the UVA is far more important than the next two

Aahh. I see.

The formula's different in college and pros too, isn't it?
 
There's no way we're that bad without throwing any pics.

Link?

The number is correct:
http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2007&div=4&rpt=IA_teampasseff&site=org

And thanks for quoting somebody on my ignore list so I see his vomit/drool. NOT.

Passing efficiency has 4 components, completion %, interception %, TD %, and yds/attempt.

Our completion % is OK (54.7%), INT % is perfect (0%), TD % is as bad as possible (0%), and yds/attempt is very low (5.79).

This is a small amount of data to be going on at present. If you take one incomplete pass and turn it into a 70-yard TD, we would go up 30 places in the rankings. Or if you took the 2 passing TDs that were ruled laterals and the one passing TD that was negated by a penalty, we would also go up about 30 places.

But those are ifs and buts, the fact remains that our passing game has not been effective so far.
 
The pro and college formulas are different. The pro formula basically caps the impact of each category, and the weights for the categories are different.

Chris Stassen's page has a built in calculator and an explanation of each:

http://football.stassen.com/pass-eff/
 
I agree that our passing offense needs to improve. I just think that using national rankings after 3 games to prove any point is ridiculous. Does anyone not think we could have passed for 500 yards and 6 TDs against Samford had we wanted to? If we were ranked #10 at this point it would be equally meaningless.
 
And thanks for quoting somebody on my ignore list so I see his vomit/drool. NOT.

Oh, I don't have jacketup ignored yet. Some of his stuff seems remotely reasonable to me.

Hrmm. Yds per attempt really isn't so hot. We need to eliminate the catches for a loss, and push our flats patterns a little further upfield before they make their breaks. That'd probably give us another yard and a half on that average.
 
Back
Top