Stats are like "balance sheets" they are good for in-season discussion and debate and can, unlike football, be used as a measure of long/short term corporate comparisons for like time periods (bet this statement will get someone fired up).... The stats you present, i'm sure are correct, however they are apples to oranges comparisons due to the changing variables, players, schedule, coaches, ect.
My perspective is 13 performed poorly with seasoned athletes against a weaker schedule; 09 exceeded expectations with 2nd year players and stronger schedule; the common factor is the coach, Johnson and Sewak (Spenser did play a roll in 09) and Preston is still with the receivers (whole other story), anyway my conclusion is Sewak is either over worked or does not have the capability to coach athletes with 3-4-5 years in the program, i conclude he is a poor coach riding his buddies coat tails, which if aren't on fire should be.
As far as talent goes remaining healthy is part of the equation; I use this analogy with no offense to any player because injuries happen to all athletes and do end careers, but an athlete playing football that stays injured and can't perform is not a talented football player, he may have all the measurable's but in the wrong sport, they should move on to baseball, basketball, tennis, golf, nascar, a sport that will allow them to use their talent for success, not continuous pain and frustration.
Dont get me wrong, performance measures are critical to proper analysis for short/ long term improvement but the bottom line is what keeps the business sustainable are wins.
