tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3887802820654018134.post4429533542779721456..comments2023-10-16T10:20:28.730-05:00Comments on Cripes! Get back to fundamentals...: Dubber: Effectively Measuring Offensive Efficiencybrophyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01533102260799641755noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3887802820654018134.post-14038072659224819132011-01-05T20:51:41.530-06:002011-01-05T20:51:41.530-06:00Kevin,
I am looking for ways to make this better....Kevin,<br /><br />I am looking for ways to make this better.....sorry, I do not have an excel sheet, but I will be breaking down another game over this weekend, and in that article I will include what I do use.....<br /><br />I appreciate your suggestion, and this is my feel toward categorizing plays:<br /><br />The area of the field being attacked is more of a situational thing (personnel matchups, front or coverage weakness, etc.)..........the FACT you called a run, pass, screen, etc. is what's of value, regardless of where you decided to attack.<br /><br />At least from a whole gameplan standpoint.......<br /><br />What you are talking about would be beneficial on a play-to-play basis........<br /><br />Example: We are in I-Twins to the field and the defense is in an Over front with Cover 3 behind it.......we know we want to do X this time in situation Y, so where are the holes in this defense to accomplish that?<br /><br />I'm more concern with the offense's decision to throw quick game on first down (general), rather than their decision to call slant/flat (specific).Dubberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06046006263757847984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3887802820654018134.post-39338013115444764362011-01-05T07:57:57.173-06:002011-01-05T07:57:57.173-06:00Is there a spreadsheet you can share that has some...Is there a spreadsheet you can share that has some of this breakdown info on it?<br /><br />As far as the first down classification of plays, why not simplify to run left right middle, pass short left right middle, medium...long...<br /><br />I know this leaves out the difference between a 3 step slant and play action flat throw, but the targeted area to me would also be helpful when breaking down a game.Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09482969203999985290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3887802820654018134.post-51609277854481862452011-01-03T13:33:45.027-06:002011-01-03T13:33:45.027-06:00A book that my football-nerdiness really enjoyed g...A book that my football-nerdiness really enjoyed growing up was Football by the Numbers by Allen Barra. It showed the value of turnovers, giving -50 yds for an Int and -40 yds for a turnover. It then computed adjusted yards per play factoring in the turnovers. I used to do this for all the college teams to see who really had the best Offense and Defense, but 03 was the last yr. <br /><br />What you can do quickly without crunching the #'s is look at the yards per play for two teams and then subtract a yard for each turover. When you do that, whichever team has the best yds/play wins about every time. As a matter of fact, this quick formula correctly picked the winner for every NFL game this weekend. Wow, I'm really procrastinating getting my grades done today, lol. <br /><br />Sorry, not trying to get off topic, just trying to verify what dubber was reporting about turnovers and explosives (which contribute to yds/play) being so important.Coach Hooverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12861382381553147719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3887802820654018134.post-56477839268756543312011-01-03T13:08:25.345-06:002011-01-03T13:08:25.345-06:00Brophy bestowed me with edit power, and I've a...Brophy bestowed me with edit power, and I've attempted to tie the post together.<br /><br />Should make a little more sense now.Dubberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06046006263757847984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3887802820654018134.post-52403228039549416442011-01-03T12:28:17.454-06:002011-01-03T12:28:17.454-06:00Anon,
Certainly, a small sample size can lead to ...Anon,<br /><br />Certainly, a small sample size can lead to bad stats, however, I wasn't trying to take the stats from this one game and hold them up a "tried and trues" for all other games.<br /><br />I compared this game to Billick's finding to see how his anaylsis holds up. <br /><br />Billick's sample size was not small (encompassing years and 1,000 of games played).<br /><br />It's like learning about Newton's Third law in physics class, and then going outside and throwing a rubber ball against a brick wall to observe it.<br /><br />I realize "immutable physical law" is not the same as "statistical probability", but you get the idea.<br /><br />It was an experiment.Dubberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06046006263757847984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3887802820654018134.post-33517531803554686252011-01-03T12:12:59.143-06:002011-01-03T12:12:59.143-06:00I believe what Dubber is pointing out (and does a ...I believe what Dubber is pointing out (and does a great job of it) is taking a game many watched against two relatively unspectacular teams (neutral matchup) and apply tenets of Billick's philosophy to it.<br /><br />What Billick has done in his book was detail the contributing factors of successful / efficient offenses. He then goes on to break those offenses down through various relevant statistical categories. Using these clearly defined quantifiables, the game plan can be constructed for the staff.<br /><br />How does it help? It narrows the focus for the coaching staff to define what EXACTLY should be run when - which plays and personnel groupings provide the highest rate of success to mitigate probable risk. Adding those up, series-by-series, the offense will find itself on the winning end of the margin.brophyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01533102260799641755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3887802820654018134.post-26094743132368814252011-01-03T12:06:14.397-06:002011-01-03T12:06:14.397-06:00I don't understand how this is supposed to hel...I don't understand how this is supposed to help. The point of Billick's guidelines is that, over time, those are relevant factors in deciding the outcome of football games, and further that they can be coached. Thus I could see someone studying the NFL season or the college season and showing how, in the aggregate, these factors did or did not explain who won and lost.<br /><br />But picking one random game and chalking up how the teams did seems a little too narrowly minded. So what if the "wrong" team had won? Would Billick's factors be irrelevant? What would you do different as a coach? It's like flipping a coin twice and saying how it landed on heads....TWICE! <br /><br />To do these kinds of studies you have to look at a larger data set. It's the sample size problem, as always.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3887802820654018134.post-50095524576203267212011-01-03T11:48:29.224-06:002011-01-03T11:48:29.224-06:00I appreciate you posting this Brophy......
I hope...I appreciate you posting this Brophy......<br /><br />I hope the readers keep in mind this was cut and pasted directly from the forum. It comprises two seperate posts.<br /><br />Brophy's only edit was the addition of cheerleaders, which is surely intended to distract the reader from the herky-jerky prose I used in the posts (if only the New York Times subscribed to the same school of journalism).<br /><br />I will be doing this again (maybe the Colts-Jets game this Sunday), and will try to add some of the first down play selection analysis I discussed in the post.<br /><br />I will either make that post "flow" more freely, or have Brophy add more pictures......<br /><br />-DubberDubberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06046006263757847984noreply@blogger.com