Steve Angeli: Torn Achilles | Page 19 | Syracusefan.com

Steve Angeli: Torn Achilles

I think people might be frustrated with Angeli again. It’s a short week and I’m expecting that our staff is going to run out some new combinations of guys and a lot of 2-3 deeps plus guys playing a new position for the first time.

Angeli is likely going to have a new line and some deeper cuts of the WRs. That’s not going to make for the crisp mistake free game we all want.

Seeing Angeli hit Cook or Gil or JRS on deep passes all day or seeing Nixon blow up their defense would be fun to watch but it means nothing against Colgate. We know they can do that already.

The staff needs to see what the 2-3 deeps can do with Angeli. Same on defense. That’s how we win games in November.
 
007 said:
Umm...that is exactly what it means. It's based on a probability formula.
Expand...
Wrong. Each event is an independent event. Every time there is a 1/100 chance of it happening. It likely will never happen at a 1% probability. Your methodology would mean that flipping a coin always alternates between heads and tails, because each is a 50% probability. Probability isn’t a punch card where you keep punching out the 99 losers until the 100th one hits.
 
OttoinGrotto said:
EAT IT ADDAZIO
Expand...
<drunk wisdom>
Unlike McCord, Angeli did not have an 11-1 season as starter, for a NC contender, under his belt. Expect growth in personal skills, as well as leadership. Fran sticks with him, and Angeli grows and proves himself under fire. That moment transforms, it's important and permanent. He sees himself as the leader. The team sees him as the leader. Fran rolled the dice on a guy he believed in, and hot damn, the guy delivered. Crux moment!

And Graham's-number likes for JRS and that elite catch. NJ to NY - the universe is righting itself.

P.S. Schiano is human waste.
</drunk wisdom>
 
Archbold44 said:
We will have to agree to disagree. I take the first FG. You just marched down the field. You do not want to come away empty. This is UConn, not Holy Cross. You are not going to be the superior team because of one drive.

A FG gives you the lead. If they get a TD, you can get a TD and retake the lead. If they get a FG, you get a FG and retake the lead. If they don't score, you can always go for it on the next one...
Expand...
Analytics say go for it. It wasn’t the decision that was the problem, it was the play calling. On the second one though I would’ve kicked just based on how the line was having issues.
 
Capt. Tuttle said:
Wrong. Each event is an independent event. Every time there is a 1/100 chance of it happening. It likely will never happen at a 1% probability. Your methodology would mean that flipping a coin always alternates between heads and tails, because each is a 50% probability. Probability isn’t a punch card where you keep punching out the 99 losers until the 100th one hits.
Expand...
It's wild how many people have no idea how probability works.

Sentence 3 and 4 directly contradict each other.
 
FrancoPizza said:
Analytics say go for it. It wasn’t the decision that was the problem, it was the play calling. On the second one though I would’ve kicked just based on how the line was having issues.
Expand...
I don't care about analytics. I kick the first FG. If we were 4th and goal from inside the 5... maybe we go for it. But just inside the 10 is not good enough--UConn was able to come out in a regular offensive set. If we were at the edge of our FG kickers range, then we go for it. But when it is a chip shot FG, but not inside the 5, I see no value in going for it. It took UConn 4 plays to get out near midfield. Not the same as being inside the 2 or 3 and having to play uber conservative just to avoid your own end zone.

Couple that with a stupid play call... I think a mistake. Maybe that play call works in the same situation at the 20 yard line, where the QB is waiting to see if the coach would call a TO and put the FG unit out there AND you have the defense more spread out/more field to cover. But to go 9 on 11 in a compressed field was a stupid waste of a play and series.

Edit: If we were playing an away game and there was little chance of a safe FG attempt or our kickoff would have no chance of a TB and we were concerned about return... that might factor in. But with our kicker kicking TBs and being at home/inside...
 
we've allowed 8 sacks in 3 games. what's the betting over/under sack total against clemson ? tigers have only generated 6 sacks so far against LSU, troy and Gtech. tenn hit us backfield 5 times. i'm gonna guess we're playing from behind early and throwing a bit more. clemson's hungry and our schemes seem a bit off. doubling one dude while leaving an open lane. tiger Dline got draft$$$ on the mind. looking for payday . i'll bet clemson matches that 5 total. if we hold that tiger to just 2 then the rest of the season bodes well. go cuse
 
Last edited:
tbonezone said:
we've allowed 8 sacks in 3 games. what's the betting over/under sack total against clemson ? tigers have only generated 6 sacks so far against LSU, troy and Gtech. tenn hit us backfield 5 times. i'm gonna guess we're playing from behind early and throwing a bit more. clemson's hungry and our schemes seem a bit off. doubling one dude while leaving an open lane. tiger Dline got draft$$$ on the mind. looking for payday . i'll bet clemson matches that 5 total. if we hold that tiger to just 2 then the rest of the season bodes well. go cuse
Expand...

So, let me understand. We give up 2.7 sacks through 3 games, and that included Tennessee,

Clemson is averaging 2 sacks per game. So you're predicting they get 5 ??

Do I have that right? Sure, it's possible, but it's hardly res ipsa loquitur.
 
IthacaMatt said:
So, let me understand. We give up 2.7 sacks through 3 games, and that included Tennessee,

Clemson is averaging 2 sacks per game. So you're predicting they get 5 ??

Do I have that right? Sure, it's possible, but it's hardly res ipsa loquitur.
Expand...
ok then . ipso / fraction/ sump tin . what's your prediction ?
 
Last edited:
IthacaMatt said:
So, let me understand. We give up 2.7 sacks through 3 games, and that included Tennessee,

Clemson is averaging 2 sacks per game. So you're predicting they get 5 ??

Do I have that right? Sure, it's possible, but it's hardly res ipsa loquitur.
Expand...
To be fair UT has high level Dline play as does Clemson ... Clemson had 4 of their sacks in the Troy game. LSU gave up 1 and GT 0. So they are capable of a big game in the sack department and part of that will simply be how many drop backs Angeli has ... more passing attempts means more potential sacks. LSU gave up 0 sacks to Florida so Nuss can be hard to get to and GT minimizes sacks by leveraging their running game. If our OL plays like it did against UT 5 sacks is possible ... not sure why that is so far out of line.
 
wfschrec said:
To be fair UT has high level Dline play as does Clemson ... Clemson had 4 of their sacks in the Troy game. LSU gave up 1 and GT 0. So they are capable of a big game in the sack department and part of that will simply be how many drop backs Angeli has ... more passing attempts means more potential sacks. LSU gave up 0 sacks to Florida so Nuss can be hard to get to and GT minimizes sacks by leveraging their running game. If our OL plays like it did against UT 5 sacks is possible ... not sure why that is so far out of line.
Expand...
Clemson’s DL is effin nice.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
175,090
Messages
5,326,716
Members
6,225
Latest member
cuse_1997

Online statistics

Members online
51
Guests online
2,732
Total visitors
2,783
Totals may include hidden visitors.


Top Bottom