07-24-2017, 12:04 PM
With practices starting one week from today, I thought we could use a new thread.
Training Camp Thread 2017
Here are my training camp threads questions (directed, of course, to the equipment manager):
1. Will black be back? I like them once a year.
2. Will the pants have no cardinal stripe, one thick cardinal stripe or two narrow cardinal stripes? I like one thick cardinal stripe. I do not like the no stripe look.
3. Will facemasks be white, red or grey? White, I hope.
4. I assume the tree within the block S will return...I like it, but please don't make it green. Green is not one of our colors.
5. Will David Shaw coordinate his sideline attire with the team's uniforms? Does he have a lucky pullover a la Harbaugh?
6. Black, red or white shoes? I like Billy Johnson...
7. Coat and tie to board the airplane?
Full disclosure: I was a student equipment manager - best work-study job on campus.
:D
1. Will black be back? I like them once a year.
2. Will the pants have no cardinal stripe, one thick cardinal stripe or two narrow cardinal stripes? I like one thick cardinal stripe. I do not like the no stripe look.
3. Will facemasks be white, red or grey? White, I hope.
4. I assume the tree within the block S will return...I like it, but please don't make it green. Green is not one of our colors.
5. Will David Shaw coordinate his sideline attire with the team's uniforms? Does he have a lucky pullover a la Harbaugh?
6. Black, red or white shoes? I like Billy Johnson...
7. Coat and tie to board the airplane?
Full disclosure: I was a student equipment manager - best work-study job on campus.
:D
Here are my training camp threads questions (directed, of course, to the equipment manager):
1. Will black be back? I like them once a year.
2. Will the pants have no cardinal stripe, one thick cardinal stripe or two narrow cardinal stripes? I like one thick cardinal stripe. I do not like the no stripe look.
3. Will facemasks be white, red or grey? White, I hope.
4. I assume the tree within the block S will return...I like it, but please don't make it green. Green is not one of our colors.
5. Will David Shaw coordinate his sideline attire with the team's uniforms? Does he have a lucky pullover a la Harbaugh?
6. Black, red or white shoes? I like Billy Johnson...
7. Coat and tie to board the airplane?
Full disclosure: I was a student equipment manager - best work-study job on campus.
:D
1. Will black be back? I like them once a year.
2. Will the pants have no cardinal stripe, one thick cardinal stripe or two narrow cardinal stripes? I like one thick cardinal stripe. I do not like the no stripe look.
3. Will facemasks be white, red or grey? White, I hope.
4. I assume the tree within the block S will return...I like it, but please don't make it green. Green is not one of our colors.
5. Will David Shaw coordinate his sideline attire with the team's uniforms? Does he have a lucky pullover a la Harbaugh?
6. Black, red or white shoes? I like Billy Johnson...
7. Coat and tie to board the airplane?
Full disclosure: I was a student equipment manager - best work-study job on campus.
:D
07-24-2017, 06:51 PM
Love the no stripe look on the pants! Very slick. Wish the axes on the helmet would disappear. Clutter.
07-24-2017, 09:46 PM
Looks like there was some sort of season ticket/donor event at the stadium tonight -- anyone go?: https://twitter.com/CalJoySeid/status/88...7951662080
Looks like there was some sort of season ticket/donor event at the stadium tonight -- anyone go?: https://twitter.com/CalJoySeid/status/88...7951662080
ChicagoCard
Unregistered
Unregistered
07-25-2017, 02:22 AM
(07-24-2017, 06:51 PM)Red State link Wrote:Love the no stripe look on the pants! Very slick.Me too!
(07-24-2017, 06:51 PM)Red State link Wrote:Love the no stripe look on the pants! Very slick.Me too!
07-25-2017, 06:28 AM
What I hope to learn:
- Chryst is head & shoulders above the other QBs, no signs of impact from knee injury
- Who is going to challenge Hall & Bright for starting OT? Keeping fingers crossed that either someone does or that those two have made major improvements from last year
- ILB rotation, hopefully down to a clearer starting pair & second team
- DL development beyond Phillips
- Thunder & lightning in the backfied
- Will any WRs be able to get open against our Back Four?
- Chryst is head & shoulders above the other QBs, no signs of impact from knee injury
- Who is going to challenge Hall & Bright for starting OT? Keeping fingers crossed that either someone does or that those two have made major improvements from last year
- ILB rotation, hopefully down to a clearer starting pair & second team
- DL development beyond Phillips
- Thunder & lightning in the backfied
- Will any WRs be able to get open against our Back Four?
What I hope to learn:
- Chryst is head & shoulders above the other QBs, no signs of impact from knee injury
- Who is going to challenge Hall & Bright for starting OT? Keeping fingers crossed that either someone does or that those two have made major improvements from last year
- ILB rotation, hopefully down to a clearer starting pair & second team
- DL development beyond Phillips
- Thunder & lightning in the backfied
- Will any WRs be able to get open against our Back Four?
- Chryst is head & shoulders above the other QBs, no signs of impact from knee injury
- Who is going to challenge Hall & Bright for starting OT? Keeping fingers crossed that either someone does or that those two have made major improvements from last year
- ILB rotation, hopefully down to a clearer starting pair & second team
- DL development beyond Phillips
- Thunder & lightning in the backfied
- Will any WRs be able to get open against our Back Four?
07-25-2017, 08:12 PM
Mark your calendar and join us for two open Sunday #CardCamp17 practices this preseason on the Elliott Fields behind Maples Pavilion: Aug 6 and Aug 13, both 2:45-5:15 PM.
http://cardinal.gostanford.com/nl/jsp/m....b27933752b
http://cardinal.gostanford.com/nl/jsp/m....b27933752b
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
Mark your calendar and join us for two open Sunday #CardCamp17 practices this preseason on the Elliott Fields behind Maples Pavilion: Aug 6 and Aug 13, both 2:45-5:15 PM.
http://cardinal.gostanford.com/nl/jsp/m....b27933752b
http://cardinal.gostanford.com/nl/jsp/m....b27933752b
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
(07-24-2017, 09:46 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Looks like there was some sort of season ticket/donor event at the stadium tonight -- anyone go?: https://twitter.com/CalJoySeid/status/88...7951662080
It was a nice event. Many members of the team were there for the reception, including the food. The program began with Husak interviewing Kalambayi, Phillips, Love and Chryst. There were jokes about Husak losing his job to the Barry White- like voiced PK. PK talked about all the experience among the LBs/DBs. Harrison is built like a brick house and is clearly looking to follow Solly into the NFL. (I had a long chat with Coach Reynolds before the formalities, and he expects HP to have a great season.) Love talked about trying to fill Christian's shoes as a team leader being important, with everyone acknowledging the need for a collective improvement to fill CM's and Thomas' shoes on the field. Chryst (and coach Bloomgren) talked about how hard he is working on the mental aspects of the game. The rehab is going well, but not much in details. When each was asked to name a break out player or two, they mentioned Williams, Swann, Stewart, Malik and Robinson (and probably a few others I am forgetting.)
Coaches Anderson and Bloomgren were interviewed next. Lance talked about the experience in the backfield allowing him to try some more sophisticated defenses. He didn't talk much about specific players but expects some of the younger DL to step up. Mike praised Chryst who is unequivocally the designated starter (well maybe not for the Rice game), and there seemed to be genuine and wide-spread enthusiasm about their expectations for him this year. Burns/ Costello are the back-ups with no order clearly indicated. Bright got a shout out for leadership. He joked about how small he and Drew Dalman looked next to the true FR 6'8" OTs but did not indicate if they would play. He did defend the team's philosophy of "bringing tonnage" to the short yardage situations as being successful and simple physics.
Shaw spoke last. In general he thinks there are a lot of players that will contribute towards filling the CMac void: Love, Irwin, A-W, and the TEs. (No mention of Marx and I didn't see him there but I certainly didn't see all the players who were there.) He's expecting a solid defense. Interestingly, he said he never knows how good a team will be but that a lot of light is shed on it by the end of the first week of real practice and then after 3 games or so. He does feel like this team has a lot of good leadership. Another interesting response to a question discussed the staff debating, when a game plan or philosophy is not working as well as hoped, whether the response should be tweaking the strategy and trying to improve execution versus scrapping it and trying something different. So they do talk about but it's clear they have a philosophy they believe in strongly so the burden of proof to justify a major change is large indeed.
(07-24-2017, 09:46 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Looks like there was some sort of season ticket/donor event at the stadium tonight -- anyone go?: https://twitter.com/CalJoySeid/status/88...7951662080
It was a nice event. Many members of the team were there for the reception, including the food. The program began with Husak interviewing Kalambayi, Phillips, Love and Chryst. There were jokes about Husak losing his job to the Barry White- like voiced PK. PK talked about all the experience among the LBs/DBs. Harrison is built like a brick house and is clearly looking to follow Solly into the NFL. (I had a long chat with Coach Reynolds before the formalities, and he expects HP to have a great season.) Love talked about trying to fill Christian's shoes as a team leader being important, with everyone acknowledging the need for a collective improvement to fill CM's and Thomas' shoes on the field. Chryst (and coach Bloomgren) talked about how hard he is working on the mental aspects of the game. The rehab is going well, but not much in details. When each was asked to name a break out player or two, they mentioned Williams, Swann, Stewart, Malik and Robinson (and probably a few others I am forgetting.)
Coaches Anderson and Bloomgren were interviewed next. Lance talked about the experience in the backfield allowing him to try some more sophisticated defenses. He didn't talk much about specific players but expects some of the younger DL to step up. Mike praised Chryst who is unequivocally the designated starter (well maybe not for the Rice game), and there seemed to be genuine and wide-spread enthusiasm about their expectations for him this year. Burns/ Costello are the back-ups with no order clearly indicated. Bright got a shout out for leadership. He joked about how small he and Drew Dalman looked next to the true FR 6'8" OTs but did not indicate if they would play. He did defend the team's philosophy of "bringing tonnage" to the short yardage situations as being successful and simple physics.
Shaw spoke last. In general he thinks there are a lot of players that will contribute towards filling the CMac void: Love, Irwin, A-W, and the TEs. (No mention of Marx and I didn't see him there but I certainly didn't see all the players who were there.) He's expecting a solid defense. Interestingly, he said he never knows how good a team will be but that a lot of light is shed on it by the end of the first week of real practice and then after 3 games or so. He does feel like this team has a lot of good leadership. Another interesting response to a question discussed the staff debating, when a game plan or philosophy is not working as well as hoped, whether the response should be tweaking the strategy and trying to improve execution versus scrapping it and trying something different. So they do talk about but it's clear they have a philosophy they believe in strongly so the burden of proof to justify a major change is large indeed.
07-26-2017, 03:45 AM
Thank you for the summary of the event, standfan.
If Michael Williams, Jovan Swann, Donald Stewart, and Curtis Robinson are all ready to be significant contributors as 2nd year players this season, Stanford's in the mix for contention. If Little starts at LT and a few Frosh like Wedington and St. Brown can make an impact, they might be a legit contender. If all this happens and Chryst is not only healthy but improved over 2016, Stanford could dethrone Washington and be a playoff team. These are a lot of ifs. I remain skeptical they will all happen, but am certainly open to the fact they could.
Most interesting part of the summary of the event provided, IMO, is the talk about changing game planned approach when things aren't working vs. hoping for better execution. There's a lot that goes into it, including talking with the players to get feedback on what they think. Could have a whole thread on this topic alone.
If Michael Williams, Jovan Swann, Donald Stewart, and Curtis Robinson are all ready to be significant contributors as 2nd year players this season, Stanford's in the mix for contention. If Little starts at LT and a few Frosh like Wedington and St. Brown can make an impact, they might be a legit contender. If all this happens and Chryst is not only healthy but improved over 2016, Stanford could dethrone Washington and be a playoff team. These are a lot of ifs. I remain skeptical they will all happen, but am certainly open to the fact they could.
Most interesting part of the summary of the event provided, IMO, is the talk about changing game planned approach when things aren't working vs. hoping for better execution. There's a lot that goes into it, including talking with the players to get feedback on what they think. Could have a whole thread on this topic alone.
Thank you for the summary of the event, standfan.
If Michael Williams, Jovan Swann, Donald Stewart, and Curtis Robinson are all ready to be significant contributors as 2nd year players this season, Stanford's in the mix for contention. If Little starts at LT and a few Frosh like Wedington and St. Brown can make an impact, they might be a legit contender. If all this happens and Chryst is not only healthy but improved over 2016, Stanford could dethrone Washington and be a playoff team. These are a lot of ifs. I remain skeptical they will all happen, but am certainly open to the fact they could.
Most interesting part of the summary of the event provided, IMO, is the talk about changing game planned approach when things aren't working vs. hoping for better execution. There's a lot that goes into it, including talking with the players to get feedback on what they think. Could have a whole thread on this topic alone.
If Michael Williams, Jovan Swann, Donald Stewart, and Curtis Robinson are all ready to be significant contributors as 2nd year players this season, Stanford's in the mix for contention. If Little starts at LT and a few Frosh like Wedington and St. Brown can make an impact, they might be a legit contender. If all this happens and Chryst is not only healthy but improved over 2016, Stanford could dethrone Washington and be a playoff team. These are a lot of ifs. I remain skeptical they will all happen, but am certainly open to the fact they could.
Most interesting part of the summary of the event provided, IMO, is the talk about changing game planned approach when things aren't working vs. hoping for better execution. There's a lot that goes into it, including talking with the players to get feedback on what they think. Could have a whole thread on this topic alone.
07-26-2017, 08:42 AM
Love it. Bringing tonnage...well, hopefully they also bring the execution too. The days of banking on 2+ yards for each push from the TWU glory days have been tempered by the occasional failures of recent OL combinations to achieve short-yardage success. Get low, get nasty, and drive the other guys off the ball.
Love it. Bringing tonnage...well, hopefully they also bring the execution too. The days of banking on 2+ yards for each push from the TWU glory days have been tempered by the occasional failures of recent OL combinations to achieve short-yardage success. Get low, get nasty, and drive the other guys off the ball.
07-26-2017, 10:24 AM
One of the best things about college athletics is to watch new kids take over form established stars. Stanford football in the Harshaw years has taken on one characteristic of the few real traditional powers, that of keeping it going. There is no comparable period including the Vow Boy era. So I will pay attention to the DL this season where somebody beyond Phillips needs to step up. I'm not as concerned with the OL, the backs or the WR's.
One of the best things about college athletics is to watch new kids take over form established stars. Stanford football in the Harshaw years has taken on one characteristic of the few real traditional powers, that of keeping it going. There is no comparable period including the Vow Boy era. So I will pay attention to the DL this season where somebody beyond Phillips needs to step up. I'm not as concerned with the OL, the backs or the WR's.
07-27-2017, 12:27 PM
(07-26-2017, 10:24 AM)Phogge link Wrote:One of the best things about college athletics is to watch new kids take over form established stars. Stanford football in the Harshaw years has taken on one characteristic of the few real traditional powers, that of keeping it going. There is no comparable period including the Vow Boy era. So I will pay attention to the DL this season where somebody beyond Phillips needs to step up. I'm not as concerned with the OL, the backs or the WR's.
Agree DL will be interesting. Akina has built a dynasty in the secondary and if the DL steps up and plays its part in the pass rush scheme, our DBs will have headlines all year.
(07-26-2017, 10:24 AM)Phogge link Wrote:One of the best things about college athletics is to watch new kids take over form established stars. Stanford football in the Harshaw years has taken on one characteristic of the few real traditional powers, that of keeping it going. There is no comparable period including the Vow Boy era. So I will pay attention to the DL this season where somebody beyond Phillips needs to step up. I'm not as concerned with the OL, the backs or the WR's.
Agree DL will be interesting. Akina has built a dynasty in the secondary and if the DL steps up and plays its part in the pass rush scheme, our DBs will have headlines all year.
07-27-2017, 01:11 PM
Speaking of Akina's DBs...
https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9701965825
Doesn't include Meeks either. I just want to point out that those who were questioning Buncom - and I did see him being questioned on this board in another earlier thread - need to stop.
https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9701965825
Doesn't include Meeks either. I just want to point out that those who were questioning Buncom - and I did see him being questioned on this board in another earlier thread - need to stop.
Speaking of Akina's DBs...
https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9701965825
Doesn't include Meeks either. I just want to point out that those who were questioning Buncom - and I did see him being questioned on this board in another earlier thread - need to stop.
https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9701965825
Doesn't include Meeks either. I just want to point out that those who were questioning Buncom - and I did see him being questioned on this board in another earlier thread - need to stop.
07-27-2017, 01:45 PM
Well, sure, except:
1) Buncom switched positions to safety
2) Buncom didn't play a lot of snaps -- so there's a low sample size.
Each of those facts suggests there's a rather large grain of salt to be taken with PFF's ratings.
Their ratings are, in general, a big black box. I'm not sure what they predict and how well they correlate with results. Take this tweet: https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9837321216
Five of the six best returning Pac-12 players are Cougars, apparently. Now I don't think you should dismiss results of statistical analytics simply because it's counterintuitive; why would you conduct the analysis if you're expecting it to confirm your previously held beliefs? But there's a rather odd tension in PFF's assertion with, well, reality. That is:
1) Washington State wasn't all that great in 2016.
2) No one expects them to be all that great in 2017.
So why do they apparently have so many great players? Dunno man.
1) Buncom switched positions to safety
2) Buncom didn't play a lot of snaps -- so there's a low sample size.
Each of those facts suggests there's a rather large grain of salt to be taken with PFF's ratings.
Their ratings are, in general, a big black box. I'm not sure what they predict and how well they correlate with results. Take this tweet: https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9837321216
Five of the six best returning Pac-12 players are Cougars, apparently. Now I don't think you should dismiss results of statistical analytics simply because it's counterintuitive; why would you conduct the analysis if you're expecting it to confirm your previously held beliefs? But there's a rather odd tension in PFF's assertion with, well, reality. That is:
1) Washington State wasn't all that great in 2016.
2) No one expects them to be all that great in 2017.
So why do they apparently have so many great players? Dunno man.
Well, sure, except:
1) Buncom switched positions to safety
2) Buncom didn't play a lot of snaps -- so there's a low sample size.
Each of those facts suggests there's a rather large grain of salt to be taken with PFF's ratings.
Their ratings are, in general, a big black box. I'm not sure what they predict and how well they correlate with results. Take this tweet: https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9837321216
Five of the six best returning Pac-12 players are Cougars, apparently. Now I don't think you should dismiss results of statistical analytics simply because it's counterintuitive; why would you conduct the analysis if you're expecting it to confirm your previously held beliefs? But there's a rather odd tension in PFF's assertion with, well, reality. That is:
1) Washington State wasn't all that great in 2016.
2) No one expects them to be all that great in 2017.
So why do they apparently have so many great players? Dunno man.
1) Buncom switched positions to safety
2) Buncom didn't play a lot of snaps -- so there's a low sample size.
Each of those facts suggests there's a rather large grain of salt to be taken with PFF's ratings.
Their ratings are, in general, a big black box. I'm not sure what they predict and how well they correlate with results. Take this tweet: https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9837321216
Five of the six best returning Pac-12 players are Cougars, apparently. Now I don't think you should dismiss results of statistical analytics simply because it's counterintuitive; why would you conduct the analysis if you're expecting it to confirm your previously held beliefs? But there's a rather odd tension in PFF's assertion with, well, reality. That is:
1) Washington State wasn't all that great in 2016.
2) No one expects them to be all that great in 2017.
So why do they apparently have so many great players? Dunno man.
07-27-2017, 02:03 PM
I'm only using the PFF numbers as some quantitative backup (people seem to really like numbers on this board) to what I've seen Buncom do on the field. I believe he's a really good player, and extremely versatile.Â
Haven't been too impressed with Ben Edwards at SS. And since the concept of FS and SS is kind of eroding away in modern pass-oriented football, would love to see Buncom get a shot at the other Safety spot not occupied by Reid. Then again, the nickel is important, I can't think of a better one than Buncom, and that isn't a position Edwards is well suited for it seems. Of course, Terrence Alexander is probably very well suited there too. Meeks, Holder, and Murphy are probably the top three CBs, but the younger guys like Antoine, Eboh, and Butler could push to get in that mix too, maybe above Alexander even.
Haven't been too impressed with Ben Edwards at SS. And since the concept of FS and SS is kind of eroding away in modern pass-oriented football, would love to see Buncom get a shot at the other Safety spot not occupied by Reid. Then again, the nickel is important, I can't think of a better one than Buncom, and that isn't a position Edwards is well suited for it seems. Of course, Terrence Alexander is probably very well suited there too. Meeks, Holder, and Murphy are probably the top three CBs, but the younger guys like Antoine, Eboh, and Butler could push to get in that mix too, maybe above Alexander even.
I'm only using the PFF numbers as some quantitative backup (people seem to really like numbers on this board) to what I've seen Buncom do on the field. I believe he's a really good player, and extremely versatile.Â
Haven't been too impressed with Ben Edwards at SS. And since the concept of FS and SS is kind of eroding away in modern pass-oriented football, would love to see Buncom get a shot at the other Safety spot not occupied by Reid. Then again, the nickel is important, I can't think of a better one than Buncom, and that isn't a position Edwards is well suited for it seems. Of course, Terrence Alexander is probably very well suited there too. Meeks, Holder, and Murphy are probably the top three CBs, but the younger guys like Antoine, Eboh, and Butler could push to get in that mix too, maybe above Alexander even.
Haven't been too impressed with Ben Edwards at SS. And since the concept of FS and SS is kind of eroding away in modern pass-oriented football, would love to see Buncom get a shot at the other Safety spot not occupied by Reid. Then again, the nickel is important, I can't think of a better one than Buncom, and that isn't a position Edwards is well suited for it seems. Of course, Terrence Alexander is probably very well suited there too. Meeks, Holder, and Murphy are probably the top three CBs, but the younger guys like Antoine, Eboh, and Butler could push to get in that mix too, maybe above Alexander even.
07-27-2017, 02:15 PM
(07-27-2017, 01:45 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Well, sure, except:
1) Buncom switched positions to safety
2) Buncom didn't play a lot of snaps -- so there's a low sample size.
Each of those facts suggests there's a rather large grain of salt to be taken with PFF's ratings.
Their ratings are, in general, a big black box. I'm not sure what they predict and how well they correlate with results. Take this tweet: https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9837321216
Five of the six best returning Pac-12 players are Cougars, apparently. Now I don't think you should dismiss results of statistical analytics simply because it's counterintuitive; why would you conduct the analysis if you're expecting it to confirm your previously held beliefs? But there's a rather odd tension in PFF's assertion with, well, reality. That is:
1) Washington State wasn't all that great in 2016.
2) No one expects them to be all that great in 2017.
So why do they apparently have so many great players? Dunno man.
Brings to mind my favorite statistical quote:
Quote:All models are wrong; some are useful
-- George Box
The question is whether the PFF ratings give us some additional insight beyond that which we get from watching the team. Guessing it probably helps in some places where other statistics aren't readily available (offensive line comes to mind). Unfortunately, there is no measure of uncertainty in any of the numbers, which makes it hard to assess their usefulness (see your comment about limited snaps).
BC
(07-27-2017, 01:45 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Well, sure, except:
1) Buncom switched positions to safety
2) Buncom didn't play a lot of snaps -- so there's a low sample size.
Each of those facts suggests there's a rather large grain of salt to be taken with PFF's ratings.
Their ratings are, in general, a big black box. I'm not sure what they predict and how well they correlate with results. Take this tweet: https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/8...9837321216
Five of the six best returning Pac-12 players are Cougars, apparently. Now I don't think you should dismiss results of statistical analytics simply because it's counterintuitive; why would you conduct the analysis if you're expecting it to confirm your previously held beliefs? But there's a rather odd tension in PFF's assertion with, well, reality. That is:
1) Washington State wasn't all that great in 2016.
2) No one expects them to be all that great in 2017.
So why do they apparently have so many great players? Dunno man.
Brings to mind my favorite statistical quote:
Quote:All models are wrong; some are useful
-- George Box
The question is whether the PFF ratings give us some additional insight beyond that which we get from watching the team. Guessing it probably helps in some places where other statistics aren't readily available (offensive line comes to mind). Unfortunately, there is no measure of uncertainty in any of the numbers, which makes it hard to assess their usefulness (see your comment about limited snaps).
BC
07-27-2017, 02:35 PM
(07-27-2017, 02:15 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:The question is whether the PFF ratings give us some additional insight beyond that which we get from watching the team. Guessing it probably helps in some places where other statistics aren't readily available (offensive line comes to mind). Unfortunately, there is no measure of uncertainty in any of the numbers, which makes it hard to assess their usefulness (see your comment about limited snaps).
Yeah, I don't think their one-number ratings are terribly useful -- but I do like some of their specific breakdowns. (e.g. sometimes they do stuff like "catch rate on deep routes" which is interesting.)
(07-27-2017, 02:15 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:The question is whether the PFF ratings give us some additional insight beyond that which we get from watching the team. Guessing it probably helps in some places where other statistics aren't readily available (offensive line comes to mind). Unfortunately, there is no measure of uncertainty in any of the numbers, which makes it hard to assess their usefulness (see your comment about limited snaps).
Yeah, I don't think their one-number ratings are terribly useful -- but I do like some of their specific breakdowns. (e.g. sometimes they do stuff like "catch rate on deep routes" which is interesting.)
07-27-2017, 03:01 PM
Yeah, though you run into a bias/variance tradeoff problem. The more you sub-set the data, the higher the likelihood that your small numbers are going to result in incomplete conclusions. I mean, a catch rate on deep routes of 100% might sound impressive, but it is less so if the player only got two deep targets.
BC
BC
Yeah, though you run into a bias/variance tradeoff problem. The more you sub-set the data, the higher the likelihood that your small numbers are going to result in incomplete conclusions. I mean, a catch rate on deep routes of 100% might sound impressive, but it is less so if the player only got two deep targets.
BC
BC
Redrum
Unregistered
Unregistered
07-27-2017, 04:07 PM
Yes, the guy is a warrior with d-line skills and built like a brick s***house...but a smallish brick s***house. And not much more established, experienced help behind him in the middle. He benefited immensely last year from opponents focusing on Solomon Thomas outside, for all the good it did them. Without Thomas, opponents can focus and pound on Phillips unless the DE/DTs are capable of taking up even half of the load Thomas carried. It is interesting looking at current sizes of our DL. Like they came out of the same mold.
DEÂ Cotton [6'6" 273] RS SRÂ Â Swann [6'2" 269] SO
DTÂ Philips [6'4" 285] SRÂ Williams [6'-2" 276] SO
DEÂ Jackson [6'6" 267] JR Schaffer [6'7" 266] SO
Average DL= 275
Compare that to, say, UDub which had its way with us (OK, OK they buried us and pissed on our grave) last year.
Their returning OL runs:
LTÂ [6'8" 320]
LGÂ [6'10" 287]
CÂ Â [6'4"Â 297]
RGÂ [6'4" 316]
RTÂ Â [6'7" 310]
Average OL=306 Â Advantage= 31 lbs. avg.
Or, USC
LTÂ [6'4" 290]
LGÂ [6'5" 300]
CÂ Â [6'4" 280]
RGÂ [6'2"Â 3I5]
RTÂ [6'6" 285]
Avg. OL = 285Â Advantage =10 lbs
Or, UCLAÂ
LT [6'8" 310]
LG [6'4" 305]
CÂ [6'4" 315]
RG [6'2" 305]
RT [6'7"Â 310]
Avg. OL = 309Â Advantage = 34 lbs.
Or, Notre Dame
LT [6'8" 312]
LG [6'5" 329]
CÂ [6'2" 305]
RGÂ [6'6" 305
RTÂ [6'7" 310]
Avg. OL = 315Â Advantage = 40 lbs.
My point in this obsessive stat-a-thon isn't that all is lost or the sky is falling. I know that, basically, in the 3-4 alignment the DL's job is mainly to keep the OL off the linebackers and let the LBs make the play. It's just that last year Solomon Thomas was a game changer with his mad skills. This season is going to much tougher on the front 7. But this year we might not be able to cope over a long season if our opponents pound it to us on the ground or have a decent grasp of our pass game rush scheme.
DEÂ Cotton [6'6" 273] RS SRÂ Â Swann [6'2" 269] SO
DTÂ Philips [6'4" 285] SRÂ Williams [6'-2" 276] SO
DEÂ Jackson [6'6" 267] JR Schaffer [6'7" 266] SO
Average DL= 275
Compare that to, say, UDub which had its way with us (OK, OK they buried us and pissed on our grave) last year.
Their returning OL runs:
LTÂ [6'8" 320]
LGÂ [6'10" 287]
CÂ Â [6'4"Â 297]
RGÂ [6'4" 316]
RTÂ Â [6'7" 310]
Average OL=306 Â Advantage= 31 lbs. avg.
Or, USC
LTÂ [6'4" 290]
LGÂ [6'5" 300]
CÂ Â [6'4" 280]
RGÂ [6'2"Â 3I5]
RTÂ [6'6" 285]
Avg. OL = 285Â Advantage =10 lbs
Or, UCLAÂ
LT [6'8" 310]
LG [6'4" 305]
CÂ [6'4" 315]
RG [6'2" 305]
RT [6'7"Â 310]
Avg. OL = 309Â Advantage = 34 lbs.
Or, Notre Dame
LT [6'8" 312]
LG [6'5" 329]
CÂ [6'2" 305]
RGÂ [6'6" 305
RTÂ [6'7" 310]
Avg. OL = 315Â Advantage = 40 lbs.
My point in this obsessive stat-a-thon isn't that all is lost or the sky is falling. I know that, basically, in the 3-4 alignment the DL's job is mainly to keep the OL off the linebackers and let the LBs make the play. It's just that last year Solomon Thomas was a game changer with his mad skills. This season is going to much tougher on the front 7. But this year we might not be able to cope over a long season if our opponents pound it to us on the ground or have a decent grasp of our pass game rush scheme.
Yes, the guy is a warrior with d-line skills and built like a brick s***house...but a smallish brick s***house. And not much more established, experienced help behind him in the middle. He benefited immensely last year from opponents focusing on Solomon Thomas outside, for all the good it did them. Without Thomas, opponents can focus and pound on Phillips unless the DE/DTs are capable of taking up even half of the load Thomas carried. It is interesting looking at current sizes of our DL. Like they came out of the same mold.
DEÂ Cotton [6'6" 273] RS SRÂ Â Swann [6'2" 269] SO
DTÂ Philips [6'4" 285] SRÂ Williams [6'-2" 276] SO
DEÂ Jackson [6'6" 267] JR Schaffer [6'7" 266] SO
Average DL= 275
Compare that to, say, UDub which had its way with us (OK, OK they buried us and pissed on our grave) last year.
Their returning OL runs:
LTÂ [6'8" 320]
LGÂ [6'10" 287]
CÂ Â [6'4"Â 297]
RGÂ [6'4" 316]
RTÂ Â [6'7" 310]
Average OL=306 Â Advantage= 31 lbs. avg.
Or, USC
LTÂ [6'4" 290]
LGÂ [6'5" 300]
CÂ Â [6'4" 280]
RGÂ [6'2"Â 3I5]
RTÂ [6'6" 285]
Avg. OL = 285Â Advantage =10 lbs
Or, UCLAÂ
LT [6'8" 310]
LG [6'4" 305]
CÂ [6'4" 315]
RG [6'2" 305]
RT [6'7"Â 310]
Avg. OL = 309Â Advantage = 34 lbs.
Or, Notre Dame
LT [6'8" 312]
LG [6'5" 329]
CÂ [6'2" 305]
RGÂ [6'6" 305
RTÂ [6'7" 310]
Avg. OL = 315Â Advantage = 40 lbs.
My point in this obsessive stat-a-thon isn't that all is lost or the sky is falling. I know that, basically, in the 3-4 alignment the DL's job is mainly to keep the OL off the linebackers and let the LBs make the play. It's just that last year Solomon Thomas was a game changer with his mad skills. This season is going to much tougher on the front 7. But this year we might not be able to cope over a long season if our opponents pound it to us on the ground or have a decent grasp of our pass game rush scheme.
DEÂ Cotton [6'6" 273] RS SRÂ Â Swann [6'2" 269] SO
DTÂ Philips [6'4" 285] SRÂ Williams [6'-2" 276] SO
DEÂ Jackson [6'6" 267] JR Schaffer [6'7" 266] SO
Average DL= 275
Compare that to, say, UDub which had its way with us (OK, OK they buried us and pissed on our grave) last year.
Their returning OL runs:
LTÂ [6'8" 320]
LGÂ [6'10" 287]
CÂ Â [6'4"Â 297]
RGÂ [6'4" 316]
RTÂ Â [6'7" 310]
Average OL=306 Â Advantage= 31 lbs. avg.
Or, USC
LTÂ [6'4" 290]
LGÂ [6'5" 300]
CÂ Â [6'4" 280]
RGÂ [6'2"Â 3I5]
RTÂ [6'6" 285]
Avg. OL = 285Â Advantage =10 lbs
Or, UCLAÂ
LT [6'8" 310]
LG [6'4" 305]
CÂ [6'4" 315]
RG [6'2" 305]
RT [6'7"Â 310]
Avg. OL = 309Â Advantage = 34 lbs.
Or, Notre Dame
LT [6'8" 312]
LG [6'5" 329]
CÂ [6'2" 305]
RGÂ [6'6" 305
RTÂ [6'7" 310]
Avg. OL = 315Â Advantage = 40 lbs.
My point in this obsessive stat-a-thon isn't that all is lost or the sky is falling. I know that, basically, in the 3-4 alignment the DL's job is mainly to keep the OL off the linebackers and let the LBs make the play. It's just that last year Solomon Thomas was a game changer with his mad skills. This season is going to much tougher on the front 7. But this year we might not be able to cope over a long season if our opponents pound it to us on the ground or have a decent grasp of our pass game rush scheme.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »