JacketFan77

G

GT3000

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
1,302
Respect. Must be hard responding to all of these idiots though.
 
I get bitching, but I really don't get only posting when we lose. Going back to the can-chan days, there was a certain forum other than the Hive and ST. As a Hive poster said when he first looked at it, "do they enjoy anything in life?"

Among our possessions, we punted twice today and lost a fumble. I looked at Pitt's record and saw their 17-13 win against VT. How many times did those teams punt each? I would guess something like 8 times each.

Along with injuries, my fear about the defense relying on turnovers last year came true. Turnovers just don't have the consistency of yardage, and past the turnovers, our defense wasn't really that great last year even after UNC. That's on CPJ's recruiting classes in 2012 and 2013.
 
floridajacket said:
I get bitching, but I really don't get only posting when we lose. Going back to the can-chan days, there was a certain forum other than the Hive and ST. As a Hive poster said when he first looked at it, "do they enjoy anything in life?"

Among our possessions, we punted twice today and lost a fumble. I looked at Pitt's record and saw their 17-13 win against VT. How many times did those teams punt each? I would guess something like 8 times each.

Along with injuries, my fear about the defense relying on turnovers last year came true. Turnovers just don't have the consistency of yardage, and past the turnovers, our defense wasn't really that great last year even after UNC. That's on CPJ's recruiting classes in 2012 and 2013.
Click to expand...

You forgot the blocked field goal and two possessions where time ran out. Would six punts have been better?
 
floridajacket said:
I get bitching, but I really don't get only posting when we lose. Going back to the can-chan days, there was a certain forum other than the Hive and ST. As a Hive poster said when he first looked at it, "do they enjoy anything in life?"

Among our possessions, we punted twice today and lost a fumble. I looked at Pitt's record and saw their 17-13 win against VT. How many times did those teams punt each? I would guess something like 8 times each.

Along with injuries, my fear about the defense relying on turnovers last year came true. Turnovers just don't have the consistency of yardage, and past the turnovers, our defense wasn't really that great last year even after UNC. That's on CPJ's recruiting classes in 2012 and 2013.
Click to expand...

+1
 
GT1992 said:
You forgot the blocked field goal and two possessions where time ran out. Would six punts have been better?
Click to expand...

Getting the chance to look it up, VT had 5 punts, 3 interceptions, and one end of half. They also had two FG's and a touchdown drive.

We also didn't have two possession where time ran out. Time ran out on the blocked FG. Our possessions were four TD's, three punts, one fumble, and the blocked FG. The blocked FG is better than a punt, since a FG at least has the opportunity for points.

And, due to our defense, we usually had worse field position than VT did. Two of the TD drives in the first half were over 85 yards. The best of the simple offensive stats is, IMO, yards per play. Here is the yards per play of every team against Pitt:

Youngstown State - 5.8 (Pitt sleptwalk through this game and barely won).
Akron - 2.3
Iowa - 5.3
VT - 1.9
UVA - 5.4
GT - 8.8

The terms of points scored overall or points per possession, it would show much the same thing. The issue with points per possession is trying to correct for field position.

Iowa, FWIW, is also 7-0 right now and beat Northwestern today 40-10. So the loss to Iowa isn't as bad for Pitt as I first thought.

And our losses are now to teams which are collectively 24-4, as it stands now. Take that FWIW.
 
floridajacket said:
Getting the chance to look it up, VT had 5 punts, 3 interceptions, and one end of half. They also had two FG's and a touchdown drive.

We also didn't have two possession where time ran out. Time ran out on the blocked FG. Our possessions were four TD's, three punts, one fumble, and the blocked FG. The blocked FG is better than a punt, since a FG at least has the opportunity for points.

And, due to our defense, we usually had worse field position than VT did. Two of the TD drives in the first half were over 85 yards. The best of the simple offensive stats is, IMO, yards per play. Here is the yards per play of every team against Pitt:

Youngstown State - 5.8 (Pitt sleptwalk through this game and barely won).
Akron - 2.3
Iowa - 5.3
VT - 1.9
UVA - 5.4
GT - 8.8

The terms of points scored overall or points per possession, it would show much the same thing. The issue with points per possession is trying to correct for field position.

Iowa, FWIW, is also 7-0 right now and beat Northwestern today 40-10. So the loss to Iowa isn't as bad for Pitt as I first thought.

And our losses are now to teams which are collectively 24-4, as it stands now. Take that FWIW.
Click to expand...

We should feel good next Saturday night when that goes to 31-4. If we put some losses on their records, it wouldn't be so daunting. When you score and how you score also plays a big part as well as three and outs. I don't think you can look at a football game from a pure statistical standpoint. Otherwise, we'd be undefeated by the predictor.
 
It's like after the orange bowl last year we got teleported to an alternate universe where Tech is still playing in SEC.
 
GT1992 said:
We should feel good next Saturday night when that goes to 31-4. If we put some losses on their records, it wouldn't be so daunting. When you score and how you score also plays a big part as well as three and outs. I don't think you can look at a football game from a pure statistical standpoint. Otherwise, we'd be undefeated by the predictor.
Click to expand...

Notice I didn't defend the defense or special teams, just the offense. I didn't say we were "better statistically" overall than the teams we have played. But our offense is still good, looking at pure points per possession or whatever else you want to look at. Not best in the country like last year, but good.

Also, if you look at something like FPI, it was never really that high on us last year. It didn't like how we got so many turnovers in our wins versus the defense getting stops.

It turns out that was correct. And our defense sucking shouldn't have been that much of a surprise. Football outsiders has our 2014 defense ranked #51. We were just blinded by the turnovers and stuff like Deshaun Watson getting hurt.

In the end, statistics and moral victories work better for predicting the future than "if ifs and buts were candies and nuts." Ifs and buts do matter for predicting the future, even though they're no comfort for past losses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top