Good Post by rabbidbee on the Hive

[jacketguy]

Posted by rabbidbee on February 11, 2002 at 16:17:55: from 139.76.65.130

Statistics can be manipulated and used to prove one’s point. Last year’s team averaged 31 points per game on offense and our defense was second in the ACC (I believe). I do not know how they are measuring the defense. Well a closer look reveals this, if you scratch the Citadel, Duke, and Navy games, our team averaged 23 points per game, and our defense gave up an average of 26 points per game. So, 23 per game on offense is respectable, but 24 points less than the 47 average against non-competitive teams. But the big eye opener is the 26 per game allowed on defense as compared to the 8 per game average against non-competitive teams. You can come up with any measurement you want to, but I do not care how many yards, first downs, etc, a defense gives up, the bottom line is, did they stop the other teams from scoring. Well sometimes the offense causes the defense problems, and vise versa. What does this prove? Really nothing, except that the UVA (39 pts) and Clemson (47 pts) games were definitely lost because the defense could not stop the other team. Therefore, Tech would have been 10-3 versus 8-5, would have tied FSU for 2nd in the ACC, finished higher in the final polls, but probably would have played in the same bowl game. Did two losses cost Tech any recruits? Who knows? Maybe one, or two max, but I doubt that it did.

 

[bugboy]

An interesting stat would be points per game for offense and defense for all teams in the ACC in ACC games only. That way, we could rank ourselves on common opponents with the rest of the conference.

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

You know the Ted Roof Disciples will never accept these facts.

 

[MacDaddy]

I apologize if the numbers are off slightly (the stats on theacc.com are hard to read)

The first number is points for in conference games only, the second is points against in conference games only, the third is point differential per conference game:

MD - 32.6, 21.6 (+11.0)

FSU - 38.0, 24.2 (+13.8)

UNC - 29.6, 18.1 (+11.5)

NCSU - 26.5, 23.1 (+3.4)

GT - 30.6, 26.9 (+3.7)

CU - 30.8, 32.3 (-1.5)

WF - 26.6, 30.9 (-4.3)

UVA - 22.3, 30.5 (-8.2) how did we ever lose to these guys?

Duke - 20.5, 48.8 (28.3)

Sorta open your eyes a little bit. I think we handle 18.1 PPG against. What do you think?

 

[jacketguy]

Great info Mac....
I added the final standings as well....it is interesting...


MD - 32.6, 21.6 (+11.0) Final Standing 1

FSU - 38.0, 24.2 (+13.8) Final Standing 2

UNC - 29.6, 18.1 (+11.5) Final Standing 3

NCSU - 26.5, 23.1 (+3.4) Final Standing 6

GT - 30.6, 26.9 (+3.7) Final Standing 4

CU - 30.8, 32.3 (-1.5) Final Standing 5

WF - 26.6, 30.9 (-4.3) Final Standing 7

UVA - 22.3, 30.5 (-8.2) how did we ever lose to these guys? Final Standing 8

Duke - 20.5, 48.8 (28.3) Final Standing 9

We beat Maryland, Va, and Clem's Son like we were supposed to and we would have been champs... and I know.. if a frog had wings......

 

[beeware]

I agree that the defense (primarily) cost us the Virginia game, but not necessarily the Clemson game. Now I realize that giving up 41 points (in regulation) is a lot of points and we could all say if we had given up less points we would have won. Well, guess what....Clemson could say the exact same thing. So that is a zero sum tactic that doesn't solve anything. The fact of the matter is this... We played a long hard fought game against Clemson and were trailing by 3 points late in the game. We quickly drove down the field and had a FIRST AND GOAL on the 7 yard line with plenty of time and timeouts to run 4 plays, if necessary, to get into the endzone and win the game. We didn't even attempt one pass in the endzone. Not one!!! We were perfectly willing to settle for a field goal (for some reason) and take the game into over time even though we had not stopped Clemson in the second half (primarily due to Daryl Smith being out). This was a foolish and costly mistake. Then we get into overtime and on 4th and One at the 16 yard line we take a field goal that is very risky since all Clemson has to do is go 25 yards for a TD and the win. So my opinion is this....it doesn't make any difference if your defense has given up 0 points or a 100 points. If you have a first and goal from the 7 with plenty of time to run four plays and win the game it is the offenses responsibility to get it done...right then... right there... no excuses. Bottom ine we didn't get it done at crunch time on offense.
Look at it this way.... if Tiger Woods had a 5 foot putt to win the match on the last hole...do you think he would lag it to tie and go into sudden death....I think not.
Just my opinion.

 

[bellyseries]

really interesting stuff, you guys.

 

[bugboy]

Beeware,
You have a good argument above. That is one of the big things that cost us the Clemson game. There were other things as well...like the 38 yard scramble for a TD on the last play of the 1st half, the long pass for a TD late in the game on 4th and 13, the short pass where our DB bit and the Clemson guy goes for a long TD early in the 2nd half, the fumble returned for a TD in the 1st quarter that was ruled "no fumble"...How 'bout the injury to Smith? After he left, our defense collapsed.
That had to be one of the most frustrating losses I've ever watched.

BTW, the stats on conference games show we had the 4th best offense and 5th best defense...that's pretty mediocre on both sides of the ball...and we went 4-4 in conference. The stats seem to fit our record in conference. Very interesting.

 

[beeware]

Originally posted by bugboy:
That had to be one of the most frustrating losses I've ever watched.

<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Bugboy, good points. I agree also about it being one of the most frustrating (and UNNECESSARY) losses ever. Enough to make one want to