Nigerian DL Coach from TX to UCLA alert! (UCLA adding two good coaches)
- Thread starter Dennis_DeYoung
- Start date
GrundleStiltzkin
New Fish
#TeamFastStrategy
Fuck. I saw this shit developing...everyone who pooped on the Chip hiring wasn't seeing this clearly. Whether he wins or not in the short term is irrelevant. He was THE NAME in the coaching searches this year. He is sizzle. If he recruits lights out at UCLA this hurts us. Instead of just trying for USC scraps now we go for USC and UCLA scraps. And sure, to some degree it has always been that way, but it will be worse with Chip there.
Scott Wolf from Inside USC gets it. He would have fired Helton this year to get Chip
His readers hate him - but we won the Pac 12!!!11!!11
His readers hate him - but we won the Pac 12!!!11!!11
NorwegianHusky
New Fish
Last edited:
dnc
New Fish
Chip's a good hire even recruiting aside. Even if you're convinced CFB has caught up with his offensive system (I'm not), it was his attention to detail and understanding of in game strategy and how it affects win probability that set him apart. That shit isn't going anymore.
UCLA is going to be a serious issue.
It's probably more accurate to say college football has embraced his offensive system. But as @dnc points out, Chip was way more than a fast temp offense.
I don't think most of the dinosaurs have caught up with that. He will still have a tuff time with Bama because Saban has his own holistic philosophy
I don't think most of the dinosaurs have caught up with that. He will still have a tuff time with Bama because Saban has his own holistic philosophy
Tequilla
Active poster
I love the win probability arguments that get thrown around at all times ... to me there are a lot of apples and oranges in them although I understand and appreciate the conclusions.
The biggest problem I have with probabilities is that while over a large sample size the conclusions will play out, in a short sample size impatience of taking a small edge can result in missing opportunities for better spots
The biggest problem I have with probabilities is that while over a large sample size the conclusions will play out, in a short sample size impatience of taking a small edge can result in missing opportunities for better spots
AIRWOLF
New Fish
You say stuff like this all the time. Implicit in your argument is the idea that a subjective judgement is going to lead to a better outcome than playing the percentages.
To put it in blackjack terms, Of course splitting aces can lead to bad outcomes, but it is still optimal strategy unless you have a larger edge in knowing the card count than splitting aces gives you.
Bread
New Fish
fuck UCLA we don't want kids that go there. This hire is easily offset by the Graham and Sumlin firings.
we have had a better shot at the 3-4 good kids a year from Arizona/west Texas area then anyone good going to UCLA. Herm ain't recruiting shit and Jimbo will stay focused to the south.
No bug time local competition in the region right now.
we have had a better shot at the 3-4 good kids a year from Arizona/west Texas area then anyone good going to UCLA. Herm ain't recruiting shit and Jimbo will stay focused to the south.
No bug time local competition in the region right now.
GreenRiverGatorz
New Fish
Chip Kelly finding success in Westwood is about as close to a foregone conclusion as you can get, so we are absolutely driving in parallel lanes. But that's probably better for us in the long run. The Pac-12 is on the brink of becoming irrelevant, and having someone besides Clay Helton's underperforming 5-stars representing the South is a huge plus for the conference.
on the brink?
Last edited:
Tequilla
Active poster
I do say that kind of stuff all the time ... a lot of it is because what kind of edge am I playing? Am I playing s 55/45 edge or an 85/15 edge? Big differences in my eye.
I’ll give you an example that I am often critical of and Chip has been a big fan of in his career. Let’s say you are playing a Top 10 game and you score the first TD. Let’s say that the national average of converting 2 point conversions is 53% but over the last 2 seasons your conversion rate is 70%. Do you go for 2?
First, the 70% self conversion rate is crap because of your opponents that fell into that category how many are reasonable comps? Second, the closer the two teams are, the more very small details in the game can get magnified. How often do you see teams go for 2 too early and they ultimately end up chasing the game as a result? Third, let’s say the real success rate is closer to the national average and being more or less a coin flip. I fully get that the expected value over the long haul is better to go for 2 ... but in a finite number of samples like this there’s value in a sure thing.
It’s not that I’m conservative by nature because that’s not completely accurate. I do find value in forcing others to beat you versus making self-afflicted mistakes. Taking educated and responsible choices have value.
And while you may think that my opinion on what seem to be similar situations or circumstances are based on a whim, you couldn’t be further from the truth.
I’ll give you an example that I am often critical of and Chip has been a big fan of in his career. Let’s say you are playing a Top 10 game and you score the first TD. Let’s say that the national average of converting 2 point conversions is 53% but over the last 2 seasons your conversion rate is 70%. Do you go for 2?
First, the 70% self conversion rate is crap because of your opponents that fell into that category how many are reasonable comps? Second, the closer the two teams are, the more very small details in the game can get magnified. How often do you see teams go for 2 too early and they ultimately end up chasing the game as a result? Third, let’s say the real success rate is closer to the national average and being more or less a coin flip. I fully get that the expected value over the long haul is better to go for 2 ... but in a finite number of samples like this there’s value in a sure thing.
It’s not that I’m conservative by nature because that’s not completely accurate. I do find value in forcing others to beat you versus making self-afflicted mistakes. Taking educated and responsible choices have value.
And while you may think that my opinion on what seem to be similar situations or circumstances are based on a whim, you couldn’t be further from the truth.
Tequilla
Active poster
While I agree that UCLA being good is a positive for conference perception, my comments are more tied to the fact that I don’t see UCLA and UW necessarily recruiting the same kind of kid.
At QB, I think we are more likely to pursue a pocket passer whereas UCLA will be more duel threat.
At WR/TE we are targeting bigger bodies that play more of a pro style. Kelly’s Offense makes use of guys that are more in the Chico realm that will excel in the screen game.
We may find challenges recruiting RBs but thee are usually enough solid ones on the West Coast where we will be fine (particularly in state.
OL will be interesting as I could see some overlap.
Defense to me is often about recruiting to your scheme and finding guys that have the skills to do what you want,
EsophagealFeces
Well-known poster
Westwood is a rough hood. Dueling ability would definitely come in handy there.