Posted by Ryan Morgan on September 13, 2013 at 10:28 AM
If you’ve been following my blog series predicting Gamecock football based upon the state’s reproductive and sexual health outcomes, you know I have a 0% success rate.
I predicted UNC would beat South Carolina because North Carolina’s estimated rates of AIDS diagnoses
was lower than South Carolina’s. Final score: 10-27, South Carolina.
In an act of contrition and hope, I predicted Carolina would eke out a win over Georgia because of our states’ respective teen pregnancy rates
. Final score: 30-41, UGA.
Yet still, I hold a misplaced confidence that my reproductive and sexual health outcome football prediction method might just work if only I follow a lesson from “Seinfeld”: If every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right. Click the video below to see what I'm talking about.
This prediction is essential me saying: “My name is George. I’m unemployed and I live with my parents.”
In Vanderbilt vs. Carolina, South Carolina will win.
Why? Because Tennessee has a lower rate of Chlamydia which by my old method means they should win, but I’m doing the opposite of what I think is correct, so Carolina will win.
Ok, here’s the evidence.
According to the CDC’s 2011 Sexually Transmitted Diseases Surveillance
, Tennessee has a Chlamydia rate of 490 per 100,000 people while South Carolina carries an even sadder rate of 626 cases of Chlamydia per 100,000 people.
In short, neither of us are winning in terms of Chlamydia, but by jove, one of us will win this football game. Why not Carolina?