Do the statistics even matter? If history is any predictor, Virginia Tech will do worse than expected and probably lose because East Carolina.
But is this Pirates squad the same caliber as the one that upset the Hokies last season? Gone is American Conference Offensive Player of the Year quarterback Shane Carden, and WR targets Justin Hardy (121 catches, 1,494 yards, 10 TDs in 2014) and Cam Worthy (55 catches, 1,016 yards, 4 TDs in 2014). In their place are newcomers that have come within a touchdown of Florida, but also let Towson within 8, and have failed to break 28 points in a game. So should we expect the same efficient passing offense as in the past, or can Hokie Nation finally enter this game with a little more confidence?
Where the Season Stands
Virginia Tech is currently 2-1. The actual and predicted score difference and odds of winning each game are:
The Hokies are favored in all but two games over the rest of the schedule, but this is based on just a few games. The stretch from NC State through Boston College will largely determine how much luck affects Tech's win total for the season. Statistically, the most likely outcome is 3-1 over those four games (NC State, Miami, Duke, Boston College), but no game is overwhelmingly in one team's favor. 0-4 and 4-0 are completely plausible.
The odds of each possible regular season win total are now:
To state the obvious, as the season progresses the simulated win totals will converge more with actual wins. As it stands now, there is about a 77% chance of a 7-9 win season. Missing out on a bowl is a small probability, and a 10-win season is on the table too. For the dreamers, there is a 1.1% chance of running the table and being an ACC Championship Game win away from a likely playoff spot. (A sole loss to Ohio State in a season opener which the starting quarterback was injured while the game was competitive would be quickly forgiven by the committee unless the wins are all close from here on out.)
A week or two ago I'd be making an argument that Tech's projected win total should be higher, as ratings are based on two games from a backup quarterback and Michael Brewer will return in a few weeks. However, as we will see below, any argument that our passing offense stands to gain upon his return is baseless at the moment.
Rankings and Computer Predictions
The computer rankings and predictions for each team:
I was tempted to make the case that this is a more comfortable margin than in years past against ECU, but then I looked back on 2014 when computers predicted about the same margin. Of course that doesn't mean they were wrong, so much as it's confirmation that a 10-15 point margin is far from a sure thing. In fact, it is within one standard deviation of an upset. The odds of an 8.5-point favorite winning are 73.6%.
Next is a look at any overall offensive or defensive advantages:
Ignore that middle panel for a minute and focus on the left. At this point in the season, Virginia Tech has a higher-rated offense than East Carolina and it's not particularly close. Just soak that in for a bit, and we'll get back to it below in more detail.
That was nice. Now let's move to the middle. The Hokies' defense is above average to be sure, but has not yet been the elite unit anticipated before the season. This is only based on two games (with some preseason rating still having weight), but Saturday would be a great time for the Lunchpail Defense to step up. Ohio State's sudden mortality on offense is not helping Bud's defense look dominant.
When Virginia Tech Has the Ball
Here is an explanation of S&P+ ratings, and FEI ratings. All statistics are now opponent-adjusted.
Who has the advantage in the passing and rushing game when the Tech offense has the ball?
This chart indeed shows Virginia Tech has not just good, but ELITE, passing and standard down offenses. And yes, the numbers have been verified. How does a team that has not racked up eye-popping numbers rank No. 2 in passing offense? Consider that this is based partially on a preseason projection, and then just two games — Ohio State and Purdue. Purdue is rated the No. 50 passing defense. Even though Virginia Tech only attempted 26 passes in the game, they completed over 60% of them, for a solid 9 yards per attempt (only 11 teams in FBS are giving up more than that on the season). More significant is the Brewer/Motley performance against Ohio State — now the No. 1 passing defense in the nation. Against Hawai'i and Northern Illinois, the Buckeyes' defense allowed on average 38% of passes to be completed for 3.8 yards per attempt and a quarterback rating of 48.
Against Virginia Tech? 60% for 7.7 YPA and a rating of 156.11.
I'm not buying that the rating stays elite for the remainder of the season, but I'm buying that those numbers get you the No. 2 rating at this point.
Given that East Carolina has a fairly pedestrian defense across the board, I'm anticipating Motley and company will have at least moderate success against the Pirates with the possibility of an outright points explosion.
When East Carolina Has the Ball
Again, examine pass-run comparisons first:
It's safe to say this is not business as usual in the Hokies-Pirates series. The East Carolina offense looks somewhat average so far, but so does the Virginia Tech defense. The weakness in the Hokies' defense thus far has been stopping the run, and even if they have not been dominant this year, the Pirates' offense is as pass-happy as ever. Will ECU lean to the run more given the struggles Tech has had stopping it thus far? We will find out Saturday.
Who To Watch Out For
As I mentioned above, there are some new faces on the East Carolina side. However, they fit a similar mold: an efficient passing offense that I like to compare to an aerial version of Georgia Tech. The quarterback gets the ball out quickly on short routes and last year's matchup excepted, they are not reliant on big explosive plays to score.
- Senior TE Bryce Williams is 6-6 and a clear red zone target — the Pirates will almost certainly target him on jump balls or fades near the end zone.
- QB Blake Kemp will be a major part of their offense simply by being the quarterback. He is completing over 70% of passes on the season, and has attempted nearly 50 passes per game.
- Sophomore ILB Jordan Williams is second on the team in tackles and leads the team with 2.5 TFL
Statistical Key to the Game
It would be easy to react to last year's matchup and worry about the long completions, but I still don't believe that is the key to this game, just as I didn't last year. An injured Brandon Facyson was attacked last year, and I don't foresee that being a problem again this year. Just as you slow down Georgia Tech by getting them into situations where they need big yardage, you slow down ECU by forcing them to run longer routes that are slower to develop. The best way to do that is force incompletions, so limiting completion percentage to under 60% will give Virginia Tech a substantial defensive advantage.
Statistical Prediction
I know, I know...East Carolina always plays well against the Hokies... and stats don't matter... and remember 2008? They beat Tech last year at home too, and you can shut up now. This is my article.
East Carolina leans to the rush more as Foster's defense limits their passing attack. They have some success, and finish with 191 yards in the air and 151 on the ground. Brenden Motley keeps the offensive momentum going in the air and on the ground. He eventually takes the game over, and Tech finishes with 311 yards in the air and 234 on the ground. That's what the stats say and who am I to argue?
Virginia Tech 41, East Carolina 24
As always a thanks to Football Outsiders, cfbstats.com, and Minitab Statistical Software.
Comments
How will the stat line look at the VT defense if anOSU keeps playing like garbage against what is supposed to be subpar teams?
Not really answering your question, but I think OSU has hit the snooze button on their season. After the "marquee" revenge game against us, their players are probably just going through the motions with no other big games to look forward to until MSU. Complacency has become a big issue in Cbus IMO. I wouldn't be surprised to see them drop one in the next couple weeks.
That's mostly what's limiting our defense rating right now...after the game it didn't seem terrible, but considering their offense hasn't been able to do the same against teams that are mediocre at best, it's making our performance look pretty bad. We need Purdue to become an offensive juggernaut to counter the OSU anchor!
I'm thinking that game (in hindsight) is leaning more and more in our favor had Brewer not gone down.
Can you do reverse statistics and predict possible alternate past outcomes, taking into account recent results? (if my question makes any sense, good on you, if not, I'm not really sure I understood it either)
Good question...the answer is sort of. I could run my own ratings system and REALLY do it, but relying on others the downside is that to do it you use ratings, and the ratings will include the result of that game. Ideally you'd exclude that game and calculate the ratings and then see what the ratings predict. So right now I'd say based on ratings we'd be about a 14-point underdog still but I wouldn't put much weight in that since that game alone is half of our rating.
Wow, the stats are quite generous me thinks. Also, the stats probably didn't include weather as a factor. Slippery might make it difficult to rack up that many yards.
Weather is not factored in but come on and roll with it.
Two words:
"excellent drainage with irrigation lines and a vacuum system that can handle up to 16 inches of rain an hour."
...and after learning to count, NavyEMC then tackled geography and the meaning of "away".
Three more words.
Drunk Drivers Ahead
Things that don't make sense:
Our offense statistically being...good.
Our defense statistically being...not good.
Computer Polls Pointshare ranking us at 82nd and Nutshell having us at 12th (huh?!)
Pointshare is a joke (http://pointshare.webs.com/ncaafootballrankings.htm) that I'm surprised is even considered a legitimate system. They have Virginia 26th.
Nutshell (http://www.nutshellsports.com/ncaafb.html) is a little more legitimate but definitely high on the Hokies. Still some wacky ratings in there but as least reading through you see that good teams are near the top and bad teams near the bottom.
The Prediction Tracker season results at http://www.thepredictiontracker.com/ncaaresults.php still have Nutsheel as one of the least accurate models, and they don't include Pointshare which would have to be the worst.
Yeah, I went to each of their sites after I saw the spread of the computer polls and was shocked. Pointshare has Ohio State at 27 (I can see a slip due to not meeting expectations and really other polls are based on perception, not performance, but that's the lowest of all computers). Nutshell has GT at #3. I will never understand computer polls.
It would be helpful if every computer poll would post their method clearly to their website instead of just saying "here are my rankings". I've made a ranking system that I don't post online but if I did I would do my best to make sure that it was explained in a way that anyone could understand so people could judge for themselves whether it seems reasonable or not.
but then you can't cheat and lie to get your way
#BCS
I always assume that any unstated system is "at the end of the season, my algorithm looks at other systems and assigns ranks similarly."
Seriously! I have been thinking this for years. I never understood why the BCS computer rankings were always kept a mystery. If they had released the algorithm, then people could agree or disagree with the method.
As I was writing this I figured out exactly why they didn't release it. They probably generated a lot of ad revenue money for each of the BCS rankings release shows on prime time... ugh.
I can give some background here...
The computer ratings they users weren't actually created by the BCS. They were existing ratings, such as Sagarin's that appear in USA Today, that the BCS felt were credible. The whole idea was that humans might be biased and computer ratings would be naturally unbiased so it would provide some "correction" and credibility.
Well after a few seasons they realized that the computers - which used different algorithms - would tend to agree by the end of the season but in some higher profile cases did not agree with the humans. Under the idea of the system, it was working perfectly because the humans obviously had some bias causing them to incorrectly evaluate certain teams (often overweighting a close win against a good team). Their response, which is absurd, was to reduce the weight of computers from 2/3 of the overall BCS ranking to 1/3, and to ban the computers from taking score differential into account.
More absurd is that every human on there would use score differential, and removing an obviously important component like that made those ratings much less accurate. At that point many rating systems started publishing two - for example, at the time Sagarin started posting what he called "ELO CHESS" as his BCS rating and PREDICTOR as his personal rating. He openly stated on his webpage that PREDICTOR was more accurate but he created ELO CHESS to be compliant with the BCS.
In any event, it wasn't for ad revenue...all of the ratings were posted on their creator's website before BCS ratings were announced each week so the computer portion was open knowledge. It was the human portion really being released.
...And this is the real reason killer robots from the future keep coming back to try and kill Sarah Conor.
It's almost as if three weeks of stats makes for a small sample space.
shots fired!
Clearly that's not the case. /s
Instead of being snarky about it, you could try to explain your position better. If I understood your point correctly, you were saying that 2.5 games, one of which was against a FCS opponent, proves that Motley is a QB of a higher standard than the 6 ACC QB's I listed (Thomas, Kaaya, Golson, Brissett, Williams, Watson). To double down, you are saying that 2 qtrs of "Better Brewer" proves that he is also of that same higher standard. Maybe you are right, it was a good 2 qtrs, but you have to consider his entire body of work. Same with Motley, he looks good, but your data is 10 qtrs old. I don't feel like digging up the stats for all 6 of those QB's, but besides Watson (who looks and plays awesome), those other five have more than a full year of starting under their belts.
My contention was that Brewer/Motley are at best avg ACC QB's (which I would quantify as being ranked 5th through 9th in a 14 team league). That seems like a very fair position to take.
Your contention, I believe, is that they are way higher than 5th based on 10 and 2 qtrs worth of work. I question the validity of that sample size. Wouldn't Foster's defense being ranked so poorly be representative of how invalid that sample size is?
This doesn't sound like a contentious discussion to me. It seems pretty clear, so maybe I am fundamentally misunderstanding your point.
I was only perusing the debate in the other thread and I don't really have a dog in this fight but I'm getting the sense that this is coming down to semantics. I think your use of the word "clearly" when stating your opinion made it sound like what you were saying was fact. If you take all of the history of each player out of the picture and look purely at the stats for this season Motley and Brewer are currently performing at a higher level than other QBs in the league. Granted, it's a small sample size but I think that is what they are trying to point out. Statistically, Brewer and Motley are lighting it up this year. I really don't think it's fair to say that they clearly are or clearly are not middle-of-the-pack QBs...Take what you will from their stats through 2 and 10 quarters. Everyone here would probably agree that it's hardly indicative of what their stats will look like at the end of the season. We all know that the competition will get much tougher and those stats will dip as we get through the remainder of our schedule. At the same time, it's encouraging that they're not putting up avg numbers against less-than-stellar competition.
Okay, thanks for the reply. I try to always be as quantifiable as possible and minimize the interpretations. In the future, I will state that it is my opinion. It just seems "clear" and "factual" that those 6 QB's have had superior careers. Maybe it is a factor of negative images of Golson and Williams. To address the other four, nobody is probably arguing Brissett and Watson (even though Watson's SS is rather S, but his talent is not). Kaaya had one year starting last year in a brand new system (he arrived in August, just like Brewer) and was superior to Brewer across the board. Thomas is a totally different type of QB, but is really, really good at what he does. But Golson and Williams leave a bad taste in peoples mouths. Seems like they do just enough to lose and/or they fail in big spots.
But look at their careers. Williams has accounted for 66 TD's and 19INT's. He's accounted for like 6500 yards. He's Tyrod Taylor (67 TD's, 20 Ints, 9300 yds). Golson lead his team to #2 in the country. Again, big stats: 54 TD's, 20 Ints, 6300 yards. Tyrod 'esque.
Foster's defense is ranking poorly. That should flavor all Hokies opinions that the SSS nature of 3 games (one against an FCS opponent) is really incomplete data. To state that Motley/Brewer are in the top 6 ACC QB's seems to me to be at best projection, at worst fanboy optimism.
I'm not trying to discount anything that you're saying and I will agree that other players have historically performed at a higher level than Brewer/Motley so realistically they are better QBs based on their overall careers. But when you look at just this season in a vacuum it appears that Brewer/Motley are the creme of the crop when you look at just the raw numbers. Perhaps that means they have taken much bigger steps forward than those other QBs and could theoretically challenge them for positioning on the ACC QB Totem Pole, if you will. Neither side of this issue will be substantiated until the end of the season so at this very point in time it isn't actually clear which QBs are at the top and which ones are at the bottom for this season. The expectations are that the QBs who were really good last year will also be really good this year and that the QBs who were just okay last year will continue to be just okay this year. As of right now, is it not possible that Brewer/Motley made significant progress through the off-season and could exceed expectations this year? Is it not possible that, despite having mediocre seasons last year, they both could have grown and improved to the point that they could rival those other QBs at the top of the league this year? I think those who are on the opposite side of the fence from you are hopeful optimists looking at their stats through 3 games and wondering, admittedly in a homer-ish way, if maybe, just maybe, Brewer/Motley are actually decent-good QBs. I imagine that you are more of a big-picture-realist and you're tempering your expectations. There is nothing wrong with either approach IMO. It is just 2 different ways of looking at the QB situation.
It's kind of a silly debate since no one really knows what will happen through the rest of the season but it's hard not to be encouraged and hopeful that maybe something clicked and these QBs that we have are actually going to be pretty good. If we rely purely on history we're only looking at half of the picture. If historical stats dictated future performances all of these games could be decided on paper and there would be no reason to play them. It's a small sample size against not-so-great competition but the stats that we have to this point through this season are at the very least encouraging. Will our QBs have a great statistical season this year? Who knows? History says no. Stats through 3 games says yes. Let them play and we'll see what happens.
Here's hoping they keep lighting it up.
Go Hokies!!
It's funny, I can see your line of thinking. It is readily apparent to me how you see your position as the rational one. Yes, Mot/Brewer could have improved to be greater than those other 6. That is a very real possibility. I can even craft the narratives that explain that: VT healthier, VT Loeffler Season 3, FSU less skill talent, UNC underpeforming as ever, Thomas injured, Watson injured, Brissett overrated last year, Kaaya overrated last year. It's all there.
To me, you do have to lean on the past performance. As demonstrated, those other 6 QB's started at a higher baseline than Motley/Brewer. Very real chance they improved as well. If two objects start on different baselines, the object starting on the lower baseline must improve at a greater rate to make up the difference. I find that hard to assume. It's possible. Not as likely as both entities improving at a similar rate that their past experience, talent level and coaching would project.
And 10 qtrs (certainly not 2 qtrs) isn't enough to establish that rate of improvement as anything more than a thin-slice.
The hard part is deciding when SSS becomes SS. I'm a baseball fan, so when the Red Sox start poorly in April, it's SSS. In May, it's still SSS. When you get to July, it's SS. As Dennis Green famously said, "You are what your record says you are." As I said after the Feerruman game, you get nothing from that. It was a skeleton drill. If it's pouring down rain in Greenville this weekend and Mot goes 4 for 13 for 39 yards, you won't get anything from that either.
I hope you guys are right and that we have "above avg QB play." Luckily, we don't even need it. If the SSS noise that says our defense is bad is corrected, avg QB play is sufficient to win a lot of games.
I don't think it's a linear progression though. I think you have to assume it is asymptotic because every athlete will eventually plateau. A Quarterback can improve on 25% accuracy a lot more easily than 95% accuracy. If two players start at different baselines there is more room for improvement for the player starting at the lower baseline but it is also more likely they'll make up that ground because the player starting at the higher baseline is going to have a harder time improving upon their own stats.
If you threw 100 passes and completed 90 of them what is the likelihood you could repeat that? If you threw 100 passes and completed 20 of them what is the likelihood that you could double your production? The player at the lower baseline will have an easier time increasing his completion percentage twofold than the person at the higher baseline will have to just meet his original benchmark.
This comment is condescending which I don't appreciate. I think you're misunderstanding what I am trying to say. Do I think that Brewer/Motley are better than the ACC QBs who finished at the top of the statistical columns in previous years? No. Do I completely disregard the stats that they have accrued thus far this season because it's such a small sample size? No. I look at those stats as an indicator that there was improvement in the off season but I also take them with a grain of salt because of all the other factors at play (and yes, that does include the context of their historical performances). I don't think you can say that at this very moment in time it is clear they are inferior to their counterparts, like you suggest, based solely on the logic that they were at such a low baseline before that they can't possibly have improved more than the other QBs. I also don't think you can say that at this very moment in time it is clear they are equal to or even superior to their peers. What I do believe can be said, however, is that they have showed more signs of improvement than their peers and I think it can be reasonably hypothesized that they have, at the very least, closed the gap between themselves and the QBs at the top of the totem pole.
You seem to be hung up on the idea that everyone thinks Brewer/Motley are suddenly world-beaters of QBs based solely on what they've done in extremely limited time and you just can't swallow that because their performances have to be considered with the context of previous seasons. That isn't at all what I'm getting out of the debate. I don't think anybody is saying that Brewer/Motley are magically ten times better than they were last year. Just look at their stats this season alone and you'll see that they are doing better than everyone expected so far. Let's hope they can build on their performances and finish this year in a better place than they finished last year.
Well, I was honestly just trying to have a bit of banter with someone who was referencing our conversation from the other thread, acknowledging I got the joke. It was more a nudge and a wink at the reference, rather than a jab at you. Sorry if you interpreted it this way.
Honestly, thanks for the explanation. I think you were trying to say this exact same thing over on that thread, but it kept cutting you off after you typed "Motley." I noticed it happened twice. Weirdness.
I knew all along you were tossing the sample size because it was so small, which is honestly understandable. I just wanted some clarification on why you said the other QBs were "clearly" better than Brewer and Motley. You've provided that. But I do disagree with using previous seasons to carry over claims about this season. Performance fluctuates year over year. See: Jones, Cardale. And it's doubly difficult to make firm statements about Motley's ranking in the ACC, because this is his first season of significant starting time. Sure, the argument that gets thrown around on here is that Brewer was clearly the better QB in the spring, and that's true. But there are some players who flourish in live game situations, and Motley might be one of those.
But again, thanks for clarifying your position. I know get where you're coming from, even if I don't see eye to eye with you on it.
Agreed, and like your position on Loeffler, I hope you are right. I really like what I've seen from Motley (I'm not a huge Brewer fan, he's gutsy but limited). Mot has a big arm, looks good in the pocket and I don't think we've seen what he can do on the ground yet. I'm trying to think of a comp, all I can think of is RG3 but Mot isn't that quick....but more powerful. Troy Smith?
By the way, Cardale is a classic example of how invalid a 3-game set of stats can be (winky face emoji)
For REAL. But good lord, who would have thought THAT three game set was unreliable? Perhaps Jones needs the hype to rise to the occasion and has a hard time self-motivating for the more ho-hum games. That's just wild speculation, though.
I loathe Cardale Jones.
I don't think he has been as bad as NI'll made him look, but I always felt like JTB with his 45 TD's last year (B10 record in 11.5 games) was the better QB for them.
If your statement about Cardale is true, I predict bad things for him in the NFL.
Conversation right turn...unexpected...I feel like I just went....Back to the Future.
This has actually happened quite a few times over Bud's tenure, when an early bad game or two tanked us out of the gate while we're still getting new personnel adjusted to game speed and situations. The trend is for a steady climb in the defensive rankings over the course of the season as the new players gel in their positions. I look for that to happen this season as well.
Not saying it hasn't ever happened, but given the hype around the defense, who would have thought that, statistically, the offense would be the better unit nationally?
inorite? especially with a back-up QB?!?! what sorcery is this?
I can't remember the year (but it was recent-ish, like within the last five) that there was major hype around the defense, the line particularly, and then the first few games there were some pretty big defensive gaffes. I remember Pitt carving us up early in the year and there being major discord over it, because the line was supposed to be such a strength. So maybe the year before Pitt joined the ACC, when we had the non-conference home and home scheduled with them.
Right...I would in no way claim that our offense will stay rated this highly or our defense this poorly throughout the season. We have a very small sample size here, as do our opponents and these stats adjust for that. Not only could our defense perform better, but if Ohio State starts blowing people out of the water again then that game will quit dragging down the defense.
Likewise, maybe Purdue starts letting teams completely carve them up through the air and our performance starts to look not so good. Let's give it a few weeks before we starting predicting performance for the rest of the season (says the guy who posted a graph above of the exact odds of winning each game for the rest of the season).
<shamelessplug>That's why I thought it would be neat to track offensive stats this year compared to last year.</shamelessplug>
What happened with ECU in 2008? All I remember is that Furman was my first VT game as an undergrad. Yep. SHUT UP
Lost it. As always, thanks Joel. I love these
Does anyone else have a hard time getting the graphs to show up? The weekly BTA#'s is the only TKP thread that does this consistently for me. Could this be a Firefox thing? Is there a setting that I might be missing?
The graphs are PNG...could that be an issue on your computer? If it helps just picture ridiculous graphs that say things like our defense is only above average and our passing offense is elite and then post angry messages to me here.