Mad Son's Ramblings: Year Three is Prove-It Time for Petersen

AEB

Pressing. The big plays happened not due to luck but execution, talent advantage, and taking advantage of what the D gives you. Improvement in all these areas will lead to success this year. In the first quarter Gaskin went for 39 Yds in 6 carries and Jake threw for 150.

The only conclusions I'm drawing on the O is we have more speed and game breaking ability, and Jake looks to have improved one part of his game year-over-year, a part where he was universally critiqued. Everything else is TBD.

I love the hype. Puts expectations on our morbid program and helps in recruiting.

FremontTroll

Mad_Son said:

FremontTroll said:

Coach effect does not equal game management.

You'd have to be regularly punting on third down to cost your team three wins in one season via game management.

Game management is wrapped up in there. It is a much larger term that encompasses nearly every aspect of the team, as I tried to acknowledge. I maybe wasn't as explicit in mentioning the offense there as I had intended to be. Basically those are the areas where we are under-performing and it is costing us games.

All coach effect does is compare recruiting rankings to results.

So, assuming the recruiting rankings are unbiased, coach effect attempts to measure every single aspect of coaching from identifying underrated talent to development to roster management to motivation to team-building to game management, etc.

Game management is the most visible aspect of coaching but also the most overrated. A lot of awful fourth down decision makers have won Super Bowls and crystal footballs.

BlowItUp

wtf'd for using coach effect.

TierbsHsotBoobs

FremontTroll said:

Mad_Son said:

FremontTroll said:

Coach effect does not equal game management.

You'd have to be regularly punting on third down to cost your team three wins in one season via game management.

Game management is wrapped up in there. It is a much larger term that encompasses nearly every aspect of the team, as I tried to acknowledge. I maybe wasn't as explicit in mentioning the offense there as I had intended to be. Basically those are the areas where we are under-performing and it is costing us games.

All coach effect does is compare recruiting rankings to results.

So, assuming the recruiting rankings are unbiased, coach effect attempts to measure every single aspect of coaching from identifying underrated talent to development to roster management to motivation to team-building to game management, etc.

Game management is the most visible aspect of coaching but also the most overrated. A lot of awful fourth down decision makers have won Super Bowls and crystal footballs.

If you have superior talent, you can get away with bad game management.

Washington doesn't have that talent advantage now and likely never will.

Mad_Son

AEB said:

The only conclusions I'm drawing on the O is we have more speed and game breaking ability, and Jake looks to have improved one part of his game year-over-year, a part where he was universally critiqued. Everything else is TBD.

I already said John Ross is back and mentioned the deep balls

Tequilla

Shit article.

Shit poster.

Obligatory

Mad_Son

FremontTroll said:

Mad_Son said:

FremontTroll said:

Coach effect does not equal game management.

You'd have to be regularly punting on third down to cost your team three wins in one season via game management.

Game management is wrapped up in there. It is a much larger term that encompasses nearly every aspect of the team, as I tried to acknowledge. I maybe wasn't as explicit in mentioning the offense there as I had intended to be. Basically those are the areas where we are under-performing and it is costing us games.

All coach effect does is compare recruiting rankings to results.

So, assuming the recruiting rankings are unbiased, coach effect attempts to measure every single aspect of coaching from identifying underrated talent to development to roster management to motivation to team-building to game management, etc.

Game management is the most visible aspect of coaching but also the most overrated. A lot of awful fourth down decision makers have won Super Bowls and crystal footballs.

Yes, so my logic is that if everything other than game mangement and the offense is good then those are what is costing us three games as per CFBMCE. Realistically if we are overachieving in say defense and off-season stuff then those two bad aspects are potentially costing us more than three wins. I acknowledged I did a poor job of showing game management and offense were linked concepts in the context of CFBMCE. I shouldn't have made offense a separate paragraph or I should have separated out game management into the offense paragraph.

Mad_Son

BlowItUp said:

wtf'd for using coach effect.

Is this because you hate quantifying things and looking at more than the win-loss column? Do you hate trying to understand root cause and to figure out what the source of the failures are? Coach Effect is a perfectly valid angle to look at performance versus recruiting. There are caveats with that but most of us are capable of understanding them...

Tequilla

The problem with some of these new dangled metrics is that they assume conditions and variables are constant and fail to account for circumstance or situation.

For example, if a team scores the same amount as they give up, the expectation is that this is a .500 team. And perhaps when this data is populated it is normally distributed. But there are still plenty of examples where there are teams that are 1-2 deviations outside the mean.

The question that you have to ask at that point is what drives those instances where teams are outside the norm? Luck? Bad coaching? Injuries? Youth? Turnovers?

BlowItUp

Mad_Son said:

BlowItUp said:

wtf'd for using coach effect.

Is this because you hate quantifying things and looking at more than the win-loss column? Do you hate trying to understand root cause and to figure out what the source of the failures are? Coach Effect is a perfectly valid angle to look at performance versus recruiting. There are caveats with that but most of us are capable of understanding them...

any metric that has Mike Leach as a better coach than David Shaw, Dabo Sweeney, Jimbo Fisher, Nick Saban and Urban Meyer is probably stupid and needs to be re-worked.