• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Five Most Important Factors of College Football

I rather liked this one:

"You can build a team and philosophy around the first four factors on this list. The fifth (turnovers) might get you fired, and there isn't much you can do about it."
 
"Even with a good kicker, averaging three points per scoring opportunity will win you about one-third of your games. (Keep this in mind the next time your team kicks an 18-yard field goal.)"

Wonder where punting from your inside your opponents 40 yard line factors in........ glad those days are gone.....
 
It's amazing that we pay coaches $1.3 million salaries and accept the fact that they don't know this stuff.

It's like all the times Grobe loved to chirp about our time of possession. Meanwhile, you have Mark Helfrich over in Oregon often telling people that they track facts determinate of success and time of possession is one of the most meaningless.
 
TexasDeac10 said:
It's amazing that we pay coaches $1.3 million salaries and accept the fact that they don't know this stuff.

It's like all the times Grobe loved to chirp about our time of possession. Meanwhile, you have Mark Helfrich over in Oregon often telling people that they track facts determinate of success and time of possession is one of the most meaningless.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you look at a school like Baylor who has this "revolutionary" offense focused on big plays and lo and behold it's the most predictive form of success. Then you look at us trying to install the damn option, which eliminates a lot of opportunities for big plays. Unreal.
 
Dean Oliver brings up the good point that big plays are more of an output than an input. I suppose you could look at average distance of passing attempts potentially as an input. Either way, I'm eager to see what he concludes in his research.
 
I think the only thing we (probably inadvertently) did was always play that soft 4-2-5 defense and have people bleed us to death rather than give up explosive plays. Only problem is that totally killed us with our limited depth over the course of a game
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I rather liked this one:

"You can build a team and philosophy around the first four factors on this list. The fifth (turnovers) might get you fired, and there isn't much you can do about it."
Click to expand...

I bet if we looked at Grobe's tenure, we'd see the reverse was true. We were mostly weak on the four factors but turnover ratio kept us in 4-5 win range.
 
PhDeac said:
I bet if we looked at Grobe's tenure, we'd see the reverse was true. We were mostly weak on the four factors but turnover ratio kept us in 4-5 win range.
Click to expand...

I look at it this way. We were so ridiculously strong on the fifth factor on 2006 and 2007, it's how Grobe got paid well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top