The CardBoard
Go Mighty Card recap - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Go Mighty Card recap (/thread-12545.html)

Pages: 1 2

Re: Go Mighty Card recap - CTcard - 09-06-2016

(09-06-2016, 12:46 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:I mean, KSU isn't the most potent offense we will face all year, but eight sacks, two turnovers, and a safety is pretty darned good no matter who your opponent is.

The strength of KSU is the key question hanging over our evaluation of that first game.

On the one hand, the KSU offense was fairly poor last year and they lost most of their OL.
On the other hand, I thought the QB who was injured all of last year was at the least a lot better than the guy who did play last year (and threw a horrendous INT on his first pass against us).

The most curious thing about their players is that our KSU friends kept telling us about how great their JC transfer Pringle was going to be. He looked decidedly not great to me (1 catch, 3 so-so kick returns, one facemask-takedown-notPI vs Holder). However, they had a couple of frosh receivers who did impress; Zuber in particular but also their sophomore Heath made some nice catches.

Re: Go Mighty Card recap - Hank 91 - 09-06-2016

I know this will never, ever happen, but wouldn't it make an awful lot of sense to hold in the initial rankings until October? Until then we're just guessing.

Re: Go Mighty Card recap - stupac2 - 09-06-2016

(09-06-2016, 01:45 PM)Hank 91 link Wrote:I know this will never, ever happen, but wouldn't it make an awful lot of sense to hold in the initial rankings until October? Until then we're just guessing.

Well, for one rankings generate too much interest, if the AP stopped doing it someone else would start and then we'd talk about their rankings instead. But even if we could completely stop it, people would just lean on other heuristics (OMG SEC, "blue bloods", etc) to decide who's good, which might be worse.

The only way to actually do this in a sensible manner is to create a computer system and let it run, but because that results in things people don't like (ie not a simple "sort by number of losses" system) the only people who look at them are nerds.

Re: Go Mighty Card recap - CTcard - 09-06-2016

(09-06-2016, 02:09 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:The only way to actually do this in a sensible manner is to create a computer system and let it run, but because that results in things people don't like (ie not a simple "sort by number of losses" system) the only people who look at them are nerds.

The other thing to do is acknowledge that rankings are not, and cannot, be perfect. Use them if you find them fun or interesting, otherwise ignore.

Computer codes do have objectivity, but have several issues of their own - beyond the issue that sometimes folks in charge simply don't like their answers (which I agree is part of the issue).

First of all, there is no universal agreement about what should go into the algorithms that would rank the teams. If you look at the collection of computer rankings, they are all over the map - particularly early on but still tons of variation after 12 games.

Secondly, just about any particular algorithm can be gamed. We all talk about it from time to time. Set up the schedule just right, choose to send in your backups or not, etc., etc.

There's no perfection.

Re: Go Mighty Card recap - stupac2 - 09-06-2016

Well yes, I meant "to remove human bias", though I suppose "choosing what matters" is a bias. IIRC most of the rankings are done based on what correlates with winning, though they take different tacks (using per-play and per-drive metrics with S&P and FEI, for instance).

Really I'm just salty about missing the playoff last year, and FSU/ND getting in when they were undefeated but clearly terrible in 2012 and 2014.

Re: Go Mighty Card recap - fullmetal - 09-06-2016

I don't think KSU will have a downfield passing game tbh.  But I'd agree with Wilner's grade...it felt like a B-ish game in terms of fan experience.  But a win's a win :)

Re: Go Mighty Card recap - ColoradoTree - 09-06-2016

(09-06-2016, 01:36 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Wilner's comment that the 'cats had no downfield passing game is a classic in why early-season polls are so useless. Did they have no downfield passing game because of Ertz and their wideouts, or because of the DBs' lockdown defense? Obviously I think the former but if you've got a strong position on the issue you're doing it wrong.

This is a great point, though I'd expect Wilner to reevaluate things if KSU's passing attack turns out to be dynamic against other opponents or if our secondary similarly shuts down other strong downfield passing games.  In past years, he's been pretty open about reevaluating past results as the season wears on.  For example, the loss to Northwestern kept getting better and better in his eyes as last season wore on.  If KSU proves to be a top-tier Big 12 team, we'll get plenty of credit for it.  But for now, I don't think a B- is unfair, especially after that second half. 

The polltracker site is always interesting.  This guy from Omaha, for example, does not seem impressed with Stanford:  http://collegepolltracker.com/football/pollster/sam-mckewon/2016/week-2.  He had us unranked in the preseason poll, and puts us at #24 after Week 1, 11 spots lower than the next-lowest pollster (Wilner, who has us at 13).  He loves Washington, though, and has them 5th.  We're ranked behind five different 0-1 teams, including UCLA.  Curious.  (He's not just a Stanford hater, to be clear. He had Stanford ranked 4th before the Oregon loss last year.) 



Re: Go Mighty Card recap - fullmetal - 09-06-2016

Where did he have Stanford after the RB win? :p  It's not like we had to replace the whole two-deep...he'll have many chances to re-evaluate over the course of the season, I hope.

Re: Go Mighty Card recap - BostonCard - 09-06-2016

(09-06-2016, 01:43 PM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15580.msg170271#msg170271 date=1473191199]

I mean, KSU isn't the most potent offense we will face all year, but eight sacks, two turnovers, and a safety is pretty darned good no matter who your opponent is.

The strength of KSU is the key question hanging over our evaluation of that first game.

On the one hand, the KSU offense was fairly poor last year and they lost most of their OL.
On the other hand, I thought the QB who was injured all of last year was at the least a lot better than the guy who did play last year (and threw a horrendous INT on his first pass against us).

The most curious thing about their players is that our KSU friends kept telling us about how great their JC transfer Pringle was going to be. He looked decidedly not great to me (1 catch, 3 so-so kick returns, one facemask-takedown-notPI vs Holder). However, they had a couple of frosh receivers who did impress; Zuber in particular but also their sophomore Heath made some nice catches.
[/quote]

Well, compared to their "not very good" last year:

Kansas State scored an average of 29.9 ppg last year; we held them to less than half of that.  They were shut out by Oklahoma and scored 9 points against Texas.  They scored at least 20 in all other games, so our game would have fallen in the top quartile of opponent scoring defense.

In 13 games, Kansas State gave up 35 sacks, or just under 3 sacks per game.  I don't have a game log, but 8 sacks would have been just over 1/5 of the total they gave up last year.  Certainly we got to the QB much more frequently than the average opponent last year.

In 13 games, Kansas State turned the ball over 19 times, or just under 1.5 times a game.  They turned it over three times twice, and had two turnovers on three occasions.  OUr two INT's would have been tied for second most among KState opponents last year.

In all of last year, Kansas State did not give up any safeties.  We got one.

Bottom line, although Kansas State was not very good offensively last year, our defensive performance would have ranked among the top three last year.  I agree that we don't have enough information to make a case for an elite defense.  But based on the Kansas State game, I think it is likely that our defense will be at least good.  I get that Kansas State doesn't have a super potent offense.  But even a weak offense usually can put together 20ish points.  By my count all but 7 Power5 teams averaged at least 20 ppg, and no team averaged fewer points scored than KState scored on Friday.

ADD: Last year, KState averaged 4.95 ypp; against us they averaged 4.59 ypp.

BC

Re: Go Mighty Card recap - larkinforever - 09-06-2016

Yes, perhaps early to chatter about an "elite defense" but with 8 sacks and 2 INTs maybe we have more "playmakers" on D.