Perhaps we needed this season

[CU44SE]

Look, I know it looks like I'm coming off harsh and extremely critical. I just don't believe that this year has really shown much improvement from the coaching staff and I believe people might see that if they stopped looking at just the name on the front of the jersey and what they have done last year and the year before. There shouldn't be any real blowouts this year. These are very good teams, but completely different teams. Clemson was an extremely winnable game saturday night with stoudt at QB. I just hate that people are looking at it like a moral victory because it wasn't like last years schilaking.

 

[anomander]

Look, I know it looks like I'm coming off harsh and extremely critical. I just don't believe that this year has really shown much improvement from the coaching staff and I believe people might see that if they stopped looking at just the name on the front of the jersey and what they have done last year and the year before. There shouldn't be any real blowouts this year. These are very good teams, but completely different teams. Clemson was an extremely winnable game saturday night with stoudt at QB. I just hate that people are looking at it like a moral victory because it wasn't like last years schilaking.

I agree 100% with everything you said. Way too much back slapping for not getting blown out by teams that aren't as good as they were the year before. We haven't got worse, but we also haven't got better. If you want to argue that we are doing it with younger guys as key contributors that may fly, but to say we are visibly improving I just don't see it.

 

[timkay99]

I think the poor offensive showing has put the defense in a difficult position in almost every game. Quite frankly, the offense is dreadful and while there are certainly reasons for the poor production, the fact remains that we have given up poor field position, had lousy TOP (13th in ACC) and failed to capitalize on the many TO's (3rd in TO Margin in ACC) the defense has created.

These things are hard to quantify as there are too many variables. IMO the defense is better (how much is anybody's guess) and the offense is simply dreadful.

I was wondering if there was a scoring by quarter to suggest that the defense is getting tired in games, but I haven't found anything (and don't want to depress myself by looking at all the boxes again).

I just don't think the defense is better. I think that only Crume has taken a big step forward, a few others have taken small steps forward and a majority (Davis, Whigham, Esk, etc) have taken steps back. When you factor in grad losses, we just haven't adequately replaced it, IMO.

That isn't to say the defense is bad, but it isn't an elite unit (again IMO) and I think it is closer to avg then above avg when compared to the other ACC units.

 

[Crusty]

I was wondering if there was a scoring by quarter to suggest that the defense is getting tired in games, but I haven't found anything (and don't want to depress myself by looking at all the boxes again).

I just don't think the defense is better. I think that only Crume has taken a big step forward, a few others have taken small steps forward and a majority (Davis, Whigham, Esk, etc) have taken steps back. When you factor in grad losses, we just haven't adequately replaced it, IMO.

That isn't to say the defense is bad, but it isn't an elite unit (again IMO) and I think it is closer to avg then above avg when compared to the other ACC units.

Oh, don't get me wrong I don't think they are an elite unit by any means. I just think that at the end of the season their stats may be demonstrably better. If you match them up position by position it is hard to identify better players this year than last. However, they are more familiar with CB's defense. We'll see soon enough.

 

[JoeSU]

"Sure luck means a lot in football. Not having a good quarterback is bad luck"

-Don Shula

 

[tep624]

We haven't got worse, but we also haven't got better.

I disagree. We've definitely gotten worse on offense from the unit we saw at the tail end of last year to the unit we saw the first half of this season under Hunt. That ship may right itself under Lester but the jury is still out. But, we've also been missing Broyld, Estime, and Hunt (who was visibly injured during the L'ville game and I'm certain that affected his performance in that game and ours on offense).

Our defense may not statistically be the prettiest but it is keeping us in games in spite of being shorthanded in the secondary and having to stay on the field much longer than it ever should have during the first half of the season due to an (often 3 and out) up-tempo offense. We are also forcing a lot of turnovers due to the style of defense we play and that seems to be something that is completely discounted in this thread as far as being part of the strategy of this defense. It's by design.

That being said, outside of the L'ville game which got away from us in the second half, we are staying in games, in spite of the numerous injuries we have at key positions. Last year, we got blown out of the water 3 times, each of which was far worse than the L'ville game.

 

[anomander]

I disagree. We've definitely gotten worse on offense from the unit we saw at the tail end of last year to the unit we saw the first half of this season under Hunt. That ship may right itself under Lester but the jury is still out. But, we've also been missing Broyld, Estime, and Hunt (who was visibly injured during the L'ville game and I'm certain that affected his performance in that game and ours on offense).

Our defense may not statistically be the prettiest but it is keeping us in games in spite of being shorthanded in the secondary and having to stay on the field much longer than it ever should have during the first half of the season due to an (often 3 and out) up-tempo offense. We are also forcing a lot of turnovers due to the style of defense we play and that seems to be something that is completely discounted in this thread as far as being part of the strategy of this defense. It's by design.

That being said, outside of the L'ville game which got away from us in the second half, we are staying in games, in spite of the numerous injuries we have at key positions. Last year, we got blown out of the water 3 times, each of which was far worse than the L'ville game.

I think we went up against much better offenses last year. So far this year anytime we have gone up against an offense with a pulse we have performed poorly.

Villanova - That was a bad showing for our defense in a game we had no excuse not to dominate (plus we were fully healthy)
CMU - Terrible offensive team so we dominated as we should
Maryland - Did what they wanted against us
Notre Dame - Moved the ball up and down the field only to shoot themselves in the foot with fumbles
Louisville - Game was over early in the 2nd half against a Freshman qb
FSU - Did what they wanted offensively
Wake - Worst P5 offense and we dominated as we should have
Clemson - By far our best defensive performance of the season, but also against an inept offense under Stoudt. Could have been a different story if it were Watson.

 

[TheCusian]

Look, I know it looks like I'm coming off harsh and extremely critical. I just don't believe that this year has really shown much improvement from the coaching staff and I believe people might see that if they stopped looking at just the name on the front of the jersey and what they have done last year and the year before. There shouldn't be any real blowouts this year. These are very good teams, but completely different teams. Clemson was an extremely winnable game saturday night with stoudt at QB. I just hate that people are looking at it like a moral victory because it wasn't like last years schilaking.

You're spot on. But we're not talking reality, stats-based, reasoned analysis. We're talking perception- and as famous cupcake schedulers Duke and Rutgers and NC State will tell you- the perception is that we're not getting blown out, so we are better.

I'd rather win. I'd rather be ranked. But I will take the perception that comes with looking like we're better, than getting blown out every day, all day.

No one here is arguing that we are better than last season (yet) - but just that it helps to not get demolished by 35 in the first half.

 

[TheCusian]

I think we went up against much better offenses last year. So far this year anytime we have gone up against an offense with a pulse we have performed poorly. Villanova - That was a bad showing for our defense in a game we had no excuse not to dominate (plus we were fully healthy) CMU - Terrible offensive team so we dominated as we should Maryland - Did what they wanted against us Notre Dame - Moved the ball up and down the field only to shoot themselves in the foot with fumbles Louisville - Game was over early in the 2nd half against a Freshman qb FSU - Did what they wanted offensively Wake - Worst P5 offense and we dominated as we should have Clemson - By far our best defensive performance of the season, but also against an inept offense under Stoudt. Could have been a different story if it were Watson.

Right. But is the perception nationally and with recruits better this season over the same point last season?

Reality is great for message boards and diehards. But I'd prefer outsiders to think we are improving.

 

[anomander]

Right. But is the perception nationally and with recruits better this season over the same point last season?

Reality is great for message boards and diehards. But I'd prefer outsiders to think we are improving.

I don't know perception wasn't too good after the Louisville blow out, and then the mid-week McDonald demotion.

Either way whatever happened so far can all be erased with a strong finish. There is absolutely no way we shouldn't be able to go 3-1, and even win all 4. Anything less then 3 wins, and missing a bowl would be a huge disappointment.

 

[Crusty]

Alright, since I dont think anyone is understanding my argument. I will break it down. Obviously we don't have a whole data set yet for this year, but...

Last years schedule

Penn State--------------------23-17-------------- Season avg 28.7-------------- Def pts/gm- 26.2
Northwestern----------------48-27--------------Season avg 26.2-------------- Def pts/gm- 27.1
Wagner-----------------------0-54 (N/A)-------Season avg N/A-------------- Def pts/gm- N/A
Tulane------------------------17-52--------------Season avg 24.8-------------- Def pts/gm- 21.4
Clemson---------------------49-14--------------Season avg 40.2-------------- Def pts/gm- 22.2
NC State---------------------10-24--------------Season avg 22.8-------------- Def pts/gm- 30.2
Geogia Tech-----------------56-0--------------Season avg 35.1-------------- Def pts/gm- 22.8
Wake Forest----------------0-13--------------Season avg 18.3-------------- Def pts/gm- 24.1
Maryland-------------------3-20--------------Season avg 26.2-------------- Def pts/gm- 25.3
FSU-------------------------59-3--------------Season avg 51.6-------------- Def pts/gm- 12.1
Pitt--------------------------17-16--------------Season avg 26.3-------------- Def pts/gm- 27.2
BC---------------------------31-34--------------Season avg 27.7-------------- Def pts/gm- 28.9
Minn------------------------17-21--------------Season avg 25.7-------------- Def pts/gm- 22.2

Avg score------------------27.5 to 24.6----------avg offense 29.5---------------avg def 24.1


2014

Villanova------------------26-27 (N/A)----- Season avg N/A-------------- Def pts/gm- N/A
Central Michigan---------3-40-------------- Season avg 23.3-------------- Def pts/gm- 23.6
Maryland------------------20-34-------------- Season avg 31.6-------------- Def pts/gm- 29.3
Notre Dame---------------31-15-------------- Season avg 33.4-------------- Def pts/gm- 19.1
Louisville------------------28-6-------------- Season avg 30.9-------------- Def pts/gm- 14.6
Florida State--------------38-20-------------- Season avg 37.9-------------- Def pts/gm- 21.6
Wake Forest---------------7-30-------------- Season avg 14.75-------------- Def pts/gm- 24.6
Clemson-------------------16-6-------------- Season avg 32.3-------------- Def pts/gm- 18.3

Avg score------------------20.4 to 21.6------avg offense 29.1---------------avg def 21.6


Just going to leave out the lower division games because I didnt see their stats right away and its hard to judge them against our competition. So i will leave them out because we should all agree that we should always win these types of games. And frankly, we got lucky to win that game this year. Now looking at the avg offensive stats is a little misleading here. They look pretty on par with last years stats. However, you need to take into account we played a Louisville true freshman QB who has only accounted for 4 td's all year. 3 of which came against murray state when they won 66-21. Not the greatest competition. So they surely do not average 30.9 points a game with him at QB, and I'm really not sure how to justify that.

Clemson is another curve buster. Stoudt has contributed to 2 td's all year, one in our game and one in the south carolina state game were clemson hung 73 points. Again, not very good competition and thats his only other td besides against syracuse. So again, Clemson is not averaging 32.3 points a game with him at QB, Watson has played less snaps and has accounted for 15 total td's in that time. Their averaging about 17 pts per game when stoudt is the starter and they scored 16 against us. so again, right on their average.

Central Michigan was without their leading rusher who runs for 167 yards a game. Their offense is much different when he is playing. I don't think they beat us, but I think they probably score more then 3 points.

Maryland scored above their average on the season

Held Notre dame below their season average by 2 points, however we also forced 5 turnovers. They still managed to almost account for their season average with 5 turnovers.

Florida State hit their average.

Wake forest was held below their average.

The bottom line which i was trying to prove is we are playing less offensive teams this year and better defensive teams, so these games will be lower scoring games, and in turn, closer. So although we were losing 59-3 and 49-14, those were those teams season averages; 51 pts and 40 pts respectively. Essentially, they exceeded their yearly averages. This year, FSU met their season average when they scored 38 pts and Clemson with stoudt at QB essentially met their season avg.

Also people say, well where are the Georgia tech and NW games from last year? Well I think a perfect example of the Northwestern game is Louisville because we gave up 28 points and lost by 22 to a kid that only accounted for 4 td's all year (1 which came against us). We lost to a NW team last year by 21 points. Higher scoring game, 49-28 which may make it look worse and more of a blowout than 28-6. But we were really never in either game. The georgia tech game really doesn't have a match as of yet. But that is an offense that you do not see every day and this team was clearly not prepared for it. Their really is no team they would match up with other then if we scheduled an army or navy. They are unlike any other team we may play.

I have looked at your numbers in a different light. I compared the first eight games of each year and eliminated Wagner and Nova.

Before I get into the numbers,I would note that you go to great length in rationalizing each performance in 2014 but make no attempt to do the same for 2013.

1. Maryland's first three QB's were injured last year and they played with a linebacker as QB.
2. We knocked out Michael Campanaro, Wake's best receiver, early in the game. He was drafted by the Ravens.
3. Jameis Winston only played 3/4 of the game last year vs the whole game this year.
4. Penn State's Hackenburg was in his first college start.
5. Northwestern was without its fabulous WR kick-off artist Venric Mark.
6. NC State starting QB was out with a broken leg and we knocked out the backup. They also played without their starting receiver Rashard Smith, offensive tackle. defensive end and defensive tackle.

The point should be obvious that there are always qualitative factors to football statistics and it is useless to try and parse these out. When you discredit our turnover margin the he next thing you will be saying is that so and so had a bad game so it doesn't count.
As you can see from the tables below, SU defense held opponents to slightly fewer points per game than their per game season averages. This s true for FBS and ACC opponents.
The data is from your tables..

 

[Crusty]

I think we went up against much better offenses last year. So far this year anytime we have gone up against an offense with a pulse we have performed poorly.

Villanova - That was a bad showing for our defense in a game we had no excuse not to dominate (plus we were fully healthy)
CMU - Terrible offensive team so we dominated as we should
Maryland - Did what they wanted against us
Notre Dame - Moved the ball up and down the field only to shoot themselves in the foot with fumbles
Louisville - Game was over early in the 2nd half against a Freshman qb
FSU - Did what they wanted offensively
Wake - Worst P5 offense and we dominated as we should have
Clemson - By far our best defensive performance of the season, but also against an inept offense under Stoudt. Could have been a different story if it were Watson.

I think you may have forgotten how many teams we played last year that were really banged up - MD, Wake, NW and NCS. Hackenburg was in his first college start as well. Winston only played 3/4.