Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Heaps to get his shot?
RaccoonHarry
Member Posts: 2,161
Maybe this is just the "break" he needs. Geno Smith out, journeyman Ryan Fitzpatrick next man up but Heaps is lurking (yes, he's a Jet).
http://www.wsj.com/articles/jets-geno-smith-breaks-jaw-in-locker-room-altercation-1439316322
http://www.wsj.com/articles/jets-geno-smith-breaks-jaw-in-locker-room-altercation-1439316322
Comments
If you watch Baylor's offense much, you learn that they spread their 4 WRs as close to the sideline as they can get them to limit the numbers in the box in the running game. For WRs, they want as many big/fast guys that they can get so that they can win 1 on 1 athletic battles. For QBs, they want guys with some combination of cannon arms to be able to get the ball to the outside with an ideal ability to run the ball to take advantage of the limited number of guys in the box.
It's great for what they do and clearly is highly successful. What it isn't good at is beating teams with comparable (or better) athletic talent or developing players to be professionals.
If you look at their recent losses, you can almost always tie it to their offense sucking. Last year they scored 27 points in a loss at West Virginia (22 points below their average). The TCU game karma caught up to them against Sparty when they gave up 21 unanswered in the 4th quarter. The end of their undefeated 2013 season came when they scored 17 points against Okie Lite.
From time to time, what happened against TCU (where they came back) or the manner that they lost to Sparty (blowing a big lead) will happen. They are perfectly ok with short-term variance over the long-haul.
Perhaps a better way to think of what they are doing is using probabilities and poker. If you look at a hand like AK suited versus a non AK pocket pair of different suits, the probability is that the pocket pair will win in the 52-54% range. If you played 10,000 hands, you'd be more than welcome to take the wins and suffer the loss. However, depending on the situation, you may not be willing to take those odds in a 1 off situation because you think you can find a better situation where you can win 60-70% of the time.
To me, this is the analogy for teams like Baylor, Oregon, etc. The more possessions and plays in a game, the more they are trying to eliminate the amount of random chance in the game. Since only a handful of teams are as talented as they are, they will often over the course of 60 minutes and 150-175 plays in a game separate themselves. Likewise, when you catch them on a day where they either aren't playing well or are playing a comparable (or better) team, the high frequency of events leads to them getting essentially "exposed" and getting blown out (the Ohio State game vs Oregon being a great example of this).
This is also why you always hear about how teams controlling time of possession can be so important (particularly for the underdog) or in basketball how the 3 point line can be the great equalizer for smaller teams due to the higher value of the long distance shot negating some of the advantage that a bigger team experiences by shooting shots closer to the basket.
It's absolutely the influence of statistics and more important game theory into sports where what was once intuitively known is now run through so many computer simulations that this information becomes used as a strategy. Of course, what many forget or don't seem to adequately measure is that you still need players to play the game and how a player performs on any given day, develops, etc. isn't at all tied to a computer simulation.