For Everyone Who Thinks the Defense is Better This Year

Status
Not open for further replies.
non-gineer said:
Because a high school senior may be a better recruiter than he is? I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Because a legacy recruit, that probably came here because of Ted Roof, is sounding truly committed and wanting to recruit for GT?? Dafuq man...this isn't hard to figure out.
 
You guys can stat it up all you want, the reason we aren't winning games is that we are failing to make the big play.

BC - we made the big plays on the final drive to convert and score - Win
Miami - Fumbled the game away, missed a pick, couldn't score when we got ourselves back to down 7 points
Pitt - Pick goes through our guy's hands, tipped pass instead of batted down, can't convert 4th and 1

If you are going to do the stat thing, show points per possession for our offense and our defense. That will tell you something.
 
coit said:
@johncu I expected better out of you. Did you really have to stir up all of the sandy vee jay jays around here?
Click to expand...
You interpreted that differently than I intended. My point is really that this is not much different than the typical CPJ team. We aren't "trending down", the defense isn't carrying the offense, and we haven't been "figured out" on either side of the ball. Our offense is still good, but not great, and our defense is still bad, but not horrible.

I actually don't think it's about scheme. The answer is talent, pure and simple. For that reason, I'm okay with keeping Roof because he seems to be helping our recruiting and he's probably less likely than most to bolt at the first sign of success.
 
RamblinWreck92 said:
Jesus, we get it. You love the offensive scheme and will defend it at all costs.

Newsflash: the offense generated a whopping 10 yards in 30 minutes of football vs Clemson. Given CPJ'S offense was unable to make a first down for an entire half of football, it's a damn miracle Roofs boys still kept us in the game....and did so again in the 2nd half while our 9th year coach's offense scored a whopping 7 points.

FF to Miami, a game lost again by our offense and it's handing of 14 pts to the ööööing canes.

At Pitt, it wasn't the D that was unable to gain half a yard with the game on the line.

CPJ'S offense deserves as much of the blame for this seasons failures as the D does....and more so in our losses to Clemson and Miami.

Why post stuff like this that just bashes our student athletes who are busting their asses on the D side of the ball?
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to place blame on anyone. I'm simply looking at stats that paint a pretty clear picture of our team strengths and weaknesses. And as usual, our strength is scoring on the possessions we get, and our weakness is stopping our opponents from scoring.

Offensively, we have a scheme that allows us to score fairly consistently, even when overmatched. It's harder to do that on defense.
 
gte490v said:
You guys can stat it up all you want, the reason we aren't winning games is that we are failing to make the big play.

BC - we made the big plays on the final drive to convert and score - Win
Miami - Fumbled the game away, missed a pick, couldn't score when we got ourselves back to down 7 points
Pitt - Pick goes through our guy's hands, tipped pass instead of batted down, can't convert 4th and 1

If you are going to do the stat thing, show points per possession for our offense and our defense. That will tell you something.
Click to expand...
Our margin of error is very small
 
johncu said:
I'm not trying to place blame on anyone. I'm simply looking at stats that paint a pretty clear picture of our team strengths and weaknesses. And as usual, our strength is scoring on the possessions we get, and our weakness is stopping our opponents from scoring.

Offensively, we have a scheme that allows us to score fairly consistently, even when overmatched. It's harder to do that on defense.
Click to expand...

Our scheme almost always gets stifled by good teams when overmatched. The Orange Bowl victory against Piss St was as awesome as it was an outlier.

Our D played lights-out against Clemson and our scheme got stuffed repeatedly. Given the way our D played, that game was winnable. Except that the scheme got stymied again and again, repeatedly going 3 and Out and putting the exhausted D back out there.

Our weaknesses are 2-fold: Sustaining drives and scoring pts against the good teams and stopping those same opponents from scoring. Against the Vandys & Southerns on our schedule, both sides of the ball take care of business.
 
I really don't want to get into this argument again. Clemson whipped our asses - no bones about it. Lots of people were talking about how they always lose in BDS, and they were ready for us. That was embarrassing.

But no, both sides do not take care of business against teams of similar or lesser talent, and that is not my opinion. It is a fact that is supported by stats, which is the whole point of this thread. Factoring in strength of opponent, style and pace of play, and anything else you could bring up, our offense is again outperforming our talent level, while our defense is performing a below average. It has been consistently that way since 2008, and if you really wanted people to take you seriously with your incessant ranting to fire CPJ, that is what you should be focusing on.
 
johncu said:
It's not. The offense, while not great, is significantly better than the defense. And don't even bother with the total offense and total defense statistics. Our style of play makes them worthless. Here are some more useful stats.

ESPN Efficiency Rating:
GT Offense: 31st
GT Defense: 101st

Don't like those ratings? Let's try another site. I think Football Outsiders' methodology is better anyway:

Football Outsiders FEI Ratings (Efficiency):
GT Offense: 13th
GT Defense: 97th

Wondering how our offense looks so bad in total offense ratings but pretty good in efficiency? Here's why:

Plays per game ranking:
GT Offense: 128th

That's right. We literally run less plays than any team in the country. So it's pretty asinine to judge our performance by total yards, on either side of the ball. Metrics like efficiency or yards per play are much more accurate. And in those metrics, our offense is basically as good as it usually is, and our defense sucks yet again. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

A lot of posts in this thread. Many defend our D/DC, but none actually respond to this data.

The issue raised by this data is not simply O>D, but D is really bad for a pwr5 team. The challenge for those of us.who like Roof is defending bottom 30 when O is top 30.
 
AE 87 said:
A lot of posts in this thread. Many defend our D/DC, but none actually respond to this data.

The issue raised by this data is not simply O>D, but D is really bad for a pwr5 team. The challenge for those of us.who like Roof is defending bottom 30 when O is top 30.
Click to expand...

I responded to the "data" in detail several times. All of you whiners talk about how you "feel" about things. Everyone goes silent when I bring the facts. Threads like these help separate the people who know football from the people who don't know shit.
 
gte490v said:
You guys can stat it up all you want, the reason we aren't winning games is that we are failing to make the big play.

BC - we made the big plays on the final drive to convert and score - Win
Miami - Fumbled the game away, missed a pick, couldn't score when we got ourselves back to down 7 points
Pitt - Pick goes through our guy's hands, tipped pass instead of batted down, can't convert 4th and 1

If you are going to do the stat thing, show points per possession for our offense and our defense. That will tell you something.
Click to expand...

Offensive points per drive - 2.54 points - #36
Defensive points per drive - 2.18 points - #65

This is a very rough stat without being adjusted for opponent strength , but our rank is much better on offense versus defense (#36 vs. #65).

If the criticism now is that the stat is too simple because it doesn't adjust for field position and opponent strength, then any way you "stat it up," the defense similarly ranks much lower than the offense. The more advanced stats have similar disparities in rankings where our defense is worse.

Personally, I think the 2004-06 defenses with Tenuta were an outlier in GT history. IMO, it's harder to scheme around talent on defense and the 2004-06 defenses had a bunch of 2*'s which happened to develop into NFL players. The 2007 defense still had Tenuta but ranked in the same range as CPJ defenses.
 
floridajacket said:
Offensive points per drive - 2.54 points - #36
Defensive points per drive - 2.18 points - #65

This is a very rough stat without being adjusted for opponent strength , but our rank is much better on offense versus defense (#36 vs. #65).

If the criticism now is that the stat is too simple because it doesn't adjust for field position and opponent strength, then any way you "stat it up," the defense similarly ranks much lower than the offense. The more advanced stats have similar disparities in rankings where our defense is worse.

Personally, I think the 2004-06 defenses with Tenuta were an outlier in GT history. IMO, it's harder to scheme around talent on defense and the 2004-06 defenses had a bunch of 2*'s which happened to develop into NFL players. The 2007 defense still had Tenuta but ranked in the same range as CPJ defenses.
Click to expand...

Where'd you get this data, FJ? I would like to know how they factor in garbage time, and things like the 2 fumble-sixes we gave up to Miami.

But assuming that this data is crunched appropriately, and reflects only our offensive production and defensive yields, the data is still worthless. According to this data, we should win every game, since we score more per drive than we yield.

Average stats are meaningless.

Ranks are even more meaningless. There could be a tiny spread between #20 and #60 in rankings like this. Maybe .1 points a drive. For us right now, that's about a TD.
 
coit said:
Where'd you get this data, FJ? I would like to know how they factor in garbage time, and things like the 2 fumble-sixes we gave up to Miami.

But assuming that this data is crunched appropriately, and reflects only our offensive production and defensive yields, the data is still worthless. According to this data, we should win every game, since we score more per drive than we yield.

Average stats are meaningless.

Ranks are even more meaningless. There could be a tiny spread between #20 and #60 in rankings like this. Maybe .1 points a drive. For us right now, that's about a TD.
Click to expand...

floridajacket said:
http://www.bcftoys.com/2016-ppd/
Click to expand...

The data only has FBS vs. FBS games. But the fact OPD > DPD doesn't mean that we would win every game. A ton of teams have positive net points per drive, but have lost a game. Points per drive is an average, which means games like Vandy and GSU can skew the average net points per drive more than the losses decrease net points per drive.
 
floridajacket said:
The data only has FBS vs. FBS games. But the fact OPD > DPD doesn't mean that we would win every game. A ton of teams have positive net points per drive, but have lost a game. Points per drive is an average, which means games like Vandy and GSU can skew the average net points per drive more than the losses decrease net points per drive.
Click to expand...

I think I covered that when I said average stats are meaningless.
 
coit said:
I think I covered that when I said average stats are meaningless.
Click to expand...

Sure, but there was demand for a simple, understandable stat. The simple, understandable stat of points per possession tells the same story the more advanced stats show. Not only is it #36 vs. #65 overall, I looked at ACC teams and points per drive is #3 in offense vs. #9 in defense.

To focus on advanced stats, here are the three most used advanced stats I know of which separate out offense and defense (FEI, FPI and S&P+). Each one is offensive rank vs. defensive rank.

FEI - #13 vs. #97
FPI - #31 vs. #102
S&P+ - #56 vs. #49

The first two have a huge gulf between the offense and the defense. It's a bigger gulf than simple average points per possession stats indicate.

The third one, S&P+, is interesting in how it's different. The first two are based per-drive, where our offense has clearly done better than our defense. S&P+ looks at whether each individual play was "successful." A play on 1st and 10 would be considered successful if it gains about four yards, for example. There is an explosiveness factor also added on, which includes yards gained above four yards in 1st and 10.

I think the offense looks worse and defense looks better on such a play-by-play basis, while per-drive the offense has had home runs and the defense has had trouble getting off the field. S&P+ thinks the home runs and defense giving up long 3rd down conversions are like turnovers: more luck-based and less likely to be consistent. And maybe that's correct. IF it is correct, then the difference between offensive and defensive production per drive going forward is not expected to be as great.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top