"You know how Kyle Flood still has a job? Yeah, all Jourdan."
- Member for
- 7 years 2 hours
- View recent blog entries
- % of your possessions where you had a multi-score lead at the end.
- Number of plays from scrimmage
- Number of first downs
- Actual time elapsed between possessions
- Clock used while with a multi-score lead.
|1 hour 13 min ago||It's a point of pride between||
It's a point of pride between Chesson and Peppers who is faster.
|1 hour 20 min ago||Ace is checking out how often||
Ace is checking out how often MSU goes 3-wide (ie how many plays Michigan would be in their 4-3/Ross personnel) when he does the FFFF viewing.
|1 day 2 hours ago||That's cool.I have a whole||
I have a whole post on this going tomorrow.
But...that's...pretty wizard...I guess.
|1 day 22 hours ago||By using a win likelihood calculator||
The chance of converting those 3rd and longs was actually not very good for Michigan's favor, but the 70 seconds run off the clock on 1st and 2nd down did marginally improve Michigan's chances of winning. Given how good Michigan's defense was that year, it's hard to point to any 40 second runoff with zero yards that would be more valuable than Michigan's base offensive performance.
|1 day 22 hours ago||Then count number of plays||
Then count number of plays run from scrimmage, not time of possession. Indiana when they still had first- or second-string quarterbacks alive would demoralize opponents by scampering to the line and running another play at ludicrous speed. That doesn't eat up a lot of clock but it has a significant football effect. So does making the other team's offense stand on the sideline for 15 or 20 minutes while you keep getting 1st downs.
Why not use it as a proxy? Because it sucks as a proxy. And other things you can measure are better as a proxy than Time of Possession:
The top one would need a season's worth of stats before the noise starts to leave the numbers, but it would also be of use in assessing a team's ability to limit possessions for the other team after a lead is established.
Measuring success at limiting possessions (whether to salt away a game or to keep your defense from having to run too many plays, or to raise the variance of the game if you're an underdog, etc.) would have some value, even if it's not as predictable (meaning good at predicting future success) as stats like yards per play or points per drive or percentage of available yards gained or turnover %. For example Michigan may have planned on 4 really cool blitzes that they thought would work against the team they're playing, and the fewer plays the defense runs the larger % of total plays are those special ones they drew up (which won't be as effective once they're used up). The more plays a defense faces, the greater % of those plays are going to be the base defense, and the more comfortable the offense will be with defeating it.
In Michigan's case I think our amazing depth everywhere but linebacker has made our defense especially capable of performing even as long drives persist. How many times this year has a drive gotten a key 3rd down conversion or something due to dumbass luck or a crappy penalty or whatever, then the defense shuts that down too? Our players don't get as tired because Michigan has the luxury of guys to rotate in who can perform as well as the starters.
|1 day 23 hours ago||Correlation does not imply orange||
You are making the classic blunder of those who use TOP as a metric: you're supposing that the cart is pulling the horse.
Teams that win time of possession consistently win football games for a very good reason: being ahead by a multi-score margin for most of the game means teams will try to burn clock as part of the strategy to limit possessions and therefore opportunities for the other team to score. Teams that are behind will do the opposite: they'll try to get either chunk yardage, out of bounds, first downs or incompletes in order to preserve clock and maximize possessions.
Put it this way: if you're down two touchdowns, do you try to "win time of possession" by going for 4- and 5-yard runs and letting the clock run down so your defense is fresher? Only if you're Kirk Ferentz. Time of Possession is therefore a mostly useless stat, since it is just measuring which team was trying to run the clock out, which is almost always the winning team.
You COULD create a statistic of use that is situational, however. IE you could track how much time a team runs off the clock when they're up by two or more scores in the 4th quarter or, like, at least 21 points before that, as a measure of their ability to put games away. But that should be separated out from other stats and used only to judge a team for when it's trying to salt away versus when its offense is operating normally.
It would be interesting to know things like how much time off the clock in a 4th quarter scenario is equal in value to a touchdown immediately. But since the value of a possession that starts on your own 25 is far less than that of a touchdown, the number of possessions you would have to remove from the game to make it equal to a touchdown would have be to rather large. I bet if you're up 17 points at the beginning of the 4th quarter, a 12-minute non-scoring drive or a 10-minute field goal drive is about equal to a touchdown drive that scores immediately. In other words, scoring points wins games, not playing keepaway.
|2 days 15 hours ago||I mean seriously||
MSU? OSU? TCU? Very rich people?
|3 days 7 hours ago||Subjective and not definite.||
Subjective and not definite. I've been tweaking since.
|3 days 18 hours ago||The one downside to losing||
The one downside to losing Dave Brandon was that was our one shot at ever naming it the Molly McGannon Memorial Student Section.
If we'd raised the funds this could have totally happened. The dream is dead.
|3 days 22 hours ago||And is there a name more fun||
And is there a name more fun to say than "Clint Copenhaver"?
|3 days 22 hours ago||Something like that. And to||
Something like that.
And to the other guy: Gold played behind Sword for the most part. I wrapped his snaps into that.
|4 days 1 hour ago||Is your handle giving Ezeh a||
Is your handle giving Ezeh a score?
|4 days 1 hour ago||That's a statement about how||
That's a statement about how good Glasgow has been. Also Renes was even better in '98.
|4 days 1 hour ago||How to Score A+: Best||
Nobody on the '97 defense scored lower than a B except nickel, which they barely used. I thought I was pretty fair.
|4 days 1 hour ago||The highest possible GPA you||
The highest possible GPA you can have is a 4.0,
Woodson scored a 4.3.
We're done here.
|4 days 5 hours ago||willing to trade msu pair of tickets for ohio pair||
|5 days 17 hours ago||This would make a good diary.||
This would make a good diary.
|5 days 19 hours ago||Accessory after the fact||
A reader had a legal question, was referred to legal people who probably know way less about football than us.
|6 days 1 hour ago||Why LTT was dismissed from team||
Posted on the front page with locked thread so board thread was superfluous. Prefer not to have anyone know we have readers who think this shit is okay.
|6 days 2 hours ago||I wrote an epic on Schobert||
I wrote an epic on Schobert when I drafted him. I want some damn recognition for finding this guy.
|6 days 2 hours ago||The MGoBloggers Will Be There||
Brian, Ace, me, Adam, the photographers, maybe David, not sure who else.
|6 days 2 hours ago||derf. fixed when David||
derf. fixed when David noticed it.
|1 week 38 min ago||I wasn't aware that's a||
I wasn't aware that's a secret. Like I think it's in his introductory post.
|1 week 3 hours ago||Man I called it a wham and||
Man I called it a wham and then got "corrected" by a certain former lineman who shall remain nameless.
It's hard to tell with this play but I think your analysis could be correct except I disagree about whether he's reading the NT. Maybe he should(?) be, but he's definitely watching the MLB because that's whose eyes he grabs, and that's whom he stuttered out of the hole.
And it makes sense from a play design angle. The NT could stunt or shoot into the wham block to cause all sorts of ruckus, and given he's lined up in a zero tech in a real 3-4 you're not going to get a lot of information about what gap he's going into--it's likely he has both of them and is just responsible for controlling his man.
On the other hand if as you say his first read is the gap he chose, he can watch to see if the MLB follows the center's pull (because that's a common enough key). If the MLB ignores the pull hit the backside; if he bolts to the backside you've taken care of the MLB. Instead he created option c: make the MLB do a stupid thing.
|1 week 5 hours ago||We have it.||
We have it.
|1 week 7 hours ago||Nice work! JZ and I got this||
JZ and I got this far and found their album "The Mean Streets of Ace Deuce" last night in the studio but all the sites had them taken down.
|1 week 22 hours ago||Ace was not in Donkey Punch.||
Ace was not in Donkey Punch. DP was big on campus when I was in school; Ace would have been in middle school then.
|1 week 22 hours ago||Working on that.||
Working on that.
|1 week 1 day ago||This should not be happening||
This should not be happening anymore now.
When it happened before it was because one of the ad networks we run had some of these redirect ads in the mobile version. I paused them until they assured me they had found the problem and cleaned it up.
I've paused them again. Let me know if it keeps happening after 11 am today.
|1 week 2 days ago||I think you're coming from a||
I think you're coming from a perspective that's shared by most in the college athletics world and many in the business world, but is not the perspective of most, and nor is it, I would argue, the right perspective.
Whether to speak out is ultimately an ethical question, right? On one hand, being part of an organization grants you access and a unique perspective. An enemy of that organization could use that perspective to damage the org. And one perspective inside is probably not a complete picture, so if one guy is talking and everyone else is mum the public will end up with a skewed perspective. That's why it's unethical to share secrets about the goings on of your company, your school, your program, etc.
However there is a higher level of ethics than that, and here's the disconnect. The people you're arguing with are speaking to these higher moral imperatives: that when your organization is diseased to the point where it's doing harm to itself and those who are part of it, the ethical thing to do is blow the whistle.
On both levels, we seek Truth. THAT is the moral we are serving when we keep our mouths shut about what goes on in our organizations. What I mean is that silence is NOT an ethic into itself. It is taught as such because it's self-serving; instilling silence is an effective method of protecting your organization from a few facts giving out a false truth, and of saving your own ass.
In this case, the Truth is that things were very wrong inside the Michigan program. And if ANYBODY who was around that program has absolutely proven his loyalty to Michigan and should be trusted implicitly to convey Truth about what went on in there, it's Gardner. We have had some impressive people come through this program, but he stands very high among them. If he throws shade on Brady Hoke, Hoke deserves it. If he throws shade on Nussmeier, it's because it's an open secret that the players did not trust Nuss.
These facts can no longer hurt Michigan; if Gardner spoke out a year ago it could have driven off recruits and damaged the team. But now we should all want to know the Truth of what happened to make Michigan so bad in 2014. Because what we care about more than Hoke's reputation here is that no player has to go through what Gardner did again.