Tangent Thread - December 2015 Edition

[NUance]

Google team rankings if you want more stats.

Yeah, I've heard of Google. I just figured if you had actually looked it up you'd know right where to find it.

http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/rankings?doWhat=archive&sportCode=MFB

TURNOVER MARGIN (the stats start at 2012 in the link you provided)

2012

NU #105

OSU #27

2011

NU #67

OSU #100

2010

NU #62

OSU #35

2009

NU #33

OSU #31


2008

NU #107

OSU #58

Granted, Oregon State's turnover margin is nothing to write home about. Little better than average, I'd say. But out of the last five years Oregon State was better than Nebraska four out of five times in turnover margin. Am I reading this wrong, or is the data saying pretty much the opposite of your statement above? Or maybe it's because you cherry picked one stat (interceptions, but not fumbles) in one year to support your statement. Is that what it is, cm husker?

Can you point out where CM said that Pelini was NOT also plagued by poor turnover margins?

No. But I can point out where I said Riley is slightly better than average. Right up there. The bolded part.

Nice deflection, btw. Way to avoid the question.

:

 

[cm husker]

Google team rankings if you want more stats.

Yeah, I've heard of Google. I just figured if you had actually looked it up you'd know right where to find it.

Sorry, was on phone; meant "teamrankings.com."

I wasn't sure of the extention, so that's why I said google that exact phrase.

 

[cm husker]

Google team rankings if you want more stats.

Yeah, I've heard of Google. I just figured if you had actually looked it up you'd know right where to find it.

http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/rankings?doWhat=archive&sportCode=MFB

Granted, Oregon State's turnover margin is nothing to write home about. Little better than average, I'd say. But out of the last five years Oregon State was better than Nebraska four out of five times in turnover margin. Am I reading this wrong, or is the data saying pretty much the opposite of your statement above? Or maybe it's because you cherry picked one stat (interceptions, but not fumbles) in one year to support your statement. Is that what it is, cm husker?

This has nothing to do with Pelini. But his teams won 9+ games a season despite those margins (I have theories on why).

No single stat paints a whole picture, but as I said, Riley's teams have been plagued by turnovers.

This year is not the product of a "mule"; it's part of a long pattern of first year QBs struggling mightly in Riley's system.

 

[cm husker]

Another issue is that Oregon State was often going three and out and other similarly short possessions.

One stat we could pull is the number of turnovers per snap, particularly rushing snap, because we know they weren't a run focused team.

 

[NUance]

No single stat paints a whole picture, but as I said, Riley's teams have been plagued by turnovers.

This year is not the product of a "mule"; it's part of a long pattern of first year QBs struggling mightly in Riley's system.

"Plagued" by turnovers? Okay, I only looked at the last five years for Oregon State, but was it much worse before that? Because they averaged 50th in the nation over that five year span. Sure, that's nothing to brag about. But it's right around the 40th percentile. So I guess that means that 60% of the teams in the nation were "plagued" by turnovers.

 

[RADAR]

I think the biggest issue with Read, is that it's literally his only job, and for $500k, we wanted VT level special teams units. Bo's special teams units were farmed out to different assistant, and were actually pretty good most of his tenure, except the disastrous 2013 season where we could barely catch a punt. IIRC, they were in Phil Steele's top 10 ST units 5 of 7 seasons (one of the few places to track that stuff), and we routinely had good kicking and coverage units. The return units were decent to good most years too. 2015 wasn't that bad, other than our kick return unit, which was non-existent until Stanly Morgan got the nod. That said, Brown got better, and we did get a bit better in the return units over the year.

That is what bothers me the most. I think we are getting very little bang for the buck with him. How is he as a recruiter?

Was going to bring this up. He appears to basically be a non-factor in recruiting - other than recruiting kickers, punters and long-snappers. Kickers are people too but that means he's probably only recruiting one guy per year (on average).

Can't remember which prominent new-hire head coach said this in the last week but he said he hires an OC, a DC and an OL coach. For the rest of the assistants, if you can't recruit, you don't work for him. Seems like a pretty good strategy to me.

That was Will Muschamp, who just got hired at South Carolina.

Damn, Bo might never make it back to D1, he does not have a single commit yet and it is mid December. Some things never change.

 

[GBRedneck]

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out in this game.

I think that UCLA will have no problem piling up points against NU's D. I think Rosen picks Banker's D apart. The only way NU keeps it close is if the offense keeps scoring with them, like NU did against Michigan State.

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out. Thinking we'll lose, yes.

Right. No basis whatsoever to think the Huskers will get blown out. Just like back in August when there was no basis whatsoever to think the Huskers would have a losing season.

 

[Mierin]

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out in this game.

I think that UCLA will have no problem piling up points against NU's D. I think Rosen picks Banker's D apart. The only way NU keeps it close is if the offense keeps scoring with them, like NU did against Michigan State.

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out. Thinking we'll lose, yes.

Right. No basis whatsoever to think the Huskers will get blown out. Just like back in August when there was no basis whatsoever to think the Huskers would have a losing season.

How do you figure? We hadn't played a game yet with the new staff.

We haven't been blown out this year. We could get blown out by UCLA but nothing that has happened this season indicates that will happen.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out in this game.

I think that UCLA will have no problem piling up points against NU's D. I think Rosen picks Banker's D apart. The only way NU keeps it close is if the offense keeps scoring with them, like NU did against Michigan State.

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out. Thinking we'll lose, yes.

Right. No basis whatsoever to think the Huskers will get blown out. Just like back in August when there was no basis whatsoever to think the Huskers would have a losing season.

How do you figure? We hadn't played a game yet with the new staff.

We haven't been blown out this year. We could get blown out by UCLA but nothing that has happened this season indicates that will happen.

The Miami game was a blowout for 3 quarters, and then they went brain dead, and let NU back in it.

Purdue was also a blowout, until NU put up some late points in the 4th quarter. It's a fallacy to say that NU wasn't blown out in any games this year.

 

[Mierin]

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out in this game.

I think that UCLA will have no problem piling up points against NU's D. I think Rosen picks Banker's D apart. The only way NU keeps it close is if the offense keeps scoring with them, like NU did against Michigan State.

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out. Thinking we'll lose, yes.

Right. No basis whatsoever to think the Huskers will get blown out. Just like back in August when there was no basis whatsoever to think the Huskers would have a losing season.

How do you figure? We hadn't played a game yet with the new staff.

We haven't been blown out this year. We could get blown out by UCLA but nothing that has happened this season indicates that will happen.

The Miami game was a blowout for 3 quarters, and then they went brain dead, and let NU back in it.

Purdue was also a blowout, until NU put up some late points in the 4th quarter. It's a fallacy to say that NU wasn't blown out in any games this year.

Until is a pretty important word, eh? The Miami game went to OT. Anyone who says that game was a blow out is a moron.

 

[Red_October]

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out in this game.

I think that UCLA will have no problem piling up points against NU's D. I think Rosen picks Banker's D apart. The only way NU keeps it close is if the offense keeps scoring with them, like NU did against Michigan State.

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out. Thinking we'll lose, yes.

Right. No basis whatsoever to think the Huskers will get blown out. Just like back in August when there was no basis whatsoever to think the Huskers would have a losing season.

How do you figure? We hadn't played a game yet with the new staff.

We haven't been blown out this year. We could get blown out by UCLA but nothing that has happened this season indicates that will happen.

The Miami game was a blowout for 3 quarters, and then they went brain dead, and let NU back in it.

Purdue was also a blowout, until NU put up some late points in the 4th quarter. It's a fallacy to say that NU wasn't blown out in any games this year.

That shows spunk and desire,,fighting back

 

[teachercd]

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out in this game.

I think that UCLA will have no problem piling up points against NU's D. I think Rosen picks Banker's D apart. The only way NU keeps it close is if the offense keeps scoring with them, like NU did against Michigan State.

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out. Thinking we'll lose, yes.

Right. No basis whatsoever to think the Huskers will get blown out. Just like back in August when there was no basis whatsoever to think the Huskers would have a losing season.

How do you figure? We hadn't played a game yet with the new staff.

We haven't been blown out this year. We could get blown out by UCLA but nothing that has happened this season indicates that will happen.

The Miami game was a blowout for 3 quarters, and then they went brain dead, and let NU back in it.

Purdue was also a blowout, until NU put up some late points in the 4th quarter. It's a fallacy to say that NU wasn't blown out in any games this year.

Until is a pretty important word, eh? The Miami game went to OT. Anyone who says that game was a blow out is a moiraine.

And the Purdue game?!?!?!

 

[Mierin]

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out in this game.

I think that UCLA will have no problem piling up points against NU's D. I think Rosen picks Banker's D apart. The only way NU keeps it close is if the offense keeps scoring with them, like NU did against Michigan State.

There's no basis for thinking we'll get blown out. Thinking we'll lose, yes.

Right. No basis whatsoever to think the Huskers will get blown out. Just like back in August when there was no basis whatsoever to think the Huskers would have a losing season.

How do you figure? We hadn't played a game yet with the new staff.

We haven't been blown out this year. We could get blown out by UCLA but nothing that has happened this season indicates that will happen.

The Miami game was a blowout for 3 quarters, and then they went brain dead, and let NU back in it.

Purdue was also a blowout, until NU put up some late points in the 4th quarter. It's a fallacy to say that NU wasn't blown out in any games this year.

Until is a pretty important word, eh? The Miami game went to OT. Anyone who says that game was a blow out is a moiraine.

And the Purdue game?!?!?!

The Purdue game wasn't a blow out either. The fact that they're a terrible team doesn't make it more of a blow out. That's not to say the loss wasn't awful. And no, I didn't say it was a blow out. Thanks.

 

[teachercd]

Favored by 8.5 and lost by 10?

That is probably a blowout.

 

[Mierin]

Favored by 8.5 and lost by 10?

That is probably a blowout.

Vegas odds have sh#t all to do with whether the results of game were a blow out or not.