Team Efficiency - A rational discussion

[IronJacket7]

To AE 87: What you have not learned is that you cannot dictate a discussion on your terms. Each person will respond with his own views of a situation regardless of your insistance in a format dictated by you.

+1

 

[Mack]

I have repeatedly said that I recognize the emotional aspect of the game and respect those who address questions of our team's performance emotionally. I wanted a rational discussion.

Have no doubt your intentions are good but it seems your are dealing with percentages and tendency's ..If you want rational discussions I would think it would not raise its head on this topic.Its still seven and five anyway you look at it.

 

[Mack]

I understand you. I was simply expressing my desire, not dictating. GTSportstalk was a place where people could outshout those who disagreed with them. Those who do not know how to respect people of differing opinions often do this. I don't know what in your life has filled you with so much hate, but I hope that putting it on me in a football forum is in some way helpful for you.

This aint GTSportstalk...most of us have been there and left mainly due to the way a person was frowned upon for his views that didnt measure up to the majority views.....I see no hate visited on you and maybe your dictating and desire resemble the same thing to some but as long as you can speak your opinion and keep personal views out of the discussion I think yu will get your points across in the future.Have a good day.

 

[Mack]

I'd be happy as hell with that. I don't care if we win 726-725 or 2-0. As long as we win. As long as we win, our TEAM is more effective. And that's what counts.

But to your point, no our offense would not have been more effective in that game. Our defense would have been though.

I'll relate this to baseball again.
Sometimes we're playing a really good pitcher. In that case, I need my pitcher to match their guy and throw up as close to a shutout as possible. If their guy gives up one, I need my offense to score 2. To insist that my offense score 7 while only giving up 1 is overkill (although it does help us coaches breathe easier!).

In football, some games like Virginia Tech happen. Our defense held them to 17 points. By any measure that's pretty decent for our defense. So our offense needed to score 18...they didn't.

Turn that around though and look @ it from VT's point of view. Their defense threw up a 10-spot, so their offense only needed to score 11. They scored 17. I wouldn't say their offense was very efficient, but it was effective because they scored enough to win the game. That's all they needed to do. To put up 40 would have just been padding. That 11th point won the game.

I agree with your point completely and will ask the younger guys to go back to Dodd football.Many many times Tech would get hell kicked out of them in stats.They would bend but not break in a hard fought game and then.......something may happen like a punt return or a td from in short due to a fumble etc.Many times the stats were against the jackets but............they won the most important task...........they won the damn game.Stats are for losers if the losers feel they are or should have won the game.Its points on the board at the end of the game that matters.

 

[Rodney Kent]

AE 87: I do not hate you, I don't even know you. I have disagreed with, you, but it seems that you can't take disagreements without it being hate. This sounds like the Obama syndrome or the Socialistic Democratic syndrome; "If you don't agree with us, it is hate".

 

[AE 87]

[quotIe="Rodney Kent, post: 20577, member: 923"]AE 87: I do not hate you, I don't even know you. I have disagreed with, you, but it seems that you can't take disagreements without it being hate. This sounds like the Obama syndrome or the Socialistic Democratic syndrome; "If you don't agree with us, it is hate".[/quote]

Thanks. Just so you know, I won't be trying to hijack the threads you started by discussing what I want to discuss. In fact, I probably won't be posting much here any more.

You, Mack and daBuzz have won. This forum has become bbuzzoff where emotional rants and carpet bombing will win every thread, and ninja edits will apparently leave offended parties looking stupid.

Have fun.

 

[GTsapper]

Why not adjust offensive scoring for strength of schedule? It's pretty simple. You create a power ranking system. With that power ranking, you divide one team's score with the other teams... and that gives you a strength multiplier. From there, you look at the offensive stats. I have a model I use to predict college football games, and the reason (that I can gather) that it holds GT in such high regard is because it's the 18th most efficient offense in FBS, adjusted for schedule. I think you could attribute a significant portion of the reason we are 7-5 to just downright bad luck and some bad playcalling in key situations.

 

[Mack]

I agree with your point completely and will ask the younger guys to go back to Dodd football.Many many times Tech would get hell kicked out of them in stats.They would bend but not break in a hard fought game and then.......something may happen like a punt return or a td from in short due to a fumble etc.Many times the stats were against the jackets but............they won the most important task...........they won the damn game.Stats are for losers if the losers feel they are or should have won the game.Its points on the board at the end of the game that matters.

[quotIe="Rodney Kent, post: 20577, member: 923"]AE 87: I do not hate you, I don't even know you. I have disagreed with, you, but it seems that you can't take disagreements without it being hate. This sounds like the Obama syndrome or the Socialistic Democratic syndrome; "If you don't agree with us, it is hate".

Thanks. Just so you know, I won't be trying to hijack the threads you started by discussing what I want to discuss. In fact, I probably won't be posting much here any more.

You, Mack and daBuzz have won. This forum has become bbuzzoff where emotional rants and carpet bombing will win every thread, and ninja edits will apparently leave offended parties looking stupid.

Have fun.[/quote] Wish you would reconsider since nobody wins when a opinion is expressed.No emotions just won lost records that are discussed.You are certainly knowledgeable about efficiency etc but still its won lost no matter what the stats say.Have a good one and please reconsider.

 

[Mack]

Why not adjust offensive scoring for strength of schedule? It's pretty simple. You create a power ranking system. With that power ranking, you divide one team's score with the other teams... and that gives you a strength multiplier. From there, you look at the offensive stats. I have a model I use to predict college football games, and the reason (that I can gather) that it holds GT in such high regard is because it's the 18th most efficient offense in FBS, adjusted for schedule. I think you could attribute a significant portion of the reason we are 7-5 to just downright bad luck and some bad playcalling in key situations.

Now that makes alot of sense..may have something to do with players also.

 

[AE 87]

Thanks. Just so you know, I won't be trying to hijack the threads you started by discussing what I want to discuss. In fact, I probably won't be posting much here any more.

You, Mack and daBuzz have won. This forum has become bbuzzoff where emotional rants and carpet bombing will win every thread, and ninja edits will apparently leave offended parties looking stupid.

Have fun.

Wish you would reconsider since nobody wins when a opinion is expressed.No emotions just won lost records that are discussed.You are certainly knowledgeable about efficiency etc but still its won lost no matter what the stats say.Have a good one and please reconsider.[/quote]

Mack, you and yours shouted louder. I don't come into forums to stomp my foot and say I'm right because I have football sense and someone else doesn't. I wanted a discussion about our offense based on things that could be compared. You have wanted to just shout about win-loss as if Defense plays no part in that.

 

[AE 87]

Why not adjust offensive scoring for strength of schedule? It's pretty simple. You create a power ranking system. With that power ranking, you divide one team's score with the other teams... and that gives you a strength multiplier. From there, you look at the offensive stats. I have a model I use to predict college football games, and the reason (that I can gather) that it holds GT in such high regard is because it's the 18th most efficient offense in FBS, adjusted for schedule. I think you could attribute a significant portion of the reason we are 7-5 to just downright bad luck and some bad playcalling in key situations.

I posted the footballoutsiders ranking of offense which is already adjusted for opponents' strength. Those stats are similar to what I posted in my op and later.

 

[awbuzz]

Goodness gracious this is gotten to the point of being ridiculous. The question really came down to is our offense efficient.
Seems this came into a "shouting match" about wins and losses. While wins and losses are the ultimate factor in deciding the how good a program is, the question was how good is the offense efficiency.
Statistics show that overall we are pretty good. If the defense improves then wins will go up in our losses will go down.
Bottom line, is that wins and losses depend on special teams, offense and defense.
IMO AE87 kept the high road.
Hope he continues to post in the future.

 

[CuseJacket]

I agree. Looks like this thread hung on a little too long and will be locked. It was a good discussion but has veered far off course.

 

[John]

Thanks Cuse. Probably should've locked it earlier because it definitely veered into two different discussions.

And please remember that name calling, whether it be direct or indirect, will not be tolerated. You could make a hundred great points but if you include one tiny indirect insult at someone else, that entire post will be removed. If the point you're trying to make is that great, removing the personal attack won't at all diminish the point you are trying to make.