Where’s the tempo?

[TheCusian]

I can’t believe that 3 years in, some are thinking after 1 game that this might be what it looks like all year.

We’ve seen Tommy have amazing moments, unreal downfield accuracy, etc - but let’s go with “if this how well he throws it, we’ll struggle all year” ...

Edit: where’s the tempo? Where it always is vs inferior opponents. Used very sparingly with a very vanilla game plan. No need to pull it out for Liberty.

 

[sufandu]

To be clear, math isn’t an opinion. Not agreeing with me is like not agreeing that 2+2=4.

Small sample size variance isn’t the same as large sample size variance. Again, I can prove it with 5 minutes and a quarter.

Anybody who subscribes to ESPN & has passed high school statistics can tell you that’s accurate.

Well, you likely have 5 minutes to spare because you're wasting time on an internet message board. You own some sort of device that allows you internet access, so I'm confident you can spare a quarter. Have at it.

BTW, the sample size isn't that small. I chose Clemson because they have the most obvious talent advantage. Every initial team that had success running up tempo was traditionally considered a weaker team and adopted the philosophy to level the playing field against their more talented opponents.

 

[FrancoPizza]

Tommy's play didn't help. They didn't have an idea of what defense Liberty would be running which was a huge wrench in the game plan.

I would’ve expected the offense to settle down after halftime if that’s all it was. The fact that Tommy’s #1 target had no clue which way to break to the ball is most concerning.

 

[cuseattle]

What's the frequency Kenneth.

 

[Cuse'91]

Did we go too easy in training camp? Seems like many other schools had more attrition than us, maybe a reason for that...

 

[OburgCuse]

And then there was the GRob era where the total number of plays run was: 4 plays x number of possessions.

You’re off by a little bit. I remember some 3 plays x number of possessions...Grob was excellent at catching the opponent off guard with the 3rd down punt...:vomit:

 

[nzm136]

No - you’ve stuck to your guns even when presented with Dino’s successes over the last 3 years and a coherent description of his philosophy.

“More possessions vs good teams is bad!” is the simplistic understanding.

Do you want to embarrass yourself again? It seems as though we have a yearly tradition. You’re right that my position is simple, and yet you shockingly have yet to grasp it. But hope springs eternal. Maybe, just maybe, this is the year where you’ll get it.

Fact - a wildly inefficient offense that scores a lot on an endless parade of possessions isn’t as good as a surgically efficient offense that scores far fewer points, even though it scores a TD every time it touches the ball. Tempo is a lever.

Fact - high number of possessions minimizes random chance, which favors the more talented team. And, if you really want to get into it, it also favors the deeper team (fatigue and injuries), which is also more likely to be the more talented team.

I feel like I’m beating a dead horse, but most of the above is just math. You can disagree with it all you want, just like you can disagree with a screen door, but you’re going to take one to the noggin if you run head first into it.

[EDIT: Also, I get that you have a long and storied tradition of making things up, but I challenge you to find one post where I’ve said Dino is a bad coach.]

 

[nzm136]

Well, you likely have 5 minutes to spare because you're wasting time on an internet message board. You own some sort of device that allows you internet access, so I'm confident you can spare a quarter. Have at it.

BTW, the sample size isn't that small. I chose Clemson because they have the most obvious talent advantage. Every initial team that had success running up tempo was traditionally considered a weaker team and adopted the philosophy to level the playing field against their more talented opponents.

The advantage to paying attention in high school stats is that I don’t need to do the quarter experiment again. You were clearly AWOL that day, so I’ll help you out.

Flip a quarter 4 times and keep track of the percent that are heads. Do that ~20 times.

Then flip a quarter 50 times a set for ~20 sets, and keep track of the percent that are heads.

Now take the standard deviation of the results and let me know which one has more variability. (We both know you have no idea how to find a standard deviation, but fear not, there is a function in excel.)

You’re going to want to pay attention to the next part, because it went over your head the first time. My reference to small sample sizes was completely independent to whatever it is that you said about Clemson. (I’m arguing mathematical mechanics, where there is a proveable right and wrong. What Dino did or didn’t do against Clemson is irrelevant.) I was referencing the number of plays. Slower games have fewer plays and are more akin to the 4 flip sets. Faster games have more plays and are more akin to the 20 flip sets.

Since the 20 flip sets (high play count) have a more predictable outcome, the favored team is more likely to win a higher percent of the time.

And, if you’re really too proud to conduct your own experiment and you don’t believe me, that concept is the underlying foundation for the black scholes options pricing model. Feel free to look it up on Wikipedia. Alternatively, watch a basketball game against SU. The weaker teams almost always desperately try to avoid foot races in favor of slowing the game down. The almost all almost always make that same decision for a reason.

 

[orlandoorange]

Well that was a fun thread

 

[sufandu]

The advantage to paying attention in high school stats is that I don’t need to do the quarter experiment again. You were clearly AWOL that day, so I’ll help you out.

Flip a quarter 4 times and keep track of the percent that are heads. Do that ~20 times.

Then flip a quarter 50 times a set for ~20 sets, and keep track of the percent that are heads.

Now take the standard deviation of the results and let me know which one has more variability. (We both know you have no idea how to find a standard deviation, but fear not, there is a function in excel.)

You’re going to want to pay attention to the next part, because it went over your head the first time. My reference to small sample sizes was completely independent to whatever it is that you said about Clemson. (I’m arguing mathematical mechanics, where there is a proveable right and wrong. What Dino did or didn’t do against Clemson is irrelevant.) I was referencing the number of plays. Slower games have fewer plays and are more akin to the 4 flip sets. Faster games have more plays and are more akin to the 20 flip sets.

Since the 20 flip sets (high play count) have a more predictable outcome, the favored team is more likely to win a higher percent of the time.

And, if you’re really too proud to conduct your own experiment and you don’t believe me, that concept is the underlying foundation for the black scholes options pricing model. Feel free to look it up on Wikipedia. Alternatively, watch a basketball game against SU. The weaker teams almost always desperately try to avoid foot races in favor of slowing the game down. The almost all almost always make that same decision for a reason.

Hahaha. I did just fine in statistics thank you. Strategy in sports is not the same as the results of coin flipping. This is where your arrogance in your intelligence fails you. Your "experiment" does nothing to explain how speeding up the game limits the opposing defense's to ability line up in complicated sets, disguise coverages, or recieve changes from the sideline, if the coach sees something he doesn't like. You place too much weight in the assumed benefit of a smaller number of possessions. It is the same assumption coaches have made for generations and is one that has been slowly shifting over the last decade or so. It started with overmatched schools and has been making it's way to varying degeees to the established programs.

I can't believe you have been on the board as long as you have and have not seen that explained before. What is more likely is that the arrogance you flaunt has not allowed you to believe it, regardless of how many times it has been explained.

 

[cuse10]

Did we go too easy in training camp? Seems like many other schools had more attrition than us, maybe a reason for that...

No, they didn't. All reports indicated that the defense was that good and there was some work to do offensively.