thoughts on UM-MSU

[RABID]

Correct, but that was a reference to your prior comment where you said the original expression was ambiguous and missing a set of parenthesis. It's not because as you correctly pointed out, the OOOs clearly tells you to perform the operation inside the parenthesis then the remaining operations left to right.

The answer is 288. Expressed this way:

48/(2(9+3))

the correct answer would be 2.

Exactly. That is why I qualified it by saying there is no such thing as ambiguous parenthesis in math. You can't have implied operations in an exact science. If you mean for them to be there, ya gotta write 'em in. Otherwise YOU are the one that is wrong.

 

[Michchamp]

I thought AA had a bigger problem with couch fires on porches, which is still in the house. Didn't your favorite Wolverine have a thread about something like that ?

I don't have favorites on here. I like all pro-Michigan posters equally, then everyone else, except Thumb, who posted that hilarious graphic in that one politics thread, and I consider him an honorary Michigan poster, even though he has no apparent ties to any college teams.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Gulo Genius does have a nice ring to it. :nod:

I'm always for promoting the arrogant Michigan fan stereotype.

 

[Gulo Blue]

MSU bros not do step one correctly, it get very hot inside party. party go up in smoke. house burn down. people die. very bad. learn things hard way.

You slipped into Rorschach-speak there.

I heard joke once: Man goes to doctor. Says he's depressed, life is harsh and cruel. Says he feels all alone in threatening world. Doctor says, "Treatment is simple. The great clown Pagliacci is in town. Go see him. That should pick you up." Man bursts into tears."But doctor" He says, "I am Pagliacci." Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains.

 

[RABID]

I'm always for promoting the arrogant Michigan fan stereotype.

I'm good with that.

 

[Michchamp]

I'm always for promoting the arrogant Michigan fan stereotype.

Red, I hinted it would be cool if you fit the numbers for State's D into the same equation so we could see our projected pts based on that, but you may have missed my post.

here, now I've even done the leg work for you:

Opp............offensive rank........pts against MSU D
WMU............113th.................13
USF..............121st..................6
YSU..............FCS..................17 (not sure where you put them)
ND................81st.................17
Iowa.............74th.................14
IU.................10th.................28
PU..............120th...................0
Ill.................73rd...................3

we are 45th. guessing that puts us in the high teens/low 20s.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Red, I hinted it would be cool if you fit the numbers for State's D into the same equation so we could see our projected pts based on that, but you may have missed my post.

here, now I've even done the leg work for you:

Opp............offensive rank........pts against MSU D
WMU............113th.................13
USF..............121st..................6
YSU..............FCS..................17 (not sure where you put them)
ND................81st.................17
Iowa.............74th.................14
IU.................10th.................28
PU..............120th...................0
Ill.................73rd...................3

we are 45th. guessing that puts us in the high teens/low 20s.

Sorry.
Leaving YSU out of it you get y = -0.1893x + 27.58. 45th place yields 19 points.

There's a lot more spread on this curve than the first one. 5 of 7 games were within a field goal of the first curve, but this curve, only 3 games were within a field goal.

 

[Spartanmack]

Exactly. That is why I qualified it by saying there is no such thing as ambiguous parenthesis in math. You can't have implied operations in an exact science. If you mean for them to be there, ya gotta write 'em in. Otherwise YOU are the one that is wrong.

Exactly. The reason I made the wise-ass comment was that you only have what's on the screen or paper in front of you - follow the rules and don't make assumptions about intent. Both expressions (in my post) yield the same result so you could look at the second expression and say the added parenthesis are unnecessary (not wrong, but not needed either) just as easily as you can look at the first and say "this could be written better".

 

[Michchamp]

so 22 to 19.

 

[Michchamp]

so 22 to 19.

alternatively, as Vic alluded to, this game could defy all expectations, and the final score could be 49-45, or 63-14 or something, in which case the only sound course of action would be for the fans of the winning team to attack the fans of the losing team on the boards and act like the result confirms their personal beliefs in the superiority of their team, and the game has greater implications for their lives than you would expect of an athletic contest in which none of them actually even participated in.

 

[RABID]

so 22 to 19.

I will give you 500 to 1 odds that that will NOT be the final score.
Talk about rare scores to hit.

Well, maybe MSU will get 6 FG's and 2 safetys and MI will score 3 TDs with two blocked PATs. :ugh:

 

[Michchamp]

I will give you 500 to 1 odds that that will NOT be the final score.
Talk about rare scores to hit.

Well, maybe MSU will get 6 FG's and 2 safetys and MI will score 3 TDs with two blocked PATs. :ugh:

I'm guessing the real life approximation of Red's number crunching would be either 23 or 21 for MSU and 17 or 20 for Michigan.

 

[RABID]

I'm guessing the real life approximation of Red's number crunching would be either 23 or 21 for MSU and 17 or 20 for Michigan.

Nuh-uh.

All time, In Sparty town- 20- 12- 2 M leads
avg score: 19.47 - 14.53

I bet that is not the final either.

 

[Green and White 95]

I will give you 500 to 1 odds that that will NOT be the final score.
Talk about rare scores to hit.

Well, maybe MSU will get 6 FG's and 2 safetys and MI will score 3 TDs with two blocked PATs. :ugh:

Hey, all that needs to happen is : Michigan gets a TD/w extra point and 4 FG. Hell you got 4 fg's last year. MSU needs 2 TD's, one missed extra point and 3 fg's. Then I get to refer to Red as Gulo the Genius forever and all MSU fans go home happy. This sounds :yay: to me

 

[Gulo Blue]

Looking at the other side of the ball, Michigan could be expected to score 32 and MSU 20, but the data is a bit ridiculous. Tons of spread. Very little trending; not much of a relationship between how D's are ranked and how much Michigan and MSU have scored. That leads to predictions pretty close to average scoring no matter what the D's are ranked.

 

[TheVictors]

Looking at the other side of the ball, Michigan could be expected to score 32 and MSU 20, but the data is a bit ridiculous. Tons of spread. Very little trending; not much of a relationship between how D's are ranked and how much Michigan and MSU have scored. That leads to predictions pretty close to average scoring no matter what the D's are ranked.

I did that and rounded to 35-20 final score ...but come on.

 

[Spartanmack]

I will give you 500 to 1 odds that that will NOT be the final score.
Talk about rare scores to hit.

Well, maybe MSU will get 6 FG's and 2 safetys and MI will score 3 TDs with two blocked PATs. :ugh:

Done. I got $5 at 500:1 on MSU 22 michigan 19. Now all I need is mich to lead 19 (td & 4 FGs - like last year but adding a TD) to 14 then State gets the go ahead TD in the 4th qtr and correctly (and successfully) goes for 2.