CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: Mdot21 on December 06, 2021, 06:30:32 PM
-
QB Bryce Young, QB CJ Stroud, QB Kenny Pickett, and DE Aidan Hutchinson.
And the award goes to: QB Bryce Young, Alabama.
-
Yes, and they all deserve that recognition.
I can hear Hutchinson in Stroud talking now:
Aiden: “ sorry I had to knock you on your ass so many times bro“
CJ: “ it’s all good dude- just doing your job”.
-
lol
-
I think they should've invited KW3 from MSU. No way they are 10-2 right now without that guy.
But, doesn't really matter because Bryce Young locked that MF'er up by torching Georgia in the SECCG.
-
Never thought he'd win it. There's a reason they call it the Hypesman
-
Never thought he'd win it. There's a reason they call it the Hypesman
Agreed.
Having said that, Bryce Young has been pretty freaking phenomenal all year though- with the exception of that Auburn stinker. Definitely a deserving winner. Even if I can't stand Bama.
-
https://twitter.com/colecubelic/status/1467980833323720704?s=20
-
I think they should've invited KW3 from MSU. No way they are 10-2 right now without that guy.
But, doesn't really matter because Bryce Young locked that MF'er up by torching Georgia in the SECCG.
The Ohio State game really hurt him, which wasn’t his fault at all.
-
The Ohio State game really hurt him, which wasn’t his fault at all.
yeah, hard to run the ball when the score is 500-0 at half-time lol.
-
Hutchinson won't win it, but OSU made sure he'd be a top 5 draft pick.
-
Hutchinson won't win it, but OSU made sure he'd be a top 5 draft pick.
he was already being mocked that high before that game. I think what his performance vs OSU/Iowa have done might've catapulted him to the #1 overall pick in year where there is shit at QB. Poor bastards prize for that: being drafted by the Detroit Lions. Yeeesh.
-
Yes, and they all deserve that recognition.
I can hear Hutchinson in Stroud talking now:
Aiden: “ sorry I had to knock you on your ass so many times bro“
CJ: “ it’s all good dude- just doing your job”.
I remember a stand-up bit where Doug Stanhope is just slagging on Dane Cook. But then he redirects and points out that he and Dane Cook have more in common than Doug has with pretty much any of his fans, based on the fact that they're both stand-up comics.
Pretty sure this is honestly like that. College football players or NFL players may have rivalries and be fierce competitors on the field, but at the end of the day they have more in common with each other than any person who sits in the stands cheering for either of them.
You see it after every NFL game. Guys who have just spent 3 hours trying to violently attack each other go and give handshakes, and hugs, and swap jerseys, and all sorts of other things. They're all part of the same tribe, and we ain't in it.
-
yeah, hard to run the ball when the score is 500-0 at half-time lol.
He ran the ball 6 times. Even with the blowout, they should have ran him 20 times. He probably lost the invite solely on the fact that he didn’t touch the ball that game and every other game showed he deserved to be there.
-
He ran the ball 6 times. Even with the blowout, they should have ran him 20 times. He probably lost the invite solely on the fact that he didn’t touch the ball that game and every other game showed he deserved to be there.
He was hurt. There was speculation he wasn't going to play at all.
In retrospect, that may have strengthened his case. The score would have been identical, but everyone would have said look what a difference he made.
-
He ran the ball 6 times. Even with the blowout, they should have ran him 20 times. He probably lost the invite solely on the fact that he didn’t touch the ball that game and every other game showed he deserved to be there.
They came out passing and then got down almost immediately. Sometimes HCs outsmart themselves into stupidity.
-
The fact Anderson isn't there is ... unfortunate.
Jordan Davis likely went down with UGA on Saturday.
-
The fact Anderson isn't there is ... unfortunate.
this. i got no problem with the others going, but anderson deserves to at least be there. dude is best player in cfb. most tfl in last 10+ years and top 5 in sacks, with 1 (maybe 2) games left.
and not just heisman. butkus, walter camp, and lott awards too. at least he won nagurski and has decent shot at bednarik.
-
this. i got no problem with the others going, but anderson deserves to at least be there. dude is best player in cfb. most tfl in last 10+ years and top 5 in sacks, with 1 (maybe 2) games left.
and not just heisman. butkus, walter camp, and lott awards too. at least he won nagurski and has decent shot at bednarik.
Yeah, Walker got snubbed, but Anderson was the bigger snub.
Dude is the best player on Alabama AND the best defensive player in the country, both comfortably, and yet there is a defender and a Bama player in New York, neither of which is him.
To be honest my three man ballot would be #1 Anderson, #2 Walker, #3 Hutchinson. I don't think any of the QBs deserve to be in the top three this year, but Young would be my 4th invite
-
i like that order and i'd be fine with that. walker is definitely deserving to be there as well.
as for bryce, he's still having a ridiculous season. everyone talks about it's a weak year, but bryce's stats measure up really well with the last 3 heisman qb's, which were all heralded as no question best players.
stats comparison pre-bowls for bryce, burrow, kyler and baker. highlights are the leaders for each category.
(https://i.imgur.com/Alcmmux.png)
-
I can hear Hutchinson in Stroud talking now:
Aiden: “ sorry I had to knock you on your ass so many times bro“
CJ: “ it’s all good dude- just doing your job but see you in '23 with a fatter contract 😋
FIFY
-
i like that order and i'd be fine with that. walker is definitely deserving to be there as well.
Absolutely
-
To be honest my three man ballot would be #1 Anderson, #2 Walker, #3 Hutchinson. I don't think any of the QBs deserve to be in the top three this year, but Young would be my 4th invite
Lock the Thread
-
You see it after every NFL game. Guys who have just spent 3 hours trying to violently attack each other go and give handshakes, and hugs, and swap jerseys, and all sorts of other things. They're all part of the same tribe, and we ain't in it.
Ya we're the Hekawi Tribe from the'60's sit-com F-TROOP as in where the "heck are we"
-
i like that order and i'd be fine with that. walker is definitely deserving to be there as well.
as for bryce, he's still having a ridiculous season. everyone talks about it's a weak year, but bryce's stats measure up really well with the last 3 heisman qb's, which were all heralded as no question best players.
stats comparison pre-bowls for bryce, burrow, kyler and baker. highlights are the leaders for each category.
(https://i.imgur.com/Alcmmux.png)
Not sure how you keep Stroud out of that invite list.
in only 11 games:
https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4432577/cj-stroud
more yards per game than Bryce, higher completion rate, higher passer rating and higher QBR.
I wouldn’t give him the Hypesman for sure, but he clearly is up there with the others you listed.
-
I think possibly all 3 Ohio State WRs have an argument to be there as well. The problem is I'm not sure which one
-
I think possibly all 3 Ohio State WRs have an argument to be there as well. The problem is I'm not sure which one
Jackson Smith-Ngjiba is the best one. And he's going to be back in Columbus next year because he's only a true sophomore. Damnit.
-
Not sure how you keep Stroud out of that invite list.
in only 11 games:
https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4432577/cj-stroud
more yards per game than Bryce, higher completion rate, higher passer rating and higher QBR.
I wouldn’t give him the Hypesman for sure, but he clearly is up there with the others you listed.
i like stroud too and i'm fine with him going to ny. at some point we got to cut the list though. i have no arguments against him going.
-
Not sure how you keep Stroud out of that invite list.
in only 11 games:
https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4432577/cj-stroud
more yards per game than Bryce, higher completion rate, higher passer rating and higher QBR.
I wouldn’t give him the Hypesman for sure, but he clearly is up there with the others you listed.
just to see it, here is his stats vs those in the above table. also extrapolated it out to 13 games for him. green is categories he'd lead in extrapolated.
(https://i.imgur.com/kiWAtwQ.png)
-
I think possibly all 3 Ohio State WRs have an argument to be there as well. The problem is I'm not sure which one
Yea it's a bit of bs none of them are finalists for the Biketnikoff either.
-
Really,WTF,is it a participation trophy now?Won't matter come draft day and I guess their disappointment will disappear
-
Gattis won the Broyles Award as the nation's top assistant.
Tell you what, Harbaugh's 1987 offense wasn't working. Gattis came in pitching "speed and space", that was a bust. This year he figured out how to merge the two, and it worked. Very nice job, and some oddly sophisticated voting
-
Gattis won the Broyles Award as the nation's top assistant.
Tell you what, Harbaugh's 1987 offense wasn't working. Gattis came in pitching "speed and space", that was a bust. This year he figured out how to merge the two, and it worked. Very nice job, and some oddly sophisticated voting
I really hope Gattis stays and they put JJ McCarthy in as the starter next year. That offense could really take off next year. They'll be getting Ronnie Bell back and only C Andrew Vastardis has exhausted his eligibility. LT Ryan Hayes can comeback for his 5th year as he redshirted in 2018 and RT Andrew Steueber can get a 6th year because of COVID if he wants it. There is a chance they could get both their tackles back. Neither one of them are being mocked in NFL drafts. Starting RB Hassan Haskins is gone however, don't see him staying as his draft stock isn't going to improve by coming back.
-
I was going to post something about how many Doak Walker Award winners were not even invited to the Heisman ceremony...except since Derrick Henry won the Heisman in 2015, the only RB to be invited was Bryce Love (who did win the Doak Walker) in 2017. So as much as people talk about the defensive disrespect, the RB disrespect is greater. 3 defensive players have at least been invited since 2015, compared to one RB
-
I was going to post something about how many Doak Walker Award winners were not even invited to the Heisman ceremony...except since Derrick Henry won the Heisman in 2015, the only RB to be invited was Bryce Love (who did win the Doak Walker) in 2017. So as much as people talk about the defensive disrespect, the RB disrespect is greater. 3 defensive players have at least been invited since 2015, compared to one RB
https://twitter.com/SimonGibbs26/status/1469121078320459782?s=20
-
not getting him the ball hardly at all vs Youngstown State- a real stat-padding opportunity- and then being down 700-0 before half-time to Ohio State and not being able to get him the ball at all because the deficit was so big that you have to pass every down- cost him a trip to NYC. He still should've been there, imo.
Michigan State is nowhere near 10-2 without that dude. He covered a lot of warts (pass defense), made that OL appear better than it was, and made life a hell of a lot easier on that QB when you can turn around and hand the ball off to a guy like that. MSU probably a 7-5 or 8-4 team without Walker.
He should've 100% been in NYC, but it's all a moot point bc Bryce Young is winning that award no matter what after he shredded Georgia like that.
-
not getting him the ball hardly at all vs Youngstown State- a real stat-padding opportunity- and then being down 700-0 before half-time to Ohio State and not being able to get him the ball at all because the deficit was so big that you have to pass every down- cost him a trip to NYC. He still should've been there, imo.
Michigan State is nowhere near 10-2 without that dude. He covered a lot of warts (pass defense), made that OL appear better than it was, and made life a hell of a lot easier on that QB when you can turn around and hand the ball off to a guy like that. MSU probably a 7-5 or 8-4 team without Walker.
He should've 100% been in NYC, but it's all a moot point bc Bryce Young is winning that award no matter what after he shredded Georgia like that.
Yeah, but when a school like MSU has a chance for that, it's important. It doesn't come along every year. Pittsburgh barely cares about Pitt, and Kenny Pickett is all over thep lace this week
-
Yeah, but when a school like MSU has a chance for that, it's important. It doesn't come along every year. Pittsburgh barely cares about Pitt, and Kenny Pickett is all over thep lace this week
Oh I agree with you there. Kenny Pickett being there is a joke. He played in the weakest P5 conference there is and the dude lost to Western Michigan head to head.
Pickett belongs nowhere near there. If you're asking me, I think only 5 guys truly deserved to be there this year, that's it.
Bryce Young - top 2 QB in the nation, huge stats- playoff team. he'll win it.
CJ Stroud - top 2 QB in the nation, huge stats- top 10 team. he's got a great shot to win it next year.
KW3 - top RB in the nation, huge stats - willed his team to top 10 finish.
Aidan Hutchinson - top 2 defensive player in the nation, top defensive lineman in the nation- will be top 3 pick in 2022 draft. (no QB's worth high picks)
Will Anderson - top 2 defensive player in the nation, top LB in the nation. will be a top 5 pick in 2023 draft (there will be QB's worth high picks, namely Stroud & Young).
I think those are the only 5 guys who should've been invited and deserved to be there.
-
Aidan Hutchinson wins the B1G Silver Award. He becomes only the 3rd defensive player to win the award since 2000. The other defensive winners were DE Chase Young, Ohio State who won the award in 2019, and DE Brandon Graham, Michigan - who was a co-winner of the award in 2009 with Penn State QB Darryl Clark.
-
Aidan Hutchinson wins the B1G Silver Award. He becomes only the 3rd defensive player to win the award since 2000. The other defensive winners were DE Chase Young, Ohio State who won the award in 2019, and DE Brandon Graham, Michigan - who was a co-winner of the award in 2009 with Penn State QB Darryl Clark.
Totally earned and deserved!
-
Oh I agree with you there. Kenny Pickett being there is a joke. He played in the weakest P5 conference there is and the dude lost to Western Michigan head to head.
Pickett belongs nowhere near there. If you're asking me, I think only 5 guys truly deserved to be there this year, that's it.
i won't disagree too much, but pickett is very much NOT the reason they lost to w mich. dude had ~75% comp%, 380+ yds, and 6 tds. also had almost 60 yds on the ground, and he ain't a running qb. that loss is all on the defense.
-
Harbaugh named AP Coach of the Year.
-
Can his ass!
-
Harbaugh named AP Coach of the Year.
space cadet
-
91 tackles, 29 TFL, 15.5 sacks
vs
58 tackles, 15.5 TFL, 14 sacks
.
Why is the 2nd guy obsessed over and the 1st guy isn't?
-
shiny helmet?
-
The 1st guy has the shiniest helmet.
-
91 tackles, 29 TFL, 15.5 sacks
vs
58 tackles, 15.5 TFL, 14 sacks
.
Why is the 2nd guy obsessed over and the 1st guy isn't?
They are both incredible players. Both belong there.
Might be a case of stats do not tell the entire story also. Anderson can be ran at according to PFF, and well, Hutchinson cannot. Hutchinson was the only edge defender in the nation rated by PFF as having over an 85 run defense and 85 pass rush grade. They deem anything an 85 elite, and Hutchinson was literally the only edge guy that PFF ranks elite in both categories.
Hutchinson had his biggest moment in literally the most watched/highest rated college football game all season getting 3 sacks vs the #1 offense in the nation and he also 15 pressures by himself vs an OL that hadn't given up more than I think 6 pressures to an opposing defense in a game all-season. Ohio State had PFF's #1 ranked pass protection OL unit and had a pair of tackles that were being projected in the 1st or 2nd round and Hutchinson just flat out whooped on them. Bullied them really.
Meanwhile Anderson had kinda quiet games down the stretch vs Auburn & Georgia. Think it was probably a case of one guy not really popping down the stretch and the other guy coming up huge in his teams biggest game in the most televised college football game all-season.
I mean it's splitting hairs if you ask me. These are both incredible college players and super high NFL draft picks. Hutch probably going #1 overall considering the QB's are god awful this draft- and Anderson won't last past the top 5 in the next draft. These guys are both premier bluechip players through and through.
-
The 1st guy has the shiniest helmet.
I don't think so. Alabama is the premier program on the field- and has been for like 15 years- but that's all because of Saban. It's still a somewhat regional program in terms of reach imo. Any reach they have had these last 15 years has been bc of the crazy success Saban has brought there. The school doesn't have a massive alumni base, built-in national fanbase, and the state of Alabama is and has always been one of the smallest states population wise and also one of the poorest states GDP wise in the union.
They are without question a helmet, blue-blood, and cornerstone franchise- but we talking purely shiniest of shiny helmets- that might be an ND v Michigan debate.
-
to the surprise of no one, QB Bryce Young of Alabama wins the Heisman.
-
Alabama now has 4 Heisman Trophy winners in it's history, and all of them during the Saban era.
I think 3 of them were legit, Derrick Henry, DeVonta Smith, and Bryce Young all very deserving winners. The Mark Ingram win in 2009 still seems pretty damn suspect to me. He shouldn't have won it. It should've went to Suh or even Toby Gehrhart.
-
They are both incredible players. Both belong there.
Might be a case of stats do not tell the entire story also. Anderson can be ran at according to PFF, and well, Hutchinson cannot. Hutchinson was the only edge defender in the nation rated by PFF as having over an 85 run defense and 85 pass rush grade. They deem anything an 85 elite, and Hutchinson was literally the only edge guy that PFF ranks elite in both categories.
I mean it's splitting hairs if you ask me.
Its not a "they're both good" or "all other things are equal" thing at all......TWICE THE TFL. Those are runs, you know that, right? Tons more tackles. All while having more sacks. Plus dropping back in coverage.
If Hutchinson could do that vs the great OSU, why didn't he do more against the mortal teams? And PFF has Anderson 80%+ vs run and pass, too.
At least the Nagurski people got it right.
-
Its not a "they're both good" or "all other things are equal" thing at all......TWICE THE TFL. Those are runs, you know that, right? Tons more tackles. All while having more sacks. Plus dropping back in coverage.
If Hutchinson could do that vs the great OSU, why didn't he do more against the mortal teams? And PFF has Anderson 80%+ vs run and pass, too.
At least the Nagurski people got it right.
Hutchinson was the best defensive player in the nation and it wasn't particularly close.
-
Some Heisman voting fun facts from previous years:
2019: OSU DE Chase Young had more 1st place votes than the 2 players ahead of him put together (Hurts, Fields....20 votes to 18).
2018: QBs Gardner Minshew and McKenzie Milton finished 5th and 6th, respectively...McKenzie has 373 fewer pass attempts. That's quite a workload disparity, no?
2016: Jabril Peppers is a weird case. Everyone was enamored with his versatility, but what did he actually DO? 3 sacks. 1 INT. 1 pass deflection. 13 TFL. 3 TDs on offense. His biggest plus was being a very good punt returner.
To me, versatility doesn't mean a lot if you can't do many things WELL. I have no doubt that his versatility helped his team and his willingness to do it was commendable, but does that equate a top-5 Heisman finish? 1 INT? 60 tackles? Meh.
2014: Wisconsin RB Melvin Gordon's 2,587 yards, 7.5 ypc, and 29 TDs warranted only 37 1st place votes. 12 fewer than the guy who finished behind him (Cooper).
.
I'm looking this stuff up and am distracted about something. I'm going to switch gears and list the 2,000 yard rushers (P5 programs).
2628 Barry Sanders, OKST - WINNER
2587 Melvin Gordon, Wis - 2nd
2427 Marcus Allen, USC - WINNER
2219 Derrick Henry, Ala - WINNER
2194 Jonathan Taylor, Wis - 9th
2185 Troy Davis, ISU - 2nd
2177 Andre Williams, BC - 4th
2150 Tony Dorsett, Pitt - WINNER
2148 Mike Rozier, Neb - WINNER
2124 Ricky Williams, Tex - WINNER
2118 Bryce Love, Stan - 2nd
2109 Ron Dayne, Wis - out of top 10
2094 Chuba Hubbard, OKST - 8th
2087 Larry Johnson, PSU - 3rd
2066 Lorenzo White, MSU - 4th
2063 Damien Anderson, NW - 5th
2055 Rashaan Salaam, CU - WINNER
2050 Charles White, USC -WINNER
2036 Tevin Coleman, IU - 7th
2034 Ron Dayne, Wis - WINNER
2028 D'Onta Foreman, Tex - 8th
2019 Christian McCaffrey, Stan - 2nd
2018 J.J. Arrington, Cal - 8th
2012 Ray Rice, Rut - out of top 10
2010 Troy Davis, ISU - 5th
2003 J.K. Dobbins, OSU - 6th
2003 Jonathan Taylor, Wis - 5th
2000 Byron Hanspard, TTU - 6th
.
I was thinking that maybe D'Onta Foreman was the most anonymous 2,000 yard rusher....and he definitely is, from a helmet program. But looking over this list and taking into account the timeline of how things happen, I'm left with a question: Why do Heisman voters need a year to get a guy on their radar before they can really reward him for what he's done?
Ron Dayne's biggest yardage year was his FR season. From out of nowhere, he ran over the B1G....and wasn't in the voting at all. Then, he basically has the same season as a SR, and wins the award. Mindless.
.
Ray Rice wasn't from out of nowhere, though. He was on an 8-5 team with no notoriety.
.
I know every season is different, but I bet a deeper study would expose the voters as slow and inconsistent.
-
Hutchinson was the best defensive player in the nation and it wasn't particularly close.
Because Stone Cold said so?
-
My all-time favorite Heisman voting thing is from 1990:
we almost had a winner with 6 total TDs as a skill position player....but he finished 2nd to a guy who threw 28 INTs. LOL
-
91 tackles, 29 TFL, 15.5 sacks
vs
58 tackles, 15.5 TFL, 14 sacks
.
Why is the 2nd guy obsessed over and the 1st guy isn't?
This bolded part is highly imaginary. The second guy was a finalist for an award that everyone agrees has lot of voting body problems. That's all.
-
Because Stone Cold said so?
Because it's easy to just watch the games. Mainstream defensive stats have always been goofy. It's like pass breakups for defensive backs. Is that supposed to be a good thing?
-
2016: Jabril Peppers is a weird case. Everyone was enamored with his versatility, but what did he actually DO? 3 sacks. 1 INT. 1 pass deflection. 13 TFL. 3 TDs on offense. His biggest plus was being a very good punt returner.
To me, versatility doesn't mean a lot if you can't do many things WELL. I have no doubt that his versatility helped his team and his willingness to do it was commendable, but does that equate a top-5 Heisman finish? 1 INT? 60 tackles? Meh.
Peppers definitely didn't belong. The only way he would've belonged imo is if he had gotten more offensive play and scored at least double digit TD's. 10 or more- plus what he did on defense plus what he did as a return man- than he would've belonged. he did not play enough offense to warrant being there- and they had him in the box or blitzing too much too really have any kind of impact in terms of putting up pass defenses/int's. even if he wasn't sacking the qb- he did get quite a bit of pressure when they sent him on blitzes and he was an absolute screen destroyer. screen destroyers are nice guys to have.
-
Because it's easy to just watch the games. Mainstream defensive stats have always been goofy. It's like pass breakups for defensive backs. Is that supposed to be a good thing?
It's better than allowing a completion, lol. This reminds me of OSU CB Shawn Springs. No INTs, but he was an All-American.
This isn't a case of obscure stats being conjured to make Anderson look better than Hutchinson......it's that the same stats that build up Hutchinson build up Anderson MORE.
And this obsession with pressures all of a sudden.....it's a bit much. It's not 2021, but Anderson led the country in pressures last year.
.
The case for Hutchinson is the case for Anderson, but weaker.
-
Some Heisman voting fun facts from previous years:
2018: QBs Gardner Minshew and McKenzie Milton finished 5th and 6th, respectively...McKenzie has 373 fewer pass attempts. That's quite a workload disparity, no?
...
2109 Ron Dayne, Wis - out of top 10
.
I know every season is different, but I bet a deeper study would expose the voters as slow and inconsistent.
The Dayne year was interesting. He wasn't the starter early. He caught fire late, but that was for a nice finish to get to 7-5, 3-5 in conference. He also had 1,863 yards heading into the bowl, which is a very good number, but the thought was no freshmen back then, for whatever reason.
The workload disparity is a bit odd. Minshew was throwing 51 times a game to 31 per game in games where his leg wasn't getting nearly torn off in the first quarter. Minshew total is bloated because of the bowl, so he was actually 49 closer when they voted. Milton lost one game to a hurricane, another to what I guess was injury, plus the aforementioned near leg removal game.
-
It's all narrative. The voting contingent is bloated. It's largely a giant whatever
One of these guys was a Heisman finalist, the other, playing the same position, in the same conference, in one less game, was 2nd team All-Big Ten
78 tackles, 15.5 TFL, 10 sacks, 1 FF, 2 FR, 1 TD
54 tackles, 14.5 TFL, 12 sacks, 2 FF, 1 FR
-
That's probably what bothers me. It's a "whoever the media clings onto" thing. And in seasons like this one, when they're bitching how "no one seems to want this thing," it's because their lazy asses haven't found an angle on a player who is good, but not any better than 20 other guys.
I'm reminded of Yogi Berra. His childhood best friend was also a baseball player, but MLB teams drafted Berra way ahead of the friend. Both of them 'knew' the friend was better, but the experts disagreed.
-
The voting base for both the Walter camp and Maxwell awards are far more qualified than the Heisman voting. I truly would be interested to know why the Heisman became the premier award over those two
-
I'm afraid it might be the actual trophy itself. The Maxwell looks like 3 people dancing and the Camp is just a guy standing there.
-
It's better than allowing a completion, lol. This reminds me of OSU CB Shawn Springs. No INTs, but he was an All-American.
This isn't a case of obscure stats being conjured to make Anderson look better than Hutchinson......it's that the same stats that build up Hutchinson build up Anderson MORE.
And this obsession with pressures all of a sudden.....it's a bit much. It's not 2021, but Anderson led the country in pressures last year.
.
The case for Hutchinson is the case for Anderson, but weaker.
Shawn Springs was a great player. Which brings up the biggest problem with defensive stats - quarterbacks being afraid to throw anywhere near Springs is...a bad thing, because he can't then record the right defensive statistics? It's nonsense. People talk about pressures more because defensive coaches want to pressure the quarterback. It's the whole deal. That defensive stats haven't really followed along with what is important in football is not the fault of any player.
-
That's probably what bothers me. It's a "whoever the media clings onto" thing. And in seasons like this one, when they're bitching how "no one seems to want this thing," it's because their lazy asses haven't found an angle on a player who is good, but not any better than 20 other guys.
I'm reminded of Yogi Berra. His childhood best friend was also a baseball player, but MLB teams drafted Berra way ahead of the friend. Both of them 'knew' the friend was better, but the experts disagreed.
If subjective things that don't align exactly with your world view bother you, I think you might just not like awards.
In the end, the award can only go to one person. And knowing you as I do, I'm going to guess that there's almost nobody, if not nobody, who is gonna fully satisfy you on this front. That's the nature of picking anything. No matter who you pick, there will be some reason to detract. And you will always be able to make the detractions the thing, if you want to.
(Had I a vote, I woulda given it to Anderson. I might not have put a QB at all on my ballot, though Young's late surge and Davis' late play might have gotten Young third)
-
It's all narrative. The voting contingent is bloated. It's largely a giant whatever
One of these guys was a Heisman finalist, the other, playing the same position, in the same conference, in one less game, was 2nd team All-Big Ten
78 tackles, 15.5 TFL, 10 sacks, 1 FF, 2 FR, 1 TD
54 tackles, 14.5 TFL, 12 sacks, 2 FF, 1 FR
It took me a second to check who what was. The construction of that, with the omitted context is kind of a good reminder why this conversation is always going to end in this spot.
The post only has one direct factual error (which actually creates another set of factual errors), but it strips away enough context to obscure enough truth to make it seem logically sound. And we stick with it because we want to believe we should be aggrieved and that the experts are fools.
I often think they're not super at picking these things (there's an OL vote, for goodness sake), but creating notably misleading narratives about these things just shows the criticism is far from sticking to the straight and narrow.
-
Shawn Springs was a great player. Which brings up the biggest problem with defensive stats - quarterbacks being afraid to throw anywhere near Springs is...a bad thing, because he can't then record the right defensive statistics? It's nonsense. People talk about pressures more because defensive coaches want to pressure the quarterback. It's the whole deal. That defensive stats haven't really followed along with what is important in football is not the fault of any player.
Exactly. Defensive stats and how a defensive player actually effects a game are two completely different things. And what a defensive player is able to do depends highly on who else is on that unit.
George Karlaftis didn't have a Heisman-worth statistical season by far... Because teams were double- and triple-teaming him on passing downs and were so terrified of him that they did everything they could to scheme and block him out of the game. They were able to do this because Purdue didn't have anyone else on that defense that was so disruptive.
Go back a few years and I think it was the tandem of Ryan Kerrigan who had a great junior season, but his senior season when Kawaan Short really became a dominant force at DT that it opened Kerrigan up and he started recording eye-popping defensive stats because the defense couldn't focus on him as the sole threat.
Michigan was an embarrassment of riches on the DL this year, so teams couldn't just scheme or double+ Hutchison out of the game. Alabama is an embarrassment of riches at every position every year, so they get the same thing. No way you can design your offense around avoiding Anderson because if he's the guy who EA Sports rates a 99, everyone else on that defense is 94-97 so it's not like you can pick that poison.
-
If subjective things that don't align exactly with your world view bother you, I think you might just not like awards.
In the end, the award can only go to one person. And knowing you as I do, I'm going to guess that there's almost nobody, if not nobody, who is gonna fully satisfy you on this front. That's the nature of picking anything. No matter who you pick, there will be some reason to detract. And you will always be able to make the detractions the thing, if you want to.
(Had I a vote, I woulda given it to Anderson. I might not have put a QB at all on my ballot, though Young's late surge and Davis' late play might have gotten Young third)
I don't recall criticizing the guy who won the award this year.
But I guess you know me really well.
-
Shawn Springs was a great player. Which brings up the biggest problem with defensive stats - quarterbacks being afraid to throw anywhere near Springs is...a bad thing, because he can't then record the right defensive statistics? It's nonsense. People talk about pressures more because defensive coaches want to pressure the quarterback. It's the whole deal. That defensive stats haven't really followed along with what is important in football is not the fault of any player.
I agree, Shawn Springs was a great player. Where did I say otherwise?
So people talk about pressures more because defensive coaches want to pressure the QB? Okay. Do me a favor - poll the top 100 DCs in the game and ask them if they'd rather have a pressure or a sack.
I'll hang up and listen.
-
I agree, Shawn Springs was a great player. Where did I say otherwise?
So people talk about pressures more because defensive coaches want to pressure the QB? Okay. Do me a favor - poll the top 100 DCs in the game and ask them if they'd rather have a pressure or a sack.
I'll hang up and listen.
pressures make QBs hurry throws and make mistakes and they are often also converted into sacks for other players on the defense if the guy making the pressure doesn't get home on the sack.
I remember one year PFF had former Michigan DE Brandon Graham rated as the #1 edge rusher in the NFL and he only had about 6 sacks or something like that- but his pressure rate per snaps played was through the roof- it was by far #1 in the NFL by a ridiculous margin. PFF had him rated as a top 10 player in the league that year, based largely on that and his run defense grade.
-
I don't recall criticizing the guy who won the award this year.
But I guess you know me really well.
I didn’t write that you criticized anyone who won the award.
And within the context of CFB opinions, I do. I have only been reading them for like a decade.
-
Exactly. Defensive stats and how a defensive player actually effects a game are two completely different things. And what a defensive player is able to do depends highly on who else is on that unit.
George Karlaftis didn't have a Heisman-worth statistical season by far... Because teams were double- and triple-teaming him on passing downs and were so terrified of him that they did everything they could to scheme and block him out of the game. They were able to do this because Purdue didn't have anyone else on that defense that was so disruptive.
Go back a few years and I think it was the tandem of Ryan Kerrigan who had a great junior season, but his senior season when Kawaan Short really became a dominant force at DT that it opened Kerrigan up and he started recording eye-popping defensive stats because the defense couldn't focus on him as the sole threat.
Michigan was an embarrassment of riches on the DL this year, so teams couldn't just scheme or double+ Hutchison out of the game. Alabama is an embarrassment of riches at every position every year, so they get the same thing. No way you can design your offense around avoiding Anderson because if he's the guy who EA Sports rates a 99, everyone else on that defense is 94-97 so it's not like you can pick that poison.
If you're tasking voters with seeing the game within the game, I'm afraid you're going to be left disappointed.
Mostly they look at 2 sets of data and point to one, thinking, "more = better." Except when it comes to Aidan Hutchinson.
I know this will get shot down in 4 seconds but the resurgent Wolverines, lacking a big-time QB, being led by a white legacy is too much to pass up.
-
pressures make QBs hurry throws and make mistakes and they are often also converted into sacks for other players on the defense if the guy making the pressure doesn't get home on the sack.
I remember one year PFF had former Michigan DE Brandon Graham rated as the #1 edge rusher in the NFL and he only had about 6 sacks or something like that- but his pressure rate per snaps played was through the roof- it was by far #1 in the NFL by a ridiculous margin. PFF had him rated as a top 10 player in the league that year, based largely on that and his run defense grade.
PFF has Jameson Williams as the 45th-best WR.
When did PFF become the authority on anything?
-
pressures make QBs hurry throws and make mistakes and they are often also converted into sacks for other players on the defense if the guy making the pressure doesn't get home on the sack.
I remember one year PFF had former Michigan DE Brandon Graham rated as the #1 edge rusher in the NFL and he only had about 6 sacks or something like that- but his pressure rate per snaps played was through the roof- it was by far #1 in the NFL by a ridiculous margin. PFF had him rated as a top 10 player in the league that year, based largely on that and his run defense grade.
This has nothing to do with whether a DC would rather have a pressure over a sack. But thanks.
-
This is comical, I don't know why PFF has become a go-to citation lately...look at this:
VA Tech allegedly has 3 of the top 5 interior defenders in the country.
Rush yards allowed per game: 87th
Rush yards allowed per carry: 83rd
.
LMFAO
.
UNC, same thing....3 of the top 8 interior defenders.....
Rush yards allowed per game: 93rd
Rush yards allowed per carry: 92nd
.
Boy, those must be some interesting schemes they're running, to be a sieve like that WHILE HAVING THEIR INTERIOR DEFENDERS GRADING OUT SO HIGH.
I know, maybe when they screwed up, they orchestrated it so they'd all screw up on the same plays, right?
I'm afraid PFF is a joke of a site with a helluva webmaster and lost of content where you can, indeed, pick and choose whatever invented stat you want to support your point.
-
Exactly. Defensive stats and how a defensive player actually effects a game are two completely different things. And what a defensive player is able to do depends highly on who else is on that unit.
George Karlaftis didn't have a Heisman-worth statistical season by far... Because teams were double- and triple-teaming him on passing downs and were so terrified of him that they did everything they could to scheme and block him out of the game. They were able to do this because Purdue didn't have anyone else on that defense that was so disruptive.
Go back a few years and I think it was the tandem of Ryan Kerrigan who had a great junior season, but his senior season when Kawaan Short really became a dominant force at DT that it opened Kerrigan up and he started recording eye-popping defensive stats because the defense couldn't focus on him as the sole threat.
Michigan was an embarrassment of riches on the DL this year, so teams couldn't just scheme or double+ Hutchison out of the game. Alabama is an embarrassment of riches at every position every year, so they get the same thing. No way you can design your offense around avoiding Anderson because if he's the guy who EA Sports rates a 99, everyone else on that defense is 94-97 so it's not like you can pick that poison.
So, I think this starts at an interesting place, and then kind of wanders us into a jungle of narrative.
The idea that stats don't always tell the story is true. but I think some weight has to be put on doing the thing. It's kind of murky. We can say Karlaftis affected the game by making life easier on teammates (he did!), but in the end, fewer blockers blocked players you're asserting are worse and Purdue had a ho-hum pass rush in terms of getting to the QB. And if you have better stats, you can see that Karlaftis piled up pressures, and Purdue was good at pressuring QBs. And then it gets even more theoretical when you think, if he's a game wrecker (yes) for a defense that's better than it should be (yes), but many of the teammates he's opening up are not producing more in terms of the things missing from his statistical resume (sacks and TFL), where does that leave us? And that's not to detract. Kid is a game-wrecker, and perhaps going forward, we'll get better double/triple/chip numbers.
Then we get into a set of narratives. There's the argument that Hutchinson and Anderson aren't getting schemed or doubled. This might be true, but it feels more like sketching in the lines of what we think. Without watching a ton of Bama and Michigan really closely, it's more just a guess (maybe you're doing that, but you seems to be leading a life interesting enough that you're not, which is better, frankly). Maybe those dudes were just on one this year, and are putting up stats despite a decent amount of doubles, though still less than Karlaftis.
I'm thinking you having the timing wrong on Kerrigan. His junior numbers were highly excellent. Better sack numbers than his senior year, and plenty good TFL numbers. Are you thinking of his sophomore year, where he was also very good, but less statistically excellent? (Also, holy hell, the defensive linemen in the conference those years. I'm unsurprised that anyone got lost those years or had a delay in recognition. Just stacked)
-
in the same way that Cincy doesn't like lists, they are simply someone's opinion
awards are just a collective opinion of a few voters
also, the media screws up sports just as badly as any topic including COVID or Global Warming
the awards really aren't important unless the fan base gets to brag about it
what is important in a monetary way is NFL draft selection - and even with all that money on the line - the GM screw it up
-
Because it's easy to just watch the games. Mainstream defensive stats have always been goofy. It's like pass breakups for defensive backs. Is that supposed to be a good thing?
I'd imagine yes,you were mentioning Shawn Springs,who prolly didn't have the same numbes as others because they didn't look his way as much.Maybe because of "pass break ups"
-
I'd imagine yes,you were mentioning Shawn Springs,who prolly didn't have the same numbes as others because they didn't look his way as much.Maybe because of "pass break ups"
The more I look at it, the more I think about the Springs story we always hear being a narrative of its era.
He had six picks the year before, four pass break ups. He had 15 break ups that year. He was probably a beast both years, but someone had to explain to really unsophisticated voters why the lack of picks didn't matter. (We're still bad now, but more sophisticated, I think)
-
So, I think this starts at an interesting place, and then kind of wanders us into a jungle of narrative.
The idea that stats don't always tell the story is true. but I think some weight has to be put on doing the thing. It's kind of murky. We can say Karlaftis affected the game by making life easier on teammates (he did!), but in the end, fewer blockers blocked players you're asserting are worse and Purdue had a ho-hum pass rush in terms of getting to the QB. And if you have better stats, you can see that Karlaftis piled up pressures, and Purdue was good at pressuring QBs. And then it gets even more theoretical when you think, if he's a game wrecker (yes) for a defense that's better than it should be (yes), but many of the teammates he's opening up are not producing more in terms of the things missing from his statistical resume (sacks and TFL), where does that leave us? And that's not to detract. Kid is a game-wrecker, and perhaps going forward, we'll get better double/triple/chip numbers.
Then we get into a set of narratives. There's the argument that Hutchinson and Anderson aren't getting schemed or doubled. This might be true, but it feels more like sketching in the lines of what we think. Without watching a ton of Bama and Michigan really closely, it's more just a guess (maybe you're doing that, but you seems to be leading a life interesting enough that you're not, which is better, frankly). Maybe those dudes were just on one this year, and are putting up stats despite a decent amount of doubles, though still less than Karlaftis.
I'm thinking you having the timing wrong on Kerrigan. His junior numbers were highly excellent. Better sack numbers than his senior year, and plenty good TFL numbers. Are you thinking of his sophomore year, where he was also very good, but less statistically excellent? (Also, holy hell, the defensive linemen in the conference those years. I'm unsurprised that anyone got lost those years or had a delay in recognition. Just stacked)
Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to say that Karlaftis should have been anywhere near the Heisman discussion. I was just using him as an example, similar to the Shawn Springs example, of someone who affects a game in a very significant way but it doesn't always show up on the stat sheet.
Re: Kerrigan, I got it a little wrong. He had amazing numbers in both the 2009 (junior) and 2010 (senior) season. Short did not play in 2008, was a true soph in 2009, and junior in 2010. While Short didn't have a crazy statistical season in 2009, he did well in 2010 with 6 sacks and 12.5 TFL of his own. I do think that Kerrigan absolutely had things open up for him once offenses had to account for Short. And both had long and productive careers on Sundays, so it's not like it was Kerrigan taking all the attention that allowed Short to produce stats either. It was having two NFL caliber players on the defensive line that allowed both of them to produce.
I'll be honest that I haven't watched a lot of Bama or Michigan. That said, it's not only difficult to compare DE and LB stats head-to-head because of the different position, it's also difficult to do so because of scheme. My point was more that it's beyond just a simple decision of "pick the guy with the higher number" when not all statistics are created equal.
-
but we talking purely shiniest of shiny helmets- that might be an ND v Michigan debate.
There were articles from Forbes,Wall Street Journal and dozens of others with Opinions and placements all over the place.Much depends on the season.Not based on who may have racked up the most wins since WWII and before
https://www.sportskeeda.com/nfl/what-valuable-college-football-programs
This from July 2021 WSJ but it's behind a paywall.So many different takes and not just a ND vs UM debate
1)Texas
2)tOSU
3)Alabama
4)Michigan
5)ND
Power 5 -- Top 15 (from 2018)
1. Texas -- $156 million
2. Georgia -- $123 million
3. Michigan -- $122 million
4. Notre Dame -- $116 million
5. Ohio State -- $115 million
6. Penn State -- $100 million
7. Auburn -- $95 million
8. Oklahoma -- $94.8 million
9. Alabama -- $94.6 million
10. Nebraska -- $94.3 million
Another one had
1)Texas
2)Georgia
3)Michigan
4) tOSU
5)Bama
-
Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to say that Karlaftis should have been anywhere near the Heisman discussion. I was just using him as an example, similar to the Shawn Springs example, of someone who affects a game in a very significant way but it doesn't always show up on the stat sheet.
"There are lies, damned lies and statistics." - Mark Twain
-
it's just a list
-
All of this is where college football suffers from lack of detailed statistics.
Maybe sites like PFF are trying to adhere their NFL stuff onto college, but you cant really do that.
NFL teams are very close in terms of quality, say 40-60 on a scale from 0-100. College football teams are more like 1-99 on that scale. And related to that, NFL schedules are much more even, my an order of magnitude when compared to college.
Think about Dre Bly. Dude shows up as a FR, nabs 11 INTs. Everybody's All-American. No Thorpe Award from the simpleton voters, because they need at least a year to digest anything. Only gets 9 INTs the rest of his career. I say 'only' because people seem to tend to take their initial exposure to someone and set that as the median. So Bly looks like he got worse, due to his INTs decreasing when in all likelihood, they threw his way less.
% of passes faced or defended would be a useful stat to have widely available. For a Karlaftis or Vince Wilfork, number of blockers per snap would be useful. Number of sacks or TFL while unblocked would be interesting to know, too.
Anyway, I'm not going to fault PFF for trying, but at the same time, it's silly to cite it.
-
the best corner will have zero stats, because.... no one has the guts to throw his way
-
Then Charles Woodson and Deion Sanders must have sucked!
-
the best corner will have zero stats, because.... no one has the guts to throw his way
Then Charles Woodson and Deion Sanders must have sucked!
Again, you have to look at the rest of the roster.
Let's say you're 2021 Purdue, and you're up against Michigan with Woodson. Woodson is going to shadow David Bell all game long.
That doesn't mean you don't throw Bell's way, because nobody else on the roster is anywhere near as good of a receiver as Bell... AND because it's not like the rest of Michigan's defense sucks.
It probably means you don't throw Bell's way as often, but you're not going to win not throwing to him at all.
Now, let's say you're 2021 Ohio State. You don't throw Woodson's way, because you have three incredible receivers and whoever isn't guarded by Woodson is probably in a positive mismatch. You have the luxury of not throwing that way.
-
I guess some opponents had the guts, how'd that work out?
-
Again, you have to look at the rest of the roster.
Let's say you're 2021 Purdue, and you're up against Michigan with Woodson. Woodson is going to shadow David Bell all game long.
That doesn't mean you don't throw Bell's way, because nobody else on the roster is anywhere near as good of a receiver as Bell... AND because it's not like the rest of Michigan's defense sucks.
It probably means you don't throw Bell's way as often, but you're not going to win not throwing to him at all.
Now, let's say you're 2021 Ohio State. You don't throw Woodson's way, because you have three incredible receivers and whoever isn't guarded by Woodson is probably in a positive mismatch. You have the luxury of not throwing that way.
The flip side is, some decent enough corner could go very unchallenged if the other corner just sucks brutally.
-
Anyway, I'm not going to fault PFF for trying, but at the same time, it's silly to cite it.
Certainly not any sillier than voting total tackles of whatever stat there is. PFF is, IMO, a little sketchy for college, mostly because I just don't believe they watch every game and grade every play. But I don't doubt they watch at least the best teams and best players.
-
Maybe sites like PFF are trying to adhere their NFL stuff onto college, but you cant really do that.
NFL teams are very close in terms of quality, say 40-60 on a scale from 0-100. College football teams are more like 1-99 on that scale. And related to that, NFL schedules are much more even, my an order of magnitude when compared to college.
.................
% of passes faced or defended would be a useful stat to have widely available. For a Karlaftis or Vince Wilfork, number of blockers per snap would be useful. Number of sacks or TFL while unblocked would be interesting to know, too.
The first part is not really a thing. They pay people (mostly different kinds of former coaches) to go through every play and grade players. I think there's a small range of points you can get (maybe 0,1,2 or something like that), and then they do it for every play. So it's very much about did you do your job, maybe with some level of opponent adjustment.
There exists % of passes faced and defended. Those are pretty solid, but not so public without paying for it. Number of blockers per snap would be kinda useless becuase of the tight range, but percentage doubled, tripled and chipped would be interesting. I've not seen it, but bet someone has it. The unblocked number would be kinda wonky because often times a player is unblocked becuase they're so fast they get to a place before be blocker does, plus scheme factors. I suppose you could have stats factoring out busts, but it would be, again, wonky.
-
Gee, I hope they're objective.
-
Certainly not any sillier than voting total tackles of whatever stat there is. PFF is, IMO, a little sketchy for college, mostly because I just don't believe they watch every game and grade every play. But I don't doubt they watch at least the best teams and best players.
It's not silly to cite what actually happens on the field, lol. But adding context to that would be better, yes.
They watch the best players? How do they know who they are before they rate everyone??? That's nonsensical.
-
It's not silly to cite what actually happens on the field, lol. But adding context to that would be better, yes.
They watch the best players? How do they know who they are before they rate everyone??? That's nonsensical.
Gee I dunno, how does one decide who the best players and best teams are before the season starts? In college football? Perish the thought.
-
Maybe PFF should wait until Oct 1st then?
-
Can't have to sell something for preseason profit margin
-
(https://scontent.ffod1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/s640x640/266347390_4718129264891112_1037912973143486691_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=hFJWs3bk2qIAX_goycq&_nc_ht=scontent.ffod1-1.fna&oh=2230fa3a37fd9d02910b4a6158d43f70&oe=61BAAC11)
-
Few programs were willing to let Henry play RB.
-
Few programs were willing to let Henry play RB.
wasn't he committed to Georgia originally to play defense? kinda crazy that none of the FL schools where he's from didn't sell their souls and tell him you can play RB whatever you want just come here.
-
Well Florida was under Muschamp, so he was probably salivating at the thought of Henry coming off the edge from the Buck position.
-
Hutchinson was the best defensive player in the nation and it wasn't particularly close.
i won't fault anyone for thinking hutchinson is the best d player. i'll disagree, but won't fault them.
but to suggest it isn't close is ridiculous. anderson broke an ncaa record for tfl. record was 32.0, anderson has 32.5 with 1, maybe 2 games left.
-
i won't fault anyone for thinking hutchinson is the best d player. i'll disagree, but won't fault them.
but to suggest it isn't close is ridiculous. anderson broke an ncaa record for tfl. record was 32.0, anderson has 32.5 with 1, maybe 2 games left.
this is where i am at.
I think they are both remarkable defensive players and Hutch will be a top 3 nfl draft pick in 2022 and Anderson will be top 3-5 in 2023 when he's draft eligible. they are both absolutely incredible players.
-
Few programs were willing to let Henry play RB.
Only one program told Ron Dayne he could play RB.
-
Only one program told Ron Dayne he could play RB.
was in a conference once and heard saban speak on his philosophy with this. he often has players that have different opinions than him on their best and/or preferred positions. and he discusses it with them and why he thinks the way he does, but he ultimately lets them choose. he said his thinking was that even if it's not their best position, if they want to play it so much more, then they'll work much harder at it than if they were forced into another position they didn't like. and he's also honest enough with himself to admit he's not always right.
-
i won't fault anyone for thinking hutchinson is the best d player. i'll disagree, but won't fault them.
but to suggest it isn't close is ridiculous. anderson broke an ncaa record for tfl. record was 32.0, anderson has 32.5 with 1, maybe 2 games left.
my take was that was some strong pot stirring to state it isn't close
I try to be a bit more subtle to draw in the unassuming
-
my take was that was some strong pot stirring to state it isn't close
I try to be a bit more subtle to draw in the unassuming
It's not pot stirring. Anderson is a great player. He's just not as good as Hutchinson this year, who I think has had one of the best seasons for a defensive player ever.
-
well, he's no Ndamukong Suh
and it's not even close ;)
-
It's not pot stirring. Anderson is a great player. He's just not as good as Hutchinson this year, who I think has had one of the best seasons for a defensive player ever.
You're so 2021.
-
You're so 2021.
Rich Glover was a starter on Nebraska's 1970 and '71 National Championship team as a defensive tackle. He won the Outland Trophy, Lombardi Award, AFCA-Kodak Player of Year, and finished Third Place in Heisman Trophy voting in 1972. Other awards that year include Defensive Player of the Year (AP and UPI), All Big Eight - AP, UPI, World-Herald, and the Outstanding Defensive Player in the Orange Bowl.
In the Game of the Century, he had 22 tackles and knocked down the 4th down pass attempt by Jack Mildren to ice the game. A single game
-
Don't tell me, tell Sammy boy! i know all about it.
-
Derrick Thomas had 27 sacks and 39 tackles for loss in 1988, but Aidan Hutchinson had the best season ever.
Idiot.
-
It's all narrative. The voting contingent is bloated. It's largely a giant whatever
One of these guys was a Heisman finalist, the other, playing the same position, in the same conference, in one less game, was 2nd team All-Big Ten
78 tackles, 15.5 TFL, 10 sacks, 1 FF, 2 FR, 1 TD
54 tackles, 14.5 TFL, 12 sacks, 2 FF, 1 FR
Wanted to come back to this because it's kinda a marvelous fib. It's an alluring fib, because it's so easy. Of course this one guys if overrated and hypocrisy abounds.
But it's pretty half true.
The only mistake ELA had was that it's actually in the same number of games. The MSU kid (the one on top) put up those numbers in 13 games, including the bowl. Now, that might not be significant, except he went ham in that bowl. At the time they actually vote on awards (voters lack time machines), that fella had these stats.
69 tackles, 14 TFL, 8.5 sacks, 1 FF, 2 FR, 1 TD
Solid numbers, certianly worth 2nd team All-Big Ten. BUT, this fella was in fact first-team All-Big Ten.
The media voted him onto that team. Alas, it was the coaches who did not. Who knows who actually fills those ballots? But in the end, the media "narrative" was that he was a first-teamer.
Now, then comes another layer. For better or worse, there's a sliding scale when it comes to team success/unit success when it comes to things like the Heisman. If you're not on a great team or unit, you have to be stud muffin productive. This MSU fella was not, but what of his team.
Well, it was 6-6. The defense was quite good, 13th in SP+, but worse in more standard metrics: 37th in scoring D,23rd in yards per play allowed. They also had some boom and bust to them. Five conference opponents hit 31 or more points.
Anyway, a good lesson in "Narrative." When people want to believe, they'll find the thing that makes them comfortable. (This isn't to tag ELA, an upstanding citizen here, but to poke at how it got traction in the first place)
-
You are overthinking it. He plays for a helmet school, that didn't have a standout offensive player. Same reason Peppers went in 2016 or Te'o in 2012. All three are good players, but hardly the type to get that rare defensive player invite. Two of the three didn't win the Nagurski or Bednarik Awards. The problem is the voting contingent for the Heisman is bloated with people who have no business participating
-
You are overthinking it. He plays for a helmet school, that didn't have a standout offensive player. Same reason Peppers went in 2016 or Te'o in 2012. All three are good players, but hardly the type to get that rare defensive player invite. Two of the three didn't win the Nagurski or Bednarik Awards. The problem is the voting contingent for the Heisman is bloated with people who have no business participating
I'm thinking that the invocation of Kenny Willekes by anyone was deeply silly.
I mean, he's a game-wrecker for a playoff team, that, you are correct, did not have a standout offensive guy. And he got a regional boost because for whatever reason, there's a tradition of regionalism in all that. Kid had a very, very good season.
The Nagurski/Bednarik thing is interesting. Hutchinson won neither because of a guy who probably should've been there and one who likely would have been but for the last game. Te'o, who was probably worse than Hutchinson won both. Peppers ... I dunno what to do with that one. We were low on Midwestern candidates, I suppose.
-
Hes the best defensive player in the Big Ten, easily. But that you need to do a deep dive to distinguish between his year and a guy who was split 1st/2nd team All-Big Ten, and him getting recognition at a level that happens less than once a year for defensive players, and you suggest it's anything other than narrative is deeply silly.
Hell, two of the guys up there weren't even the best player on their own team. It's fine, but it is what it is. The end result of a bloated voting base that catches a few highlights
-
Derrick Thomas had 27 sacks and 39 tackles for loss in 1988, but Aidan Hutchinson had the best season ever.
Idiot.
You throw Derrick Thomas out there like you have never even heard of Lawrence Taylor. Amateur hour.
-
Hes the best defensive player in the Big Ten, easily. But that you need to do a deep dive to distinguish between his year and a guy who was split 1st/2nd team All-Big Ten, and him getting recognition at a level that happens less than once a year for defensive players, and you suggest it's anything other than narrative is deeply silly.
Hell, two of the guys up there weren't even the best player on their own team. It's fine, but it is what it is. The end result of a bloated voting base that catches a few highlights
He's getting smoke as being the top pick in the draft, certainly will be picked very high. He's not just some dude who made a few plays then got swept up in the narrative. There isn't a defensive player in the country more important to their team's success this year.
-
This year perhaps but not ever
-
You're acting like I didn't put him in my top 3
-
Chase Young was much more disruptive, imo
-
Chase Young was much more disruptive, imo
Yeah, but he's not a white legacy.
The sports media LOVE them a legacy. They're obsessed with it.
-
Chase Young was much more disruptive, imo
disagree. I think Chase Young was obviously phenomenal, but I don't think he was any more or less the player Hutchinson is. Mich more disruptive is a stretch. Both are super high level players. Speaking strictly OSU guys- never even felt like Young was the best- I know he had better raw stats- but to me Nick Bosa was the best DE that I've seen at Ohio State- he was better than his older brother and better than Young- and Hutch reminds me a ton of Nick.
-
Yeah, but he's not a white legacy.
The sports media LOVE them a legacy. They're obsessed with it.
his race had nothing to do with him being a Heisman trophy finalist, so knock it off please. Kid was the highest rated player in CFB according to PFF and he's going to be the #1 pick in the upcoming NFL Draft. he is simply put an awesome football player.
-
He's getting smoke as being the top pick in the draft, certainly will be picked very high. He's not just some dude who made a few plays then got swept up in the narrative. There isn't a defensive player in the country more important to their team's success this year.
Ohhh
Tell us how you quantified that one!
-
eyeball test
-
his race had nothing to do with him being a Heisman trophy finalist, so knock it off please. Kid was the highest rated player in CFB according to PFF and he's going to be the #1 pick in the upcoming NFL Draft. he is simply put an awesome football player.
Hmm. Maybe you're right.
But I do have a question: how many past highest-rated defenders were Heisman finalists? What color were they?
-
eyeball test
He eyeballed every other team in the country this year and figured out how important their best defender was to the team? Maybe on the back of a napkin or something, huh?
-
You throw Derrick Thomas out there like you have never even heard of Lawrence Taylor. Amateur hour.
This isn't just about famous names.
Go look up Corey Moore.
George Selvie.
Scooby Wright.
Will Sutton.
Trent Murphy.
I could list 50 other guys with better statistical seasons than Hutchinson's. But I'm wrong because I don't worship PFF.
-
Hmm. Maybe you're right.
But I do have a question: how many past highest-rated defenders were Heisman finalists? What color were they?
the only defensive player ever to win the award is a black guy. the last player Michigan sent to the award ceremony was Jabrill Peppers- a black guy that played defense- and who didn't belong there at all to be honest with.
has nothing to do with his race and everything to do with him being an incredible player, his team being in the playoff, and the shiny helmet he wears- which is literally the shiniest of the shiny and whose fanbase just might be the largest in the nation and whose team was the most viewed team on television and also the most attended in-person this season.
-
Ohhh
Tell us how you quantified that one!
Well, quite simple really. Alabama has a Heisman winner who isn't a defensive player, a great defensive player, and a bunch of the most talented guys in the country. Georgia has a fleet of great players and can lose one or three and still be great. Cincinnati has two of the best secondary players in the country, but obviously they wouldn't start for any other D-1 program. So that leaves Michigan, which has the best defensive player in the country, another DE that is raw but talented, and a bunch of average to above average guys who are playoff bound pretty much due to one guy. Taking Hutchinson off Michigan probably leads to them not going to the playoffs, not winning the B1G, not beating OSU, and not doing any of the things that they are taking a victory lap for right now. Which seems important.
-
So to support your assertion, you provide more assertions?
Mkay. That sounds about right.
-
the only defensive player ever to win the award is a black guy. the last player Michigan sent to the award ceremony was Jabrill Peppers- a black guy that played defense- and who didn't belong there at all to be honest with.
has nothing to do with his race and everything to do with him being an incredible player, his team being in the playoff, and the shiny helmet he wears- which is literally the shiniest of the shiny and whose fanbase just might be the largest in the nation and whose team was the most viewed team on television and also the most attended in-person this season.
Could you answer my question, please?
-
This isn't just about famous names.
Go look up Corey Moore.
George Selvie.
Scooby Wright.
Will Sutton.
Trent Murphy.
I could list 50 other guys with better statistical seasons than Hutchinson's. But I'm wrong because I don't worship PFF.
You are wrong because basing a defensive player's season in a few stats that don't account for how good they are is objectively dumb. Ndamukong Suh had as dominant a season at DT as you will find in 2009, but statistically wasn't particularly special so...what? We are supposed to trust random numbers over our lying eyes? Baseball is as statistically driven as any sport out there, and has changed drastically over the last two decades as people realized the statistics they were using were dumb.
-
So to support your assertion, you provide more assertions?
Mkay. That sounds about right.
I mean buddy, you are point to sacks. Sacks! That's like one to two plays a game, and thinking that is the whole deal! It's objectively crazy, yet here we are.
-
So that leaves Michigan, which has the best defensive player in the country, another DE that is raw but talented, and a bunch of average to above average guys who are playoff bound pretty much due to one guy. Taking Hutchinson off Michigan probably leads to them not going to the playoffs, not winning the B1G, not beating OSU, and not doing any of the things that they are taking a victory lap for right now. Which seems important.
JR's DB Dax Hill (former 5*), DT Mazi Smith (former Top100), and DT Chris Hinton (former 5*) are definitely well above average- and are legit future NFL Draft picks. So are S RJ Moten and LB Junior Colson (former Top100)- but they are both inconsistent freshman.
The rest of their starters on defense- you're probably right. SR's CB Vincent Gray, S Brad Hawkins, and LB Josh Ross are pretty much average. RS Soph CB DJ Turner probably above average but he's only started 6-7 games.
-
You're citing a DT with 85 tackles, 21.5 of which were behind the line, and 12 sacks as 'not particularly special?'
10 passes defended, 28 hurries, and the previous season he had 2 pick-sixes to show off his athleticism.
Get all the stats you want, friend. You made a stupid claim and can't support it with anything besides "because I said so."
-
I thought Jadeveon Clowney was the best ever because of one highlight play vs Michigan?
-
I mean buddy, you are point to sacks. Sacks! That's like one to two plays a game, and thinking that is the whole deal! It's objectively crazy, yet here we are.
Where did I specify only sacks matter? You're inventing shit now. Please stop.
-
We should do a poll.
Which group contains the best defensive player in college football history?
A) Aidan Hutchinson
.
B) EVERYONE ELSE IN HISTORY
-
I thought Jadeveon Clowney was the best ever because of one highlight play vs Michigan?
this lmao. a play in which the OL & TE blew their assignments- Clowney went completely unblocked and blew up Vincent Smith- a 5'6, 170 pound RB.
CloWNeY iZ dAh GrAyTESSSST EVVVVURRRRRR.
-
We should do a poll.
Which group contains the best defensive player in college football history?
A) Aidan Hutchinson
.
B) EVERYONE ELSE IN HISTORY
you are acting like an irrational woman. who said Aidan Hutchinson was the greatest defensive player in college football history?
he's not even the best defensive player to ever play at his own school. ever heard of charles woodson?
-
Hmm. Maybe you're right.
But I do have a question: how many past highest-rated defenders were Heisman finalists? What color were they?
Just going by top three:
2021: Hutchinson, White
2012: Manti Te'o, Samoan
1997: Charles Woodson, Black
1980: Hugh Green, Black
1972: Rich Glover, Black
1964: Dick Butkus, White
1962: Bob Bell, Black
1957: Alex Karras, White
1948: Chuck Bednarik, White
May have missed someone
-
you are acting like an irrational woman. who said Aidan Hutchinson was the greatest defensive player in college football history?
he's not even the best defensive player to ever play at his own school. ever heard of charles woodson?
MaximumSam did.
-
Just going by top three:
2021: Hutchinson, White
2012: Manti Te'o, Samoan
1997: Charles Woodson, Black
1980: Hugh Green, Black
1972: Rich Glover, Black
1964: Dick Butkus, White
1962: Bob Bell, Black
1957: Alex Karras, White
1948: Chuck Bednarik, White
May have missed someone
I appreciate the effort, but this doesn't answer my question, either.
Read slower maybe?
-
maybe the most overrated play ever by one of the most overrated college football players ever right here...SEC! SEC! SEC! GrAyesT rEcRuiT EvErrrRRRR tho.
LT Taylor Lewan runs on an angle right and into the defensive tackle, the TE to the left of Lewan tries to follow Lewan and neither one of them lay a finger on Clowney- and he darts into the backfield completely untouched and completely unblocked bc of bungled OL play and he blows up literally a 5-foot, 6-inch, 170 pound Vincent Smith and people lose their shit. Not impressive at all- and it probably made the guy the #1 pick in the draft and his rep lived off this stupid play for a year plus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JYx-_eXQa4
-
you are acting like an irrational woman. who said Aidan Hutchinson was the greatest defensive player in college football history?
he's not even the best defensive player to ever play at his own school. ever heard of charles woodson?
Sexist.
-
Where did I specify only sacks matter? You're inventing shit now. Please stop.
Stop what? You are going on about the best statistical seasons. Statistical seasons I assume means the stats that we generally keep - tackle, sacks, tackles for loss, interceptions, fumble recoveries, that sort of thing. Am I wrong on that? Aren't sacks and tackles for loss the glory stats for front seven players? Don't wax on about statistical seasons then in the same breathe say you aren't talking about the stats.
-
I appreciate the effort, but this doesn't answer my question, either.
Read slower maybe?
Write better, maybe?
-
Stop what? You are going on about the best statistical seasons. Statistical seasons I assume means the stats that we generally keep - tackle, sacks, tackles for loss, interceptions, fumble recoveries, that sort of thing. Am I wrong on that? Aren't sacks and tackles for loss the glory stats for front seven players? Don't wax on about statistical seasons then in the same breathe say you aren't talking about the stats.
Oh, you admit it. Fantastic!
-
Write better, maybe?
How many past highest-rated defensive players were Heisman finalsits?
As in "highest rated" by PFF. You know, what he and I were talking about.
-
How many past highest-rated defensive players were Heisman finalsits?
As in "highest rated" by PFF. You know, what he and I were talking about.
PFF, as far as I can tell, has only looked at college players since 2014.
2021: Hutchinson, Anderson, Jordan Davis
2020: No one
2019: Chase Young
2018: Quinnen Williams
2017: Roquan Smith
2016: Jonathan Allen
2015: No one
2014: Scooby Wright
-
Oh, you admit it. Fantastic!
So you concede what is stunningly obvious? Good to know.
-
Okay, so 25% of the black players and half the white dudes.
Don't get mad at me because this small sample agrees with me.
-
Okay, so 25% of the black players and half the white dudes.
Don't get mad at me because this small sample agrees with me.
?? 25% are white, 75% are black. And really, it's only Hutchinson. Scooby Wright got a handful of votes in 2014 because he had lots of glory stats. There is simply no evidence that Heisman voters reward undeserving white defensive players. Joey Bosa didn't even appear, and he was actually really good!
-
Yeah....that was never my take....
Hutchinson was in my top 3. I just said the only time defensive players seem to get recognized is when they play for a helmet school that lacks a viable offensive option
-
?? 25% are white, 75% are black. And really, it's only Hutchinson. Scooby Wright got a handful of votes in 2014 because he had lots of glory stats. There is simply no evidence that Heisman voters reward undeserving white defensive players. Joey Bosa didn't even appear, and he was actually really good!
I love how you just dismiss Wright's season. Impressive stuff.
How many other guys had 160+ tackles AND 15 sacks? 31 TFL.
I guess he didn't have enough pressures?
-
Yeah....that was never my take....
Hutchinson was in my top 3. I just said the only time defensive players seem to get recognized is when they play for a helmet school that lacks a viable offensive option
I’m still unsure if the helmet thing is an indicator or just kind of lost in the wash. Being on a contender is a near requirement. Peppers is the only one who wasn’t on a playoff/title game team, and his candidacy was weird and dumb anyways.
Looking back, since that weird six-finalist 2013 group, you’ve had 29 finalists, seven are non helmet guys. The past four years had one non-helmet guy.
Pickett
Bryce Love
Lamar Jackson (returning Heisman winner)
Jackson
McCaffery
Gordon at more than 2,000 yards Mariota.
I’ll admit, I’m not without bias. I do think it’s good that they recognize any defensive players. In an era where QB numbers are making that position regularly have the best statistical case, I don’t mind throwing a few game wreckers, who’s impact I see, in the mix.
-
I’m still unsure if the helmet thing is an indicator or just kind of lost in the wash. Being on a contender is a near requirement. Peppers is the only one who wasn’t on a playoff/title game team, and his candidacy was weird and dumb anyways.
Looking back, since that weird six-finalist 2013 group, you’ve had 29 finalists, seven are non helmet guys. The past four years had one non-helmet guy.
Pickett
Bryce Love
Lamar Jackson (returning Heisman winner)
Jackson
McCaffery
Gordon at more than 2,000 yards Mariota.
I’ll admit, I’m not without bias. I do think it’s good that they recognize any defensive players. In an era where QB numbers are making that position regularly have the best statistical case, I don’t mind throwing a few game wreckers, who’s impact I see, in the mix.
It's hard to say, but the non-helmet CFP teams (MSU, Washington) didn't get a finalist. Shilique Calhoun had multiple elite years on title contending MSU teams, and wasn't in the Heisman discussion. Budda Baker on a CFP Washington team in 2016 had a better year than Peppers. The sample size is too small to say anything with certainty, but I think it's trends towards begin more narrative driven from a voter base that is easily the least dialed in compared to other awards.
-
It's hard to say, but the non-helmet CFP teams (MSU, Washington) didn't get a finalist. Shilique Calhoun had multiple elite years on title contending MSU teams, and wasn't in the Heisman discussion. Budda Baker on a CFP Washington team in 2016 had a better year than Peppers. The sample size is too small to say anything with certainty, but I think it's trends towards begin more narrative driven from a voter base that is easily the least dialed in compared to other awards.
I mean, it's all narratives to a degree. The helmet idea is narrative. Whatever is happening in the posts above that I'm just not reading are narrative.
From a purely analytical perspective, the two names you mentioned are kinda interesting. I think Baker's problem was the offensive guys. Browning was sixth. Baker had no pop stats. Hutchinson is at least second in the NCAA in sacks and had a couple high-profile games (unfairly part of all to it, but part just the same).
Calhoun is interesting. 14.5 TFL in 13 games, 10.5 sacks, three bat downs, one FF. Showed out against Iowa, I don't know if he felt that dominating. Might have been hurt by the skin of the teeth nature of that MSU team and Cook being "the guy." He ended up 9th. Henry won, which seemed kinda silly at the time, but looks better with his NFL career.
(One year that was in retrospect stupid, and I think we all kinda bought the narrative was 2011. Montee Ball was a Heisman finalist and Russell Wilson wasn't. That was a weird, no exactly narrative moment, but fit and an anchor stat blinded us. Mathieu getting a finalist nod was interesting. He was more of an eye test guy than stat guy, and he was on that team that had one of the best regular seasons resume-wise)
-
I love how you just dismiss Wright's season. Impressive stuff.
How many other guys had 160+ tackles AND 15 sacks? 31 TFL.
I guess he didn't have enough pressures?
I'm not sure what the point is anymore. Aidan Hutchinson is the product of people loving white legacy players, which is borne out by Scooby Wright getting a few Heisman votes in 2014, and if you think he should have gotten more it is due to him being white and if you think he should have gotten less you are dismissing his great season.
(https://c.tenor.com/4LvAD8hD5tcAAAAC/charlie-day.gif)
-
It's more like if Aidan Hutchinson was black, he'd finish something like 7th in the Heisman voting. It's not that his whiteness lifts him up, it'd be that his fictional blackness would fail to.
-
It's more like if Aidan Hutchinson was black, he'd finish something like 7th in the Heisman voting. It's not that his whiteness lifts him up, it'd be that his fictional blackness would fail to.
you live in a la-la fantasy land. must be nice.
-
Have them dial back the voltage at the home
-
It's more like if Aidan Hutchinson was black, he'd finish something like 7th in the Heisman voting. It's not that his whiteness lifts him up, it'd be that his fictional blackness would fail to.
You mean if he played for Baylor?
-
You mean if he played for Baylor?
Yes, and that too.
I think the helmet aspect is less that it's Michigan, but more that it's resurgent Michigan.
Greg Middleton had a similar season for IU in 2007. But no one was on the internet saying he had the best season ever. Weird.
-
Yes, and that too.
I think the helmet aspect is less that it's Michigan, but more that it's resurgent Michigan.
Greg Middleton had a similar season for IU in 2007. But no one was on the internet saying he had the best season ever. Weird.
https://twitter.com/FOXSportsPR/status/1466125630303391746?s=20
https://twitter.com/ESPNPR/status/802958708305063936?s=20
https://twitter.com/JamesYoder/status/1466132963607793665?s=20
https://twitter.com/BradPowers7/status/1466107448545058821?s=20
-
https://twitter.com/FOXSportsPR/status/1466125630303391746?s=20
https://twitter.com/ESPNPR/status/802958708305063936?s=20
https://twitter.com/JamesYoder/status/1466132963607793665?s=20
https://twitter.com/BradPowers7/status/1466107448545058821?s=20
So the "most outstanding player" in all of college football is based on how many eyeballs tune in?
:57:
-
So the "most outstanding player" in all of college football is based on how many eyeballs tune in?
no. most of the voters who vote for the award don't attend games. they watch them on tv, and they don't watch them all. they probably just watch a handful of them, chief among them the biggest most watched games.
it's increasingly become a best QB on the shiny helmet team award. the shinier the helmet a player wears the better his chances of exposure and winning that award. hutchinson wears one of the shiniest of shiny helmets that attracts more eyeballs and exposure than just about any helmet.
to win that award or even be a finalist as a non-helmet you have to have an insane year ala Barry Sanders or RGIII.
-
Of the top 5 highest rated games on TV in CFB this year, Michigan played in 3 of them.
1) Michigan - Ohio State - 15.9 million viewers
3) Michigan - Iowa - B1G CCG - 11.7 million viewers
5) Michigan - Michigan State - 9.3 million viewers (3rd highest rated regular season game)
-
Do you guys think the actual "best player" over the course of the last 7+ decades has fallen in a normal distribution of player positions?
Whether you break it down by QB-RB-WR-TE-T-G-C, etc or more broadly, like QB-RB-pass catcher-OL-DL-LB-DB....what do you think? Maybe certain positions are discounted, like CB > S or OT > OG, etc?
Or maybe some of you think QB > OL or even QB > WR?
What do you guys think? Have 10-20 offensive linemen warranted a Heisman? Or X% of cornerbacks?
-
Do you guys think the actual "best player" over the course of the last 7+ decades has fallen in a normal distribution of player positions?
Whether you break it down by QB-RB-WR-TE-T-G-C, etc or more broadly, like QB-RB-pass catcher-OL-DL-LB-DB....what do you think? Maybe certain positions are discounted, like CB > S or OT > OG, etc?
Or maybe some of you think QB > OL or even QB > WR?
What do you guys think? Have 10-20 offensive linemen warranted a Heisman? Or X% of cornerbacks?
IF Orlando Pace, Joe Thomas, or Jake Long never won the Heisman or finished even runner up- don't think any OL ever will.
-
Dave Rimington won the Outland Trophy, given to the nation's top interior offensive or defensive lineman, in 1981 and 1982 and is the only two-time winner of the award. He also won the Lombardi Award in 1982, and placed fifth in the balloting for the Heisman Trophy that same year.
-
IF Orlando Pace, Joe Thomas, or Jake Long never won the Heisman or finished even runner up- don't think any OL ever will.
Thank goodness Danny Wuerfful beat out Pace in ‘96. You can clearly see in the following years that Danny was the superior talent.
-
Do you really think the Heisman should go to the best pro prospect?
You guys don't seem to understand.
I'm not saying these other positions will win one. I'm asking if you think the talent of football players is evenly distributed among all positions. If that's the case, then the Heisman "should" have been awarded to all positions equally over the years.
-
Greg Middleton had a similar season for IU in 2007. But no one was on the internet saying he had the best season ever. Weird.
Well known future 11th round draft pick of the Florida Tuskers Greg Middleton. He was basically Aidan Hutchinson, but no one paid attention because he played for Indiana. Even teams that played Indiana didn't pay attention. Poor Greg Middleton.
-
Do you really think the Heisman should go to the best pro prospect?
You guys don't seem to understand.
I'm not saying these other positions will win one. I'm asking if you think the talent of football players is evenly distributed among all positions. If that's the case, then the Heisman "should" have been awarded to all positions equally over the years.
Id' say the talent distribution is probably best analyzed by how the NFL drafts and then pays players, which is a lot more even than the Heisman. Some positions are more important than others, namely quarterback. The biggest issue with the Heisman is how it defaults to offensive skill position players over defensive players pretty much no matter what.
-
Do you really think the Heisman should go to the best pro prospect?
You guys don't seem to understand.
I'm not saying these other positions will win one. I'm asking if you think the talent of football players is evenly distributed among all positions. If that's the case, then the Heisman "should" have been awarded to all positions equally over the years.
you could make a great case that Orlando Pace was the best player in 1996. Probably should've went to him, if we're talking "best player". He was the most dominant college OL I think ever. He wasn't just a #1 overall NFL Draft pick and NFL HOF'er. He was fricken insane in college. He was like a cheat code.
Think you could even make case for Jake Long in 2007. Of course his impact isn't as big as the QB- no player can have as big an impact on a game as the QB. But that whole season, Jake Long was just burying people. No one could get pressure on the QB on him and he was an absolute bully in the run game. I still remember that bowl game vs UF where Jake Long turned Derrick Harvey from Florida into his bitch boy all game long.
Absolutely freakish, dominant LT's like that will never win the award, but damn some years they probably should.
-
Well known future 11th round draft pick of the Florida Tuskers Greg Middleton. He was basically Aidan Hutchinson, but no one paid attention because he played for Indiana. Even teams that played Indiana didn't pay attention. Poor Greg Middleton.
There seems to be a popular opinion that a player's true ability level and what they do in the NFL has some bearing on whether they deserve a college award for their production during 1 season.
How's that work?
Are voters supposed to see what they did and then predict who will do better in the future, then cast their vote based on that??
-
Id' say the talent distribution is probably best analyzed by how the NFL drafts and then pays players, which is a lot more even than the Heisman. Some positions are more important than others, namely quarterback. The biggest issue with the Heisman is how it defaults to offensive skill position players over defensive players pretty much no matter what.
Was the QB more important in 1985? 1970? Certainly it'd be a hard case to make when most teams were playing single-wing football and the halfbacks had as many pass attempts as the QB did.
-
Id' say the talent distribution is probably best analyzed by how the NFL drafts and then pays players, which is a lot more even than the Heisman. Some positions are more important than others, namely quarterback. The biggest issue with the Heisman is how it defaults to offensive skill position players over defensive players pretty much no matter what.
Also, isn't part of the reason QBs are so valued is that there is only one you use in a given season (if everything goes to plan)?
You need more than 1 RB.
You need more WRs/TEs than RBs.
You need 5 OL.
Etc.
.
Is QB important because of its scarcity? Sure, he touches the ball on every play, but each pass-rusher could beat his blocker every play and sack the QB, no? In theory.
I've created teams for my Whoa Nellie game where the team has passed fewer than 10% of the time...I'm going to have a hard time valuing the QB so highly there.
But more so, as we discussed on another topic, the NFL is radically more even across the board than college football. I'm not sure what they value can be applied to an individual college football season. Remember, even the NFL draft is based on what the players MIGHT become as much as it's about what a player has already done.
I don't care if a RB runs a 4.8 in the 40, if he rushes for 1,800 yards vs a good schedule, he's a (college) badass. He'll go undrafted and never play football again, but for a college award, he's worthy.
I'll never understand this inability or unwillingness to separate college and pro, when valuing players. They are 2 completely different animals.
-
There seems to be a popular opinion that a player's true ability level and what they do in the NFL has some bearing on whether they deserve a college award for their production during 1 season.
How's that work?
Are voters supposed to see what they did and then predict who will do better in the future, then cast their vote based on that??
While their are differences in the NFL and college games, the biggest difference is that the NFL has much better players. The NFL isn't the end all and be all, but if the NFL thinks one guy can't play in the NFL and thinks the other guy is the best player in the game, then I'd put a lot more stock into that over whatever stats were accumulated.
-
Was the QB more important in 1985? 1970? Certainly it'd be a hard case to make when most teams were playing single-wing football and the halfbacks had as many pass attempts as the QB did.
You can make a decent argument that modern football is just old timey football with more passes. In any event, as passing has become more popular, and the rules have changed to favor passing, quarterbacks have grown in importance.
-
I'll never understand this inability or unwillingness to separate college and pro, when valuing players. They are 2 completely different animals.
I don't think they are that different. NFL people have their whole paycheck dependent on evaluating football players for how good they are. Which isn't to say you automatically give an award to whomever you think is the best NFL prospect. For example, this spring I imagine we will get debates over whether Aidan Hutchinson or Kayvon Thibodeaux should be the top defensive player (or overall player) drafted. The arguments for Thibodeaux will revolve around him being more athletic and having more upside. The arguments for Hutchinson will be that he was better on the field. Seems like relevant information when giving an award to the best player.
There will always be guys who have great seasons who aren't NFL caliber players. But when determining who the best players are, I'd like to know what the people think whose paycheck revolves around picking the best players.
-
I don't think they are that different. NFL people have their whole paycheck dependent on evaluating football players for how good they are. Which isn't to say you automatically give an award to whomever you think is the best NFL prospect. For example, this spring I imagine we will get debates over whether Aidan Hutchinson or Kayvon Thibodeaux should be the top defensive player (or overall player) drafted. The arguments for Thibodeaux will revolve around him being more athletic and having more upside. The arguments for Hutchinson will be that he was better on the field. Seems like relevant information when giving an award to the best player.
But on what planet does "being more athletic and having more upside" have ANYTHING to do with awarding a player's season?????
-
But on what planet does "being more athletic and having more upside" have ANYTHING to do with awarding a player's season?????
Well, nothing. But being the best player on the field is definitely something.
-
Not without production.
-
Not without production.
Production?
-
Was the QB more important in 1985? 1970? Certainly it'd be a hard case to make when most teams were playing single-wing football and the halfbacks had as many pass attempts as the QB did.
QB's were always the most important piece of the puzzle. With the advent of modern pass offenses, rule changes, and everything geared towards passing the football their considerable importance has only increased and they have just become even more important and are far and away the most important single piece of the puzzle.
-
Production?
he's implying Aidan Hutchinson wasn't productive.
I wish Florida would've played Michigan OOC this year so this guy could've watched Aidan whip his teams ass live on tv.
-
Fix my list
.
My vote for the "most outstanding player" having the "most outstanding season" in the past 10 seasons, taking into account QB, RB, and WRs aren't given any more weight than any other position:
2021 - Will Anderson, LB, Alabama
2020 - Kyle Pitts, TE, Florida
2019 - Joe Burrow, QB, LSU
2018 - Josh Allen, LB, Kentucky
2017 - Quenton Nelson, G, Notre Dame
2016 - Lamar Jackson, QB, Louisville
2015 - Christian McCaffrey, RB, Stanford
2014 - Scooby Wright, LB, Arizona
2013 - Aaron Donald, DT, Pitt
2012 - Barrett Jones, C, Alabama
.
What's wrong with these? Would the Heisman be worse? Would it mean less? Or would it actually have true fans' respect because it's not a limited selection process?
One could say it's lacking DBs...but maybe that requires a Woodson or a Deion.
Maybe it's SEC-heavy....but what conference has the most best recruits AND draft choices EVERY single year in this 10-year period?
.
Pick it apart, improve upon it, but don't stack it with QBs and RBs...that defeats the point.
-
he's implying Aidan Hutchinson wasn't productive.
I wish Florida would've played Michigan OOC this year so this guy could've watched Aidan whip his teams ass live on tv.
I didn't have any player in mind. This is how bonkers you're being. You're in OJ conspiracy land.
.
Hutchinson was extremely productive. Please read that sentence again. Hutchinson is a great player. Your invented narrative that I think he sucks is a lie, and you know it's a lie. Please stop lying.
Thank you.
-
I wish Florida would've played Michigan OOC this year so this guy could've watched Aidan whip his teams ass live on tv.
Beating Florida isn't a big deal this year. We also run way more than we pass, so that would yield limited sack opportunities.
And when we look at TFL numbers of Hutchinson and say....Will Anderson, that's just not Aidan's thing.
-
he's implying Aidan Hutchinson wasn't productive.
I wish Florida would've played Michigan OOC this year so this guy could've watched Aidan whip his teams ass live on tv.
Well Michigan went from unranked to the playoffs. Seems pretty productive to me.
-
Beating Florida isn't a big deal this year. We also run way more than we pass, so that would yield limited sack opportunities.
And when we look at TFL numbers of Hutchinson and say....Will Anderson, that's just not Aidan's thing.
Ah, tackles for loss. A great statistic. Tackles 20 yards down the field go in the same group as tackles at the line of scrimmage. But a foot behind the line of scrimmage gets it's own special statistic. And if it's a quarterback behind the line of scrimmage, it gets an even more special statistic. Who wouldn't want these stats to be the backbone of any analysis of how good a player is?
-
Which player DID more?
Player A: 91 tackles, of which 29 were behind the LOS and 15.5 sacks
OR
Player B: 58 tackles, of which 15.5 were behind the LOS and 14 sacks
.
33 tackles, 13.5 TFL, and a 1.5 sack difference. Tell me more about pressures?
-
Which player was a down lineman fending off on coming heiffers and which could free lance and pick his spots.Anderson absolutely is impressive but to compare an LB with a DL not only on different teams but different leagues isn't apples/oranges - reality exists.I would draft according to need
-
33 tackles, 13.5 TFL, and a 1.5 sack difference. Tell me more about pressures?
Yes! You definitely want to know more about pressures! When the stats available are kind of silly and not very informative, you have to look for more information. Otherwise you end up thinking Aidan Hutchinson and Chase Young are basically as good as Greg Middleton.
-
It may be unintentional, but you keep using that word "good."
I feel like I've been using the word "productive."
And I guess I don't give a shit how good a player is if he's not as productive as a less-good player. Is that all fair?
-
It may be unintentional, but you keep using that word "good."
I feel like I've been using the word "productive."
And I guess I don't give a shit how good a player is if he's not as productive as a less-good player. Is that all fair?
I don't know that it's unfair, but it depends on how you define productive. The goal of the defense is to prevent points being scored. The goal of the offense is scoring points. Offensive statistics for skill players have the advantage of being directly tied to scoring points (and the secondary part, gaining yards). Defensive statistics don't have this. They are quite crappy in actually measuring a particular player's impact on the defense.
So when we say a player is productive, are we talking about actually improving the defense, or just recording popular statistics?
-
Both.
But to make a claim requires evidence. If I claim Player B was great and benefitted his team, that's great, but you have to provide evidence. I'm not going to listen to one moment of any faith-based rating system of players.
-
Both.
But to make a claim requires evidence. If I claim Player B was great and benefitted his team, that's great, but you have to provide evidence. I'm not going to listen to one moment of any faith-based rating system of players.
Hence the references to PFF and the NFL
-
Okay, but PFF is a number from a (I assume) formula. Care to unpack that?
If player B is rated 3 points better than player A vs running plays...what does that mean? 3% of running plays better? 3 blocker-engagements on running plays in night games on the road?
PFF could be a fun stat source for fans and media types that the actual NFL teams laugh at behind closed doors.
I don't know what the NFL has to do with anything.
-
Okay, but PFF is a number from a (I assume) formula. Care to unpack that?
If player B is rated 3 points better than player A vs running plays...what does that mean? 3% of running plays better? 3 blocker-engagements on running plays in night games on the road?
PFF could be a fun stat source for fans and media types that the actual NFL teams laugh at behind closed doors.
I don't know what the NFL has to do with anything.
PFF claims to grade a player on every play, then converts the score to a percentage. It is not a formula, but essentially a subjective score for a game or the season based on evaluating their play.
The NFL is where the best football players get paid to play football, so they have an very compelling interest in choosing who the best players are.
-
Okay, but PFF is a number from a (I assume) formula. Care to unpack that?
If player B is rated 3 points better than player A vs running plays...what does that mean? 3% of running plays better? 3 blocker-engagements on running plays in night games on the road?
PFF could be a fun stat source for fans and media types that the actual NFL teams laugh at behind closed doors.
On every play, every player gets a grade between -2 and 2 1/2 in half point increments (zero is average/unremarkable, And the standard runs from catastrophic to extremely outstanding). They have some kind of rubrics for this. The score of all plays get adjusted to a 100 point scale.
It is neither perfect nor a be all end all, but it is a solid tool. I know there’s some skeptics in the deeper football community, and that’s ok. They’d scoff at tackles totals too.
It’s frankly a little disappointing you didn’t just Google this. It’s very easy. in for a person who prides himself on trying to KNOW lots of things and acting like he knows lots of things, falling back on the “night games on the road” splits defense of one’s own ignorance is a bit surprising. Reads like one of those people who’s confused about going for 2 earlier instead of later.
-
I can look it up, but I didn't introduce it to the conversation.
MaxySamy inserted it into the conversation in support of Hutchinson as being perhaps the best defensive college football player ever. I'm still stunned by that. I wouldn't have the gall to suggest that about anyone, much less the 'hot' player in the moment, lol.
Anyway, he retorts with something like, "yeah, but PFF grades him out as the best in pass rush and over 85 vs the run" with no context or additional support.
Great, but is Anderson 2nd? 30th?
It'd be like talking about the greatest basketball players and mentioning a guy's height. What?!? Cool, but.......gonna need more. Is it a crime to ask for more?
-
On every play, every player gets a grade between -2 and 2 1/2 in half point increments (zero is average/unremarkable, And the standard runs from catastrophic to extremely outstanding). They have some kind of rubrics for this. The score of all plays get adjusted to a 100 point scale.
PFF claims to grade a player on every play, then converts the score to a percentage. It is not a formula, but essentially a subjective score for a game or the season based on evaluating their play.
Yes, it's a formula.
When you just decide the range you want and it's in half-point increments because 'reasons,' yes, it's a formula. Simplistic and arbitrary, but a formula nonethelss.
-
MaxySamy inserted it into the conversation in support of Hutchinson as being perhaps the best defensive college football player ever.
I didn't say he was the best defensive player ever. I said he was having one of the best seasons ever for a defensive player. Which, btw, is objectively true, considering he was great, his team went from unranked to the playoffs, and he finished second in the Heisman voting. So I don't know why you would be surprised by it.
Yes, it's a formula.
When you just decide the range you want and it's in half-point increments because 'reasons,' yes, it's a formula. Simplistic and arbitrary, but a formula nonethelss.
Well, it is a formula in the same way that adding up tackles to get a total result is a formula. Some formulas are much more objective - like KenPom rankings or SP+, which are basically inputting stats into an algorithm and spitting out a result. PFF is not objective - it is basically someone watching a guy and telling you how good he was in a game.
-
Yes! You definitely want to know more about pressures! When the stats available are kind of silly and not very informative, you have to look for more information. Otherwise you end up thinking Aidan Hutchinson and Chase Young are basically as good as Greg Middleton.
I'd like defensive stats to include offensive holding calls forced
many times the offensive player holding prevents a TFL or a sack, but the result of the penalty can force a punt or kick, ending the drive
-
Yes, it's a formula.
When you just decide the range you want and it's in half-point increments because 'reasons,' yes, it's a formula. Simplistic and arbitrary, but a formula nonethelss.
Yards per carry is a Formula. What does being a formula have to do with anything?
-
Curiosity, lol.
-
I'd like defensive stats to include offensive holding calls forced
many times the offensive player holding prevents a TFL or a sack, but the result of the penalty can force a punt or kick, ending the drive
Sure, I wish football stat-keepers were as thorough as baseball ones. I'd love to know how many sacks/TFL a guy has when he's completely unaccounted for by the offense's plays.
-
Sure, I wish football stat-keepers were as thorough as baseball ones. I'd love to know how many sacks/TFL a guy has when he's completely unaccounted for by the offense's plays.
What would be an example of "completely unaccounted for"?
-
Unblocked, ignored.
And not like some kind of Lawrence Taylor - Im going to run down the RB on a sweep away from me thing.....just a normal play where that successful defensive play had no obstacle.
-
Unblocked, ignored.
And not like some kind of Lawrence Taylor - Im going to run down the RB on a sweep away from me thing.....just a normal play where that successful defensive play had no obstacle.
Ahh. Interestingly, this would actually be a semi-good use for PFF. (I was looking for a video example, if you had one)
The problem with this thing you mention is that being unblocked is often not being ignored. And it can be for many sorts of reasons. Sometimes its because you're fast. Sometimes a line communication. Sometimes an unblocked backside DE gets a TFL because the front side set the edge well. Sometimes you scheme up a really nasty blitz. And sometimes it's just a pain to tell that.
I was at a game a few years back. One of the first plays, the tackle in front of a stud DE blocks down, he races at the handoff unmolested, TFL. A guy near me curses about the tackle, and I'm sure a lot of folks would see it and say "that fella was unblocked and ignored." Only the play was counter, and you had a guard coming across to get him. Now, that guard was not fast and the DE was, and thus, races in untouched. But it wasn't a freebee.
Like, no plays are designed simply not to account for someone. They account for them in different ways. Sometimes that way doesn't work out. And the meaning from those stats would just not be worth the time. You'd actually be better off tracking the inverse, something like defeated blocks or tackles made when somewhat blocked.
-
Unblocked, ignored.
And not like some kind of Lawrence Taylor - Im going to run down the RB on a sweep away from me thing.....just a normal play where that successful defensive play had no obstacle.
Like when those Gator players were blocking each other?
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/9I6DV3C7wijMEI2iuc8dlKZfj8oQgdwJNSBEg3ReGnG0Oql9E0yKYvjQuvL9PEADmZSDt_6fJsnP9URkMgoHjFQ4uHSN7XCqTvUIHU1XKIXfeiWZ5f3gQsDpG4ltpIV80auTcbQd41itWDwJaATzAeRBYGbf7S370Hhm2xeK9hHFqnc_-nXzgnnF5IIrCIoemUU)
-
this lmao. a play in which the OL & TE blew their assignments- Clowney went completely unblocked and blew up Vincent Smith- a 5'6, 170 pound RB.
CloWNeY iZ dAh GrAyTESSSST EVVVVURRRRRR.
Just the TE. Not the OL. Granted, asking a tight end to down block with the speed of Clowney's get off, that ain't gonna end well.
-
Ahh. Interestingly, this would actually be a semi-good use for PFF. (I was looking for a video example, if you had one)
The problem with this thing you mention is that being unblocked is often not being ignored. And it can be for many sorts of reasons. Sometimes its because you're fast. Sometimes a line communication. Sometimes an unblocked backside DE gets a TFL because the front side set the edge well. Sometimes you scheme up a really nasty blitz. And sometimes it's just a pain to tell that.
I was at a game a few years back. One of the first plays, the tackle in front of a stud DE blocks down, he races at the handoff unmolested, TFL. A guy near me curses about the tackle, and I'm sure a lot of folks would see it and say "that fella was unblocked and ignored." Only the play was counter, and you had a guard coming across to get him. Now, that guard was not fast and the DE was, and thus, races in untouched. But it wasn't a freebee.
Like, no plays are designed simply not to account for someone. They account for them in different ways. Sometimes that way doesn't work out. And the meaning from those stats would just not be worth the time. You'd actually be better off tracking the inverse, something like defeated blocks or tackles made when somewhat blocked.
There are many plays designed not to block someone.
In your example, the guard was supposed to block the end, but was too slow. I don't care. I care that the end made the play without an obstacle. That'd be an "unblocked TFL."
All read-option plays today leave a defender unblocked. If the QB makes the wrong read and keeps the ball, boom, there's an unblocked TFL.
Play-action rollouts and bootlegs also often leave an unblocked DE, but that was much more common 20 years ago.
Anyway, if the offense screws up and the defender makes the play without being blocked, he benefits without causing the problem. It's a dumb-luck thing and accounts for a small % of plays, but it exists and I wonder what the numbers on it are.
-
There are many plays designed not to block someone.
In your example, the guard was supposed to block the end, but was too slow. I don't care. I care that the end made the play without an obstacle. That'd be an "unblocked TFL."
All read-option plays today leave a defender unblocked. If the QB makes the wrong read and keeps the ball, boom, there's an unblocked TFL.
Play-action rollouts and bootlegs also often leave an unblocked DE, but that was much more common 20 years ago.
Anyway, if the offense screws up and the defender makes the play without being blocked, he benefits without causing the problem. It's a dumb-luck thing and accounts for a small % of plays, but it exists and I wonder what the numbers on it are.
OK. So some of the things described above are not the bolded part.
And I suppose it would be interesting to combine freak plays (a guy is so fast he beats the blocking), bad guess plays (you pop out the tackle and the defender takes an inside lane), plays when a defender just wins a mental game (sets up outside, breaks inside), when someone is a good weapon on an overload blitz, plus bad reads, people who force and option decision and make the play anyway and a few other categories.
But the problem is, the stat wouldn't show "a dumb-luck thing." But it would be waved around like it did and make us just a bit stupider about this sport.
(There's an interesting play that comes to mind here, a Clowney one. He's going against Florida and it's late. They run a triple option to his side. The first fake has him turn his shoulders, though not outright pursue. This is usually enough to gain some width, instead he chases down the QB. This is fine, he pitches it away. Still Clowney keeps after it. A safety has helped hem in the back and Clowney finishes the play. So you have an unblocked guy trigger two option reads and chase down the play. As my college's boring coach would say "Dumb luck my f*&^ing ass")
-
The important part is that this is what PFF is meant to grade. It's people who understand football actually evaluating a player's actions on the play.
Pretty sure they'll grade a DB who happens to make an INT when the QB sails a pass over the receiver's head and the DB just happens to be in the right place to catch it a lot lower than a DB who makes an athletic leap to high point the ball and rip it away from the WR.
PFF is trying to include that nuance that isn't captured in the box score.
-
Well put - "Lies,damn lies and statistics" if you're a scouting dept something you would consider
-
(There's an interesting play that comes to mind here, a Clowney one. He's going against Florida and it's late. They run a triple option to his side. The first fake has him turn his shoulders, though not outright pursue. This is usually enough to gain some width, instead he chases down the QB. This is fine, he pitches it away. Still Clowney keeps after it. A safety has helped hem in the back and Clowney finishes the play. So you have an unblocked guy trigger two option reads and chase down the play. As my college's boring coach would say "Dumb luck my f*&^ing ass")
No, that wouldn't be what I'm talking about.
I'm sure you could come up with 100 others that don't fit what I'm talking about. Instead of focusing on double-reverse passes, maybe consider the plays that happen 97% of the time instead of 0.0001%.
-
No, that wouldn't be what I'm talking about.
I'm sure you could come up with 100 others that don't fit what I'm talking about. Instead of focusing on double-reverse passes, maybe consider the plays that happen 97% of the time instead of 0.0001%.
But again that's what PFF is meant for. If a DE is unblocked due to an offensive mistake and gets a 1 yard TFL, it'll be graded differently than if he splits a double team for that same 1 yard TFL.
-
PFF actually talks in their little brochure about Vic Beasley leading the league in sacks one year, but upon closer review half his sacks weren't particularly special.
-
Excellent!
So do we throw all of the traditional stats in the trash can and only count PFF or do we take them both into account?
What's the quality control like at PFF? Are there 'conflict of interest' safeguards? Does one guy do each game? Focus on 1 player? Or do 2 or 3 do it and they go with the consensus? Is it the same handful of people or do they have purposeful, annual turnover?
-
PFF actually talks in their little brochure about Vic Beasley leading the league in sacks one year, but upon closer review half his sacks weren't particularly special.
Well he opportunistic,get while the gettin's good
-
Excellent!
So do we throw all of the traditional stats in the trash can and only count PFF or do we take them both into account?
What's the quality control like at PFF? Are there 'conflict of interest' safeguards? Does one guy do each game? Focus on 1 player? Or do 2 or 3 do it and they go with the consensus? Is it the same handful of people or do they have purposeful, annual turnover?
I'm not sure how great they are. Their bread and butter is the NFL, and I imagine it is easier to do NFL games. I have always been a little suspect of their college stuff, because there are so many more games, and access to film seems like it would be a lot more limited. If you don't have All 22 type video, how do you even judge the secondary?
In any event, you can do with stats what you like. Defensive stats are mostly trash, because they don't really measure much of anything at all. They are also completely tempo dependent. You don't get any information on how many snaps a guy played, and how many the team played, etc. I think the best you can say is that a guy who accumulates a lot of stats is probably good. Otherwise, you are putting Chase Young and Greg Middleton in the same category, which is very much not where you want to be when judging players.
-
It would be nice to have Trackman data on defensive players, especially defensive backs and LBs. Measuring their speed and distance traveled to a tackle or INT.
If they can measure RB yardage after contact, can't they do the reverse for defenders?
If they keep track of targets and catches for WRs, they can do the reverse for CBs. But you have the man vs zone thing.
Just because it'd be tricky doesn't mean it can't be done or done well.
-
Excellent!
So do we throw all of the traditional stats in the trash can and only count PFF or do we take them both into account?
What's the quality control like at PFF? Are there 'conflict of interest' safeguards? Does one guy do each game? Focus on 1 player? Or do 2 or 3 do it and they go with the consensus? Is it the same handful of people or do they have purposeful, annual turnover?
It's data. More data is good.
Turning data into information is a skill.
-
No, that wouldn't be what I'm talking about.
I'm sure you could come up with 100 others that don't fit what I'm talking about. Instead of focusing on double-reverse passes, maybe consider the plays that happen 97% of the time instead of 0.0001%.
See, this is where it just doesn't add up. Because if you know what you're looking at, 97% of the unblocked TFLs are not because the offense simply failed to account for a player. But if a person didn't totally know what they were looking at, they might assume that. And it just seems silly to compile a stat based on not understanding what we're looking at ... for what end? The main one I could imagine is saying "actually, those TFL stats are really overstating it."
There are just more direct ways to talk about dominance or whatever.
If you think I still just don't understand, feel free to show me the plays I'm misinterpreting. There are thousands of hours of football on this here internet, and I'd gladly be shown where I erred.
-
It would be nice to have Trackman data on defensive players, especially defensive backs and LBs. Measuring their speed and distance traveled to a tackle or INT.
If they can measure RB yardage after contact, can't they do the reverse for defenders?
If they keep track of targets and catches for WRs, they can do the reverse for CBs. But you have the man vs zone thing.
Just because it'd be tricky doesn't mean it can't be done or done well.
NFL players are tracked like that, and a lot of NCAA players are too.
How do you mean yards after contact for defenders? Broken tackles? Yards after block? They do track block defeated stats in some corners.
They do track defensive targets. PFF does.
-
It's data. More data is good.
Turning data into information is a skill.
This is why I was confident I could create a football game from scratch. I'm good at math/toiling with numbers, studied gameplay, and know enough about football to make a meaningful, fun experience with it.
All I needed was a website guy, and Drew is the man!
-
If you think I still just don't understand, feel free to show me the plays I'm misinterpreting. There are thousands of hours of football on this here internet, and I'd gladly be shown where I erred.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Phzb0hq99M
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Phzb0hq99M)2:04 here, W. Anderson....it's a stunt and he gets the sack, but did he do anything any OLB who runs under a 4.8 forty couldn't do?
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjfI_oVCgRs&t=118s
3 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjfI_oVCgRs&t=118s):20 here, A.Hutchinson....it's a shit play-action and he's there, and gets the sack....but did he do anything special there?
These aren't examples of either player doing anything wrong or anything like that, but they made plays anyone decent would have made. On both plays, they were unblocked. Both plays ended in a sack.....as they should have. The Hutchinson play was designed not to block him. The Anderson play, the blocker was amusingly tardy and they simply handled the stunt poorly.
But these are good examples of what I've been talking about.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Phzb0hq99M
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Phzb0hq99M)2:04 here, W. Anderson....it's a stunt and he gets the sack, but did he do anything any OLB who runs under a 4.8 forty couldn't do?
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjfI_oVCgRs&t=118s
3 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjfI_oVCgRs&t=118s):20 here, A.Hutchinson....it's a shit play-action and he's there, and gets the sack....but did he do anything special there?
These aren't examples of either player doing anything wrong or anything like that, but they made plays anyone decent would have made. On both plays, they were unblocked. Both plays ended in a sack.....as they should have. The Hutchinson play was designed not to block him. The Anderson play, the blocker was amusingly tardy and they simply handled the stunt poorly.
But these are good examples of what I've been talking about.
Hmmm. Interesting.
The first one, it ends up a 2-3 gap stunt. That's not easy, especially as fast as he did it. But you're correct, it's the product of good scheme.
The second one, I probably give Hutchinson a good deal of credit. He's almost never gonna crash there, but he gains ground really quickly while the QB is bootlegging. He does a good job keeping hands up and ensuring the passing lane is closed. The short WR is open on the whip, but Hutchinson's ability to play in control, read the situation and get where he's going quicker than most makes that a sack where a lot of D ends likely give up the pass to the flat. It's not a prefect two-play (taking away QB run and throw), but an above average one.
This opens a larger question. In this scenario, we're basically saying if you're a weapon on a blitz or stunt, those stats should be counted as lesser (especially a kind of stunt that's easy to eff up for the defense because it's almost never picked up). And if you cover ground well under control, it also should be lesser to a degree. So do we punish people for making the plays that are there? That seems overcomplicated, reductive and quite squishy.
You're better off measuring upside plays (or downside plays). Doubles and triples draws (assuming they don't drive you into the dirt), different degrees of pop plays, percent of blocks beaten. Or maybe finding rates (pressures per drop back or some such thing). It seemed oddly roundabout to start with the numbers and then try to factor out the average, especially when it's really just focused on TFLs and sacks. (It's also weird to create a situation where a free runner situation is counted against a defender, but I guess if you want to)
-
I was just showing you that those 'free runner' situations happen plenty.
If you look at the rest of either highlight video, these guys make stupid-crazy plays....splitting double-teams, overpowering a 300 lber one play, then slipping through a gap another play.
I'm surprised that many here seem to poo-poo stats like tackles, TFL, and sacks. It seems sudden to me. I can't help but think if Anderson's and Hutchinson's numbers were traded, there wouldn't be this focus on PFF and this downgrading of the common stats.
I'm not trying to say that's the case, I just can't help but think it.
-
I was just showing you that those 'free runner' situations happen plenty.
If you look at the rest of either highlight video, these guys make stupid-crazy plays....splitting double-teams, overpowering a 300 lber one play, then slipping through a gap another play.
I'm surprised that many here seem to poo-poo stats like tackles, TFL, and sacks. It seems sudden to me. I can't help but think if Anderson's and Hutchinson's numbers were traded, there wouldn't be this focus on PFF and this downgrading of the common stats.
I'm not trying to say that's the case, I just can't help but think it.
I think it's more that there's just more to it than stats. As I said, stats are data, PFF is data, how able someone is to synthesize that data and extract meaning from it is the difference. (For the record, the Heisman voters suck at it IMHO.)
Look at another DE:
39 tackles, 11 TFL, 4.5 sacks, 4 passes defensed, 2 forced fumbles, 2 fumble recoveries, one defensive TD
Those stats aren't all that gaudy at all.
That guy is George Karlaftis. He's largely seen as the 3rd-best DE in the draft and was a goddamn wrecking crew for the Boilers this year. He swallowed up blockers and disrupted things, but he was often double-teamed or double-teamed AND chipped by an additional blocker, which allowed his teammates to record the stats. He was first-team all-conference, behind only Hutchinson, despite having stats NOWHERE near Hutchinson.
PFF captures that (he's VERY high in PFF grading), whereas traditional stats don't.
-
Which player was a down lineman fending off on coming heiffers and which could free lance and pick his spots.Anderson absolutely is impressive but to compare an LB with a DL not only on different teams but different leagues isn't apples/oranges - reality exists.I would draft according to need
tell me you didn't watch bama play this season without saying you didn't watch bama play this season.
anderson is "lb" in title only. he's at line of scrimage 100% of plays and hand in dirt 80%+ of plays.
-
That guy is George Karlaftis. He's largely seen as the 3rd-best DE in the draft and was a goddamn wrecking crew for the Boilers this year. He swallowed up blockers and disrupted things, but he was often double-teamed or double-teamed AND chipped by an additional blocker, which allowed his teammates to record the stats. He was first-team all-conference, behind only Hutchinson, despite having stats NOWHERE near Hutchinson.
PFF captures that (he's VERY high in PFF grading), whereas traditional stats don't.
Right, and I think people who watch the games know about these guys - again, it's the Shawn Springs thing. I guess I always cite him because the mid-late 90s was the peak of my obsession with college football and he was an All-American caliber CB with no INTS.
I don't know if I'm being painted as the "only the traditional stats matter" guy or not, because that would be false. But when I see 2 pass-rushers compared to each other and one has nearly DOUBLE the TFL.....I'm not going to just ignore that, lol.
-
I was just showing you that those 'free runner' situations happen plenty.
If you look at the rest of either highlight video, these guys make stupid-crazy plays....splitting double-teams, overpowering a 300 lber one play, then slipping through a gap another play.
I'm surprised that many here seem to poo-poo stats like tackles, TFL, and sacks. It seems sudden to me. I can't help but think if Anderson's and Hutchinson's numbers were traded, there wouldn't be this focus on PFF and this downgrading of the common stats.
I'm not trying to say that's the case, I just can't help but think it.
Such is life. Fwiw football hanging on to its traditional stats better than baseball or basketball. But math nerds come for everyone.
-
tell me you didn't watch bama play this season without saying you didn't watch bama play this season.
anderson is "lb" in title only. he's at line of scrimage 100% of plays and hand in dirt 80%+ of plays.
I haven't watched hardly any Bama games,you're saying he was the DE?Or lined up in the vacinity?Big difference,because just chipping a DE with a TE can make a difference in any of those stats.Because the O-Lineman has assignments right across from them,if an LB is behind or outside of LOS containment - it's a different position altogether.If you have stats he lined up as DE then present them.ANderson is 1st rd material but his position has much more flexibility and leeway is the point
-
I haven't watched hardly any Bama games,you're saying he was the DE?Or lined up in the vacinity?Big difference,because just chipping a DE with a TE can make a difference in any of those stats.Because the O-Lineman has assignments right across from them,if an LB is behind or outside of LOS containment - it's a different position altogether.If you have stats he lined up as DE then present them.ANderson is 1st rd material but his position has much more flexibility and leeway is the point
Part of that flexibility includes pass coverage. So if he happened to have twice the TFL in fewer pass-rushing opportunities.....DAMN.
-
Duly noted and good on him as he was effective but still was not taking the raging bulls head on as DE would is the point.Just like on sweeps many cbs sacrifice themselves on sweeps to the 1st pulling guard or blocker it's the guy behind him whether an OLB or another DB that is free in most circumstances to make the tackle
-
Right, and I think people who watch the games know about these guys - again, it's the Shawn Springs thing. I guess I always cite him because the mid-late 90s was the peak of my obsession with college football and he was an All-American caliber CB with no INTS.
I don't know if I'm being painted as the "only the traditional stats matter" guy or not, because that would be false. But when I see 2 pass-rushers compared to each other and one has nearly DOUBLE the TFL.....I'm not going to just ignore that, lol.
Nobody's saying you should ignore that. You should give it appropriate weight, not overweight or underweight, in your analysis.
Which is the hard part... How much weight is appropriate?
As I said, the hard part is turning data into information. More data is good, if you're intellectually honest and want to actually reach deeper and more full understanding. More data is BAD if all you want to do is cherry-pick the data which proves the narrative you believed before looking at the data. Most people do the latter, sadly.
-
I haven't watched hardly any Bama games,you're saying he was the DE?Or lined up in the vacinity?Big difference,because just chipping a DE with a TE can make a difference in any of those stats.Because the O-Lineman has assignments right across from them,if an LB is behind or outside of LOS containment - it's a different position altogether.If you have stats he lined up as DE then present them.ANderson is 1st rd material but his position has much more flexibility and leeway is the point
he is the jack lb, which lines up on the weak side of the line in 6 technique. 6 technique is either head up the te or, if no te (which is usually the case on weak side) just outside the ot. their primary responsibilities are to rush the passer and, on run plays, set the edge to turn runners into the lbs. on rare occasions, they'll drop into pass coverage, but it's quite rare. this doesn't matter as much, imo, but he's also most often in a 3 point stance (by a significant amount, too), but will line up in 2 pt stance from time to time on obvious passing downs. but that's not unusual for "true de's" either.
for most peoples' football vernacular, he's a de. he's the outside defensive player on the line of scrimmage that rushes the passer or plugs a gap to stop the run.
i have no idea where to find "stats" saying he line up as a de. his position is technically labelled a lb, so that's where the put him in the stats. he line up inside at dt some too, but they don't change his position for those plays.
tried finding highlight of this season, but they all start after the snap so hard to see where he lined up (here they are anyway (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEWk8Sww9rQ)). but here is highlights from last year with most showing where he lines up. the first couple happen to be pulling linemen so he has free shots, but after that he's usually going vs an off tackle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGV34gcehPY
-
Duly noted and good on him as he was effective but still was not taking the raging bulls head on as DE would is the point.Just like on sweeps many cbs sacrifice themselves on sweeps to the 1st pulling guard or blocker it's the guy behind him whether an OLB or another DB that is free in most circumstances to make the tackle
he was taking on the "raging bulls" though. often doubled either with a g or a te/rb.
-
fwiw, i didn't post any of that to take anything away from hutchinson, dude is a top top player.
i posted only to show that anderson wasn't "running around free from blockers behind the dline" like many seem to believe just because the "lb" beside his name.
-
Such is life. Fwiw football hanging on to its traditional stats better than baseball or basketball. But math nerds come for everyone.
The funny part:
-In baseball, the nerds upended what the coaches thought
-In basketball, the nerds took what many smart coaches did and mainstreamed it
-In football, most of what the nerds did is what the coaches have done, just with less raw info, but some efficiency and spots where math makes things cleaner.
Like, PFF grading is modeled after what coaches do every week. And the whole NFL uses PFF, not for the grades, but for play databasing purposes.
-
-In football, most of what the nerds did is what the coaches have done, just with less raw info, but some efficiency and spots where math makes things cleaner.
Like, PFF grading is modeled after what coaches do every week. And the whole NFL uses PFF, not for the grades, but for play databasing purposes.
That's true of player grading, but analytics has also changed the way that coaches approach game situations, regarding going for it on 4th down, going for 2 after a TD, moving more and more to pass-happy offenses, etc.
Old-school coaches were FAR too risk-averse if you look at the actual numbers, and analytics is changing that.
-
he was taking on the "raging bulls" though. often doubled either with a g or a te/rb.
Not every play he wasn't facing all conference linemen.Show me stats where he lined up more as a DE right across from an OT than a LB is the freaking point.He's good but you can't compare DE stats and apply them to some one is a hybrid.Saban would utilize his speed on the outside even though he's what 6-3 or 4? Why send him into the grind where he could get hung up & there is also a greater chance of injury just by someone falling
-
That's true of player grading, but analytics has also changed the way that coaches approach game situations, regarding going for it on 4th down, going for 2 after a TD, moving more and more to pass-happy offenses, etc.
Old-school coaches were FAR too risk-averse if you look at the actual numbers, and analytics is changing that.
I mean, it’s true of most facets. Tendencies, pressure numbers, target numbers, formational and personnel stuff, the great bounty of situational analysis.
There’s weirdly that small part of situational analysis, that they’ve been super weird about, especially considering the fact someone is always pushing for something new somewhere.
-
Like, PFF grading is modeled after what coaches do every week. And the whole NFL uses PFF, not for the grades, but for play databasing purposes.
You don't know that,hell,some of the front offices aren't nearly a informed as we are here.The Kardashians could do as good a job.And if we got a shot I know we could do much better than about 7-8 teams.Belichiks drafts were horrible in the 90's,since 2000, the Browns/Lions/Jaguars/Raiders/Washington for example could have done better with PFF - if/when it was availible - some crazy stupid drafts
-
Not every play he wasn't facing all conference linemen.Show me stats where he lined up more as a DE right across from an OT than a LB is the freaking point.He's good but you can't compare DE stats and apply them to some one is a hybrid.Saban would utilize his speed on the outside even though he's what 6-3 or 4? Why send him into the grind where he could get hung up & there is also a greater chance of injury just by someone falling
In that video, he lines up at a traditional end spot on all but two plays. The exception is when they’re in 5-2, and he’s on the outside, and a goal line package where he’s an end on a six-man front with four interiors guys.
He’s either on the outside or inside shoulder of the tackle on most plays, save for some where he’s on the strong side and aligned on the tight end’s outside shoulder, as defensive ends often are.
The kid is an end doing mostly end things. (Interestingly Wisconsin’s “linebackers” regularly play more than half the game lined up as “ends”. The wonders of flexible modern football)
-
You don't know that,hell,some of the front offices aren't nearly a informed as we are here.The Kardashians could do as good a job.And if we got a shot I know we could do much better than about 7-8 teams.Belichiks drafts were horrible in the 90's,since 2000, the Browns/Lions/Jaguars/Raiders/Washington for example could have done better with PFF - if/when it was availible - some crazy stupid drafts
I say this nicely, this simply is not true.
These people might make bad choices, but the depth of how much more they know then us is impressively vast.
-
Not every play he wasn't facing all conference linemen.Show me stats where he lined up more as a DE right across from an OT than a LB is the freaking point.He's good but you can't compare DE stats and apply them to some one is a hybrid.Saban would utilize his speed on the outside even though he's what 6-3 or 4? Why send him into the grind where he could get hung up & there is also a greater chance of injury just by someone falling
you want to keep being ignorant and/or disingenuous go for it.
-
I say this nicely, this simply is not true.
These people might make bad choices, but the depth of how much more they know then us is impressively vast.
I think cutting between both of you is how the consensus is so often wrong. Teams can go along with the consensus and not make waves, avoiding criticism in the moment.
The talking heads are generally positive anytime a pick is made that is within the general consensus. The fanbase of a team cheers if their team picks who they're slotted to.
5 years later, they're made fun of, but it doesn't matter. In the moment, they did the "wise" thing of going along with the consensus.
What it comes down to is the randomness of the whole thing. Truly great players have garbage careers due to all sorts of reasons - shitty position coach, horrible marriage, an ankle that never heals, poor usage, wrong fit, coach turnover, etc.
It's akin to why I don't really make predictions on games played by 20 year olds....there's no rhyme or reason. Teams have to draft players and develop their futures, but it's a crapshoot.
The only team I can think of that's routinely gone against the consensus by design is the Raiders. Their obsession with 40 times is childish. And in 17 years, they've had 1 winning season.
-
I think cutting between both of you is how the consensus is so often wrong. Teams can go along with the consensus and not make waves, avoiding criticism in the moment.
The talking heads are generally positive anytime a pick is made that is within the general consensus. The fanbase of a team cheers if their team picks who they're slotted to.
5 years later, they're made fun of, but it doesn't matter. In the moment, they did the "wise" thing of going along with the consensus.
What it comes down to is the randomness of the whole thing. Truly great players have garbage careers due to all sorts of reasons - shitty position coach, horrible marriage, an ankle that never heals, poor usage, wrong fit, coach turnover, etc.
It's akin to why I don't really make predictions on games played by 20 year olds....there's no rhyme or reason. Teams have to draft players and develop their futures, but it's a crapshoot.
The only team I can think of that's routinely gone against the consensus by design is the Raiders. Their obsession with 40 times is childish. And in 17 years, they've had 1 winning season.
I play fantasy football. It's easy to try to categorize decisions as "right" or "wrong" when those decisions lead to "wins" or "losses" week to week.
But that's stupid. There is SO much randomness in the actual result of what happens on the field, that an individual decision and that week's result are barely correlated.
The key is to try to have good process. It's a question of "what's most likely to happen", not "what will happen"? The results over a season, if you have good process, will usually average out to be good. But sometimes the randomness just overwhelms even good process.
Generally the Patriots have had good process. If they had drafted Brady in the first round because you thought he'd be the eventual GOAT, everyone would have looked at the end result 20 years later and said "OMG what a great decision", but it would have been TERRIBLE process, both because if you're constantly wagering that you're 6th-round "hunch" is going to pay off like a first-rounder, you're probably making a lot of other terrible decisions, but also because if you waste that 1st-round pick on a QB that you could have "reached" for in the 4th or 5th round, the opportunity cost of that draft decision is too high.
Heck, for most teams who get the #1 overall pick, and pick QB, it's terrible process. If you're the 32nd-best team in the NFL, your problems are WAY bigger than the QB spot. You probably don't have an OL that can block for that QB, and can't open holes in the running game to take pressure off that QB. You probably have a terrible defense that will put that QB into "drop back and chuck it" mode early in every game because you're constantly playing catch-up. So you'll put that QB behind a bad OL in obvious passing downs all year, and then suddenly nobody understands why the QB is shellshocked and not developing. Uhh, it's freakin' obvious why.
Yes, it's REALLY hard to go to, and win, the Super Bowl without an elite QB. But an elite QB on a bad team won't play like an elite QB, so if you're that bad it's much better to stick with a pedestrian QB until you've upgraded the team around the QB to at least be good. An elite QB can then put you over the hump.
-
you want to keep being ignorant and/or disingenuous go for it.
So no stats huh,you're that blind you don't see or admit differences between the positions.What part of I like Anderson did you miss.If i plant a 6'7" 320 OT like Bama has in front of you on every play I'm guessing he may hinder your ability to interact with the opposition.As opposed to some one who can move in/out as they choose unmolested
-
I say this nicely, this simply is not true.
These people might make bad choices, but the depth of how much more they know then us is impressively vast.
Um,no Those teams drafted like a bag of rats in a burning Meth Lab.These just off the top of my head - I and every fan in Cleveland didn't want a 28 yr old rookie named Brandon Weeden - in the 1st,2nd or 3rd.There was a reason he was playing against 18-22 yr olds.He turned 29 his rookie season.And to prove that stumble thru stupidity was no fluke they tapped a fidgety waif Johnny Manziel also in the 1st a few yrs later.Get this because the Owner Jimmy Haslem said a homeless guy in a bus shelter told him to.Like he got out of his limo to rub elbows with the unfortunates in society.
Belichick drafted Craig Powell number one in the '95 draft - he didn't play in '94 sitting out all season with a ripped up knee,he was like 2nd team big ten during the '93 season.So ya let's take him with the 1st pick.BB also drafted a short yardage specialist Touch Down Tommy Vardell in the 1st who stiffed out also.C'mon you don't take a fire plug who'd play sparingly with holes all over the roster - I'm confident enough you wouldn't have done it.He also took Steve Everitt a AA center out of Michigan with a bad knee number 1,but at least he played and was a grinder who toughed it out and a fan favorite to boot because of that.Still a questionable pick there though
Browns fans were banging their heads like a screen door in a hurricane the letters to local paper had to be deleted because of profanity.I'm not wearing out my keyboard and wasting time regaling anymore of that ka-ka.We here follow college football much more than many of those blisterheads.Go tell ELA or Mdot they couldn't have done better in Detroit,Millen used the 1st pick to drft 4 WRs in 6 years from 2003-2007 - like who needs interior lineman on both sides of the ball.SMDH,if I knew which video I'd post the link to an interview with Jimmy Johnson in 5 yrs he took a 1-15 team into a team that won 3 SBs.He didn't use draft composite's or analytics.The talent guys would drag they're stats and measurables/metrics and show him.And his response was always "ya but can he play".Just saying many here would hold their own - given a full time gig to apply themselves.
-
Which player was a down lineman fending off on coming heiffers and which could free lance and pick his spots.Anderson absolutely is impressive but to compare an LB with a DL not only on different teams but different leagues isn't apples/oranges - reality exists.I would draft according to need
I haven't watched hardly any Bama games,you're saying he was the DE?Or lined up in the vacinity?Big difference,because just chipping a DE with a TE can make a difference in any of those stats.Because the O-Lineman has assignments right across from them,if an LB is behind or outside of LOS containment - it's a different position altogether.If you have stats he lined up as DE then present them.ANderson is 1st rd material but his position has much more flexibility and leeway is the point
So no stats huh,you're that blind you don't see or admit differences between the positions.What part of I like Anderson did you miss.If i plant a 6'7" 320 OT like Bama has in front of you on every play I'm guessing he may hinder your ability to interact with the opposition.As opposed to some one who can move in/out as they choose unmolested
you said he wasn't a down lineman taking on heiffers, but was freelancing and picking his spots. then you said you didn't watch hardly any of his games.
that stats have been provided ad nauseam to show he's a front line player. i've provided verbal confirmation and video evidence of that. and yet you want "stats" of his position? no one even keeps those kinds of "stats". you want me to go back and change his listed position to de for every game? every play? what kind of asinine person asks for something that doesn't exists, and then ignores the only potential evidence that can be provided?
they did plant 6-7 320 ot's in front of him most plays. but i don't know how i can possibly prove that to someone who admits they didn't watch hardly any of his games, and refuses to believe someone who did and also has video evidence (if limited due to being highlights).
i'll remain "blind" while watching and knowing what i'm talking about. you can keep the ignorance and refusal to admit you're wrong.
-
In that video, he lines up at a traditional end spot on all but two plays. The exception is when they’re in 5-2, and he’s on the outside, and a goal line package where he’s an end on a six-man front with four interiors guys.
He’s either on the outside or inside shoulder of the tackle on most plays, save for some where he’s on the strong side and aligned on the tight end’s outside shoulder, as defensive ends often are.
The kid is an end doing mostly end things. (Interestingly Wisconsin’s “linebackers” regularly play more than half the game lined up as “ends”. The wonders of flexible modern football)
maybe mrnubbz needs to see this again.
-
So no stats huh,you're that blind you don't see or admit differences between the positions.What part of I like Anderson did you miss.If i plant a 6'7" 320 OT like Bama has in front of you on every play I'm guessing he may hinder your ability to interact with the opposition.As opposed to some one who can move in/out as they choose unmolested
He has tackles in front of him most plays. Sometimes it’s guards. Against some formations, it’s tight ends, but that’s not that common.
-
Um,no Those teams drafted like a bag of rats in a burning Meth Lab.These just off the top of my head - I and every fan in Cleveland didn't want a 28 yr old rookie named Brandon Weeden - in the 1st,2nd or 3rd.There was a reason he was playing against 18-22 yr olds.He turned 29 his rookie season.And to prove that stumble thru stupidity was no fluke they tapped a fidgety waif Johnny Manziel also in the 1st a few yrs later.Get this because the Owner Jimmy Haslem said a homeless guy in a bus shelter told him to.Like he got out of his limo to rub elbows with the unfortunates in society.
Belichick drafted Craig Powell number one in the '95 draft - he didn't play in '94 sitting out all season with a ripped up knee,he was like 2nd team big ten during the '93 season.So ya let's take him with the 1st pick.BB also drafted a short yardage specialist Touch Down Tommy Vardell in the 1st who stiffed out also.C'mon you don't take a fire plug who'd play sparingly with holes all over the roster - I'm confident enough you wouldn't have done it.He also took Steve Everitt a AA center out of Michigan with a bad knee number 1,but at least he played and was a grinder who toughed it out and a fan favorite to boot because of that.Still a questionable pick there though
Browns fans were banging their heads like a screen door in a hurricane the letters to local paper had to be deleted because of profanity.I'm not wearing out my keyboard and wasting time regaling anymore of that ka-ka.We here follow college football much more than many of those blisterheads.Go tell ELA or Mdot they couldn't have done better in Detroit,Millen used the 1st pick to drft 4 WRs in 6 years from 2003-2007 - like who needs interior lineman on both sides of the ball.SMDH,if I knew which video I'd post the link to an interview with Jimmy Johnson in 5 yrs he took a 1-15 team into a team that won 3 SBs.He didn't use draft composite's or analytics.The talent guys would drag they're stats and measurables/metrics and show him.And his response was always "ya but can he play".Just saying many here would hold their own - given a full time gig to apply themselves.
They did make many poor choices.
I don’t know that any of our friends would do worse. But they would be completely out of their depth knowledge-wise, and there’s no shame in that.
I compare something like this to making a TV show. I’m sure you can find lots of bad TV shows. And it takes a fantastic amount of expertise to produce even a horrendous TV show. Likewise, even very bad personnel people know a ridiculous amount more about football than laymen.
-
Any team that has the owner chiming in on draft picks is going to fail.
-
i'll remain "blind" while watching and knowing what i'm talking about. you can keep the ignorance and refusal to admit you're wrong.
I didn't ever say he wasn't a good or greatplayer - so put that thing out you'll burn your fingers?Walk yourself back a few pages and read what the original discussion was - one player is a DE one is an LB. Therefore it's an apples/oranges when comparing stats,ability or usefulness .Because I haven't watched much BAMA shouldn't preclude you - who does from fetching a few stats and answering a question that twisted you off .They don't play the same freakin' position and you don't seem to get that.Don't show his highlights - show the number of times statistically he lined up as True DE if there is to be remtely a fair comparison.Perhaps you haven't noticed in most cases 5 down o-lineman aren't going to cover 4 down lineman and 3 lbs - there are mismatches galore. I even said 2-3 pages back if you are not to broke to pay attention that I'd draft one or the other based on need.
-
You keep suggesting that he's like '86 Lawrence Taylor hopped up on coke and plays freelance.
On what planet is a defensive player going freelance on a Nick Saban-coached team!?!?! Wake up.
-
Likewise, even very bad personnel people know a ridiculous amount more about football than laymen.
That's just it we're not layman,we're fanatics.there is not some clinic these guys go to it's natural observation and processing what youve seen.look at some of the things that we.If given the same time afforded those failures at least 5-6-7 guys from he could hold there own.You can watch until your eyes bleed doesn't make your intuition any better
-
You keep suggesting that he's like '86 Lawrence Taylor hopped up on coke and plays freelance.
On what planet is a defensive player going freelance on a Nick Saban-coached team!?!?! Wake up.
Line backers move around a hell of a lot more so free lance was a bad choice of words,their simply not taking on lineman play after play after play.Have you missed reading that the last 3 pages or just had to take a shot.
-
I didn't ever say he wasn't a good or greatplayer - so put that thing out you'll burn your fingers?Walk yourself back a few pages and read what the original discussion was - one player is a DE one is an LB. Therefore it's an apples/oranges when comparing stats,ability or usefulness .Because I haven't watched much BAMA shouldn't preclude you - who does from fetching a few stats and answering a question that twisted you off .They don't play the same freakin' position and you don't seem to get that.Don't show his highlights - show the number of times statistically he lined up as True DE if there is to be remtely a fair comparison.Perhaps you haven't noticed in most cases 5 down o-lineman aren't going to cover 4 down lineman and 3 lbs - there are mismatches galore. I even said 2-3 pages back if you are not to broke to pay attention that I'd draft one or the other based on need.
i haven't mentioned anything about you saying he was bad, because you didn't. i corrected you when you insinuated he was roaming free behind the line because he was a lb. we were discussing how people were incorrect in thinking he is a lb in the typical sense of the word. for all practical purposes, he is a de, only a lb by label.
therefor, since he is lined up almost exclusively the same as a de, the stats are comparable.
and THERE IS NOT A STAT THAT SHOWS WHERE HE LINES UP. there is only video evidence and hearsay evidence from people who actually watched, which you freely admit you didn't. i have provided as much evidence as is possible. virtually all of which corroborates what i've said.
i'll say it again, will anderson is 1 of the 4 down lineman on defense. he is on the end of the defensive line. he lines up vs either the offensive tackle or the te, depending on the offensive alignment. he is NOT lined up off the line of scrimmage. he is NOT line up outside the box. for all intents and purposes, he is a defensive end. but his position title is "jack" so he must be a lb, right?
do hutchinson and anderson pay the same position? no and i never said as much. hutchinson in bama's d would be the de opposite of anderson. i won't presume to know where anderson would line up in mich d since i know little about it. are both of their responsibilities to rush the passer and stop the run? yes. do both line up on the end of the defensive line, facing offensive lineman? also yes.
-
I think if I was a personnel person, I'd value intelligence too much.
My guys would be in the right place at the right time doing the right thing.....and get run over or something.
-
Line backers move around a hell of a lot more so free lance was a bad choice of words,their simply not taking on lineman play after play after play.Have you missed reading that the last 3 pages or just had to take a shot.
You've missed a guy who watched every Alabama play say that your suggestion isn't the case for 3 pages.
-
Line backers move around a hell of a lot more so free lance was a bad choice of words,their simply not taking on lineman play after play after play.Have you missed reading that the last 3 pages or just had to take a shot.
the whole point of this convo is that he doesn't move around like a linebacker because he doesn't line up in a traditional lb spot. he lines up in a traditional de spot. taking on lineman play after play. you need to stop looking at those 2 letters beside his name and watch him play.
-
Heck, for most teams who get the #1 overall pick, and pick QB, it's terrible process. If you're the 32nd-best team in the NFL, your problems are WAY bigger than the QB spot. You probably don't have an OL that can block for that QB, and can't open holes in the running game to take pressure off that QB. You probably have a terrible defense that will put that QB into "drop back and chuck it" mode early in every game because you're constantly playing catch-up. So you'll put that QB behind a bad OL in obvious passing downs all year, and then suddenly nobody understands why the QB is shellshocked and not developing. Uhh, it's freakin' obvious why.
Exactly Baltimore proved this in 2000 with Dilfer under center had solid lines and built out.Conversely they proved just having a QB after winning their SB in '13 was a fools errand as they ponied up for Flacco but lost everyone else
-
the whole point of this convo is that he doesn't move around like a linebacker because he doesn't line up in a traditional lb spot. he lines up in a traditional de spot. taking on lineman play after play. you need to stop looking at those 2 letters beside his name and watch him play.
He plays close to the line as an LB,just looked it up 4 guys listed in depth charts as DE's none of them W.A..Now you want to go digging for more actual plays from scrimmage by position be my guest.So F****** difficult
-
You've missed a guy who watched every Alabama play say that your suggestion isn't the case for 3 pages.
There's a difference between watching and paying attention and WTF does this graffiti mean?Would you care to provide the statistics play by play for the DE position this season or follow your usual bark at the moon satire
-
He plays close to the line as an LB,just looked it up 4 guys listed in depth charts as DE's none of them W.A..Now you want to go digging for more actual plays from scrimmage by position be my guest.So F****** difficult
lol have a good week nubbz. hope you have a wonderful christmas.
-
You also maybe the elves will stuff your stocking with a updated 2021 TIDE Statisticians Manual
-
He plays close to the line as an LB,just looked it up 4 guys listed in depth charts as DE's none of them W.A..Now you want to go digging for more actual plays from scrimmage by position be my guest.So F****** difficult
Well friend, you have a person who would do just that. I pulled up Bama's most recent game, here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gyQ0r09fig&t=5s
On the first play, Will Anderson is lined up at DE, across from the tackle.
On the second play, he's playing the weak side end spot, lined up across from the tackle in a 5-2 look.
On the third play, a coverage drop
On the fourth, they're in an exotic look, but there is is at the tackle's outside shoulder (his taking on the tackle opens things up for a rushing LB)
Play No. 5 At DE
And Play No. 6
And play 7
And 8
And 9
And 10
11 is him over the tackle in the 5-2
12, WE HAVE HIM OFF THE LOS, a whole linebacker snap
(One play off)
Back outside the tackle at DE on the YY side for 13
Play 14 starts a new drive, back at DE
DE in the 5-2 for Play 15, hand down, over the tackle
Tradtional DE for 16
(I think he's a standup end, but the angle isn't good to ID, so we'll put aside)
DE once more
Stand up end lined up across the OT
Outside standup end taking on the tackle
(Another hard to ID if he's on the field)
Back at 5-2 edge, back setting the edge vs a probable NFL OT
So taking more than a quarter of his team's biggest game of the season, of plays where I could ID him, he lined up at linebacker once, as the wide edge in the 5-2 three times, in a more traditional 4-man front end spot 16 or so times. Just about all of them had him starting out over a tackle, and tackles were most often the primary guys blocking him.
Fin.