SIAP: Steve Lorenz calls b/s on offensive line graph
I feel somewhat obligated to post this because I posted the offensive line graph that purported to show Owenu and Ulizio being god awful:
According to Lorenz, the chart is b/s. Given Steve's reputation, I think I was too quick to post. The article is paywalled, but here's the link: http://michigan.247sports.com/Board/59424/Contents/Quick-VIP-Note-OL-graphicstuff-107670674
September 21st, 2017 at 12:01 PM ^
grant newsome already called it BS on twitter, so i dont think it is really VIP worthy anyways
September 21st, 2017 at 12:04 PM ^
Holy shit, you found information on the INTERNET that turned out to not be true? That's gotta be a first, right???
September 21st, 2017 at 3:35 PM ^
My wife has sent me that image multiple times when I'm on here too long.
September 21st, 2017 at 12:07 PM ^
Yeah, like I posted in the original, the site this comes from is trash. They gave no explanation as to how they came up with those numbers and in fact this wasn't even able to be found on their site.
September 21st, 2017 at 12:07 PM ^
Obviously
September 21st, 2017 at 12:09 PM ^
Here is what you get when you click on their Michigan section.
Really advanced stuff!!!
https://www.cfbfilmroom.com/michigan-wolverines/#tab-549476404
September 21st, 2017 at 12:11 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 12:44 PM ^
or..."inciteful"
September 21st, 2017 at 1:05 PM ^
I don't think you understand how percentiles work.
September 21st, 2017 at 1:14 PM ^
Which tells you all you need to know.
September 21st, 2017 at 1:12 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 1:15 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 2:00 PM ^
Shitty hot takes smell worse in warm weather. Fact.
September 21st, 2017 at 2:44 PM ^
Like farting in the shower?
September 21st, 2017 at 12:14 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 12:57 PM ^
I think there's a really interesting discussion around this idea. Without knowing the exact play call, how accurate can these game charting systems be? And coaches will never release the actual play call. So coaches can call these out and say their internal charting shows very different results, and fans can't really object because they don't know the play call. However, I'm sure coaches will lie to cover their players or create more confusion among opponents. So the best we get is flawed data.
September 21st, 2017 at 1:57 PM ^
PFF, UFR, etc. are all nice summaries to try and give you an idea of how players are doing. However, without knowing the playcall, line calls for blocking assignments, specific routes, etc. one should take these reviews with some grains of salt.
September 21st, 2017 at 1:18 PM ^
I think the hubbub is mostly because PFF has blown up and the subjective grades are being elevated/presented as gospel by ESPN, game announcers, writers, etc.
PFF is useful (more information!) but a bit scattershot, particularly with line play. Like any attempts to quantify football, if you don't know the assignments and how things are coached, you're always going to miss on a fair amount of plusses and minuses.
It's not just sour grapes: I know TJ Lang has been vocal about PFF being wrong and he's a PFF fave rave.
September 21st, 2017 at 2:14 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 12:21 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 2:56 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 12:23 PM ^
So it is BS that Ulizio and Onwenu have been below average?
September 21st, 2017 at 12:35 PM ^
and worst in all of college football.
Would be curious to see where Ulizio and Onwenu actually fall. Obviously, it's somewhat pointless to compare across all teams this early in the season, as differences in opponent quality are so vast. But it should still be relatively easy to do this analysis. Wonder where these guys went wrong...
September 21st, 2017 at 12:52 PM ^
Below average on this graph is <50.
Onwenu and Ulizio's scores on the graph indicate that Onwenu is in the bottom ~15ish in all of FBS while Ulizio is in the bottom ~3ish in all of FBS (I didn't look up the exact number of teams, I think it's around 130 though, so 260 starters at Guard and Tackle each). That's a LOT worse than just below average.
September 21st, 2017 at 12:46 PM ^
... is it trash in that the methodology is idiotic and invalid. Or is it trash in that it was just made up and not even real, regardless of concerns about methodology?
September 21st, 2017 at 1:04 PM ^
Methodology is likely poor and Michigan's internal charting shows much different results. These sites don't know the playcall, and I doubt they spend enough time on each game if they are actually charting every player on every play. Look at how long Brian takes to do UFR and that is just for 1 game a week, plus even he admits that his charting isn't perfect due to info he doesn't have from the coaches. So you need to take these numbers with a big grain of salt and if something doesn't pass the smell test, it's likely an error.
September 21st, 2017 at 1:57 PM ^
but they are looking for volunteers to chart their favorite teams. I think they only chart a dozen or so teams, so their percentile ranks are probably just for them.
September 21st, 2017 at 1:31 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 1:47 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 2:22 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 2:32 PM ^
September 21st, 2017 at 3:39 PM ^
I am shocked that has more ads than content on their main page would post illogical, poorly-created content.
September 21st, 2017 at 4:03 PM ^
/s
September 21st, 2017 at 8:32 PM ^