that's unfortunate, but at least the interest is there on both sides
- Member for
- 4 years 41 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|46 weeks 3 days ago||Davis really did make an||
Davis really did make an argument for more playing time. Hopefully it wasn't a result of the competition level as it was nice to see.
The game also clarified Altidore's role I think. As Brian said, he didn't have many one-on-one scoring opportunities, but he did a good job of boxing defenders out and fighting for possession.
There was a nice sequence in the second half where Altidore controlled a long pass, kept the defender away from the ball with his body, made a quick little pass to Bradley who tried to thread another quick pass to a wide open Davis which was just narrowly deflected.
I have a feeling that more than one goal in this World Cup will follow that model: Altidore fights for possession deep allowing the rest of the team to come up, quick pass to Dempsey, quick pass to Bradley, etc, as opposed to a lone player streaking down the field beating defenders.
|1 year 22 weeks ago||Gardner seems to be reading||
Gardner seems to be reading the MLB ... Does he keep because that LB takes off for the playside? But that doesn't seem right, because the pulling guard ends up on the MLB. Is this supposed to be a handoff but Gardener pulls because the FB botches the block?
|1 year 26 weeks ago||I very much like this theory,||
I very much like this theory, and giving the coaches some credit in general. Regarding important games, I would throw in ND, which would seem to be a datapoint in Borges's favor.
Now, for the tackle-over stuff, I think it makes a lot of sense to deploy it for the two-game Minny/Penn St. stretch. Its a totally sensible gameplan against Penn St. in particular who are thin at the linebacker position. However, it would very much be a datapoint against the coaching if we continued to see it this year.
I think another factor behind running non-optimal plays partway through the season is that we want to hide plays from Michigan St. and Ohio. Make them prep for weird stuff, and then throw something completely new that they haven't seen. There are only so many times we can reinvent the offense during the season, and it makes sense to try to have some stuff off-film going into those games.
For example, it would make a lot of sense to me see this team turn into a short passing team that utilizes the strengths of Gallon, Dileo and Norfleet in those games. But if that (or some other direction) is coming in the future, we don't want it on film yet, so it should stay in the barn against inferior opposition. Furthermore, if that is the plan, then you don't want to be throwing lots of bubbles, because you don't want to see press coverage on every play.
|1 year 28 weeks ago||There's another option, which||
There's another option, which is to change up the playcalling. This line has been better at pass-protection than run protection. It seems to me that an emphasis on short passing routes might get some defenders out of the box and make the running game easier. The problems come when the opponent knows we're going to run and we run anyways.
|1 year 30 weeks ago||30 - 10 Wolverines||
30 - 10 Wolverines
|2 years 1 week ago||Thank you! You'll always be||
Thank you! You'll always be remembered for your TREMENDOUS blocks and those sweet throwback screens!
|2 years 11 weeks ago||News like this demands||
News like this demands muppets!
|2 years 18 weeks ago||It seems like you'd see a||
It seems like you'd see a bump (over the team average at least) this whenever your worst rebounder shoots, assuming that getting your own rebounds (a la McGary) is rare.
|2 years 18 weeks ago||Couldn't these teams also||
Couldn't these teams also just be the ones for which your method is the least accurate - for whatever reason? You're essentially saying that teams that won more than you expected got "lucky", but what if your model is just plain wrong for some teams?
|2 years 22 weeks ago||31 - 17 Michigan||
31 - 17 Michigan
|2 years 22 weeks ago||Thanks for all your work BISB||
Thanks for all your work BISB - especially in the (ever chaotic) liveblog!
|2 years 23 weeks ago||25-15 Michigan||
|2 years 24 weeks ago||This is obviously better than||
This is obviously better than the straight numbers, but the problem with this approach is that different teams schedules can have very different levels of difficulty. For example, if team A plays a very difficult schedule, they're not going to change those strong teams offensive output as much as team B, who plays nobody but cupcakes.
|2 years 24 weeks ago||Mich 9 Minn 3||
|2 years 25 weeks ago||45-30 M wins||
45-30 M wins
|2 years 26 weeks ago||20 - 12 M||
180 yards rushing.
State moves the ball but can't get in the endzone. Turnovers keep Michigan's point total down.
|2 years 26 weeks ago||Exactly, forward progress was||
Exactly, forward progress was clearly stopped, end of story.
|3 years 5 weeks ago||I actually used pagerank a||
I actually used pagerank a few years ago to pick my bracket. It did well, especially in the first round or so, but only ended up getting 3rd in my bracket pool.
|3 years 5 weeks ago||You can't draw conclusions||
You can't draw conclusions from data with such low R2. The R2 is telling you that the percentage of the variation you're accounting for with this variable is 2-3%. So of all the wild outcomes that can occur on the basketball court, the 3pt attempts can explain less than 3% of the result.
Don't get mislead by the fact that the conclusions line up in a way that you can rationalize - this data isn't conclusive at all.
|3 years 6 weeks ago||Its been fun to watch Ace's||
Its been fun to watch Ace's writing style improve so much over the last few months. The only problem now is that he sounds just like Brian. Given another year and he's going to be among the best sportswriters in the sports blogosphere.
|3 years 6 weeks ago||I just read about it on the||
I just read about it on the internet.
|3 years 8 weeks ago||Exactly. Reductio ad||
Exactly. Reductio ad absurdum: QBs have higher PAN than offensive guards, so we should stop recruiting so many linemen. Clearly this is wrong.
There is a tradeoff between defending the run and defending the pass. Teams that sell out to stop one open themselves up to the other. I think its reasonable to say that one reason Russel Wilson's numbers look so good is precisely because Wisconsin's running game was so dominant.
|3 years 9 weeks ago||For a "meta stat" post, this||
For a "meta stat" post, this is very light on data. Instead of debating the merits of EV vs SR, why not just show some data on which one is more predictive of wins?
I'm looking forward to the case study.
|3 years 9 weeks ago||I must be a super football||
I must be a super football nerd, but when I read the bit about the inside zone minutia my first thought was: "I hope Brian turns that into a post".
|3 years 13 weeks ago||The play-by-play breakdown||
The play-by-play breakdown adds depth that isn't available from summary statistics but I think everyone understands that this is a busy recriuting season, and you're looking for a break after football. Maybe you could focus on ufr-ing "interesting" games (like this one), probably games where something either went really well or horribly wrong, on either side of the ball.
|3 years 19 weeks ago||This is really great - stick||
This is really great - stick with it!
|3 years 22 weeks ago||No discussion of 3rd and long?||
I was expecting some praise for the defense on the 3rd and long plays. At one point during the game I found myself saying "I love watching this defense in 3rd and long".
|3 years 22 weeks ago||Smart football has a pretty||
Smart football has a pretty good list (though not all are strictly football related):
"The Inner Game of Tennis" is a classic with lessons that extend beyond tennis.
|3 years 22 weeks ago||He's a baller. The coaching||
He's a baller. The coaching helps.
|3 years 23 weeks ago||I've can't shake the bad||
I've can't shake the bad feeling I have about this game. Homefield is huge (see Ohio vs Wiscy) and they're going to be out for blood after an embarassing loss. . .