header pic

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

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: CFP era performance Ranking

 (Read 1453 times)

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71536
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: CFP era performance Ranking
« Reply #28 on: January 27, 2024, 09:07:44 AM »
TOs in my view are mostly "luck" though it's known some players have a propensity for INTs and FBs.  

Thet can end up sitting.

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18840
  • Liked:
Re: CFP era performance Ranking
« Reply #29 on: January 27, 2024, 10:52:13 AM »
It's tricky.  If you look closer at turnovers, there's more nuance.  
For any volume of passes, you're going to have x% intercepted.  But what kind of interceptions?
What do we do where there is a miscommunication and the QB throws it right to the defender, since the WR made a poor read?
What about a pass tipped at the line that wobbles into a defender's hands?  We may want to say that's a good defensive play, to get your hands up.  But a defensive lineman only does that if his pass-rush was ineffective.  
With that one, it makes me think about the idea that there can be no truly great 2nd basemen in baseball, as they're all just failed shortstops.
If your pass-rusher has more batted balls than sacks...he's not doing his job well.
.
Other 'luck' potentials in football are ball-marking by the refs, penalties witnessed and called by refs, injuries (and not just 'injuries,' but who and at what point in the game, etc), quality of teams you play consecutively, weather conditions, and on and on.

I really think a big one that no one mentions is the ref's ball-marking on low-stakes, 2nd down plays in the first half.  They're not being shitty with it or unethical, but please don't tell me they're being as careful then as they are on 4th and 1 plays in the 4th quarter, either.
So maybe teams have to punt 0.3 times more, on average, than they actually should have to.  That's not nothing.  But the game really is a game of inches and those inches add up here and there.  
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71536
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: CFP era performance Ranking
« Reply #30 on: January 27, 2024, 10:53:55 AM »
UGA had zero punts returned in 2023.  

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18840
  • Liked:
Re: CFP era performance Ranking
« Reply #31 on: January 27, 2024, 11:00:32 AM »
Yeah, kickoff and punt returns are going the way of the dodo.  Used to be super exciting if you had a great return man....no longer.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

Gigem

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2141
  • Liked:
Re: CFP era performance Ranking
« Reply #32 on: January 28, 2024, 01:11:15 PM »
I love how hours have been spent to unravel what the CFP was trying to resolve. Who’s 2nd best all the way through #25 or whatever. 


 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.