to talk about the impact of politics without debating politics, and I'm good with that. I don't think anyone here is taking one side or the other, simply pointing out the impact of the demographics.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #189 on:** October 31, 2019, 11:22:20 AM »

I entirely agree, and the group here should be able to talk politics intelligently.

Perhaps we could use a political "board" other than the one that exists (which is "interesting").

Big Beef Tacosupreme · « **Reply #190 on:** October 31, 2019, 11:53:11 AM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on October 31, 2019, 10:49:00 AM

Ohio has but only slightly until 2016 and you have to go back almost 50 years to find a Presidential election in which Ohio voted more Democratic than the nation as a whole. As noted above, Ohio has voted for the winner in 15 straight Presidential elections (starting with 1964) so the Buckeye State has, for the last ~60 years, been pretty much even with the nation as a whole. I believe that Ohio's 52 year streak of voting for the winning Presidential candidate is the longest such streak in the nation. Lately, however, Ohio has typically been slightly to the right of the national vote so it is basically just a matter of time until Ohio votes for an unsuccessful Republican candidate:
In 2016 the national popular vote was 48/46 D while Ohio was 52/43 R so Ohio was ~3-4 points to the right.
In 2012 the national popular vote was 51/47 D while Ohio was 51/48 D so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 2008 the national popular vote was 53/46 D while Ohio was 51/47 D so Ohio was ~1-2 points to the right.
In 2004 the national popular vote was 51/48 R while Ohio was 51/48 R so Ohio was close to dead on.
In 2000 the national popular vote was almost exactly even while Ohio was 50/47 R so Ohio Was slightly to the right.
In 1996 the national popular vote was 49/41 D while Ohio was 47/41 D so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1992 the national popular vote was 43/37 D while Ohio was 40/38 D so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1988 the national popular vote was 53/46 R while Ohio was 55/44 R so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1984 the national popular vote was 59/41 R while Ohio was 59/40 R so Ohio was close to dead on.
In 1980 the national popular vote was 51/41 R while Ohio was 52/41 R so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1976 the national popular vote was 50/48 R while Ohio was almost exactly even so Ohio was slightly to the right.
In 1972 the national popular vote was 61/38 R while Ohio was 60/38 D so Ohio was slightly to the left.
In 1968 the national popular vote was almost exactly even while Ohio was slightly to the right of that.
In 1964 the national popular vote was 61/39 D while Ohio was 63/37 D so Ohio was slightly to the left.
In 1960 the national popular vote was almost exactly even while Ohio was 53/47 R so Ohio was slightly to the right.

Note that Ohio was more Democratic than the nation as a whole in 1964 and 1972. Ohio was only slightly to the right in all of the other elections since 1960 until 2016 when Ohio was substantially more Republican than the nation as a whole.

There is a trend but it is pretty minor. From ~1960-1972 Ohio was slightly more Republican than the country twice and slightly more Democratic twice. After that Ohio became consistently more Republican but only by a VERY thin margin so that isn't much change.

If you graphed this all out for the Great Lakes States I think you'd see roughly the same thing in MN, WI, MI, and PA. They have all probably drifted slightly to the right and then moved sharply right in 2016. The interesting thing to see, going forward, will be if that right turn in 2016 is a trend that future Republican candidates can maintain or even grow (possibly taking Minnesota where Trump lost by about 1.5%) or if it is a one-time phenomena that future Democratic candidates can reverse.

Close states in 2016:
States that Tump won by <8%:
16 EV's, Michigan, Trump won by 0.23%
20 EV's, Pennsylvania, Trump won by 0.72%
10 EV's, Wisconsin, Trump won by 0.77%
29 EV's, Florida, Trump won by 1.20%
1 EV, Nebraska 2nd District, Trump won by 2.24%
11 EV's, Arizona, Trump won by 3.55%
15 EV's, North Carolina, Trump won by 3.66%
16 EV's, Georgia, Trump won by 5.13%
Note that Ohio is conspicuously absent from this list. For decades Ohio has been a swing state if not THE Swing State but in 2016 Trump won Ohio by a comfortable 8.13% margin (slightly to the right of Georgia and just left of Texas).

States that Clinton won by <8%:
4 EV's, New Hampshire, Clinton won by 0.37%
10 EV's, Minnesota, Clinton won by 1.52%
6 EV's, Nevada, Clinton won by 2.42%
2 EV's, Maine at-large, Clinton won by 2.96%
9 EV's, Colorado, Clinton won by 4.91%
13 EV's, Virginia, Clinton won by 5.32%

This really demonstrates how precarious Trump's 2016 win was. He won 102 EV's by <5% and 115 by less than 6%. Even a leftward shift of just 1% would flip the election. Meanwhile, Clinton only won 31 EV's by <5% meaning that a rightward shift wouldn't change much because there aren't many competitive states that Clinton actually won.

Assuming that the seven "faithless electors" would have voted for the candidate that won their state if it mattered:
Clinton won 232 EV's.
Trump won 306 EV's.
Won by at least 1%:
Clinton won 228 EV's by at least 1% (subtract 4 NH)
Trump won 260 EV's by at least 1% (subtract 16 MI, 20 PA, 10 WI)
Won by at least 2%:
Clinton won 218 EV's by at least 2% (subtract 10 MN)
Trump won 231 EV's by at least 2% (subtract 29 FL)
Won by at least 3%:
Clinton won 212 EV's by at least 3% (subtract 6 NV)
Trump won 230 EV's by at least 3% (subtract 1 NE 2nd)
Won by at least 4%:
Clinton won 212 EV's by at least 4% (none 3-4%)
Trump won 204 EV's by at least 4% (subtract 11 AZ, 15 NC)
Won by at least 5%:
Clinton won 203 EV's by at least 5% (subtract 9 CO)
Trump won 204 EV's by at least 5% (none 4-5%)
Won by at least 6%:
Clinton won 190 EV's by at least 6% (subtract 13 VA)
Trump won 188 EV's by at least 6% (subtract 16 GA)

The next closest states after that are Ohio (18 EV's Trump won by 8.13%) and New Mexico (5 EV's Clinton won by 8.21%).

Thanks, I love data like this. Very interesting.

Another point of interest, millennials and Gen X are far more liberal than older generations. As those groups become larger voting blocks it will be interesting to see if that will counter the red shift in some of these states.

FearlessF · « **Reply #191 on:** October 31, 2019, 11:57:43 AM »

I don't think Urbs is a "fit" at ND. Probably not at USC either. The more I think about his coaching return (and he WILL return), the more I think he's headed for the NFL. They'll give him his own Brinks truck.

Obviously, ND and/or USC could easily afford $10 million a season or as much as any NFL team would be willing to pay

847badgerfan · « **Reply #192 on:** October 31, 2019, 12:02:52 PM »

While appearing on The Colin Cowherd Show, Meyer was asked about whether Oklahoma's Lincoln Riley should be interested in the job if it were to come open.

"That's New York Yankees, that's the Dallas Cowboys," Meyer said. "That's the one. Great city. They got Dak Prescott, Zeke Elliott. You got a loaded team. And I can't speak for him obviously, I hate to even speculate because I don't know him, that's really not fair, but to me, that's the one job in professional football that you say, 'I got to go do that.'"

Cowherd, being the professional interviewer that he is then sensed Meyer's feelings on it, and pressed him a bit further on whether he'd be interested himself.

"Sure," Meyer said. "Absolutely. Absolutely. That one? Yes."

847badgerfan · « **Reply #193 on:** October 31, 2019, 12:10:10 PM »

Quote from: Big Beef Tacosupreme on October 31, 2019, 11:53:11 AM

Thanks, I love data like this. Very interesting.

Another point of interest, millennials and Gen X are far more liberal than older generations. As those groups become larger voting blocks it will be interesting to see if that will counter the red shift in some of these states.

It is a point of interest for sure, and I'm pretty certain we all know why.

Interesting, also, is that the several who work for me are not liberal. Two of them still live with their parents though. I guess that's a thing too, with that generation.

That bugs me.

MrNubbz · « **Reply #194 on:** October 31, 2019, 12:10:58 PM »

Quote from: bayareabadger on October 31, 2019, 10:11:10 AM

There’s a lot in there, much about how what persons never actually did is held in high regard compared to what someone actually did that contributed to a national title. you point out JT failed on a big stage, the implication is some second year QB wouldn't have. I reject that premise. You can reject the fact that one coach (Saban) took a proactive stance and replaced a running QB with a thrower and won.Another coach under similiar circumstances stood pat for 2 seasons after the fact with men that proved to be winners.So comprehension is the problem not attitude - my bad

(I also point out that if Burrow crapped the bed vs Clemson, we’d have laments about him years laterMaking shyt up in your alternate universe -good stuff.Nobody and I mean nobody would have blamed Urbz for trying after JT himself made the case for relief.31-0 smashing - your career as a football analyst continues to skyrocket - not

The Saban part is again a comparison of convenience. No it's a comparison of similiar circumstances - nothing ventured nothing gained.How many times does that have to be paraded in front of your eyes

We wouldn’t say a third stringer should be put in by OSU at the start of the playoffs this year, even thought it’s the only way OSU has claimed a title this decade.Yes a 3rd stringer that Urban didn't play or recruit but had to settle on.Who could go over the top and stretch a defense as NOB previously pointed out to you - twice

I look at the part where you say I’ve not read or watched anything but what I pull from my ... well. And the issue is the opposite. I seen too much. I’ve seen it all through your eyes. If you really believe that then You've taken enough drugs to send sniffer dogs into early retirement

I’ve seen more than a decade, close to a decade and a half of this message board, and Close to 20 years on message boards at large. I have seen my own fan base call for benching‘s of between nine and 11 of its past 12 starting quarterbacks. Oh forgive me I didn't know your fanbase had a QB drafted in the 1st round after setting single season Big Ten records in passing yds and TDs.Also set single season Team records in passing %,TDs & Yds who just happened to have to sit 2 yrs behind a guy who got cut 3 times from NFL practice squads.I'd bring up the other back up but he's busy filling out his resume rather handsomely at LSU

And I have been told they tried to bench the three before that too. Ohio State had a run of five consecutive quarterbacks which they were deeply dissatisfied with, at least four who they called to be benched, two of them were. I’ve heard how SO many backup QBs would’ve changed things and how so many coaches don’t know what they’re doing. There's that wide brush again I didn't know that our fans had been deeply dissatified with Terrelle Pryor,Braxton Miller or Cardale Jones but I haven't been told that so you got me there.I made a passing reference oh 10 pages back about a specific situation.And you had to jump in and correct me on Generalities,turning a ripple into a Tsunami

MrNubbz · « **Reply #195 on:** October 31, 2019, 12:21:11 PM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on October 31, 2019, 10:58:25 AM

I think he should stay in the booth, and will, but that's a guess.

I agree easy coin

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: OSU and reality

Cincydawg

Re: OSU and reality

FearlessF

Re: OSU and reality

medinabuckeye1

Re: OSU and reality

847badgerfan

Re: OSU and reality

Cincydawg

Re: OSU and reality

Cincydawg

Re: OSU and reality

ELA

Re: OSU and reality

Cincydawg

Re: OSU and reality

Big Beef Tacosupreme

Re: OSU and reality

FearlessF

Re: OSU and reality

847badgerfan

Re: OSU and reality

847badgerfan

Re: OSU and reality

MrNubbz

Re: OSU and reality

MrNubbz

Re: OSU and reality