Recent Comments

Louisville
Northwestern
Georgia Tech
Stanford
Alabama
BYU

Whew, found myself and I am not doing anything that will be turned into an internet meme.

read down on that link. as per hokie sports the key play started as a thing we did on offense NOT defense. now it's changed for the better, which is the point. traditions change and can begin from something other view as annoying. just give it meaning and context

Miami Game 2011 one made it out of the east stands and almost landed in the Miami huddle. Felt like the whole stands was cheering it on.

Clemson
Northwestern
Georgia Tech
USC
Alabama
BYU

Clemson
Duke
GT
USC
Ole Miss
BYU

Klempson
N'western
ND
USCw
Bama (I hate that I always pick them but it's also always correct)
Hail Marys

Never been a matter of whether he knows what he's doing or not, it's whether it's worked or not.

I'll never understand how you people always take "paper airplanes" and extend it into "students are bored and don't care, they should all be ashamed."

I am pretty sure in one photo you can see his fingers of his glove on the facemask. They might not of stayed there but they were definitely there

One made it out about 10 yards onto the field last game. Somewhere about the 20 yd line IIRC.
A couple made it out last season.

I don't know much about statistics, but I am wondering about that 3/7 value. I don't bring this up out of pickiness, just genuine curiosity. The 7 ignores the possibility of the offense going for 2, but I think that may be irrelevant to my question (I only bring it up because I'm not sure if it's relevant). You say that you want to put field goals at 3/7 of a touchdown because you risk missed PATs skewing the data. Don't missed field goals also skew the data, and aren't they also a part of special teams, not offense? If we say Field goals are worth 3/6 of a touchdown, we give each score its official value. PATs are made so frequently that we often discount them, but they are separate from touchdowns. Is there a way to adjust the weight of a field goal based on the expectancy that it will be made (20 yard field goals are more likely to be made than 37 yard field goals), or to discount them entirely?

Would it make sense to do some kind "partial touchdown" metric, where we count by scores instead of points? I'm spitballing here, but imagine we score 3 out of 4 trips to the red zone. 2 touchdowns, and a made field goal. 1 touchdown is worth 1, one field goal is worth 0.5. Would a metric that said we earned 2.5 "touchdowns" be asinine? We could then differentiate for how failed red zone trips ended too. For instance, empty trips due to special teams blunders could be worth a value, and empty trips due to offensive blunders like turnovers or penalties could be worth a 0 or negative value.

Imagine an offense driving 70 yards only to have a missed field goal end the drive. Why should they receive less credit for this than driving 35 yards and having a made field goal? A missed field goal could be assigned 0.25 to reward an offense's work, and a offensive blunder could be worth 0, or -0.25 or something. I don't know. As I'm sure you can tell, I didn't study statistics, but I don't think we're testing the offense accurately if we allow field goals to and PAT's to count towards their success, but I also don't think it's fair to measure the offense solely on touchdowns. Long drives that stall in the red zone are better than drives that don't make it to the red zone.