My Theory, its whats up front that counts

A friend and I were discussing what is the best measure of a team available to every fan. Starting QB experieince, wide reciever speed, running backs yards?

Nope, none of the above.

I am going to try to prove this as best I can, meaning I will try to find stats for opponents and compare them to the Gophers. The stats, total starts for the offensive and defensive lines. If I have the number correct and the players correct our projected offensive line will bring 28 starts in to the season. Wynn leads with 13, Alford with 10, Stommes with 1, Wills with none, and Carufel brings 4 from Notre Dame. I will not include any tightend as too many teams play spread.

Now on defense I am a little lost with the defensive ends, but Brown and Small each have 19 starts. Onauwichi has 13, and no one else has any. And as a topper Onauwichi is not getting any press. So the defensive line total will either be 38 or 51 based on one player.

Now it becomes a matter of our offense against the opponent defensive line. And the same for our defense versus their offense. The total becomes an opening line.

As I look at the Gophers from this prospective, the wins will come against young defensive lines, or by virtue of our defensive line. Air Force plays a 3 4 and I will take the linebacker with the most starts and add him to their line total.

husker70 said:

A friend and I were discussing what is the best measure of a team available to every fan. Starting QB experieince, wide reciever speed, running backs yards?

Nope, none of the above.

I am going to try to prove this as best I can, meaning I will try to find stats for opponents and compare them to the Gophers. The stats, total starts for the offensive and defensive lines. If I have the number correct and the players correct our projected offensive line will bring 28 starts in to the season. Wynn leads with 13, Alford with 10, Stommes with 1, Wills with none, and Carufel brings 4 from Notre Dame. I will not include any tightend as too many teams play spread.

Now on defense I am a little lost with the defensive ends, but Brown and Small each have 19 starts. Onauwichi has 13, and no one else has any. And as a topper Onauwichi is not getting any press. So the defensive line total will either be 38 or 51 based on one player.

Now it becomes a matter of our offense against the opponent defensive line. And the same for our defense versus their offense. The total becomes an opening line.
As I look at the Gophers from this prospective, the wins will come against young defensive lines, or by virtue of our defensive line. Air Force plays a 3 4 and I will take the linebacker with the most starts and add him to their line total.

Click to expand...

Interesting theory. Keep us informed.

BTW Will you take into account talent? or will it just be starts/ experience?

I couldn't agree more, or is it less. What ever it is you're right on. I would temper it to advantage = experience rather than proclaiming a victor.

It would be cool to see a little case study on this using last years results.

The early line

So here is the early line for Gophers vs. Air Force. Air Force brings a defense line with 9 total starts against our offensive line with 27. Air Force has one player with 8 starts, two with none, and one with one. Advantage Gophers. And our defense without any defensive end starts will be 38 versus Air Force's 18. Again Air Force has one player with 13 starts, two with none, one with 2 and one with 3.


So, the early line for the TCF Opener, Gophers -37.

That would be an interesting stat to keep track of as the year progresses. How the combined starts of the lines correlates with wins and losses. I agree, the lines make everyone look better. I'm sure if you look back at Heisman and offensive position winners, nearly everyone had a good line in front of them.

If you can run the ball on offense and stop the run on defense, you will compete and you have a chance to win a lot of Big Ten football games! I like that kind of a game plan.

I have seen a clip of Lou Holtz talking to the team before they took on Purdue in 1985. He said that the key to every game is running. If you stop the run on defense and don't allow them to get any yards after completion in passing, they will have a lot tougher time winning. On the offense, you have to establish the run to win. And the key to establishing the run is through the Oline.

I have seen a clip of Lou Holtz talking to the team before they took on Purdue in 1985. He said that the key to every game is running. If you stop the run on defense and don't allow them to get any yards after completion in passing, they will have a lot tougher time winning. On the offense, you have to establish the run to win. And the key to establishing the run is through the Oline.

Click to expand...

This is why Glen Mason's offenses were successful. He was able to establish the run against just about any defense in the Big Ten. Unfortunately he just didn't have a defense that could hold up on the other side. This philosophy is very Big Ten oriented. Until this decade, nearly every team that won the Big Ten relied on this philosophy for the most part, especially defense. In the Big Ten defense truly does win you ball games.

Some U grad student could do their thesis on this

It would be petty simple. The student could try to predict Win/loss by all kinds of factors: line experience, QB experience, etc, I also think that turnover margin would be important. While I think that Mason's teams were great at running the ball and that may well be a predictor of victory/defeat, his team's big problem (IMHO) was that the defense could not defend the pass. How many opposing QB's had their career passing day vs. a Mason team? Too many in my book. I also think that at certain times of games they need to be able to run the ball. Mason's teams would march on the ground all day, and then in the 4th quarter when they could really use the running game to get a first down or run some clock, they would get stuffed. So I guess that I believe that to be good teams need to be good/adequate in a lot of areas and great in a couple. If you are bad/terrible in one (pass defense) it will haunt. How many times in a Mason late game melt down did I say, "what I would'nt give for a sack of an opposing QB right now." It never happened, that I recall.

Number of starts implies two things. First, if they have previous starts they are the best talent the team has at any given position. Second, if they have several starts they are older, more experienced, stronger, etc. That works for me.

The problem is that if you look at the number of starts made by our O-line as Gophers at the position they'll be starting at this fall the number goes from 28 to 0.

I agree with the thought process but you're going to run in to problems comparing a team like Minnesota or Indiana with a team like Penn State or Ohio State that have more talented back ups than the starters at the lesser programs. For instance, going in to last season Aaron Maybin had not started a game. It took two DE's being suspended for him to get his chance and he ended up being a first round pick. Your methodology would suggest that Van De Steeg > Maybin because of the start differential but the reality is Maybin > Van De Steeg.

I think the running back yardage your friend mentioned is a very legit measurement. It is a reflection of the OL blocking moreso than it is the quality of the running back. You're trying to get at the quality of the line by judging experience but just looking at running yards for vs. running yards against tells you the quality of the OL/DL. QB experience matters but you'd be better off looking at turnover margin than QB starts for your metric because the theory of an experienced QB is that he doesn't turn the ball over. Why not just cut to the chase and look at the turnover margin.

My opinion on what wins games:
1. Turnover margin
2. Rushing yards for and against
3. 3rd down conversions
4. Red zone scoring
5. Passing yards (for a team like Texas Tech, Missouri, Kansas this doesn't work because their short passes are like runs)

grunkiejr said:

My opinion on what wins games:
1. Turnover margin
2. Rushing yards for and against
3. 3rd down conversions
4. Red zone scoring
5. Passing yards (for a team like Texas Tech, Missouri, Kansas this doesn't work because their short passes are like runs)

Click to expand...

Would you agree that all of those 5 things are affected by how good the lines are, both offensive and defensive?

-Many (not all) interceptions are caused by pressuring the quarterback, and a bad offensive line/good defensive line plays the most part in causing that pressure. I am aware there are other factors as well, but I think the lines are the biggest factors.

-Rushing yards are of course dependent on the Line blocking and so forth. Running is very difficult without blocking.

-Depending on how much yardage is required for 3rd down, the line either provides the push needed for the short run, or the time necessary for the WR's to get to the sticks.

-Again, depending on how many yards are necessary for in the red zone, the Line either lets the RB/FB/QB take it in, or block just long enough for the WRs to make a play.

-If a quarterback is constantly rushed, more than likely they are not going to be as accurate, causing the passing yardage to decrease. The lines decide how much time a QB gets to throw.

I agree with your 5 points as to what wins/loses games, but I'm sure you will agree that they are all directly affected by line play. And I think that's the whole point of Husker's logic.

It still boils down to the "size of the dog" in the fight for me. It's not athleticism pure and simple, but the team with the better athletes tend to win over time. One of the keys I see in college football is continuity and not having massive turnover happening all at once. In other words, your team is balanced between mostly juniors and seniors starting with sophomores and select freshmen (redshirt and otherwise) being slotted in and gaining experience.

The "start" statistic adds an interesting twist, but there are a number of poor teams that always seem to be re-building and, in the process, have guys build up starts as sophomores and maybe juniors, only to be replaced by other younger players when they are sophomores and juniors because the team never seems to get better, so why stick with lousy upperclassmen when they can be replaced with someone with a higher ceiling.

I do agree, however, that games are, if not won, certainly tilted toward winning, up front on offense and defense. The team that controls the line-of-scrimmage forces players behind the opposing lines to take on additional assignments, which will lead to a "manpower in a given space" advantage to the team winning the battle upfront.

I am optimistic about our talent on the offensive line, but there is going to need to be some adjustments as people are in different positions.

MinnMarchDTF said:

Would you agree that all of those 5 things are affected by how good the lines are, both offensive and defensive?

-Many (not all) interceptions are caused by pressuring the quarterback, and a bad offensive line/good defensive line plays the most part in causing that pressure. I am aware there are other factors as well, but I think the lines are the biggest factors.

-Rushing yards are of course dependent on the Line blocking and so forth. Running is very difficult without blocking.

-Depending on how much yardage is required for 3rd down, the line either provides the push needed for the short run, or the time necessary for the WR's to get to the sticks.

-Again, depending on how many yards are necessary for in the red zone, the Line either lets the RB/FB/QB take it in, or block just long enough for the WRs to make a play.

-If a quarterback is constantly rushed, more than likely they are not going to be as accurate, causing the passing yardage to decrease. The lines decide how much time a QB gets to throw.

I agree with your 5 points as to what wins/loses games, but I'm sure you will agree that they are all directly affected by line play. And I think that's the whole point of Husker's logic.

Click to expand...

I agree with his premise that the offensive/defensive line units are the most important unit(s) on the field. My only disagreement is with his chosen metric. I believe there are other metrics that will show a higher correlation with wins than number of starts by OL/DL.

To go through this point by point...

Turnover margin can be a function of line play, an inexperienced QB, general carelessness with the football or aggressiveness on defense. I can come up with plenty of turnovers last year that had nothing to do with the OL/DL. For instance, against Purdue Sherels ripped a ball away from a receiver and Brock put a perfect form tackle on Sheets for a 2-0 turnover margin (I'll ignore the Hail Mary type throw that ended the game)--I'm picking out one particular game but I coud do this a lot. In Mason's last year we had an experienced QB and we led the country in turnover margin (pathetic to finish 6-7 after leading the country in that stat) whereas the next year we had Weber in a new offense and we were one of the worst in turnover margin. Our OL was actually pretty strong in 2007 and probably as good as it was in 2006 but the TO margin differential was drastically different.

Running the ball is all about line play. You can put an average back behind a great line and he'll be a star but if you put Adrian Peterson behind a bad line he still won't move the ball.

Third down conversions come down to how you play 1st & 2nd down to get makeable 3rd downs. Once you get to third it comes down to either the line getting a push or an accurate QB. Either one can work.

The worst red zone teams have something in common, the inability to run the football. I'm not saying you have to run it in the red zone but passing becomes more difficult because DB's have a shorter field to cover. Line play is important in the red zone.

I agree a QB needs time to throw and OL is important. A team can adjust to a poor OL by running 3 step drops but that can be countered by a good DC with bump and run coverage. A strong passing game relies on the OL, QB & WR groups and can fail if any of them are inadequate.

The point is Husker was asking what is the best measure of a team available to all fans. I think if you run a regression, TO margin will have a higher correlation to W/L than experience on OL/DL. I'm not discounting the line in anyway--I am just saying TO margin tells more and it encompasses what he thinks is important as well as what his friend thinks is important.

If I misinterpreted your thoughts, I apologize.

I wonder though to what extent T/O margins can be predictive of future wins. It helps explain past results but can you really use it for prognositcations. For instance, Husker is suggesting our Lineman have much more starting experience for the AF game thus we have a strong advantage. What's the expected TO margin, and why do we believe that?

It would be good to look at the correlation between a big +/- TO margin and line experience. We might find that TO margin is symptomatic of a strong/poor line.

Schnoodler said:

I wonder though to what extent T/O margins can be predictive of future wins. It helps explain past results but can you really use it for prognositcations. For instance, Husker is suggesting our Lineman have much more starting experience for the AF game thus we have a strong advantage. What's the expected TO margin, and why do we believe that?

It would be good to look at the correlation between a big +/- TO margin and line experience. We might find that TO margin is symptomatic of a strong/poor line.

Click to expand...

Bingo. That is how he should have responded.

I almost added in my post that the problem with TO margin is that it is hard to predict prior to the season. Once we're through 3-4 games a prediction might be reasonable but prior to the beginning of the season I don't have an answer for how to predict it.

Things like turnover margin

Can be the factor in deciding a game, or be totally meaningless in a blow out. Another factor along the turnover margin would be 3rd down makes and stops. And a further factor beside how many of each, but when and where on the field they happen. A three and out by the defense having pinned the opponent inside its twenty is a direct opportuntity. While a third down stop on an opponent drive that occurs on our 40 is dodging a bullet. Consistent, momentum sustaining third down efforts are as important as turnovers.

But again these are results of a factor going into the game. A mismatch, playmakers, and that should be a factor of experience. Surely a starting OL should have about 40-50 starts. Same as the DL. As we progress through the season and face the Wisconsins, Ohio States et al you will see these numbers come into play.

i like real football talk. it is good.