King Injury Factual Updates

[stinger78]

Stupid plays are all baked in to the record. A badly banged up 6-6/7-5 team becomes a 5-7/6-6 team.

 

[RonJohn]

You’re not wrong, but I went through all the Gailey years rationalizing strange crap. Also it tends to only go one way (rationalizing losses but not wins).

I don’t think any of us would refer to last year’s regular season as 6*-6 or 5*-7*. We went 6-6. Cristobal’s complete inability to understand the basic concepts of how time works opened the door for GT to earn the miracle win.

I don't think anyone is saying that GT is actually a 6-3 or 7-2 team. We are just discussing reasons for the loss. Some people, maybe not in this forum, are saying that Key needs to be fired immediately. That is ridiculous. Some people are saying that the offense stinks. Yet the offense gained 50% more yards than VT on Saturday. I think it is much more complicated than a coach or player being inept. Injuries and illness are certainly part of the issues.

 

[RonJohn]

But that’s the problem with stats. This offense flat out doesn’t pass the eye test. They score in the red zone and look ok on the stat sheet, but when you watch there’s just something off. A lot of it seems that as the season has progressed the defenses have just cheated up more and more since we can’t go over top.

One big stat id like to see is 3-and-out. It sure seems like we’ve been doing that a whole lot more this year than last year. Especially in our losses.

A big problem with the eye test is that it simply follows your feelings. Going by the eye test, the College Gameday crew said that FSU was going to trounce GT. I heard explanations of that after the game. Apparently, they viewed a GT practice and an FSU practice and said that FSU just looked bigger, stronger, and faster. You don't get speeding tickets based on how fast the officer "believes" you might have been going, they use laser speed guns. If you are a salesperson and beat your goals by 300%, is your bonus based on your managers eye-test, or on the actual numbers that you produced? Many people thought that Collins was exactly what GT needed in 2019 because he looked cool. Maybe it is just because I am an engineer, but actual stats mean more than feelings to me.

 

[bke1984]

I don't think anyone is saying that GT is actually a 6-3 or 7-2 team. We are just discussing reasons for the loss. Some people, maybe not in this forum, are saying that Key needs to be fired immediately. That is ridiculous. Some people are saying that the offense stinks. Yet the offense gained 50% more yards than VT on Saturday. I think it is much more complicated than a coach or player being inept. Injuries and illness are certainly part of the issues.

I would argue that we should have beat Louisville. That of all the losses was just stupid mistakes in a game where we otherwise dominated. At Cuse we looked flat, ND we seems completely outmatched when our offense was on the field.

 

[Bogey]

What I think is stupid is playing a hurt QB in a winnable game when he is not producing vs trying a healthy QB for a couple of series considering all the talent we have in our top 3 QB's.

 

[bke1984]

What I think is stupid is playing a hurt QB in a winnable game when he is not producing vs trying a healthy QB for a couple of series considering all the talent we have in our top 3 QB's.

I’m surprised you’d think this after watching our QB play the past two weeks. Maybe I’m misinterpreting you, but Im curious… do you think we beat Carolina without hurt King? It’s quite feasible. Their defense is still a mess, but I’m just curious if you really think we win that game without him.

 

[bobongo]

A big problem with the eye test is that it simply follows your feelings.

If you look at it with your critical eye instead of your emotional eye, the eye test does not "simply follow your feelings".
I know what I saw against VT. We couldn't run the ball at all. We could throw it sporadically, but not nearly consistently enough to pose much threat to their goal line.
The stats that suggest we should have won because we outgained them might mislead one to think otherwise. There are a lot of things you can pick up by simply watching the game that you'll miss by looking at the stats. Why would you believe a bunch of numbers if they belie what your eyes saw?

 

[cpf2001]

If you just go with the stats despite a continuing trend of “they don’t score as much as you’d expect based on the stats” you’re putting a lot of faith in the idea that the stats are capturing everything relevant.

I don’t think any current model fits every team perfectly. Efficiency is different than absolute production and I think GT is a team that exposes that gap in current modeling.

I think another issue is that the models don’t do “step changes” well. E.g. GT can run the ball against some teams but has consistently failed to for entire games at a time against other teams. The models don’t really deal well with that sort of “boom or bust” in ranking offenses or predicting future wins. On average the run game may be efficient but there are four losses where it was pretty damn bad, and so can’t be relied on as a primary weapon.

 

[RonJohn]

If you look at it with your critical eye instead of your emotional eye, the eye test does not "simply follow your feelings".
I know what I saw against VT. We couldn't run the ball at all. We could throw it sporadically, but not nearly consistently enough to pose much threat to their goal line.
The stats that suggest we should have won because we outgained them might mislead one to think otherwise. There are a lot of things you can pick up by simply watching the game that you'll miss by looking at the stats. Why would you believe a bunch of numbers if they belie what your eyes saw?

You can also pick out stats that are meaningless in a larger context.

My intent is to try to say that GT didn't play as poorly as people on here seem to believe. GT stopped VT a lot more than VT stopped GT. VT only converted 2 3rd downs. VT did convert 1 4th down, but that was after the officials moved the sticks/chain back to 9 yards instead of 10 yards. GT gained 100 more yards in the ND game than VT did in the game on Saturday. The attitude in the chat, and now in the threads, is that GT sucks and should be 0-9 at the moment. If the eye-test is telling you that, then your eyes are wrong.

 

[RonJohn]

If you just go with the stats despite a continuing trend of “they don’t score as much as you’d expect based on the stats” you’re putting a lot of faith in the idea that the stats are capturing everything relevant.

I don’t think any current model fits every team perfectly. Efficiency is different than absolute production and I think GT is a team that exposes that gap in current modeling.

I think another issue is that the models don’t do “step changes” well. E.g. GT can run the ball against some teams but has consistently failed to for entire games at a time against other teams. The models don’t really deal well with that sort of “boom or bust” in ranking offenses or predicting future wins. On average the run game may be efficient but there are four losses where it was pretty damn bad, and so can’t be relied on as a primary weapon.

That isn't exactly what I am trying to say. There is some disconnect. Duke game especially, GT had about triple the yards that Duke had in the first half yet only led by 3. Something isn't lining up between how the team is playing, and getting points on the board.

My point is that blaming the offensive production, or the defensive production doesn't seem to be the correct area to place blame. Special teams have been an issue. The defense hasn't been forcing turnovers. The offense hasn't been pushing all the way to the end zone. Replacing players nor coaches seems to be to be a likely solution. The chat on Saturday felt like everyone believed that the offense couldn't gain 2 yards the entire game. There are definitely things that need to be fixed, but I think those things are smaller and more fine tuning than giving up on what has been working for the most part.

 

[bobongo]

You can also pick out stats that are meaningless in a larger context.

My intent is to try to say that GT didn't play as poorly as people on here seem to believe. GT stopped VT a lot more than VT stopped GT. VT only converted 2 3rd downs. VT did convert 1 4th down, but that was after the officials moved the sticks/chain back to 9 yards instead of 10 yards. GT gained 100 more yards in the ND game than VT did in the game on Saturday. The attitude in the chat, and now in the threads, is that GT sucks and should be 0-9 at the moment. If the eye-test is telling you that, then your eyes are wrong.

Oh, mine eyes saw the glory of the defense. No doubt about that.
Defense (and DL) was stout. Offense (and OL) was weak and misfiring. That's what I saw. Don't know about the chat, I didn't participate in that.

 

[Bogey]

I’m surprised you’d think this after watching our QB play the past two weeks. Maybe I’m misinterpreting you, but Im curious… do you think we beat Carolina without hurt King? It’s quite feasible. Their defense is still a mess, but I’m just curious if you really think we win that game without him.

Read my post again, slowly. I said when he is not productive, eg Pyron playing hurt against VT, according to Quinlan. Philo came in much too late. It is obvious King was productive against UNC, we scored 41 points!

 

[RonJohn]

Oh, mine eyes saw the glory of the defense. No doubt about that.
Defense (and DL) was stout. Offense (and OL) was weak and misfiring. That's what I saw. Don't know about the chat, I didn't participate in that.

I didn't watch the line closely enough. The PFF grades have the OL good at run blocking and very good at pass protection. Those grades have the RB average at rushing, and bad at blocking. They have the WRs bad at run blocking. I think the skill guys were more to blame that the OL.

 

[bobongo]

If you just go with the stats despite a continuing trend of “they don’t score as much as you’d expect based on the stats” you’re putting a lot of faith in the idea that the stats are capturing everything relevant.

I don’t think any current model fits every team perfectly. Efficiency is different than absolute production and I think GT is a team that exposes that gap in current modeling.

I think another issue is that the models don’t do “step changes” well. E.g. GT can run the ball against some teams but has consistently failed to for entire games at a time against other teams. The models don’t really deal well with that sort of “boom or bust” in ranking offenses or predicting future wins. On average the run game may be efficient but there are four losses where it was pretty damn bad, and so can’t be relied on as a primary weapon.

You're getting to the heart of the issue. Stats can tell you in a sense what happened, but your eyeballs tell you why and how they happened, and what that means going forward.

 

[bobongo]

I didn't watch the line closely enough. The PFF grades have the OL good at run blocking and very good at pass protection. Those grades have the RB average at rushing, and bad at blocking. They have the WRs bad at run blocking. I think the skill guys were more to blame that the OL.

PFF grades are very useful. You can't watch everybody at once. Eyeballs are good at seeing the forest, but not the trees.

 

[cpf2001]

That isn't exactly what I am trying to say. There is some disconnect. Duke game especially, GT had about triple the yards that Duke had in the first half yet only led by 3. Something isn't lining up between how the team is playing, and getting points on the board.

My point is that blaming the offensive production, or the defensive production doesn't seem to be the correct area to place blame. Special teams have been an issue. The defense hasn't been forcing turnovers. The offense hasn't been pushing all the way to the end zone. Replacing players nor coaches seems to be to be a likely solution. The chat on Saturday felt like everyone believed that the offense couldn't gain 2 yards the entire game. There are definitely things that need to be fixed, but I think those things are smaller and more fine tuning than giving up on what has been working for the most part.

There were a bunch of three and outs in a row in the middle of the game and Pyron’s arm seemed very off and the run game was doing nothing. The stats for that chunk of the game would be as bad as the emotion test.

I don’t think the general temperament of the one or two day after discussion is “we should be 0-9.” I think it’s “we have wasted golden opportunities to have a 8+ win season and we’re worried about those things being fixed in the future.”

Special teams and dumb penalties getting worse at this point in Key’s tenure is a concern.

That disconnect between the offense being efficient but less potent scoring-wise is a concern. That’s where I specifically disagree with the models (and the “no INTs above all else” coaching philosophy that has been reported about Faulkner studying pro offenses).

The defense has shown signs of improvement recently. I definitely hope that continues.

 

[RonJohn]

There were a bunch of three and outs in a row in the middle of the game and Pyron’s arm seemed very off and the run game was doing nothing. The stats for that chunk of the game would be as bad as the emotion test.

I don’t think the general temperament of the one or two day after discussion is “we should be 0-9.” I think it’s “we have wasted golden opportunities to have a 8+ win season and we’re worried about those things being fixed in the future.”

Special teams and dumb penalties getting worse at this point in Key’s tenure is a concern.

That disconnect between the offense being efficient but less potent scoring-wise is a concern. That’s where I specifically disagree with the models (and the “no INTs above all else” coaching philosophy that has been reported about Faulkner studying pro offenses).

The defense has shown signs of improvement recently. I definitely hope that continues.

Special teams was pretty good on Saturday. Their issues have been perplexing. One bad play is because a guy just misses his block and causes a blocked FG. One because the punter kicks a line drive that is returned for a TD. Two because the long snapper snaps the ball too high. It hasn't been a single cause, it always seems to be one guy missing an assignment or making a mistake. And not the same guy, different guys making different mistakes on different plays.

The offensive stats vs scoring probably comes down to special teams and turnovers. However, i don't think that was the case in the Duke game. That is something that needs to get fixed. 356 yards of offense should produce more than 6 points.

I think it is highly likely that the discontent from fans is because the team is close to winning more games. We could have won the Syracuse, Louisville, and VT games. If the team was 8-1 with the only loss being to ND, we would all feel differently at the moment. We were not that far from being there. I think I posted it in an earlier thread, but it seems that it is more frustrating for the fans when there is a decent chance of winning. In 2021 and early 2022, there was a lot of malaise regarding the team. Now people can see the one or two things that could have won the games and are frustrated.

 

[ChristoGT]

So, any factual reports on Haynes? Holy cow, just caught up on 10 pages of the usual.

 

[stinger78]

So, any factual reports on Haynes? Holy cow, just caught up on 10 pages of the usual.

Factual is no factual. Sorry!

 

[roadkill]

The offensive stats vs scoring probably comes down to special teams and turnovers.

I think you are onto something here.

I was looking at our advanced stats (I know, stats again) and noticed we rank 110th in starting field position. That means our offense is not on a level playing field due to having to sustain longer drives to score. This is likely influencing our inability to get TD's even though we are moving the ball fairly well.

Why is our starting field position so bad? Special teams. Especially relative to our opponent's punting and return game.