brophog Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 51 minutes ago, Making Chimichangas said: I think there will only be "grumbles" about running back by committee if there is no production to speak of. If each RB is averaging 5-6 (or more) yards a pop, I doubt any one will care. This isn't a "Rozier gets 40 carries a game" offense, either. Too much of its strength comes from forcing a defense to consider all of the possibilities. As to production, this staff means it when they say every day is competition day. Who plays game 1 may not be who plays game 8. That's where it's huge that Bryant and Washington are now available. There's now competition that forces everyone to get better, and if you're not cutting it (see last year), there are now options. Riley, by his own failure to correct roster issues, was forced to overuse the one back that was productive. 2 Quote Link to comment
Scarlet Overkill Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 Maybe worth mentioning, maybe not, but a UCF fan did analytics on what personnel was used and the success rate. He mentioned that when there were 2 back sets, it was successful 60% of the time. Now, I don't know what percentage of time there were two backs, but don't be shocked if we see it. http://power6analytics.com/breaking-down-ucfs-2017-success-and-what-to-expect-in-2018-using-analytics/ 2 Quote Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 3 minutes ago, Dilly Dilly said: Maybe worth mentioning, maybe not, but a UCF fan did analytics on what personnel was used and the success rate. He mentioned that when there were 2 back sets, it was successful 60% of the time. Now, I don't know what percentage of time there were two backs, but don't be shocked if we see it. http://power6analytics.com/breaking-down-ucfs-2017-success-and-what-to-expect-in-2018-using-analytics/ 2 running backs is Personnel #20 and #21. The first # indicates the number of running backs. So 17.77% of the time. The 2nd # is the # of TEs. 3 Quote Link to comment
brophog Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 A huge consideration in that analysis is he is considering Otis Anderson as a running back, not a receiver. This is also a look at personnel and not formation. Very important distinctions in this offense. 1 Quote Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 minute ago, brophog said: A huge consideration in that analysis is he is considering Otis Anderson as a running back, not a receiver. This is also a look at personnel and not formation. Very important distinctions in this offense. If he wanted to be obsessive about it (and wasn't) he would look at whether the WR/RB ran a route or ran the ball/was faked to. Quote Link to comment
The Dude Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 If Washington doesn't start, we riot. 3 Quote Link to comment
brophog Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 minute ago, Moiraine said: If he wanted to be obsessive about it (and wasn't) he would look at whether the WR/RB ran a route or ran the ball/was faked to. That gets into NFL territory where pay is based on position in a game that is becoming more and more positionless. There have been such tedious analysis, especially on positions like TE/WR or DE/LB. At some point it becomes useless semantics. Quote Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 minute ago, The Dude said: If Washington doesn't start, we riot. lol Quote Link to comment
Scarlet Overkill Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 31 minutes ago, Moiraine said: 2 running backs is Personnel #20 and #21. The first # indicates the number of running backs. So 17.77% of the time. The 2nd # is the # of TEs. Thanks. I am far too lazy tonight. Quote Link to comment
Huskers93-97 Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 Someone just fire urban Meyer already 3 Quote Link to comment
Xmas32 Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 8 hours ago, ADS said: 2 Quote Link to comment
admo Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 10 hours ago, Mavric said: Cool. I can't say I know anything about Wash, but the speed sounds good for us (Frost's offense). I believe the lead carrier will come down to Bell and Bryant. This trio should solidify the backfield. Agree? Quote Link to comment
Huskers93-97 Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 22 minutes ago, admo said: Cool. I can't say I know anything about Wash, but the speed sounds good for us (Frost's offense). I believe the lead carrier will come down to Bell and Bryant. This trio should solidify the backfield. Agree? I think those 3 are all 3 great options to feel good about making plays when it’s their turn to be in the game. But I think if your rating the most natural talent in the room it’s washington. He is the youngest and newest to the program so maybe at the start of the season he is not the starter while he catches up. But by seasons end or for sure next season he is #1 on depth chart Quote Link to comment
NoLongerN Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 I love Wash ... but I was still hoping he would play the last four games of the year so he doesn't use a year of eligibility. This might end up being a silly view. :-) Quote Link to comment
runningblind Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 6 hours ago, NUance said: Not sure that he'll be the starter. But he's earned the right to a nickname. I'm thinking: MoWa. 7 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.