Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

How’s this for analytics?


WarHeel
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, WarHeel said:

I think that’s kind of the point of the stat. There probably aren’t any other schools that have had 20+ seasons of SB contenders. Hence the comparison.

but there is no comparison because you didn't contextualize those numbers lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems a little more interesting. The colleges with the most players this year. Instead of trends from 20 years ago this focuses on now.

Georgia not in the top 22

https://thespun.com/more/top-stories/colleges-super-bowl-rosters-chiefs-bucs

 

And 2020: (though having the Chiefs again would just tend to cause some common schools)

https://www.ncaa.com/news/article/2020-02-02/2020-super-bowl-rosters-colleges-49ers-and-chiefs-players

Edited by Moo Daeng
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, PhillyB said:

but there is no comparison because you didn't contextualize those numbers lol

I’ll defer to someone with more time on their hands to investigate what the hundreds of other colleges and universities are doing in context of consecutive SB appearances but I doubt there are many with this particular stat. Regardless, it’s an interesting stat and one that I’m sure Tepper and co. might be interested in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

I think he was pointing out that 2 numbers aren't analytics. Maybe an interesting anecdote though.

I mean if we are arguing semantics sure. If the stat followed up with “no other teams have this production” then I think it’s a different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WarHeel said:

I mean if we are arguing semantics sure. If the stat followed up with “no other teams have this production” then I think it’s a different story.

but Georgia isn't even in the top 20 this or last year so that they had 1 or so this year or what happened 20 years ago isn't a very relevant analysis. It's pretty much just counting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Moo Daeng said:

but Georgia isn't even in the top 20 this or last year so that they had 1 or so this year or what happened 20 years ago isn't a very relevant analysis. It's pretty much just counting.

Could be just a rare coincidence. But SEC teams like GA and LSU are at least in the conversation of competing each year. It’s an impressive stat and if it assists with draft logic then great. One could argue relevance to the topic as it dates back so far but it’s a telling stat for program success and if I’m scouting impactful players that could get me to a SB I think this has its relevance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

If the question is "How's this for analytics?". My honest answer would be that it's rather weak or useless.

Fair enough. It was more of a playful title as we are in the midst of draft discussion, era of a new GM, and Tepper loves his “analytics.” I’ll make sure to do a paragraph long title next time like most folks on here to really drive the point across.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah it is wasted for everyone. Even AT, who he fed, felt like it was wasted. Was done with it.  The resources…  surely as a long term Panthers, he put it on a side track that does not lead anywhere but right back where we were. If we had healthy CBs vs TB in ‘22 we could have gotten into the playoffs with a losing record. We essentially blew all of that time, money and assets to do a 360. 3 fuging years.    Now we are supposed to wait 5 years for him to make mid. Top 15 ranking. I am not sure they would have waited 5 years for Joe Montana. You think Belichick waits 5 years for Brady? Not me. And we are in the era of the cheap slotted salary for drat picks era, where it is supposed to be easier to move on. You have to want to though and you have to be in charge with a clue.  He has had flashes that lasted a whole game, a couple of times. I could stretch that to 4 maybe but I am not even sure of that. Maybe. He has had substantially more flashes that lasted a half or quarter, and all that combined doesn’t stack as high as his weak performances.  It is maddening.       
    • Well, I guess we know which team showed up.
    • Here is how I see it...You can talk to the QB until 15 seconds before the play clock expires.  There are reasons to believe that Canales is spending a lot of time gathering information from those in better position to make the decisions.  Have you noticed how often we break the huddle between 15 and 13 seconds remaining?  I have a theory... 1. Canales is on the sideline.  His view of the field is not as good as the OC, who is sitting in the box in the sky--he can see the defense, spacing, substitutions, etc.  This means that Canales must get information from up top before selecting a play. 2. Canales has to spend time during the week with the defense, special teams, etc. in addition to the offense.  The OC is with the offense all week.  He knows the plays that were run well in practice--he knows the nicks and dings they might be complaining about--he knows their questions and input about certain plays, formations, etc.  Canales may be aware, but not AS aware.  In other words, his hand is not on the pulse as much as the OC.  It is likely that, during the week, the OC is the person answering questions and making decisions.  On Sunday, Canales steps in and makes less informed decisions. 3.  Canales likes the moniker "QB whisperer."  He may feel more confident being the voice in Bryce's helmet because he is Bryce's mentor.  Maybe he has a calming effect and maybe he thinks he can keep Bryce focused.  MAYBE he is not the best play caller, but he calls plays and mentors Bryce.  Maybe that is why he calls plays. Just a theory--but Canales could be the play caller because Bryce is the QB and he is trying to literally whisper into the QB ear.
×
×
  • Create New...