USF's definitely not in a good spot, but coupling Temple's placement here with their recruiting rankings - yikes...

USFFan

(02-16-2021 02:12 PM)usffan Wrote:  

USF's definitely not in a good spot, but coupling Temple's placement here with their recruiting rankings - yikes...

USFFan

Thanks for posting.

We had a pretty tiny recruiting cycle this year, so figured we'd be returning a lot. Pretty excited that we've got so much defensive production returning. Our first year DC did a lot with what little face/practice time he got with our young defense.

Looks like Cindy is poised for another run with the best combined production coming back.

I call shenanigans on this graphic, Tulsa returned every defensive player except one (granted he was the most important one in Zaven Collins) but he didn’t account for over 40% of our defensive production. Also, I have no idea how offense returning is judged... we did lose our QB and a rotation RB but we retained everyone else plus added a former 1000+ yard rusher coming off injury.

Cincinnati returns a ton on both sides of the ball. According to the Cincinnati Enquirer, as of January 26th, we are expected to return 16 starters and 57 contributors. The only position of concern is LT, where we are losing James Hudson to the NFL draft. But we are gaining Stony Brook transfer tackle James Tunstall, who was an FCS All-American 2 years ago. We did something similar a few years by bringing in Dino Boyd from Rhode Island, who ended up being a First-Team All-AAC honoree at LT. We should be deep, and should far and away be the favorites to win the AAC. To say I'm giddy is an understatement.

(02-16-2021 03:29 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I call shenanigans on this graphic, Tulsa returned every defensive player except one (granted he was the most important one in Zaven Collins) but he didn’t account for over 40% of our defensive production. Also, I have no idea how offense returning is judged... we did lose our QB and a rotation RB but we retained everyone else plus added a former 1000+ yard rusher coming off injury.

Ditto

(02-16-2021 03:29 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I call shenanigans on this graphic, Tulsa returned every defensive player except one (granted he was the most important one in Zaven Collins) but he didn’t account for over 40% of our defensive production. Also, I have no idea how offense returning is judged... we did lose our QB and a rotation RB but we retained everyone else plus added a former 1000+ yard rusher coming off injury.

Per Bill:

"Defense is a little bit trickier. The units aren't quite as well-defined -- teams play with three or four linemen, three or four linebackers, four or five defensive backs -- but this is approximately what goes into the defensive returning production figure:

Returning tackles: 56%
Returning tackles for loss: 6%
Returning sacks: 7%
Returning passes defensed: 31%

This ends up being a nice blend of raw tackling figures and disruption stats. Apparently disruption in the passing game is harder to replace -- continuity matters more there.

Perhaps because of this, continuity in the back of the defense has far more of an effect on your stats than continuity up front. Returning production in the secondary ends up accounting for about 59% of your overall statistical change, a monstrous amount compared to linebackers (minus-33%) and defensive linemen (minus-8%). Apparently change up front is much easier to account for, which might surprise some."

Based on that explanation, I'd agree with you that Collins shouldn't make that big a dent if your starting secondary is intact. I wonder what kind of assumptions he's making about guys that were seniors last year on whether they will return.

(02-16-2021 05:01 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 03:29 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I call shenanigans on this graphic, Tulsa returned every defensive player except one (granted he was the most important one in Zaven Collins) but he didn’t account for over 40% of our defensive production. Also, I have no idea how offense returning is judged... we did lose our QB and a rotation RB but we retained everyone else plus added a former 1000+ yard rusher coming off injury.

Per Bill:

"Defense is a little bit trickier. The units aren't quite as well-defined -- teams play with three or four linemen, three or four linebackers, four or five defensive backs -- but this is approximately what goes into the defensive returning production figure:

Returning tackles: 56%
Returning tackles for loss: 6%
Returning sacks: 7%
Returning passes defensed: 31%

This ends up being a nice blend of raw tackling figures and disruption stats. Apparently disruption in the passing game is harder to replace -- continuity matters more there.

Perhaps because of this, continuity in the back of the defense has far more of an effect on your stats than continuity up front. Returning production in the secondary ends up accounting for about 59% of your overall statistical change, a monstrous amount compared to linebackers (minus-33%) and defensive linemen (minus-8%). Apparently change up front is much easier to account for, which might surprise some."

Based on that explanation, I'd agree with you that Collins shouldn't make that big a dent if your starting secondary is intact. I wonder what kind of assumptions he's making about guys that were seniors last year on whether they will return.

(yes I realize I'm replying to myself). Maybe that's it. Along with Collins who led the team in sacks, interceptions, and forced fumbles, Christian Williams and Allie Green were also both seniors last year. Maybe he's assuming they didn't opt back in.

(02-16-2021 02:12 PM)usffan Wrote:  

USF's definitely not in a good spot, but coupling Temple's placement here with their recruiting rankings - yikes...

USFFan

LOL recruiting rankings? Let's talk NFL players. We lead the G5 and we lead many in the P5. Recruiting rankings are worthless.

I'll take 26 NFL players right now over some meaningless rankings based on number of message board subscribers.

No wonder Napier was in no rush to grab Auburn or Tennessee. He should have a massive year this year and have a better pick, especially if Orgeron gets canned at LSU.

(02-16-2021 05:18 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 05:01 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 03:29 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I call shenanigans on this graphic, Tulsa returned every defensive player except one (granted he was the most important one in Zaven Collins) but he didn’t account for over 40% of our defensive production. Also, I have no idea how offense returning is judged... we did lose our QB and a rotation RB but we retained everyone else plus added a former 1000+ yard rusher coming off injury.

Per Bill:

"Defense is a little bit trickier. The units aren't quite as well-defined -- teams play with three or four linemen, three or four linebackers, four or five defensive backs -- but this is approximately what goes into the defensive returning production figure:

Returning tackles: 56%
Returning tackles for loss: 6%
Returning sacks: 7%
Returning passes defensed: 31%

This ends up being a nice blend of raw tackling figures and disruption stats. Apparently disruption in the passing game is harder to replace -- continuity matters more there.

Perhaps because of this, continuity in the back of the defense has far more of an effect on your stats than continuity up front. Returning production in the secondary ends up accounting for about 59% of your overall statistical change, a monstrous amount compared to linebackers (minus-33%) and defensive linemen (minus-8%). Apparently change up front is much easier to account for, which might surprise some."

Based on that explanation, I'd agree with you that Collins shouldn't make that big a dent if your starting secondary is intact. I wonder what kind of assumptions he's making about guys that were seniors last year on whether they will return.

(yes I realize I'm replying to myself). Maybe that's it. Along with Collins who led the team in sacks, interceptions, and forced fumbles, Christian Williams and Allie Green were also both seniors last year. Maybe he's assuming they didn't opt back in.

Thanks for posting Bill's explanation, Coastal. The part about the secondary could be skewed by the fact that players like Allie Green don't get targeted much so they don't have a measureable stat despite the fact thdy're shutting people down. That could be true for any good DB. Joe Broback mentioned that about Green in his AAC DPOY watch list today.

As an Art Director/Graphic Designer, that graphic is ****!

(02-16-2021 10:58 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 05:18 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 05:01 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 03:29 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I call shenanigans on this graphic, Tulsa returned every defensive player except one (granted he was the most important one in Zaven Collins) but he didn’t account for over 40% of our defensive production. Also, I have no idea how offense returning is judged... we did lose our QB and a rotation RB but we retained everyone else plus added a former 1000+ yard rusher coming off injury.

Per Bill:

"Defense is a little bit trickier. The units aren't quite as well-defined -- teams play with three or four linemen, three or four linebackers, four or five defensive backs -- but this is approximately what goes into the defensive returning production figure:

Returning tackles: 56%
Returning tackles for loss: 6%
Returning sacks: 7%
Returning passes defensed: 31%

This ends up being a nice blend of raw tackling figures and disruption stats. Apparently disruption in the passing game is harder to replace -- continuity matters more there.

Perhaps because of this, continuity in the back of the defense has far more of an effect on your stats than continuity up front. Returning production in the secondary ends up accounting for about 59% of your overall statistical change, a monstrous amount compared to linebackers (minus-33%) and defensive linemen (minus-8%). Apparently change up front is much easier to account for, which might surprise some."

Based on that explanation, I'd agree with you that Collins shouldn't make that big a dent if your starting secondary is intact. I wonder what kind of assumptions he's making about guys that were seniors last year on whether they will return.

(yes I realize I'm replying to myself). Maybe that's it. Along with Collins who led the team in sacks, interceptions, and forced fumbles, Christian Williams and Allie Green were also both seniors last year. Maybe he's assuming they didn't opt back in.

Thanks for posting Bill's explanation, Coastal. The part about the secondary could be skewed by the fact that players like Allie Green don't get targeted much so they don't have a measureable stat despite the fact thdy're shutting people down. That could be true for any good DB. Joe Broback mentioned that about Green in his AAC DPOY watch list today.

I mentioned Green because he seems to be 2nd on the team in picks and fumble recoveries, and top 10 in tackles. If there was an assumption built in that him and other seniors weren't returning, then that would skew your stats.

(02-17-2021 08:15 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 10:58 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 05:18 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 05:01 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 03:29 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I call shenanigans on this graphic, Tulsa returned every defensive player except one (granted he was the most important one in Zaven Collins) but he didn’t account for over 40% of our defensive production. Also, I have no idea how offense returning is judged... we did lose our QB and a rotation RB but we retained everyone else plus added a former 1000+ yard rusher coming off injury.

Per Bill:

"Defense is a little bit trickier. The units aren't quite as well-defined -- teams play with three or four linemen, three or four linebackers, four or five defensive backs -- but this is approximately what goes into the defensive returning production figure:

Returning tackles: 56%
Returning tackles for loss: 6%
Returning sacks: 7%
Returning passes defensed: 31%

This ends up being a nice blend of raw tackling figures and disruption stats. Apparently disruption in the passing game is harder to replace -- continuity matters more there.

Perhaps because of this, continuity in the back of the defense has far more of an effect on your stats than continuity up front. Returning production in the secondary ends up accounting for about 59% of your overall statistical change, a monstrous amount compared to linebackers (minus-33%) and defensive linemen (minus-8%). Apparently change up front is much easier to account for, which might surprise some."

Based on that explanation, I'd agree with you that Collins shouldn't make that big a dent if your starting secondary is intact. I wonder what kind of assumptions he's making about guys that were seniors last year on whether they will return.

(yes I realize I'm replying to myself). Maybe that's it. Along with Collins who led the team in sacks, interceptions, and forced fumbles, Christian Williams and Allie Green were also both seniors last year. Maybe he's assuming they didn't opt back in.

Thanks for posting Bill's explanation, Coastal. The part about the secondary could be skewed by the fact that players like Allie Green don't get targeted much so they don't have a measureable stat despite the fact thdy're shutting people down. That could be true for any good DB. Joe Broback mentioned that about Green in his AAC DPOY watch list today.

I mentioned Green because he seems to be 2nd on the team in picks and fumble recoveries, and top 10 in tackles. If there was an assumption built in that him and other seniors weren't returning, then that would skew your stats.

That could be it... that they don’t account for 5th (or 7th) year seniors. It

(02-16-2021 02:12 PM)usffan Wrote:  

USF's definitely not in a good spot, but coupling Temple's placement here with their recruiting rankings - yikes...

USFFan

Temple is screwed. On top of the stats above, we have an HC and staff that I have no faith in.

Without scholarship limits, SMU plans to have huge roster in 2021 compared to area schools. Is that a good long-term plan?
A look at the numbers: How does SMU’s current roster size stack up with other, bigger schools in the area entering what will be an unprecedented year?

https://www.dallasnews.com/sports/smu-mu...long-term/

(02-17-2021 08:15 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 10:58 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 05:18 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 05:01 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-16-2021 03:29 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I call shenanigans on this graphic, Tulsa returned every defensive player except one (granted he was the most important one in Zaven Collins) but he didn’t account for over 40% of our defensive production. Also, I have no idea how offense returning is judged... we did lose our QB and a rotation RB but we retained everyone else plus added a former 1000+ yard rusher coming off injury.

Per Bill:

"Defense is a little bit trickier. The units aren't quite as well-defined -- teams play with three or four linemen, three or four linebackers, four or five defensive backs -- but this is approximately what goes into the defensive returning production figure:

Returning tackles: 56%
Returning tackles for loss: 6%
Returning sacks: 7%
Returning passes defensed: 31%

This ends up being a nice blend of raw tackling figures and disruption stats. Apparently disruption in the passing game is harder to replace -- continuity matters more there.

Perhaps because of this, continuity in the back of the defense has far more of an effect on your stats than continuity up front. Returning production in the secondary ends up accounting for about 59% of your overall statistical change, a monstrous amount compared to linebackers (minus-33%) and defensive linemen (minus-8%). Apparently change up front is much easier to account for, which might surprise some."

Based on that explanation, I'd agree with you that Collins shouldn't make that big a dent if your starting secondary is intact. I wonder what kind of assumptions he's making about guys that were seniors last year on whether they will return.

(yes I realize I'm replying to myself). Maybe that's it. Along with Collins who led the team in sacks, interceptions, and forced fumbles, Christian Williams and Allie Green were also both seniors last year. Maybe he's assuming they didn't opt back in.

Thanks for posting Bill's explanation, Coastal. The part about the secondary could be skewed by the fact that players like Allie Green don't get targeted much so they don't have a measureable stat despite the fact thdy're shutting people down. That could be true for any good DB. Joe Broback mentioned that about Green in his AAC DPOY watch list today.

I mentioned Green because he seems to be 2nd on the team in picks and fumble recoveries, and top 10 in tackles. If there was an assumption built in that him and other seniors weren't returning, then that would skew your stats.

That could be it... that they don’t account for 5th (or 7th) year seniors. It