Banker = Cosgrove

[wanderful]

 

 

 

So do we update this list now? 3 out of our 4 games this year would be on it...

 

BYU - 7.10 YPP

Miami - 6.81 YPP

S. Miss - 7.05 YPP

 

http://www.cfbstats.com/2015/team/463/total/defense/gamelog.html

 

What's your argument here? 8 games ago, these defenders had the second worst defensive performance in school history. 4 games later, those same players (minus a 2nd round draft pick and adding some true freshman) had only the 18th worst defensive performance in school history.

 

If anything, that shows that they're getting better.

 

Are they where we want them to be? Hell no. But arguing anything else against Banker (at this early point in the season) just seems to ignore the trajectory of the facts.

 

Look a the teams on the list? I'm pretty sure BYU, S. Miss, and Miami would get skull drug by most of those teams (except SDSU, Wyoming, and Ball State).

 

 

So they're the 3 worst teams on that list (except these three teams that are worse)?

 

I totally understand everyone's frustration with the D this season. But it's the same frustration we had with the D last season. And in 2013. And 2012. So I'm not sure why piling on Banker when he has the same exact guys on the field as last year is going to produce any productive results.

[wanderful]

 

 

I completely disagree, it's not a value assessment at all, it's just a pure evaluation of crappy performances. These same players were the second worst team of all time 8 games ago. Now they are only the 18th worst team. There's no way you can't say that's improvement.

Yeah, that's not how it works. You also have to take into account the quality of the competition.

 

 

So what you're saying is you want to make a statistical argument, except for when you don't like the conclusions, at which point you want to bring in the subjectivity of quality of team into the argument?

 

As you pointed out, SDSU, Ball State, and Wyoming are the list, as well as LA Tech, and 5-loss Wisconsin team. Those teams don't seem very good either.

[Saunders]

I totally understand everyone's frustration with the D this season. But it's the same frustration we had with the D last season. And in 2013. And 2012. So I'm not sure why piling on Banker when he has the same exact guys on the field as last year is going to produce any productive results.

Yes and no. The defense wasn't bad until Wisconsin, when the wheels fell off (and left the atmosphere).They averaged 4.86 YPP up until that point (and a lovely 9.8 against Wisconsin).

 

The frustration, is that we've literally flip-flopped our defensive strengths. We had a decent rush D (until Wisconsin) and a great Pass D. This year, we have a great rush D, and (currently( the worse pass D in school history. THAT, is why people are grumbling. There has to be a balance somewhere, and just hoping that because we play in a crap division and that the QB's suck isn't going to cut it.

[Guy Chamberlin]

If I may be candid, I think our defense needs to play better.

[Saunders]

 

 

 

I completely disagree, it's not a value assessment at all, it's just a pure evaluation of crappy performances. These same players were the second worst team of all time 8 games ago. Now they are only the 18th worst team. There's no way you can't say that's improvement.

Yeah, that's not how it works. You also have to take into account the quality of the competition.

 

 

So what you're saying is you want to make a statistical argument, except for when you don't like the conclusions, at which point you want to bring in the subjectivity of quality of team into the argument?

 

As you pointed out, SDSU, Ball State, and Wyoming are the list, as well as LA Tech, and 5-loss Wisconsin team. Those teams don't seem very good either.

 

No, it's because I understand that looking at numbers in a vacuum is bad. Giving up 7 ypp against scrubs is much worse than giving up 7 Ypp against a national title contender is slightly different. I think you missed that point.

[Saunders]

If I may be candid, I think our defense needs to play better.

Hater.

 

[wanderful]

 

I totally understand everyone's frustration with the D this season. But it's the same frustration we had with the D last season. And in 2013. And 2012. So I'm not sure why piling on Banker when he has the same exact guys on the field as last year is going to produce any productive results.

Yes and no. The defense wasn't bad until Wisconsin, when the wheels fell off (and left the atmosphere).They averaged 4.86 YPP up until that point (and a lovely 9.8 against Wisconsin).

 

The frustration, is that we've literally flip-flopped our defensive strengths. We had a decent rush D (until Wisconsin) and a great Pass D. This year, we have a great rush D, and (currently( the worse pass D in school history. THAT, is why people are grumbling. There has to be a balance somewhere, and just hoping that because we play in a crap division and that the QB's suck isn't going to cut it.

 

 

I won't begrudge you any of those arguments at the end of the season if our D is still as bad as it is now. My point is mostly that we've seen marginal improvements (we're still terrible, just not quite as terrible as last year) and that we should all be patient and "row in the same direction" (i.e. support the staff 100%) for the time being.

[junior4949]

 

 

 

So do we update this list now? 3 out of our 4 games this year would be on it...

 

BYU - 7.10 YPP

Miami - 6.81 YPP

S. Miss - 7.05 YPP

 

http://www.cfbstats.com/2015/team/463/total/defense/gamelog.html

 

What's your argument here? 8 games ago, these defenders had the second worst defensive performance in school history. 4 games later, those same players (minus a 2nd round draft pick and adding some true freshman) had only the 18th worst defensive performance in school history.

 

If anything, that shows that they're getting better.

 

Are they where we want them to be? Hell no. But arguing anything else against Banker (at this early point in the season) just seems to ignore the trajectory of the facts.

 

Look a the teams on the list? I'm pretty sure BYU, S. Miss, and Miami would get skull drug by most of those teams (except SDSU, Wyoming, and Ball State).

 

 

I'm not so sure about that. Strictly speaking of the offenses rather than the entire team, BYU with Hill is pretty impressive. He was in the Hypseman talk a year ago before getting injured. He definitely would have been in the Hypseman talk this year if it weren't for an injury. BYU's offense with Hill was pretty darn impressive. Kayaa is already getting some love nationally. The kid is a player. Miami has oodles of speed and talent. If it weren't for a lack of quality coaching, Miami would probably find themselves ranked in the top 15.

[teachercd]

If I may be candid, I think our defense needs to play better.

Ban this guy for being so negative! ha

[wanderful]

 

 

 

 

I completely disagree, it's not a value assessment at all, it's just a pure evaluation of crappy performances. These same players were the second worst team of all time 8 games ago. Now they are only the 18th worst team. There's no way you can't say that's improvement.

Yeah, that's not how it works. You also have to take into account the quality of the competition.

 

 

So what you're saying is you want to make a statistical argument, except for when you don't like the conclusions, at which point you want to bring in the subjectivity of quality of team into the argument?

 

As you pointed out, SDSU, Ball State, and Wyoming are the list, as well as LA Tech, and 5-loss Wisconsin team. Those teams don't seem very good either.

 

No, it's because I understand that looking at numbers in a vacuum is bad. Giving up 7 ypp against scrubs is much worse than giving up 7 Ypp against a national title contender is slightly different. I think you missed that point.

 

 

But you don't know yet that BYU and Miami won't be national title contenders. You can make that argument at the end of the season and I would buy in with you 100%, but we're only 4 games in.

 

Do I think they're going to be National Title Contenders? No. But I also didn't think Ohio State would be either last year after the VT loss.

[Saunders]

 

 

 

 

 

I completely disagree, it's not a value assessment at all, it's just a pure evaluation of crappy performances. These same players were the second worst team of all time 8 games ago. Now they are only the 18th worst team. There's no way you can't say that's improvement.

Yeah, that's not how it works. You also have to take into account the quality of the competition.

 

 

So what you're saying is you want to make a statistical argument, except for when you don't like the conclusions, at which point you want to bring in the subjectivity of quality of team into the argument?

 

As you pointed out, SDSU, Ball State, and Wyoming are the list, as well as LA Tech, and 5-loss Wisconsin team. Those teams don't seem very good either.

 

No, it's because I understand that looking at numbers in a vacuum is bad. Giving up 7 ypp against scrubs is much worse than giving up 7 Ypp against a national title contender is slightly different. I think you missed that point.

 

 

But you don't know yet that BYU and Miami won't be national title contenders. You can make that argument at the end of the season and I would buy in with you 100%, but we're only 4 games in.

 

Do I think they're going to be National Title Contenders? No. But I also didn't think Ohio State would be either last year after the VT loss.

 

Byu has 2 losses, got shut out 31-0 in their last game, and could easily be 0-4.

 

Miami has Al Golden.

[Saunders]

 

Look a the teams on the list? I'm pretty sure BYU, S. Miss, and Miami would get skull drug by most of those teams (except SDSU, Wyoming, and Ball State).

 

 

I'm not so sure about that. Strictly speaking of the offenses rather than the entire team, BYU with Hill is pretty impressive. He was in the Hypseman talk a year ago before getting injured. He definitely would have been in the Hypseman talk this year if it weren't for an injury. BYU's offense with Hill was pretty darn impressive. Kayaa is already getting some love nationally. The kid is a player. Miami has oodles of speed and talent. If it weren't for a lack of quality coaching, Miami would probably find themselves ranked in the top 15.

 

Eh, I disagree. Only 4-5 finished unranked, and most were top ranked teams. BYU very likely has 2-3 more losses, and Miami, well they might squeak in the bottom.

[junior4949]

Everyone including BYU knew they were in trouble when Hill went down for the season against us. Bronco is a heck of a coach and rallied the troops with a victory against ranked Boise State, and they played UCLA who some have in the final four down to the wire. It's no surprise they're not the same team without Hill considering their backup just got back from his mission shortly before the season started. No one is arguing that Miami is going to struggle. They'll struggle due to pi$$ poor coaching rather than Kayaa's play and ability. However, Miami has a lot of speed and talent on offense. I don't think many can argue that.

[wanderful]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I completely disagree, it's not a value assessment at all, it's just a pure evaluation of crappy performances. These same players were the second worst team of all time 8 games ago. Now they are only the 18th worst team. There's no way you can't say that's improvement.

Yeah, that's not how it works. You also have to take into account the quality of the competition.

 

 

So what you're saying is you want to make a statistical argument, except for when you don't like the conclusions, at which point you want to bring in the subjectivity of quality of team into the argument?

 

As you pointed out, SDSU, Ball State, and Wyoming are the list, as well as LA Tech, and 5-loss Wisconsin team. Those teams don't seem very good either.

 

No, it's because I understand that looking at numbers in a vacuum is bad. Giving up 7 ypp against scrubs is much worse than giving up 7 Ypp against a national title contender is slightly different. I think you missed that point.

 

 

But you don't know yet that BYU and Miami won't be national title contenders. You can make that argument at the end of the season and I would buy in with you 100%, but we're only 4 games in.

 

Do I think they're going to be National Title Contenders? No. But I also didn't think Ohio State would be either last year after the VT loss.

 

Byu has 2 losses, got shut out 31-0 in their last game, and could easily be 0-4.

 

Miami has Al Golden.

 

 

I'm not saying you're going to be wrong come end of season, I'm just saying crazier things have happened in college football. Look at how we got into our last national championship game, for example. Or that Ohio State, with an early season loss and from a conference that common wisdom said was weak, ended up winning a National Championship.

 

We can't truly judge how good a team is 4 games in, so I don't think it's fair to use the supposed weakness of those teams to crucify our defensive coordinator, especially not 4 games in.

[Saunders]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I completely disagree, it's not a value assessment at all, it's just a pure evaluation of crappy performances. These same players were the second worst team of all time 8 games ago. Now they are only the 18th worst team. There's no way you can't say that's improvement.

Yeah, that's not how it works. You also have to take into account the quality of the competition.

 

 

So what you're saying is you want to make a statistical argument, except for when you don't like the conclusions, at which point you want to bring in the subjectivity of quality of team into the argument?

 

As you pointed out, SDSU, Ball State, and Wyoming are the list, as well as LA Tech, and 5-loss Wisconsin team. Those teams don't seem very good either.

 

No, it's because I understand that looking at numbers in a vacuum is bad. Giving up 7 ypp against scrubs is much worse than giving up 7 Ypp against a national title contender is slightly different. I think you missed that point.

 

 

But you don't know yet that BYU and Miami won't be national title contenders. You can make that argument at the end of the season and I would buy in with you 100%, but we're only 4 games in.

 

Do I think they're going to be National Title Contenders? No. But I also didn't think Ohio State would be either last year after the VT loss.

 

Byu has 2 losses, got shut out 31-0 in their last game, and could easily be 0-4.

 

Miami has Al Golden.

 

 

I'm not saying you're going to be wrong come end of season, I'm just saying crazier things have happened in college football. Look at how we got into our last national championship game, for example. Or that Ohio State, with an early season loss and from a conference that common wisdom said was weak, ended up winning a National Championship.

 

We can't truly judge how good a team is 4 games in.

 

I hear ya!