• 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!

WFU @ Louisville – Sat 10/29 – 3:30 ACCN

Wakeforest22890 said:
Yeah I mean Wake is more likely overall to end the season 9-3 than 11-1. We have the BC game and then five games where the spread will be single digits (Wake probably favored in all five at this point).
Click to expand...

How dare you tell people this.
 
I think it’s fair to say State is plummeting. Leary being out the whole season is a big blow to a team that was already kind of average offensively. Someone posted on their board that they haven’t scored a TD since he was knocked out of the FSU game. Ouch.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
what are the inputs for post-game win expectancy?
Click to expand...
Bill Connelly's version includes a lot of the same underlying "key predictive stats" that go into SP+: success rate, turnover margin/luck, explosive play rate, starting field position, some version of "finishing drive" rate (aka number of drives converted into points v. what you'd "expect" from where the team was). I'm sure there are a couple more I'm missing.
 
BiffTannen said:
How dare you tell people this.
Click to expand...
Yeah I mean that's just basic win expectancy. Converting a rough estimate of projected lines into implied odds:

Boston College: 98% (rounded down from Boyd's bets which has >20 point spread at 100%)
Louisville: 62%
State: 51% (this is probably a little low - I'd have it 55%-60% with Leary out)
UNC: 73%
Cuse: 66%
Duke: 75%

So expected record based on these would be 9.25-2.75 (4.25 expected wins of 6 games)
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
State: 51% (this is probably a little low - I'd have it 55%-60% with Leary out)
Click to expand...
I’ll be really disappointed if we lose to State without Leary. I know it’s in Raleigh and they probably (?) will get a little better offensively over the next few weeks but we have way more firepower.
 
Bill Connelly also had WF's postgame win expectancy at <50% after the win at FSU
 
PhDeac said:
Plummeting seems like a strong word for losing on the road to a team that’s on their level and losing an overrated QB. I think State beats VT and it will still be a tough game.
Click to expand...
they’ve been progressively plummeting since the season started
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Yeah I mean that's just basic win expectancy. Converting a rough estimate of projected lines into implied odds:

Boston College: 98% (rounded down from Boyd's bets which has >20 point spread at 100%)
Louisville: 62%
State: 51% (this is probably a little low - I'd have it 55%-60% with Leary out)
UNC: 73%
Cuse: 66%
Duke: 75%

So expected record based on these would be 9.25-2.75 (4.25 expected wins of 6 games)
Click to expand...
You’ve got it. I did the same breakdown/analysis on the season-long thread yesterday and the takeaways were that a) we will likely be favored in all of our remaining games; and b) the odds of going 6-0 and not dropping one or more games is like 9-10%.
 
thatguy2016 said:
Bill Connelly also had WF's postgame win expectancy at <50% after the win at FSU
Click to expand...
Yep, but > 50% for the Clemson loss. We were also below 50% for Liberty which...yeah.

The FSU result shows the issues that you have with some analytics in football specifically given smaller sample size in one game. That game plays out completely differently if the game was closer in the first half because Wake both stopped doing what was working so well in the first half (airing it out all over the place) to stretch the clock out while also gaining fewer yards per carry driving the sucess rate down.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Yep, but > 50% for the Clemson loss. We were also below 50% for Liberty which...yeah.

The FSU result shows the issues that you have with some analytics in football specifically given smaller sample size in one game. That game plays out completely differently if the game was closer in the first half because Wake both stopped doing what was working so well in the first half (airing it out all over the place) to stretch the clock out while also gaining fewer yards per carry driving the sucess rate down.
Click to expand...
This is interesting to me, because those stats from second half FSU game go on to affect the analysis of Wake for determining future game spreads and are obviously incorporated into statistical models meant to rank teams/project games. Considering that half is 1/12 of our season so far, it seems like that would be a significant thing.

Taking into account the fact that Clawson goes super-conservative on offense when up 2-3 scores more often than most coaches, I wonder if that's a reason that analytics often have pessimistic views of Wake Forest even though we win a lot of those types of games.
 
deacon14 said:
This is interesting to me, because those stats from second half FSU game go on to affect the analysis of Wake for determining future game spreads and are obviously incorporated into statistical models meant to rank teams/project games. Considering that half is 1/12 of our season so far, it seems like that would be a significant thing.

Taking into account the fact that Clawson goes super-conservative on offense when up 2-3 scores more often than most coaches, I wonder if that's a reason that analytics often have pessimistic views of Wake Forest even though we win a lot of those types of games.
Click to expand...
Obviously you could write a whole book about this, but a couple thoughts.

1. One argument is that these types of decisions somewhat even out over the course of the season with teams. This is one reason there is an SP+ garbage time cutoff for included stats (over 34 points second quarter, over 28 points in the third quarter, over 22 points in the fourth), however where the difference in style/playcalling/efficiency is from a fast-paced balls to the wall attack that Wake normally runs and a milk the clock, grind the ball out on the ground this may be worth a point or over multiple games. Another aspect here is that even though Wake did go conservative, it doesn't change that this still decreased our success rate and FSU's offensive success rate improved over the course of the game - aka staying "on pace" on first, second, and third down to convert first downs.

2. I'd also argue that the better metrics out there have at least some baked in preseason projections where you almost have to use recruiting rankings to some degree as these are a pretty good proxy overall for talent/expectations. I think since Wake does have a pretty solid development over at least a year or two that these rankings disproportionately impact Wake's outlook. I don't really know what a solution is for this because I think you need some starting point. I also don't know if this is a feature or a bug.

3. I think that even non-metrics based analysis (eye test, just looking at final score, etc.) includes drawbacks similar to "took foot off the pedal" that shows up in metrics too.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
they’ve been progressively plummeting since the season started
Click to expand...

I feel like they are who they are. People’s expectations for them have been plummeting as they realize who State is.

I find it hilarious that numbers has seemingly been off the boards for months but has come back in full force on this thread to spout…numbers.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Obviously you could write a whole book about this, but a couple thoughts.

1. One argument is that these types of decisions somewhat even out over the course of the season with teams. This is one reason there is an SP+ garbage time cutoff for included stats (over 34 points second quarter, over 28 points in the third quarter, over 22 points in the fourth), however where the difference in style/playcalling/efficiency is from a fast-paced balls to the wall attack that Wake normally runs and a milk the clock, grind the ball out on the ground this may be worth a point or over multiple games. Another aspect here is that even though Wake did go conservative, it doesn't change that this still decreased our success rate and FSU's offensive success rate improved over the course of the game - aka staying "on pace" on first, second, and third down to convert first downs.

2. I'd also argue that the better metrics out there have at least some baked in preseason projections where you almost have to use recruiting rankings to some degree as these are a pretty good proxy overall for talent/expectations. I think since Wake does have a pretty solid development over at least a year or two that these rankings disproportionately impact Wake's outlook. I don't really know what a solution is for this because I think you need some starting point. I also don't know if this is a feature or a bug.

3. I think that even non-metrics based analysis (eye test, just looking at final score, etc.) includes drawbacks similar to "took foot off the pedal" that shows up in metrics too.
Click to expand...
1. Yeah, I assumed there was a garbage time cutoff, but didn't know what it was. There's certainly more nuance to playcalling than a black and white cutoff like that, but I understand that it's only possible to capture so much of that nuance in a realistic to build model.

2. I'd argue that these metrics should re-rank players after each season and incorporate these rankings instead of using recruiting rankings that are out of date by multiple years. Just adjust a player's rating up or down based on collegiate performance thus far. That's a lot more work, but it fixes the problem to a large degree.

3. This is certainly true, and the metrics usually are better predictors even with their flaws, which makes sense. But it's fun to discuss ways in which they could be better.
 
deacon14 said:
This is interesting to me, because those stats from second half FSU game go on to affect the analysis of Wake for determining future game spreads and are obviously incorporated into statistical models meant to rank teams/project games. Considering that half is 1/12 of our season so far, it seems like that would be a significant thing.

Taking into account the fact that Clawson goes super-conservative on offense when up 2-3 scores more often than most coaches, I wonder if that's a reason that analytics often have pessimistic views of Wake Forest even though we win a lot of those types of games.
Click to expand...

At least from the FSU game, I don't think there's much, if any, actual evidence to suggest we "took the foot off the pedal" or changed anything about our offense until our final drive where we bled 7 minutes off the clock. We just happened to have two drives in the 2nd half where we happened to get out-executed. But we were basically playing the same offense as before, and still running tempo.
 
deacon14 said:
Taking into account the fact that Clawson goes super-conservative on offense when up 2-3 scores more often than most coaches, I wonder if that's a reason that analytics often have pessimistic views of Wake Forest even though we win a lot of those types of games.
Click to expand...
feels like the two losses to UNC the last couple years followed this pattern and were, obviously, not wins
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
feels like the two losses to UNC the last couple years followed this pattern and were, obviously, not wins
Click to expand...
Well I didn't say we win all of them, just that we win a lot of them. Although I understand fans hating the strategy, because our lead usually gets smaller, and almost never bigger, while we do it.

I'd need to see a drive chart/play by play to know whether Clawson really did go conservative in the FSU or either UNC game. Even more than that, you'd need to watch film to know whether it was designed runs being called or whether it was RPO run plays that simply didn't work.
 
The funny thing about a two possession lead is if you get stopped on two possessions, that’s enough of a window for the other team to tie to take the lead.

On the coaches show after Army, Clawson broke down what constitutes garbage time (or a big enough lead) by lead and quarter. I forget what it was but I think that’s what guides him to go “conservative.”

What happened against FSU was a team with a two possession lead got stopped on two possessions. Then going “conservative” worked and took 7+ min off the clock.
 
Which games did we go conservative (or super conservative) in non-garbage time?

Can't recall from before last year, but don't think either @FSU or @UNC fit the bill. It's actually pretty easy to watch the film thanks to YouTubers who clip each play.

For example:


 
I went back and watched the two failed offensive drives in the second half of FSU, and it's kind of interesting to consider whether or not that was normal or conservative playcalling.

Drive 1 (score 28-13, 7:03 in 3rd Quarter):
1st down: RPO run. 4 DL and 2 LBs in the box, play goes for 4 yards.
2nd down: No RPO, drop back to pass out of shotgun. Sam gets sacked with only 5 guys pass rushing.
3rd down: No RPO, drop back to pass out of shotgun. Sam gets sacked with only 5 guys pass rushing.

There's not really a legit argument that we went conservative with playcalling on this drive, this is FSU defense just winning a possession.

Drive 2 (score 28-13, 0:37 left in 3rd Quarter)
1st down: RPO run for no gain.
2nd down: No RPO, pass over the middle to AT for 6 yards
3rd down: No RPO, pass over the middle to Bull for first down
1st down: RPO in which the pass option is a screen to Morin. Sam keeps it for a one yard loss.
2nd down: RPO in which Sam gives the ball to Ellison in a 7 man box. Run goes for no gain.
3rd down: No RPO, drop back to pass out of shotgun. Sam gets sacked by the LB that was probably covering the blocking RB, only a 5 man pass rush.

You could argue that the 1st and 2nd down play calls/RPO decision making by Sam was pretty conservative, and it certainly didn't work. Considering we never did anything to stop the clock, and it was now early 4th quarter, you could make an assumption that was on Clawson's mind. But we also didn't really slow down the tempo that we normally operate at, although as I recall Clawson doesn't do that even when it's clear that playcalling is more conservative than normal.

The last drive (that I didn't review here) certainly affects our yards/play and explosive play rate numbers, as it was a grind it out/ run the clock type of drive, but it also won us the game and I'd imagine other teams would do something similar with a 7 point lead in mid 4th quarter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top