Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - 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: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse (/thread-25129.html)

---

Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - msqueri - 09-21-2024

1. Consecutive wins! Doing that for the first time in the Taylor era produces a tangible sense of progress in the rebuild, and doing it in Stanford's first ACC game gives a sense of the page being turned to something new. Doing it in exciting fashion with a game-winning kick and a balanced performance in which each phase contributed and was entertaining makes it all the sweeter. Subjectively, it stands with last year's Colorado game as the most enjoyable Stanford football has been in a while. Objectively (based on quality of opponent/margin), it's the third best performance of the Taylor era after last year's Washington State win and Arizona loss (and a win is always a better result than a loss). We are still in the zone of dogged, glacial progress in this rebuild but, considering that we know this team's limitations, a road conference win against a decent opponent is a major cause of celebration.

2. The team showed resilience and competitiveness out the wazoo, which is becoming something we can rely on. The mentality of the program is a breath of fresh air compared to the last years under Shaw. It's a deeply flawed team but every unit battles and tries to claw out a chance. That's the plus side. The negative side is this team has to dig pretty deep just to compete against very mediocre opponents. Syracuse was extremely overrated by their AP #27 and coaches' poll #30 positions, which was already evident before the game from number crunching and is even more so now. Against such an opponent, we got outgained on a yards per play basis as we always do (last year's Arizona game remains the only time we've been more effective than a power conference opponent on this basis under Taylor) and did worse in yards per play on both sides of the ball than Syracuse's mediocre competition to date (Ohio and Georgia Tech) - much worse in the case of the offense but also worse on defense. We had 1.7 points per meaningful drive and gave up 2.0 points per meaningful drive. [For those wondering how we can win doing worse than an opponent in both points per drive and yards per play......pick six baby! Play of the game bar none.] The upshot is last night was a good, resilient, gutty, team win but still the performance of a bad team, not even close to how well a mediocre Georgia Tech team played against Syracuse in a losing effort.

3. All could see that, while it was a team effort, the defense clearly played better. Nobody is ever going to complain about 26 yards rushing and 1.53 yards per carry allowed to a conference opponent. Don't look now, the vaunted Wisconsin run defense for April we had been hoping for now is ranked ninth in the country in yards per carry allowed and third (!!!!) in rushing yards allowed per game. We did unambiguously better than Ohio and Georgia Tech, which are respectable run defenses and both gave up in the 126-134 yard range and 4.2 yards per carry. April is giving us reason to believe in the run defense. I think this is the biggest story of our season so far. I also want to tip my hat to the pass defense though, as it held McCord (a pretty underrated player for my money) to the lowest passer rating, yards per attempt, yards, completion percentage, and touchdowns (and most interceptions) he's had this young season. I am getting more optimistic about our pass defense. We've now played two of the best QBs we will play all season in Hoover and McCord and the pass defense did very similarly against both (big difference last night was of course getting two brobdingnagian interceptions). Our national rankings on pass defense are ugly but I think there's a chance those rankings rise as degree of difficulty goes down substantially after next week.

4. The offense was much less impressive. TCU and Syracuse appear to have very similar passing defenses and our passing performance was almost identical in the two games. It appears Daniels is playing at a very consistent sub-par level, reinforced by our passing performance being much worse than the Ohio (bad QB) and Georgia Tech (very good QB) mustered against Syracuse. In the run game, our rushing stats were clearly the best we've had this season. However, as I always emphasize, the enemy gets a vote. Syracuse has atrocious run defense, now 127th in the nation. [But you know what's fun? Guess who the only Power Four team ranked worse in yards per carry allowed is: Clemson.] The truth is that we were under Syracuse's average in yards per carry allowed and rushing yards per game allowed and PFF gave us our lowest run blocking grade of the season (and of course our run blocking grades had already been terrible). I like what some of the receivers and the freshmen running backs give us but the OL is still an enormous, dispiriting problem.

5. He's not as big of a problem as the OL but Daniels is also a problem. Last night's performance was seventh of the eight QBs who've played so far this week in Total QBR and wouldn't have cracked the top 80 any week this season (nor do I expect it to this week). On the season, Daniels is 110th of 133 QBs after being 85th of 127 last year. As I have observed in the past, Total QBR and PFF often don't see eye-to-eye on QBs. PFF likes Daniels much more, slotting him as top 38 percent of QBs nationally, significant improvement over being top 80 percent last year. I don't put a lot of stock into these until the sample sizes are bigger, just giving a snapshot of how metrics I find interesting assess Daniels' play so far. As usual with regard to QBs, the Total QBR conforms more closely with my subjective sense. By the eye test, it just seemed like he left so much meat on the bone with overthrows to Ayomanor (and one underthrow and one spectacular touchdown that was actually overthrown and saved by Ayomanor's greatness), and of course two very bad interceptions that showed poor judgment. He also doesn't have good pocket sense and even some of his athletic leaving of the pocket abandons clean pockets. Ultimately, I think the offense is getting marginally better than it was last year but not because of Daniels (rather because modest improvement from an egregious baseline at OL and because we actually trust our running backs to hand them the ball sometimes). As the rest of the offense hopefully improves, I think Daniels places a lackluster ceiling on this team. Of course, fans will react to that with despair that Brown is out for a month or two with the hand injury. It's hard to escape that what we've seen so far this year makes it very enticing to see what Brown could do.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - msqueri - 09-21-2024

6. The bright spot of the offensive play last night was unquestionably the skill position guys. Ayomanor is of course the straw who stirs our drink and he had another very good game, with the biggest offensive plays of the game (what a touchdown catch, how clutch on the decisive 4th down, and some others....though how braindead is Syracuse to single cover Ayomanor on a must-pass down with the game on the line?!?!). Cisse is a recruit I underestimated and he made a very big impact. Even Roush (I'm not a fan) contributed. [Do we need to start talking about Bachmeier? He has gone from second in targets to sixth (six times in three games) and he is edging out Leyrer for the worst season grade on our team. Pretty clear liability. He had some fun moments last year (and of course the punt return against Cal Poly) but even then he didn't grade well. I think we would be well-served to miraculously get Mosley healthy.] I really like Ford and Davis and would give an arm to get to see them run behind a good offensive line. [Moving the chains (first down) leaderboard: Ayomanor (4), Ford (4), Cisse (3), Daniels (3), Davis, Roush, Reuben, Lamson, Irvin]

7. I think the most dispiriting thing going on in Stanford football is that there is no reason, in my judgment, to have much optimism that we are on a trajectory to ever give those young backs a good line to run behind. Something needs to change with OL. By the way, this was the first time in the last 12 games and the first time against a power conference team ever in the Taylor era that RBs had more carries than QBs (17 to 15). I am not sure I will predict that going forward against competent run defenses; it still seems somewhat likely that our run blocking is so putrid that RB is not a real part of our offense. Really hope we can change that, as I do think Agnew has the horses. The OL silver lining in this game was possible progress in pass blocking. It remains to be seen how good Syracuse's pass rush is going to end up being this season, but I will take one sack allowed any week of the season, and as I recall Daniels had a lot of time on the one he did take. It seems like we are going to have a lot better pass blocking than run blocking this season, currently #65 in pass blocking according to PFF and #116 in run blocking. The other encouraging thing in this game for the OL is that House took a big step forward compared to his debut. Very encouraging that he did better than Baklenko has in any FBS game the last two seasons. I realize there is arguably a coherent developmental philosophy with our OL shuffling and youth movement, but I am struggling with the idea McLaughlin is being benched for a true freshman and a true sophomore, neither of whom has ever had a single game at McLaughlin's normal level of performance. We are sacrificing current line play for developmental opportunity. Reasonable minds can debate if that makes sense with where our offense is (I myself am finding myself more conflicted) but I don't think there's a doubt it's happening. Speaking of the developmental youth movement, Pale and Baklenko are slumping (as is the more veteran Leyrer). Evidence continues to mount that our OL coaching blows, though maybe the picture will complicate if pass blocking progress can be sustained.

8. Reversion to the mean on penalties but even still it was in the middle-ish range for what teams nationally typically commit in a game and no more damaging than Syracuse's own penalties. Because the offense is so flawed and has to little margin for error, the OL penalties are very frustrating. But by and large, I would say the penalties are not that big of a story. The one exception is Leyrer's very bad game. I'm glad he was benched for Maikkula and I think there is a good chance Maikkula starts against Clemson. After all, it wouldn't be a Talamaivao/Netter football game without yet another starting lineup for this bad offensive line.

9. It was great to see some partying in the backfield, the second most tackles for loss and tied for the most sacks we've had against a power opponent under April, and it was even better to see multiple turnovers with the two big interceptions (and Bailey's forced fumble was equally turnover-conducive, just can't predict the bounce of a fumble). Nothing like a pick six for momentum and excitement. The amount we dropped Bailey or Tafiti back mercifully decreased, though Tafiti still did it a lot. With the nice things I've said about how the defense is trending I will soften my criticism of Tafiti's usage as long as we let Bailey hunt. And hunt he did. He was a terror, though he continues to be on the field a lot less than Aybar and Tafiti. But he wasn't actually the defender with the most positive plays in the box score. That would be - to my shock - Green. Heck of a game for him, far and away a career day even going back to his two (bad) years at Washington. He tackled in run defense and pass defense and of course had the interception. I also really appreciated Franklin's effort. We again had high single digits of players show up multiple times to me in significantly contributing ways in the box score (Green, Franklin, Sinclair, Tafiti, Bailey, Leigber, Bernadel, Edwards). Looking to the future, Staples and Rowell continue to show some potential at DL.

10. Another game, another round of special teams contributions. Have to start with Kenney and his makes of 38, 51, 35, and the game-winner from 39. He now is atop the kicker heap nationally, the most made field goals of any kicker who has yet to miss this season, as well as the most made field goals per game of any kicker in the nation (a massive 2.7 per game, higher than any kicker has had in years, which I'm sure will come down to earth). He has three from 40+ and now the one from 50+, which compares to Karty last year having 11 40+ and four 50+ on the season, so Kenney is exactly on that stellar pace. What a complete shock, at least to me and judging from Taylor's tone him as well, to not have missed a beat with a kicker who never attempted a field goal in three years and whose only real memory for Stanford fans was one of the most surprising and incompetent injuries in Stanford history. After the game, Taylor emotionally called Kenney the best kicker in the country, gave him the game ball, and gave him the honor of leading the C-House chant. Who could possibly disagree with any of that at this point. What. A. Story. Elsewhere on special teams, Flintoft contributed nicely to field position with net punts of 47 to the 17, 45 to the 30, 47 to the 32, and 40 to the 40. Bachmeier had a quiet day with punt returns for 1, 7, and 0, with the most notable thing being muffing a punt (could have been disastrous). Morris had an uncharacteristic missed tackle on kick coverage but Bailey quickly cleaned it up.

11. Game balls: Ayomanor, Bailey, Kenney, April

12. This win is the difference between a 3-4 win expectation for the season and a 4-5 win expectation. That is brobdingnagian for three reasons. First, for a program on a three year streak of three win seasons, a four win season would feel inordinately relieving. Second, five wins would feel and look a lot different in terms of selling the program's momentum to recruits, fans, and within the program, especially since we are on a five year streak of not winning more than four games. Third, this puts us one more surprise win away from a bowl being a legitimate aspiration. One can't overstate how much that level of over-achieving would mean for the rebuild. All of a sudden it feels like we're really playing for something. I haven't seen enough to make me think beating Clemson is a real possibility but, hey, we know the team battles and we are on our first winning streak in 23 months, so it's going to be a lot more fun going into Death Valley than we anticipated.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - d4cohn - 09-21-2024

Syracuse is not *that* bad of a team, at least compared to other conference opponents we have on the schedule at home like Virginia Tech (lost to Vandy, who then followed up that performance with a loss to Georgia State), home against Wake Forest (who got blown out so badly at home by Ole Miss that they canceled the rest of the home-and-home and lost at home to Virginia), home against SMU (lost at home to BYU and didn't look particularly good doing it). Even a road game at NC State (their star transfer QB got hurt, and with an inexperienced backup, have now gotten blown out in consecutive weeks) and definitely San Jose State are winnable. 

I don't know why we can't hope and expect this team to make a bowl. I think low expectations can actually undermine the program, because subconsciously it means everyone is ok with going year after year not making the postseason.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - fullmetal - 09-21-2024

Re: skill players -- I wouldn't start grading receivers just yet.  Daniels' inability to make reads means that we really don't have idea of whether receivers are winning their routes unless we have the All-22 film for study. 

I know the OL has been much maligned, and the penalities this game were near-fatal, but I saw a few pockets hold for so much longer this game.  Daniels had so much time to throw!  Watching him stand there with the occasional shoulder fake made me realize that the OL was winning their battles (for that play anyway).  If your OL gives you 5+ sec to throw, that should be an automatic positive play.  Make something happen, buddy.

As for run-blocking, my uneducated eye says that the OL needs to be faster to the point of attack and catch their targets off-balance.  And finish those blocks.  The freshman RBs looked good.  I liked the swing passes out of the backfield (but read the defense first).

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - TriangleTree - 09-21-2024

Can’t argue with the offensive stats, but I may have a different interpretation on their meaning and outlook. 

What I saw yesterday was an offense that’s not yet working, but at least I can see what it’s trying to do and what the mistakes that stalled it were. In earlier/past games the plays were doomed or busted from the start. I couldn’t even tell what we were trying to do. Yesterday i saw missed throws, holding penalties and false starts, but many plays were executed well and with good protection, and  when they didn’t I knew why.
The outcome may not be too different in the stats, but as a fan that gives me hope and feels like progress. 

It may come down to Syracuse not being all that great, but like another posted said, I bet they’re in the upper half of our schedule. 

In any case, really appreciate the analysis and levelheadedness of it as always

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - needle - 09-21-2024

Quote: Evidence continues to mount that our OL coaching blows, though maybe the picture will complicate if pass blocking progress can be sustained.

If Taylor fails (which I think is most likely) one could argue that it will have been a failure to prioritize O-line play. Consider the background of the O-line coaches, which maybe colors my perceptions more than it should, but still matters: a guy from Northern Arizona and another guy from Yale. Consider how Shaw brought in guys from the NY Jets (Bloomgren) and Washington Redskins (Carberry).

I also question how/why Stanford did not bring in a single transfer O-lineman before this season, but maybe that's less on TT given the guys brought in last year (Mayberry and Bank) arguably didn't help all that much (though being Ivy League guys, surely met the overly stringent transfer requirements Stanford seems to still be shackled with).

To bring this around to Friday's game and coaching, I was *shocked* to see Stanford's most experienced and probably best lineman, Levi Rogers, just flat out grab a guy's waist and tackle him. I mean, that's junior high stuff, and while I don't think that's a technique exactly taught by Netter and Talamaivao, at a certain point certain things come back to them, and, by extension, to your offensive-minded head coach.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - SamuelMcF - 09-21-2024

(09-21-2024, 12:35 PM)needle Wrote:  If Taylor fails (which I think is most likely) one could argue that it will have been a failure to prioritize O-line play. Consider the background of the O-line coaches, which maybe colors my perceptions more than it should, but still matters: a guy from Northern Arizona and another guy from Yale. Consider how Shaw brought in guys from the NY Jets (Bloomgren) and Washington Redskins (Carberry).

I also question how/why Stanford did not bring in a single transfer O-lineman before this season, but maybe that's less on TT given the guys brought in last year (Mayberry and Bank) arguably didn't help all that much (though being Ivy League guys, surely met the overly stringent transfer requirements Stanford seems to still be shackled with).

We tried and got skunked on transfers.

I agree on skepticism of the OL coaches, but you may recall the original OL coach Taylor brought in (Klayton Adams, from the Indianapolis Colts) bailed to coach the Arizona Cardinals instead after 2 months on the job, leaving Taylor totally up the creek.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - msqueri - 09-21-2024

(09-21-2024, 11:56 AM)d4cohn Wrote:  Syracuse is not *that* bad of a team, at least compared to other conference opponents we have on the schedule at home like Virginia Tech (lost to Vandy, who then followed up that performance with a loss to Georgia State), home against Wake Forest (who got blown out so badly at home by Ole Miss that they canceled the rest of the home-and-home and lost at home to Virginia), home against SMU (lost at home to BYU and didn't look particularly good doing it). Even a road game at NC State (their star transfer QB got hurt, and with an inexperienced backup, have now gotten blown out in consecutive weeks) and definitely San Jose State are winnable. 

I don't know why we can't hope and expect this team to make a bowl. I think low expectations can actually undermine the program, because subconsciously it means everyone is ok with going year after year not making the postseason.

Here is how the teams on the schedule rank based on Sagarin ratings heading into the weekend's action:

7) Notre Dame
20) Clemson
21) Louisville
29) TCU
38) Virginia Tech
40) SMU
41) Cal
59) Syracuse
64) NC State
84) Wake Forest
97) San Jose State
209) Cal Poly

Using the home field advantage adjustment, Notre Dame, Clemson, Louisville, and Cal are harder games than Syracuse while the others are easier.

I definitely think we should strive for a bowl, but analytically I am not predicting it until we get at least one more surprise win. Lots of good in the game that I highlighted in my post, but fundamentally we still played like a bad team that will be expected to lose more than win. If we played like we did against Syracuse we will still lose most of our games, unless we can get a pick six in all of them.

---

(09-21-2024, 12:17 PM)fullmetal Wrote:  Re: skill players -- I wouldn't start grading receivers just yet.  Daniels' inability to make reads means that we really don't have idea of whether receivers are winning their routes unless we have the All-22 film for study. 

I know the OL has been much maligned, and the penalities this game were near-fatal, but I saw a few pockets hold for so much longer this game.  Daniels had so much time to throw!  Watching him stand there with the occasional shoulder fake made me realize that the OL was winning their battles (for that play anyway).  If your OL gives you 5+ sec to throw, that should be an automatic positive play.  Make something happen, buddy.

As for run-blocking, my uneducated eye says that the OL needs to be faster to the point of attack and catch their targets off-balance.  And finish those blocks.  The freshman RBs looked good.  I liked the swing passes out of the backfield (but read the defense first).

As I always say, the enemy has a vote. You can't just say there were pockets and more time to throw and that means the OL is improved. Syracuse does not have a good defense at all and had a star player lost for the season in the opener. It means a lot less to have some success up front against Syracuse than it would against a good defense.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - d4cohn - 09-21-2024

(09-21-2024, 12:48 PM)msqueri Wrote:  Here is how the teams on the schedule rank based on Sagarin ratings heading into the weekend's action:

7) Notre Dame
20) Clemson
21) Louisville
29) TCU
38) Virginia Tech
40) SMU
41) Cal
59) Syracuse
64) NC State
84) Wake Forest
97) San Jose State
209) Cal Poly

Using the home field advantage adjustment, Notre Dame, Clemson, Louisville, and Cal are harder games than Syracuse while the others are easier.

I definitely think we should strive for a bowl, but analytically I am not predicting it until we get at least one more surprise win. Lots of good in the game that I highlighted in my post, but fundamentally we still played like a bad team that will be expected to lose more than win. If we played like we did against Syracuse we will still lose most of our games, unless we can get a pick six in all of them.

---

This may be an ironic argument to make, given professionally I analyze data for a living, but just looking at these Sagarin ratings, I think they are too biased toward prior year performance (either explicity or implicitly; I haven't seen a description of the formula yet). I can tell that because, based solely on data from performances this year, no rating system would have Notre Dame ranked #7 after losing to Northern Illinois at home etc. On the flip side, I think Sagarin (massively) undersells Syracuse because of how bad they had been under their previous head coach. Particularly in this NIL era with so much roster turnover, even if Sagarin doesn't explicitly factor in prior seasons' performance, a team with a lot of transfers (like Syracuse) may be better later in the season because of the time it takes for a lot of the new players to learn a new system and implement it in game action. 

If Sagarin doesn't take into account prior years performance, then it is a problem of very small sample sizes.

So either way, I see these Sagarin ratings similar to how I would see polling data: snapshots and sketches in time, but with (many) inherent limitations and biases.

On the yards per play stats, I understand a pick-six is a rare occurrence, but I also think defensive busts like the one we saw in the first half by the defense are also reasonably rare too (particularly given Syracuse had so little time left in the half). I also think on offense, our yards per game stats reflect QB limitations more than anything (Daniels completed three passes for positive yards in the final 7-8 minutes of the first half). I think Brown, when he is healthy, would give this team a (much) better chance to win (if TT is willing to make a change). 

Stanford dominated both lines of scrimmage in a way that the final score, and even the yards per play stats, belie.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - msqueri - 09-21-2024

Yes, many flaws in Sagarin at this stage. I used it out of convenience/familiarity but for what it's worth here is how SP+ ranks teams:

10) Notre Dame
16) Louisville
21) Clemson
27) TCU
35) Virginia Tech
38) SMU
42) Cal
51) NC State
64) Syracuse
82) San Jose State
83) Wake Forest
N/A) Cal Poly

That probably does a better job ranking based on this year's results/rosters than Sagarin, which still needs a few more weeks to get the results connected/meaningful. Either way, I think it's very likely Syracuse was overhyped.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - needle - 09-21-2024

It looks like SP+ before the game gave Syracuse a 67% chance to win: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CJImfkg0ouHIIIGOWRfbvwC0TNWh76n47xkz8nqrVBc/edit?gid=258607518#gid=258607518

So, Friday night's result qualifies as a Stanford upset victory, but certainly it wasn't a shocking result to SP+ (for some frame of reference, other games with the same 67% win probabilities this weekend are Arkansas at projected winner Auburn and projected winner Tennessee at Oklahoma, both of which I'd describe as coin flip games, fwliw).

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - Mick - 09-21-2024

(09-21-2024, 12:35 PM)needle Wrote:  To bring this around to Friday's game and coaching, I was *shocked* to see Stanford's most experienced and probably best lineman, Levi Rogers, just flat out grab a guy's waist and tackle him. I mean, that's junior high stuff, and while I don't think that's a technique exactly taught by Netter and Talamaivao, at a certain point certain things come back to them, and, by extension, to your offensive-minded head coach.

Probably used the KC Chiefs' OL performance in the Super Bowl as a guide...the Chiefs' OL have had no holding penalties in three straight Super Bowls.

And as for Daniels and a potential QB controversy...the way Daniels plays, I suspect he will be injured within the next few games, especially if he keeps leading with his head.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - d4cohn - 09-21-2024

(09-21-2024, 01:39 PM)msqueri Wrote:  Yes, many flaws in Sagarin at this stage. I used it out of convenience/familiarity but for what it's worth here is how SP+ ranks teams:

10) Notre Dame
16) Louisville
21) Clemson
27) TCU
35) Virginia Tech
38) SMU
42) Cal
51) NC State
64) Syracuse
82) San Jose State
83) Wake Forest
N/A) Cal Poly

That probably does a better job ranking based on this year's results/rosters than Sagarin, which still needs a few more weeks to get the results connected/meaningful. Either way, I think it's very likely Syracuse was overhyped.

Agreed. Syracuse is clearly not a top 30 team. I would say somewhere around 40, no lower than 50.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - cardcrimson - 09-21-2024

(09-21-2024, 03:39 PM)Mick Wrote:  

(09-21-2024, 12:35 PM)needle Wrote:  To bring this around to Friday's game and coaching, I was *shocked* to see Stanford's most experienced and probably best lineman, Levi Rogers, just flat out grab a guy's waist and tackle him. I mean, that's junior high stuff, and while I don't think that's a technique exactly taught by Netter and Talamaivao, at a certain point certain things come back to them, and, by extension, to your offensive-minded head coach.

Probably used the KC Chiefs' OL performance in the Super Bowl as a guide...the Chiefs' OL have had no holding penalties in three straight Super Bowls.

And as for Daniels and a potential QB controversy...the way Daniels plays, I suspect he will be injured within the next few games, especially if he keeps leading with his head.

Nice points Mick!

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - msqueri - 09-22-2024

Correction:

But Georgia Tech having a -1.1 points per meaningful drive is worse than Stanford having a -0.3 points per meaningful drive. If we are going to benchmark compared to Georgia Tech, we did better than they did on scoring by 0.8 points per meaningful drive and worse on yards per play by 0.49 yards per play. The comparison to Georgia Tech is not as negative as I thought and there's a meaningful metric I dug into that we look better in.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - BostonCard - 09-22-2024

Wouldn’t a pick six count as -7 points for Syracuse’s offensive drive rather than 0?

BC

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - needle - 09-22-2024

Quote: Looking to the future, Staples and Rowell continue to show some potential at DL.

Not doing a full rewatch, but watching a bit and Staples really jumps out. He showed an uncanny ability to slip right off blocks. Very exciting.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - msqueri - 09-22-2024

Yeah, Staples has been a surprise for me. He's only a redshirt freshman and a lightly-recruited reach undersized tweener at that, and he's already getting into games, 10 snaps well played in two straight games. One to watch.

---

(09-22-2024, 09:31 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Wouldn’t a pick six count as -7 points for Syracuse’s offensive drive rather than 0?

BC

I thought safeties counted as negative points but wasn't sure about defensive touchdowns.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - martyup - 09-22-2024

McCord was 14-1 as a starting QB coming into this game.

---

RE: Saturday morning thoughts - Syracuse - old spanish trail - 09-22-2024

(09-22-2024, 09:37 PM)martyup Wrote:  McCord was 14-1 as a starting QB coming into this game.

He was with Ohio State. Why did he transfer? Were they bringing in someone to replace him?

---