couch sale!!!
- Thread starter dhdawg
- Start date
FremontTroll
New Fish
Answer: He is not. Ducks hire Boise DC.
GrundleStiltzkin
New Fish
greenblood
New Fish
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
HillsboroDuck
New Fish
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
Still better than Heyward
FremontTroll
New Fish
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
GreenRiverGatorz
New Fish
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
I don't think it's a bad stat, but it certainly requires more context, like the pace of play of the offense and yards allowed, in order to be truly meaningful.
FremontTroll
New Fish
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
I don't think it's a bad stat, but it certainly requires more context, like the pace of play of the offense and yards allowed, in order to be truly meaningful.
So you agree it is meaningless as a standalone statistic?
Just use yards per play for christ's sake.
greenblood
New Fish
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
I don't think it's a bad stat, but it certainly requires more context, like the pace of play of the offense and yards allowed, in order to be truly meaningful.
So you agree it is meaningless as a standalone statistic?
Just use yards per play for christ's sake.
I actually prefer the win/loss statistic myself.
whatshouldicareabout
Active poster
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
I don't think it's a bad stat, but it certainly requires more context, like the pace of play of the offense and yards allowed, in order to be truly meaningful.
So you agree it is meaningless as a standalone statistic?
Just use yards per play for christ's sake.
I actually prefer the win/loss statistic myself.
Jake Browning is the winningest QB in Pac-12 history
GreenRiverGatorz
New Fish
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
I don't think it's a bad stat, but it certainly requires more context, like the pace of play of the offense and yards allowed, in order to be truly meaningful.
So you agree it is meaningless as a standalone statistic?
Just use yards per play for christ's sake.
Most stats are meaningless in isolation, hence the rise in advanced stats and analytics. Yards per play, while better than PPG, is also meaningless by itself as it doesn’t account for red zone D, turnovers, 3rd down efficiency, etc.
HillsboroDuck
New Fish
This isn't true because red zone and 3rd efficiency (good or bad) are largely unsustainable and will typically return to the mean success rates one would expect from yards per play.
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
I don't think it's a bad stat, but it certainly requires more context, like the pace of play of the offense and yards allowed, in order to be truly meaningful.
So you agree it is meaningless as a standalone statistic?
Just use yards per play for christ's sake.
Most stats are meaningless in isolation, hence the rise in advanced stats and analytics. Yards per play, while better than PPG, is also meaningless by itself as it doesn’t account for red zone D, turnovers, 3rd down efficiency, etc.
Turnovers are less sustainable as well but more sustainable than 3rd down or red zone so I agree it deserves to be factored in at some level.
FireCohen
New Fish
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
I don't think it's a bad stat, but it certainly requires more context, like the pace of play of the offense and yards allowed, in order to be truly meaningful.
So you agree it is meaningless as a standalone statistic?
Just use yards per play for christ's sake.
I actually prefer the win/loss statistic myself.
Jake Browning is the winningest QB in Pac-12 history
Well done sir
GreenRiverGatorz
New Fish
This isn't true because red zone and 3rd efficiency (good or bad) are largely unsustainable and will typically return to the mean success rates one would expect from yards per play.
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
I don't think it's a bad stat, but it certainly requires more context, like the pace of play of the offense and yards allowed, in order to be truly meaningful.
So you agree it is meaningless as a standalone statistic?
Just use yards per play for christ's sake.
Most stats are meaningless in isolation, hence the rise in advanced stats and analytics. Yards per play, while better than PPG, is also meaningless by itself as it doesn’t account for red zone D, turnovers, 3rd down efficiency, etc.
Turnovers are less sustainable as well but more sustainable than 3rd down or red zone so I agree it deserves to be factored in at some level.
I’m curious as to what you’ve seen that demonstrates them to be unsustainable. Intuitively it might make some sense because we can often see on a game-to-game basis how wildly those stats can fluctuate. But that doesn’t necessarily imply that it’s random or unsustainable, it just suggests that it’s very difficult to achieve consistency. There is absolutely a “skill” that some defensive coordinators have more than others, where they’ve implemented a defense that responds better in 3rd down and red zone situations. The old “bend but don’t break” adage is very real.
HillsboroDuck
New Fish
This isn't true because red zone and 3rd efficiency (good or bad) are largely unsustainable and will typically return to the mean success rates one would expect from yards per play.
With more talent Oregon gave up 30 points per game vs conference opponents. So, Avalos giving up 34.9 at Boise State against P5 opponents is at worst a lateral move. I still have hopes
PPG is the worst stat.
I don't think it's a bad stat, but it certainly requires more context, like the pace of play of the offense and yards allowed, in order to be truly meaningful.
So you agree it is meaningless as a standalone statistic?
Just use yards per play for christ's sake.
Most stats are meaningless in isolation, hence the rise in advanced stats and analytics. Yards per play, while better than PPG, is also meaningless by itself as it doesn’t account for red zone D, turnovers, 3rd down efficiency, etc.
Turnovers are less sustainable as well but more sustainable than 3rd down or red zone so I agree it deserves to be factored in at some level.
I’m curious as to what you’ve seen that demonstrates them to be unsustainable. Intuitively it might make some sense because we can often see on a game-to-game basis how wildly those stats can fluctuate. But that doesn’t necessarily imply that it’s random or unsustainable, it just suggests that it’s very difficult to achieve consistency. There is absolutely a “skill” that some defensive coordinators have more than others, where they’ve implemented a defense that responds better in 3rd down and red zone situations. The old “bend but don’t break” adage is very real.
I've read the studies, can't remember exactly where but essentially over time defenses tend to perform how you would expect they would in 3rd down and red zone situations based on how they perform on first and second downs.
People like to point to UW's recent defenses as "bend but don't break" but they have comparatively been very good on first and second downs as well.
HillsboroDuck
New Fish
I know this was something that came up numerous times when discussing the Seahawks defense this year as it gave up massive yardage but not many points. It was pointed out a number of times that it's almost impossible to be so bad on 1st and 2nd downs and so good on 3rd downs/red zone and that they would likely
give up more points going forward. Which they did to the tune of over 5 points per game more in the second half than the first half despite having two more home games/two less road games in the second half.
Perhaps this is different at the college level but I doubt it.
give up more points going forward. Which they did to the tune of over 5 points per game more in the second half than the first half despite having two more home games/two less road games in the second half.
Perhaps this is different at the college level but I doubt it.