• 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!

Wake-Vanderbilt GAME THREAD - 9/9/2023, 11am Allegacy Federal Credit Union Stadium - lightening delay

The deal with Claiborne, so far at least, looks just like KWIII and CBS. I was watching our game vs. UNC from 2019 and CBS was in the first 2 or 3 series on offense and gained a handful of yards. KWIII gets in and we go right down the field. In our offense there seems to be a big difference in backs that are a little hesitant and backs that have the ability to see the hole and hit it quickly. Ellison is a good player and he certainly has a place in the rotation, but Claiborne is showing the same type of traits I think KWIII showed and if we don't take advantage of that as much as we can, then it's stupid. I watched the replay of the Vandy game and as I witnessed live, Claiborne made some really good blocks in pass-pro and on Carney's TD run out of the wishbone.
 
Guys Ellison and Claiborne were both healthy against Elon, and Claiborne got more carries (13 to 10). That includes Claiborne being the choice on the drive where we fully dedicated to running the ball with the jumbo package.

Carries are going to be split at RB, as has been the case every year of Clawson's tenure. When both are healthy, the carries will probably be split close to evenly, which is how nearly every other team in college football operates. It's going to be fine.
 
Colonel Angus said:
You must be new around here - Strickland, Barca and many on the left won't be happy until schools are shut down (again), economy is damaged (again), and all public events are cancelled (unless the protest is for a virtuous enough cause) until their great-great grandchildren come out of the womb wearing a cloth mask
Click to expand...

I hope hell is hot
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Wake post game win expectancy per SP+ at 57.4% with an “expected adjusted margin” Wake winning by 3.4. Dropped a few spots in the ratings to 44th.

@IAppreciateIt
Click to expand...
Win expectancy of 57% feels very low in a game that was won by 16 points.

I understand that Vandy got stopped on the 1 yard line, but we fumbled on the 1 yard line so that basically evens out. Wake outgained Vanderbilt 484 to 423, so I guess that's pretty close?
 
Claiborne averaged 2x more yards per carry against Elon and went 26 for 165 against Vandy. I'm happy to review all the data and talking points, but I'm not going to ignore what I saw: Claiborne is a bad man. If we want to win, we get Demond and Key Williams the ball as much as we can.
 
wakelaw13 said:
Claiborne averaged 2x more yards per carry against Elon
Click to expand...
This ignores pretty important context that the majority of those yards came when Wake went jumbo package in order to actually have the numbers to run block. I think he was at around 3 yards per carry before that drive against Elon.

But yes, I don't think anyone here believes that Ellison is a better rusher of the football than Claiborne.
 
I think a fair thing to say in this discussion is that if we get another game like Vanderbilt in which the other team is playing 3 safeties and a light box, Claiborne should definitely get more snaps than Ellison. If Ellison out-carries Claiborne in a game like that, then I will definitely be joining those of you that are concerned.
 
deacon14 said:
Win expectancy of 57% feels very low in a game that was won by 16 points.

I understand that Vandy got stopped on the 1 yard line, but we fumbled on the 1 yard line so that basically evens out. Wake outgained Vanderbilt 484 to 423, so I guess that's pretty close?
Click to expand...
The fumble returned for a touchdown is basically six points from 16 to 10 since that’s not generally replicable so that’s a quick jump start down from 16. Vandy also gained more yards per play than we did (6.71 to 6.54). I do think just looking at “turnover luck” where we were up 3-1 discounts that the other two Vandy picks were just awful plays by the QB and not really any “luck” involved at all (aka those are turnovers that were likely to occur at large because Swann was making bad decisions and that seems to be kinda who he is). Taking one of the picks back inside the 10 also helped “inflate” margin.

I figured it would be around 70% and was a little surprised to see sub 60%
 
wakelaw13 said:
Claiborne averaged 2x more yards per carry against Elon and went 26 for 165 against Vandy. I'm happy to review all the data and talking points, but I'm not going to ignore what I saw: Claiborne is a bad man. If we want to win, we get Demond and Key Williams the ball as much as we can.
Click to expand...
The thing with Claiborne is his longest run Saturday was 17 yards, which to me make 26 for 165 more impressive. One or 2 long runs didn't make up the bulk of his 165, he was gaining good yards consistently.
 
deacon14 said:
Win expectancy of 57% feels very low in a game that was won by 16 points.

I understand that Vandy got stopped on the 1 yard line, but we fumbled on the 1 yard line so that basically evens out. Wake outgained Vanderbilt 484 to 423, so I guess that's pretty close?
Click to expand...
One of our punts also turned into 7 points — for Wake. Much closer game without that complete gift.

Even with that being the case, it didn’t ever feel like we were losing that one, so 57% does feel low.
 
Haros said:
One of our punts also turned into 7 points — for Wake. Much closer game without that complete gift.

Even with that being the case, it didn’t ever feel like we were losing that one, so 57% does feel low.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Although at the same time if Vandy just fair catches that punt they were only down 17-14 with a minute to work to go try and tie the game.
 
deacon14 said:
I think a fair thing to say in this discussion is that if we get another game like Vanderbilt in which the other team is playing 3 safeties and a light box, Claiborne should definitely get more snaps than Ellison. If Ellison out-carries Claiborne in a game like that, then I will definitely be joining those of you that are concerned.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and it's certainly not as oversimplified, cut-and-dry, our coaches are incompetent that some of our message board geniuses like to believe.

I do think there is a chicken-or-egg situation, where to use Clawson's words, "we need to pass to set up the run" which then neccessitates strong blocking from our running backs -- but also exacerbates our need to pass to set up the run. I think our history tells us we'll struggle to run the ball unless it's against a light box (and even that hasn't been a gimme), which leads to the pass first mindset.

But I think with special runners (and a mobile QB), the math might shift a little bit to where you can opt to run against seven in the box and you lessen the importance of pass blocking from your running backs.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
The fumble returned for a touchdown is basically six points from 16 to 10 since that’s not generally replicable so that’s a quick jump start down from 16. Vandy also gained more yards per play than we did (6.71 to 6.54). I do think just looking at “turnover luck” where we were up 3-1 discounts that the other two Vandy picks were just awful plays by the QB and not really any “luck” involved at all (aka those are turnovers that were likely to occur at large because Swann was making bad decisions and that seems to be kinda who he is). Taking one of the picks back inside the 10 also helped “inflate” margin.

I figured it would be around 70% and was a little surprised to see sub 60%
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is all fair enough. That's an interesting thought about turnover luck, do you think the model considers that at all? Some turnovers are certainly a lot "luckier" than others (the punt fumble vs terrible INTs being a good example).

At the end of the day, Wake rushed for >7 yards per carry from RBs in a game in which Wake rushed the ball 39 times. With that stat alone in mind, I struggle to see a world in which the opposing team wins >40% of the time.
 
deacon14 said:
Yeah, this is all fair enough. That's an interesting thought about turnover luck, do you think the model considers that at all? Some turnovers are certainly a lot "luckier" than others (the punt fumble vs terrible INTs being a good example).

At the end of the day, Wake rushed for >7 yards per carry from RBs in a game in which Wake rushed the ball 39 times. With that stat alone in mind, I struggle to see a world in which the opposing team wins >40% of the time.
Click to expand...
I don’t know if Connelly discloses what goes into it but I’d imagine it’s based around the concept that while forcing fumbles is a skill recovering fumbles is basically a coin flip; interceptions somewhere in between? That’s a good question though and worth asking I’ll see if I can find an answer.
 
It seems to me that if you have an elite rb like Walker or Claiborne, you tweak your offense to take advantage of their skills and design it to require less of him blocking ; maybe two backs and let him swing out for passes.
 
Carney's fumble messed us up.

He scores and we are rolling and dominating. Instead it's just another nice win.

LY Vandy did beat Florida (home) and Kentucky on the road at the end of the year. So, they are decent under Lea.

And we almost dominated them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top