Up Front: The OL so far (non-conference edition)

Donate To GopherHole
rockford said:
Finally, I'll stand by my judgement, which was formed while watching 165 offensive plays from scrimmage somewhere around 900 times.


JTG
Click to expand...

Yes, and almost all of us commend you for that. Most people who post to online discussions are lazy. With your painstaking observations and scoring, you certainly can never be accused of that.

I did look up a number of team stats on NCAA.org today. Here are two simple stat rankings that say a lot about our team's blocking issues so far this season:

Sacks allowed per game: worst in the conference and among the 10 or so worst in the nation

Tackles for a loss allowed: worst in the conference and pretty bad overall nationally

Of course, we are doing some things well and those should be no surprise: passing efficiency is quite good and total defense in terms of yards allowed is pretty good (although yards allowed per play could be better).
 

cjbfbp said:
Yes, and almost all of us commend you for that. Most people who post to online discussions are lazy. With your painstaking observations and scoring, you certainly can never be accused of that.

I did look up a number of team stats on NCAA.org today. Here are two simple stat rankings that say a lot about our team's blocking issues so far this season:

Sacks allowed per game: worst in the conference and among the 10 or so worst in the nation

Tackles for a loss allowed: worst in the conference and pretty bad overall nationally

Of course, we are doing some things well and those should be no surprise: passing efficiency is quite good and total defense in terms of yards allowed is pretty good (although yards allowed per play could be better).
Click to expand...

Thank you, cjbfbp.

You're right, sacks and TFL are deplorable. We've certainly had breakdowns. But I remain optimistic there will be improvement. (There better be!) We have three guys on the OL who performed at a high level last year, another guy that's shown to be a strong run blocker, and a fifth who was highly regarded as a recruit and effective in the bowl game last year. For whatever reason, we're just not clicking so far, although we have been able to control the ball and clock and move the ball consistently.

Thanks also for pointing out what has been impressive -- our passing game and overall defense.

Can't wait to see what the B1G season brings.

JTG
 

rockford said:
Very, very nice, @MnplsGopher! Thank you!

I think this gives a clearer indication of who's elevating the average, and who's bringing it down.

BTW, is the third data point for Andries missing in the Rushing RER graph?

Still bummed I don't have full-game data for Fresno St. Anybody have any clues to where I can find video?

JTG
Click to expand...

No it's "there", it's just hiding behind the identical datapoint for Olson.
 





Here's a slightly different way of looking at the same raw data.

Until @Oregon Gopher comes up with something better :D, we'll call it P3. That's short for "percentage of perfect plays." Now, I'm taking a lot of leeway here in regard to use of the word "perfect." I don't mean literally perfect. In this case, "perfect" simply means successfully executing your assignment, regardless of technique, etc.

Theoretically, this should give us an idea of how dependable a lineman is. The higher the percentage, the more often he can be counted on to execute his role.

RUSHING
Faalele 81.1%
Andries 80%
Schlueter 77.8%
Olson 71.1%
Dunlap 66.7%

PASSING
Olson 85.3%
Andries 81.1%
Faalele 76%
Dunlap 71.6%
Schlueter 68%

As I mentioned earlier, the standard measurement (RER) is based on rating a lineman's performance on each play from 0-3. A "3" is the only passing grade. Do anything wrong and you get knocked down to a "2", which is not a passing grade. Really screw up and you get a "1" or even a "0."

So to a certain extent, P3 is more similar to the binary system I used last year, where players earned a "1" or "0" for each play. (But it's not exactly the same, since a "2" this year may have earned a superior "1" rating last year.)

Even though I've never calculated this before, I find it a bit alarming that our top linemen are only "perfect" 80% to 85% of the time. Meanwhile, our weakest links in the running and passing game aren't getting the job done 1/3 of the time.

Thoughts?

JTG
 


rockford said:
Here's a slightly different way of looking at the same raw data.

Until @Oregon Gopher comes up with something better :D, we'll call it P3. That's short for "percentage of perfect plays." Now, I'm taking a lot of leeway here in regard to use of the word "perfect." I don't mean literally perfect. In this case, "perfect" simply means successfully executing your assignment, regardless of technique, etc.

Theoretically, this should give us an idea of how dependable a lineman is. The higher the percentage, the more often he can be counted on to execute his role.

RUSHING
Faalele 81.1%
Andries 80%
Schlueter 77.8%
Olson 71.1%
Dunlap 66.7%

PASSING
Olson 85.3%
Andries 81.1%
Faalele 76%
Dunlap 71.6%
Schlueter 68%

As I mentioned earlier, the standard measurement (RER) is based on rating a lineman's performance on each play from 0-3. A "3" is the only passing grade. Do anything wrong and you get knocked down to a "2", which is not a passing grade. Really screw up and you get a "1" or even a "0."

So to a certain extent, P3 is more similar to the binary system I used last year, where players earned a "1" or "0" for each play. (But it's not exactly the same, since a "2" this year may have earned a superior "1" rating last year.)

Even though I've never calculated this before, I find it a bit alarming that our top linemen are only "perfect" 80% to 85% of the time. Meanwhile, our weakest links in the running and passing game aren't getting the job done 1/3 of the time.

Thoughts?

JTG
Click to expand...

Why am I depressed even before the start of B1G play?
 




rockford said:
Here's a slightly different way of looking at the same raw data.

Until @Oregon Gopher comes up with something better :D, we'll call it P3. That's short for "percentage of perfect plays." Now, I'm taking a lot of leeway here in regard to use of the word "perfect." I don't mean literally perfect. In this case, "perfect" simply means successfully executing your assignment, regardless of technique, etc.

Theoretically, this should give us an idea of how dependable a lineman is. The higher the percentage, the more often he can be counted on to execute his role.

RUSHING
Faalele 81.1%
Andries 80%
Schlueter 77.8%
Olson 71.1%
Dunlap 66.7%

PASSING
Olson 85.3%
Andries 81.1%
Faalele 76%
Dunlap 71.6%
Schlueter 68%

As I mentioned earlier, the standard measurement (RER) is based on rating a lineman's performance on each play from 0-3. A "3" is the only passing grade. Do anything wrong and you get knocked down to a "2", which is not a passing grade. Really screw up and you get a "1" or even a "0."

So to a certain extent, P3 is more similar to the binary system I used last year, where players earned a "1" or "0" for each play. (But it's not exactly the same, since a "2" this year may have earned a superior "1" rating last year.)

Even though I've never calculated this before, I find it a bit alarming that our top linemen are only "perfect" 80% to 85% of the time. Meanwhile, our weakest links in the running and passing game aren't getting the job done 1/3 of the time.

Thoughts?

JTG
Click to expand...

I like this system better. It feels like it better reflects what’s happening. One guy messes up and the play is shut down or short.

Watching Wisconsin yesterday I have to hand it to them they reloaded instead of regressed and are a machine up front, against a Michigan defense no less. Of course JT23 helps.



.
 
Last edited:

Pompous Elitist said:
I like this system better. It feels like it better reflects what’s happening. One guy messes up and the play is shut down or short.

Watching Wisconsin yesterday I have to hand it to them they reloaded instead of regressed and are a machine up front, against a Michigan defense no less. Of course JT23 helps.



.
Click to expand...

I assume the Wisc OL played very well, but I don't think one can discount the bolded. I really noticed that in rewatching the GT bowl game like I mentioned in another thread. Mo found every crease, and even when he was contacted near the line, he broke a ton of tackles. Rodney was doing that early in the GSU game. When he went out, the running game regressed significantly with the same OL out there.

Of course there are a million variables and it doesn't change the fact the MN OL is playing poorly as a whole so far this year, but I'm looking forward to seeing Mo, Rodney, and Shannon at full health.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom