Jump to content

Octavian

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    718
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Octavian

  1. 3 minutes ago, Had Enough said:

     

     


    Way too much positivity.

    The lower power rate is on Sark. He was Herman-esque in trying to impose his will. Too little QB as a running threat. Too little TE usage. Too little Bijan-Roschon 2 back/wildcat sets. We need to scheme/play call success.

    We played 3 of the top 17 and 6 of the top 40 teams creating TFLs on a per game basis. OSU was slightly higher than Bama. Of our 12 games, we gave up more TFLs than our opponents average in 4 of those. Two of those were 0.5 more than their average. Point being that our returning guys have seen pressure and aggressive defenses and have done well or better than average in many cases. They may not have seen Anderson, but they’ve played against that next tier of guys that bring the pressure.

    The interesting question on the tackles is whether we play the guys who give you a B most consistently or the guy who’ll give you an A one play then a C, which presumably has the greater upside.

     

     

    I think if your offense is contingent on staying on schedule (ex. Herman offense), you want the line that is more consistently going to give you a B. If you’re running an explosive offense (a la Sark), then you probably want the line that gives you a perfect pocket every few plays because you know you’ll get a 30+ yard play off of it.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  2. 6 minutes ago, NoName said:

    start your 5 best players on the OL. but starting 3 true freshmen means a lot of inconsistency and pretty significantly lowers the ceiling on the team. just sucks to realize how fucking bad the OL currently on campus are.

    I think variability is high for sure but just going back through previous classes, a lot of five star o-line guys start as true freshmen. If our guys live up to the hype, it’s entirely possible we have an average/above average line this year. Just don’t count on it.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  3. 1 hour ago, Big Woodrows said:

    Gerry at 2:45:

    "Hearing more positive vibes on AH this afternoon."

    In response to a question about decision timeline:

    "I say before, or early in season."

    Hill and Hicks are two I’m not counting on but would be absolute gamechangers for this defense. I believe in Bo but PK/Choate are still pretty suspect on the recruiting front.

  4. 5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

    Doesn't the composite "perfect rating" just mean they're the #1 overall recruit in every ranking set included in the composite? So a recruit could be 1.000 in the composite partially because of a weak recruiting year at the top of the rankings. It's not really a "this is how good this recruit is" score. It's a relative ranking disguised as a numerical rating. 

    Yes, that’s technically correct. The composite rating is more of a “percentile” score for that recruit within that year’s class. If you want to get the rating service’s actual rating, you have to go their specific ranking. The problem is that they all use different scales so there’s no great way to compare what they think across classes. 
     

    Another issue is that what the services value at each position has dramatically changed over the years too. I don’t think Zach Branch would be WR1 in 2017 because all the services would have said he’s “too small.” Now, he’s just seen as having elite speed and great hands.

×
×
  • Create New...