[CTcard]

[quote author=teejers1 link=topic=18310.msg217424#msg217424 date=1512686010]
Well, CTC, if we're parrying back and forth, will you at least acknowledge that when you put a premium on fewer possessions - which Stanford inexplicably appears to do - that when the D scores or puts the O in a great position to score, that such instances make the O look far better on a PPP basis than it would with a team that actually, you know, likes to have a lot of offensive possessions and plays with a little more pace?

Returns aren't counted on offensive points per drive metrics.
[/quote]

I am not sure if I don't understand teejers point or simply don't agree.

As WIM notes, defensive scores don't count. Short field scores do count (as BC noted), but presumably those things also occur on a per possession basis, i.e. if you give the defense more opportunities, they'll make more TOs or if you give the return guys more opportunities they'll give good returns more often.


Like most choices anywhere, there are strengths and weaknesses that go along with deciding to huddle and let the play clock run. I am not quite sure whether I think the strengths or weaknesses win out in Stanford's case, but there is no question that Stanford does so and thus pointless to ignore it in considering what has been good or bad about the Stanford offense.

[CTcard]

[quote author=teejers1 link=topic=18310.msg217424#msg217424 date=1512686010]
Well, CTC, if we're parrying back and forth, will you at least acknowledge that when you put a premium on fewer possessions - which Stanford inexplicably appears to do - that when the D scores or puts the O in a great position to score, that such instances make the O look far better on a PPP basis than it would with a team that actually, you know, likes to have a lot of offensive possessions and plays with a little more pace?

Returns aren't counted on offensive points per drive metrics.
[/quote]

I am not sure if I don't understand teejers point or simply don't agree.

As WIM notes, defensive scores don't count. Short field scores do count (as BC noted), but presumably those things also occur on a per possession basis, i.e. if you give the defense more opportunities, they'll make more TOs or if you give the return guys more opportunities they'll give good returns more often.


Like most choices anywhere, there are strengths and weaknesses that go along with deciding to huddle and let the play clock run. I am not quite sure whether I think the strengths or weaknesses win out in Stanford's case, but there is no question that Stanford does so and thus pointless to ignore it in considering what has been good or bad about the Stanford offense.