Recruiting Football Talk VIII

#88,004
#88,004
MoCo_Vol said:
Regular Season recap for Nico's first year starting

Rankings are in SEC:
4th in passing completion at 65.7%
7th in passing yards at 2512
tied for 6th in passing completions with 199
6th in passing TDs at 19
4th in INT% with 1.7% (SEC average was 2.5%, lower is better)
5th in yards per attempt at 8.3
4th in QB rating at 152.7


Pretty damn good start I'm hoping to see him make big strides next year.
39 total TDs responsible for in a single season is a record I think he could break as well as Peyton's most total yards by a QB (3799)
Click to expand...
Good look that the efficiency stats are higher than the volume stats.

Stronger run blocking, a talented RB, and a young QB all point to us leaning more on the run game in redzone (which obviously worked pretty consistently), so fewer TDs. The deep ball issues have capped yardage/avg, but both QB and WRs have been getting on the same page more.

Hooker looked good in his first year starting, but in his second year in the system he was on a heater. I’m hoping to see the same thing from Nico and getting this playoff experience should hopefully only help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gainesvol82, Volnukem and MoCo_Vol
#88,005
#88,005
I think Ohio State will fall behind us.

Indiana lost, dropped 5 spots
Bama lost, dropped 6 spots
Ole Miss lost, dropped 5 spots
BYU lost, dropped 5 spots
A&M lost, dropped 5 spots
Colorado lost, dropped 9 spots

Those were all teams that lost regular season games and had major drops...

Ohio State was 2nd...so assuming they drop 5 spots that'll move them to 7th...
Miami was 6th...assume they drop 5


1 Oregon
2 Texas
3 Penn State
4 Notre Dame
5 Georgia
6 Tennessee
7 Ohio State
8 SMU
9 Indiana
10 Boise State
11 Miami
12 Bama
13 Ole Miss
14 South Carolina
15 Arizona State

And then I think losing in conference title game will potentially drop folks...don't think it'll be 5 or more spots, but I could see dropping 1 or 2
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, smokeyhuntsgators, jlawso21 and 5 others
#88,006
#88,006
AllVol11717 said:
Good look that the efficiency stats are higher than the volume stats.

Stronger run blocking, a talented RB, and a young QB all point to us leaning more on the run game in redzone (which obviously worked pretty consistently), so fewer TDs. The deep ball issues have capped yardage/avg, but both QB and WRs have been getting on the same page more.

Hooker looked good in his first year starting, but in his second year in the system he was on a heater. I’m hoping to see the same thing from Nico and getting this playoff experience should hopefully only help.
Click to expand...

Will also point out we saw a nice trend to as the season progressed.

Nico was on pace to hit 200+ in 4 of our final 5 games with Georgia being the one he wasn't. He only had 13 attempts in the Miss State game with 174 yards before getting banged up.

But last 2 games hit for 73.9% & 69.2% went for 4 TDs in both games and over 200 yards as well. OL, especially in pass protection was a let down this year...some of that was on Nico but a lot was also on them. We looked better overall because Nico was better than Joe and Dylan had a great season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AllVol11717, Midas, Devo182 and 1 other person
#88,008
#88,008
You also have to assume that folks in the committee will be pushing the best stadiums for hosting.

Don't think they want a Boise State hosting a playoff game...

Wouldn't surprise me at all if they want those first 4 hosted at Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State and Tennessee... work out the seeding however ya want to make those the 5-8 seeds, but get them hosting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rishvol and volsagain
#88,009
#88,009
Devo182 said:
H2H is ok as 1 single factor to use, among others, if 2 teams are nose to nose.

Otherwise it's endless circularity. The transitive property just doesn't fit neatly in sports.

It certainly shouldn't be used as a sole, deciding factor. The committee is trying to determine who is the best, not vs a single opponent, but vs a field of options of playoff-caliber opponents.


The point of playing is to win of course...but adjacently to boost your resume and prove yourself. Just like us playing and beating Bama has done for us. They're our one saving grace as far as "good wins" go (sort of a silly term, maybe should be "top win" or "great win"...UF, Vandy, OU, State are "good" wins too...but people are so dichotomous and binary these days).
Click to expand...
I agree it shouldn’t be the sole deciding factor. But like you said when teams are nose and nose it needs to be a factor and should be greatly used

It would be like if Smu beats undefeated Oregon in the championship and the AP poll still has Oregon number #1 after the game. “Sure Smu won the H2H but Oregon didn’t have a bad loss” that would be idiotic
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ulysees E. McGill
#88,010
#88,010
There's 1 clear and verifiable fact as to why this system is so bad as-is.

The gap between the 5 and 8 seed is MUCH closer than between 1 and 4...

Therefore an 11 or 12 seed is actually better off trying to advance deep into the playoffs than a 9 or 10.

That's stupid. Have to do away with the guarantees. Worst idea in playoff history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volunteer821, theutvolunteers, Checker_the_Shire and 1 other person
#88,016
#88,016
MoCo_Vol said:
Perfect situation for us for Saturday's games...

22 UNLV upsets 11 Boise State (UNLV would 100% be seeded behind us and Boise State would drop out of the playoffs)
Army beats 17 Tulane (just to be safe that 2 group of 5 conference champs don't sneak in...other than Boise Tulane is the highest rated G5 team still in the mix)
18 Iowa State vs 16 Arizona State (honestly doesn't matter winner is going to most likely be seeded below us regardless)
3 Texas beats 7 Georgia (if Georgia wins then both teams likely are seeded ahead of us, Georgia loses and there's a chance they with 3 losses fall behind us)
1 Oregon beats 4 Penn State (just need Penn State to get dog walked they're only in this game out of sheer luck and weak schedule)
12 Clemson upsets 9 SMU (a 3 loss ACC champ that just lost to a 3 loss SEC team won't be seeded above us, SMU wins and they will get a top 4 seed)

I actually think SMU will beat Clemson... and with the BS top 4 going to conference champs regardless of record that might be the better outcome...cause we know SEC/BIG 10 champs are the 1 & 2 seed regardless of who wins...SMU and Boise State would be the next 2, but if either loses I think Big 12 champ gets one.

Ohio State and Notre Dame would be the only 2 at large teams I could see getting seeded ahead of us...I know people don't think conference champion losers will be punished...but I just don't think a 2 loss Penn State, 3 loss Georgia, or a 2 loss SMU would stay ahead of us in seeding so that's why I'm wanting the above outcomes.
Click to expand...
Top 4 conference winners get top 4 seeds. Winner of ACC will 100% get a seed above us. If Bsu loses to UNLV it will cause the B12 winner to jump us in seeding. Those games don’t matter for our seeding

SEC and B10 are the two games that might change our seeding but that’s TBD
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangenSC
#88,018
#88,018
Checker_the_Shire said:
I got into it with some family and close friends, even made myself look like an ass with a comment I made to a very close friend of mine. So I did some soul searching and decided to take a lot of time off from anything political. Which has honestly been a very positive experience. I even took a further step, not because of politics but more so to see if I can better myself further, and deleted all social media. That was an even better, more positive experience. I’m glad to see you’ve taken some steps towards finding that peace as well and I hope it works out.

Also, just for laughs, now anytime someone sends me something political, I send them this gem and explain that this is my current thought process:
Click to expand...

He was a National treasure in the football world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volunteer821, TennacJed, Checker_the_Shire and 3 others
#88,020
#88,020
MoCo_Vol said:
You also have to assume that folks in the committee will be pushing the best stadiums for hosting.

Don't think they want a Boise State hosting a playoff game...

Wouldn't surprise me at all if they want those first 4 hosted at Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State and Tennessee... work out the seeding however ya want to make those the 5-8 seeds, but get them hosting.
Click to expand...
Don't think there's any way for Boise to host. They're either a 1st rd bye or a 12 seed
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangenSC, Volnukem, DarthVol1 and 1 other person
#88,024
#88,024
Devo182 said:
There's 1 clear and verifiable fact as to why this system is so bad as-is.

The gap between the 5 and 8 seed is MUCH closer than between 1 and 4...

Therefore an 11 or 12 seed is actually better off trying to advance deep into the playoffs than a 9 or 10.

That's stupid. Have to do away with the guarantees. Worst idea in playoff history.
Click to expand...
Have guarantees qualification, but seed accordingly. First 4 should be the top 4 ranked teams.

The way they have it now would be like if March Madness had all 1-4 seeds as conference champs. So the Big South champ would be a 4 seed while the ACC runner up has to play the Big12 runner up in the second round or something stupid.

They need to move the CFP to 16 now (they should've done 8 originally) so all top seeds are rewarded with a host site. Do 16 with 6 guaranteed slots and 10 at-large. Seed the bracket straight up. If the Top 4 are all SEC/BIG12 so be it.

If they'd done 8 with 4 guaranteed highest ranked conference champs it would be 1 - Oregon, 2. Texas, 3. Penn State, 4. Notre Dame, 5. Georgia, 6. Tennessee, 7. Boise State, 8. SMU

SMU at Oregon
Boise at Texas
Tennessee at Penn State
Georgia at Notre Dame
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top