Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Nebbie is a good pick to do better than expected I think mostly because they had so many close losses last year.  Teams like that often regress to the mean.

I agree that part of it is simply regression to the mean. Teams aren't likely to go 0-9 in one score games twice in a row.

The other part is the Nebraska can improve their record immensely with just a modest one score per game improvement:

Their three wins were all blowouts:

• By 49 over NU
• By 45 over Fordham
• By 25 over Buffalo 

Their nine losses were all close:

• By 9 to tOSU
• By 8 to IL
• By 7 to OU, MN, UW, IA
• By 5 to PU
• By 3 to MSU, M

A slightly better team could have been 9-3.

I think the same is often true with turnovers.  If you got bit last year, you may upswing this year, and vice versa.

A team with close losses last year AND a negative TO margin should be primed.

I'd love to see a serious data analysis on the subject of training your defense to make sure tackles vs training them to go for turnovers.

I have no idea where you'd get solid data but consider these two choices:

• Give up 4.0 yards per play (best in the nation, Wisconsin in 2021) and force an average of two turnovers per game (if I'm reading it right, UW forced 24 turnovers in 2021 so almost two per game). Or
• Give up 5.1 yards per play (#35 in the nation, Ohio State in 2021) and force X turnovers per game.

What would X have to exceed for you to select #2 over #1?


In 2021 the Buckeyes actually forced only 20 turnovers (less than UW) but what if they had forced 2.5 per game or 3 per game?

I think a lot of INTs are random chance, or close to that.  Even when a QB misreads a safety or doesn't see him, it's semi-random, even the best do it.  Then there are tipped balls that fall to the turf or get scooped.  And of course some QBs play "loose" and think they can force it in there but can't.

It probably evens out with QB comparisons, but a team can get snakebit one year on TOs and then do better then next.  I don't know if that happened to Nebraska or not, but a TO or 2 in a close game means a loss usually.

I'd love to see a serious data analysis on the subject of training your defense to make sure tackles vs training them to go for turnovers.

I have no idea where you'd get solid data but consider these two choices:

• Give up 4.0 yards per play (best in the nation, Wisconsin in 2021) and force an average of two turnovers per game (if I'm reading it right, UW forced 24 turnovers in 2021 so almost two per game). Or
• Give up 5.1 yards per play (#35 in the nation, Ohio State in 2021) and force X turnovers per game.

What would X have to exceed for you to select #2 over #1?


In 2021 the Buckeyes actually forced only 20 turnovers (less than UW) but what if they had forced 2.5 per game or 3 per game?

Relatively a big number.  1.1 yards per play is immense!

Relatively a big number.  1.1 yards per play is immense!

Oh, I agree but turnovers have a humongous impact on games. My point was that there IS a number above which you WOULD make that trade.

Ie, if I told you you could choose between:

• UF 2022 gives up 4.0 ypp and forces zero turnovers, or
• UF 2022 gives up 5.1 ypp and forces 6 turnovers per game.

I assume you'd choose #2. I certainly would for my team. Sure, 1.1 ypp is a lot but 6 turnovers per game more than makes up for it. I'm curious where the tradeoff becomes even.

How about the other way, when a defender has the ball hit him in the face, chest, or both hands and he doesn't catch it?  That's probably more common than tips + juggles combined.

Why not both?

I know some folks track dropped picks. Tracking tip ball picks would probably be good too.

I know Bill Connelly does more general stats that weigh PBUs vs picks and then works off that baseline (is your rate high or low?). It’s interesting stuff.

The thing we don’t thing about enough is just how random football is, especially with all the moving pieces.