Why time of possession is meaningless

[NineOneSeven]

Baylor:

68 offensive touchdowns.

53 of those have been < 2 minute drives.

25 have been < 1 minute drives.



That's stupid.

 

[OrangeTarheel]

Tell that to Bill Parcells. I saw one of his teams, I think it was in 1990, take an entire quarter -- all 15 minutes -- to go down the field and score a TD. If Baylor's not on the field then Baylor's not scoring TD's.

 

[shandeezy7]

You really have to look no further than last weekend's game to see how pointless time of possession really is:

SU time of possession: 41:42
FSU time of possession: 18:18
FSU - 59 SU - 3

 

[Doc5120]

Time of possession and bench points in basketball are 2 of the most worthless stats out there. I can't stand it when announcers harp on these things. They are meaningless. The goal is to score more points than your opponent. It does not matter how long it takes to do so, nor does it matter who scores those points. Thank you Go for starting this thread. I'm glad others see the light.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Tell that to Bill Parcells. I saw one of his teams, I think it was in 1990, take an entire quarter -- all 15 minutes -- to go down the field and score a TD. If Baylor's not on the field then Baylor's not scoring TD's.

More plays, more time, higher probability of a turnover.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I think as a general rule it's better to have more time of possession than not.

But, yeah - put points on the board. It works.

 

[bnoro]

Baylor:

68 offensive touchdowns.

53 of those have been < 2 minute drives.

25 have been < 1 minute drives.



That's stupid.

Can you even add, bro?

 

[Doc5120]

Can you even add, bro?

Some drives less than 2 minutes are also less than 1 minute, so it's not necessarily going to add up to 68.

 

[Alsacs]

Time of Possession matters a lot because if you watched MNF this week. Carolina and New England offensively each dominated on offense and had long drives which took up a lot of clock and shortened the game. If you can sustain long drives its very important. Carolina had 7 possessions(really 6 possessions because the one ending the 1st half was nothing) and scored 24 points and New England only had 6 possessions the entire game and had 20 points because they like Carolina dominated offensively and shortened the game.

If you want to beat a team with a super offense your going to need to have long sustained drives that eat clock and shorten the game. Its how Stanford beat Oregon 2 weeks ago and how IMO the Giants beat the Patriots in Super Bowl 42. Each team used a physical defense and a ball control offense and beat superior offenses by keeping the ball away and beating the other team up when they had the ball.

 

[donniesyracuse]

It is an overrated stat. I blame Scott Norwood. Had he made that field goal, we wouldn't have heard about the Giants and their time of possession. The movement towards no huddle and up tempo offenses would have happened sooner.

 

[bnoro]

Some drives less than 2 minutes are also less than 1 minute, so it's not necessarily going to add up to 68.

Dammit. Too early in the morning. Was just trying to rag on a buddy.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Some drives less than 2 minutes are also less than 1 minute, so it's not necessarily going to add up to 68.

As Starbury would say, that's factorial.

 

[Millhouse]

Tell that to Bill Parcells. I saw one of his teams, I think it was in 1990, take an entire quarter -- all 15 minutes -- to go down the field and score a TD. If Baylor's not on the field then Baylor's not scoring TD's.

SU had 41 min TOP against FSU

unless you do the bo jackson zig zag between the goal lines, eventually you're going to score or turn the ball over

 

[dollarbill44]

It's not a black and white issue. In football where a defensive front 7 can get very worn down over the course of a quarter/half when the other team controls the ball. Fatigued players are less effective - that's a fact of science, and is the reason why tackling gets very sloppy when players are tired.

Sure, if your offense scores every possession, or scores easily, like the Baylor example, it can be less meaningful. But in the case of a team who struggles to score, like SU, TOP can be very important. It can actually decide the outcome of a close game. To blur the lines even further, the tipping point at which TOP becomes meaningful likely varies from team to team. So, for SU, it may be able to deal with a -5:00 TOP, whereas, Baylor can handle a -15:00 TOP.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Some drives less than 2 minutes are also less than 1 minute, so it's not necessarily going to add up to 68.

Dammit. Too early in the morning. Was just trying to rag on a buddy.

 

[NineOneSeven]

It's not a black and white issue. In football where a defensive front 7 can get very worn down over the course of a quarter/half when the other team controls the ball. Fatigued players are less effective - that's a fact of science, and is the reason why tackling gets very sloppy when players are tired.

Sure, if your offense scores every possession, or scores easily, like the Baylor example, it can be less meaningful. But in the case of a team who struggles to score, like SU, TOP can be very important. It can actually decide the outcome of a close game. To blur the lines even further, the tipping point at which TOP becomes meaningful likely varies from team to team. So, for SU, it may be able to deal with a -5:00 TOP, whereas, Baylor can handle a -15:00 TOP.

No it's not.

But, my basic point was, look at those numbers again. Can you fathom them? I know I can't.

 

[Millhouse]

It is an overrated stat. I blame Scott Norwood. Had he made that field goal, we wouldn't have heard about the Giants and their time of possession. The movement towards no huddle and up tempo offenses would have happened sooner.

the giants would've have had all that time of possession if marv levy hadn't done so many chickensh!t punts

the time of possession crowd is also the crowd that wants to run more but yet is also the crowd that wants to punt more

going for it more means you can run it more and means you will have possession more

everybody loves to go back to super bowl 25. it was so long ago, none of us can even read the roman numerals anymore.

everyone knows about the giants time of possession but no one knows about levy's terrible punts. why is that? meatheads like TOP and don't like 4th downs

buffalo punted on 4th and 2 from the NY 44, the giants marched down and got a touchdown before halftime

convert and score there, you're up 19-3 instead of 12-10

i'm not bitter

also belichick probably video taped everything. ******** next to every super bowl for him.

 

[tbonezone]

i wouldn't go so far as to say TOP is "meaningless". when you have the ball chances are pretty slim that the opponent is putting up points. the stat can certainly be called "deceiving" in some rare instances but overall possession is a good thing.