Matthew Smith runs an analysis of turnover margin for 2010 teams and finds just about what you’d expect:
… Does turnover margin really have a legitimate predictive value for the next year?
The answer is yes. Turnover margin has meaningful predictive value. The reason for this is twofold: first, that turnover improvement very strongly correlates to record improvement; and second, that the turnover margin from one year generally has a very small correlation with the turnover margin for the next year…
As to his first point, he looked at the ten teams which improved their turnover margins the most from 2009 to 2010. The results were significant.
Nine of the ten improved their record. Six of the ten improved by 4+ wins. And in case you’re wondering, it was a similar story with those who improved by 12 turnovers (OK St, Illinois, and Mizzou all materially improved their records as well).
Only one of the ten failed to improve. (You know where I’m going with this, don’t you?) The only team on his list which didn’t win more games in 2010 was the team with the second greatest improvement (+26!) in all of D-1 football, our beloved Georgia Bulldogs.
As to his second point, I have no idea if that’s good news or bad for this year’s Dawgs. But I think I’ll keep the regression-to-the-mean talk to a minimum this go ’round.
Get The Picture 
Your regression to the mean talk was on target, and the results were as predicted. You can’t be blamed if turnover margin isn’t the only thing that matters. Next time (if there is one) you’ll look smarter.
LikeLike
I’m just not feeling this whole regression to the mean vibe, I guess.
LikeLike
They had a plus 10 in 2010 and they had a losing record.
They could have had a plus 12 but some players never felt the vibe.
It would appear that this number tells me that our offense [fumbling inside the 10, ball control, no solid running game, and a first year starting QB, and etc…could throw in maybe some coaches did not feel the vibe].
Its good to close the turkey season on a high . Always good to close anything in a flourish. Awhile till football season, but you make your seasons in the off-seasons. Something a few of these dawgs can not do. They do not think they can get the vibe in the off season. Either you want to make the kills or you don’t. Preparation, preparation, preparation.
Maybe these dawgs need to have a freaking hunting instinct. Just maybe a vibe or two during a drive to get the freaking ball in the end zone. I’d bet you would have all kind of vibes.
Vibes like putting up more freaking points on the big board than those losers on the other side.
Good thing there is baseball. Just trying to figure out how the Diamond Dawgs are in a slump this season after playing well at the end of last. How long will the AD stay with this coaching staff.
LikeLike
Richt should send 10 percent of his income this year to the girl who was in the car with Damon.
LikeLike
Situational turnovers are what killed us. Fumbling while going in for a TD. Fumbling while setting up a winning FG attempt at the end of a game. Interception in OT setting up a win for the opponent with a FG. Get the picture?
LikeLike
We absolutely had some crushing turnovers. Fumbling a couple against someone like L. Lafayette late in the game does not matter, but it adds to the total of turnovers. The stats guys need to dig deeper and see WHEN the turnovers happened.
LikeLike
Yea, and I still have ‘situational’ depression and hangover from it too!
LikeLike