|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Aug 7, 2017 9:31:12 GMT -5
As good as our passing game has been in some years, we have not had a more efficient passing offense (defined simply by yards/attempt) than our opponents since 2011. Understanding that there are so many factors/measures beyond "yards/attempt" in rushing & passing (fumbles, interceptions, big plays, 3rd down efficiency, ability to get 3 needed yards for 1st down, etc) here's what the stats say for pass 13 years
YEAR= HC YDS/CARRY VS. OPP YDS/CARRY= DIFF; HC YARDS/PASS ATT VS OPP YDS/PASS ATT=DIFF
2004= 3.8 VS 4.9 = (1.1) ; 5.4 VS 7.5= (2.1)
2005= 3.8 VS 4.5 = (0.7); 6.1 VS 7.0 = (0.9)
2006= 3.6 VS 4.4 = (0.8); 7.1 VS 6.5 = +0.6 Dom Randolph first season
2007= 4.3 VS 4.5 = (0.2); 7.4 VS 6.6 = +0.8
2008= 3.8 VS 3.7 = +0.1; 7.3 VS 7.5= (0.2)
2009= 4.4 VS 3.8= +0.6; 7.7 VS 6.2= +1.5 Dom Randolph final season. Note rushing advantage: strong performances by Randolph, Bellomo, Houghton
2010= 3.4 VS 3.8 = (0.4); 5.9 VS 6.4 = (0.5)
2011= 4.1 VS 3.9= +0.2; 6.8 VS 6.1 = +0.7
2012= 3.2 VS 4.7= (1.5); 6.4 VS 7.1 = (0.7)
2013= 4.1 VS 4.7= (0.6); 6.6 VS 8.4= (1.8) Compare the 8.4 Yards/Attempt by opponents vs DR's best season.......
2014= 4.0 VS 4.3 = (0.3); 6.3 VS 7.3 = (1.2)
2015= 3.9 VS 3.9 = EVEN; 6.5 VS 6.7= (0.2)
2016= 3.2 VS 4.3= (1.1); 6.6 VS 8.2 = (1.6) Those are alarming numbers, in my opinion
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Aug 7, 2017 11:05:35 GMT -5
What has always been one of my points, KY... just because we are pass-wacky doesn't mean it is the Greatest Show on Fitton Turf™. It's taken rare talent like a Randolph, or Pujals at his best (has been inconsistent at times) to be successful with that scheme. I have advocated continually for a balanced approach, if not by formation, than by play calling to keep the defense a little bit more off-guard. If the pass pass pass pass approach was working so well, your numbers above wouldn't be so ugly, and neither would win loss.
Essentially, we have been out-run in 9 of the last 13 seasons, but out-passed 9 of the last 13 seasons too.
|
|
|
Post by joe on Aug 7, 2017 11:37:40 GMT -5
And it's not even all about TIME of possession alone, I'm talking about number of plays. That's what wears out a defense.
If anyone knows how to look it up, I wonder if we could analyze number of snaps on O vs D per game and then break it down by quarter. I think this would be interesting. Equally as interesting would be run v pass in the 4th quarter and compare that to our opponents.
In the grand scheme, this is an eyeball test. I've watched the HC games, all of them, and many games of our opponents. Championship teams almost always have a 4th quarter running game at our level. Had we had one as well, we would have won most of the games we blew at the end, and there were so many of these games that our W/L record would have been decent. Can't lean on a QB not named Dom Randolph that much. Look what happens when said QB gets hurt. It's called risk management. Good skill to learn. And as KY points out even with Dom in '09 we still had a strong running game. Maybe even with Dom, as good as he was, we wouldn't have won the PLC that year without the presence of the run.
|
|
poka
Newbie
Posts: 1
|
Post by poka on Aug 7, 2017 13:29:03 GMT -5
I saw that Roberts was added to the roster yesterday. I initially assumed he was a walk-on; did not realize he was a transfer. Do you have any other information about him? Doing some further checking, I see that he was rated at 2* (5.3) by Rivals as a WR and was rated 2* (77) by 247 Sports as a QB at the time he committed to Navy. Also added to the roster is a freshman walk-on from my home town in New Jersey, RB Matt Varano. My understanding is that he had some serious recruiting interest as a HS senior but it dissipated when he suffered a serious injury. He took a year off to recover, was admitted to Holy Cross, and has now been added to the roster. My hometown is also Westfield. Hello. I've seen Varano play during two Westfield HS championships. A formidable running back. Hurt in his senior year. Rehabilitated. Accepted to Holy Cross on academics and then offered a roster opportunity. Not a walk on. Go Crusaders!!
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Aug 7, 2017 13:57:24 GMT -5
Welcome, poka Post often Aren't there only two categories of players, scholarship or walk on, even recruited walk on ?
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Aug 7, 2017 16:03:32 GMT -5
And it's not even all about TIME of possession alone, I'm talking about number of plays. That's what wears out a defense.
If anyone knows how to look it up, I wonder if we could analyze number of snaps on O vs D per game and then break it down by quarter. I think this would be interesting. Equally as interesting would be run v pass in the 4th quarter and compare that to our opponents.
In the grand scheme, this is an eyeball test. I've watched the HC games, all of them, and many games of our opponents. Championship teams almost always have a 4th quarter running game at our level. Had we had one as well, we would have won most of the games we blew at the end, and there were so many of these games that our W/L record would have been decent. Can't lean on a QB not named Dom Randolph that much. Look what happens when said QB gets hurt. It's called risk management. Good skill to learn. And as KY points out even with Dom in '09 we still had a strong running game. Maybe even with Dom, as good as he was, we wouldn't have won the PLC that year without the presence of the run. Joe-- I'll bet you'll be as surprised as I am by the numbers Year= HC PLAYS VS OPPONENT PLAYS= HC Advantage or (deficit) = Extra Plays per game 2003= 846 vs 893 = (47) = (4) plays per game 2004= 796 vs 774= +18= +1 play per game 2005= 736 vs 809= (73)= (7) per game 2006= 765 vs 792= +73= +7 per game 2007= 828 vs 766= +62= + 6 per game 2008= 831 vs 714 = +117= + 11 plays per game! 2009= 809 vs 918=(109) = (9) plays per game, an amazing anomaly for our 9-3 season 2010= 736 vs 845 = (109) = (10) per game 2011= 784 vs 769= +15= + 1 per game 2012= 778 vs 794= (16)= (1) per game 2013= 890 vs 857= +33= + 3 per game 2014= 875 vs 813= + 62 = +5 per game 2015= 807 vs 802= +5= Even 2016= 780 vs 762= +18= + 2 per game Very surprising to see that we typically have more plays per game than our opponents
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Aug 7, 2017 16:23:01 GMT -5
Uh, would that be because they break big gainers for TDs and don't have to inch down the field?
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Aug 7, 2017 17:08:49 GMT -5
Poka --
No disrespect intended in describing Matt Varano as a walk-on. I'm not aware that he was recruited by Holy Cross but if he was, I stand corrected.
|
|
|
Practice!
Aug 7, 2017 19:10:56 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by joe on Aug 7, 2017 19:10:56 GMT -5
Yes I am surprised. Maybe it's the long gainers or maybe these numbers weigh heavily on quarters 1-3.
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Aug 7, 2017 19:12:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Aug 7, 2017 19:17:51 GMT -5
Thanks, Breezy Need a program
|
|
|
Post by breezy on Aug 7, 2017 19:26:52 GMT -5
Go to the football roster on the football page. Click on the up/down arrow next to "Number" and get the roster in numerical order.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Aug 7, 2017 19:30:44 GMT -5
Thanks, but #99 did not look 6'3, 250
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Aug 8, 2017 8:08:17 GMT -5
Nice video, but #wewilll needs to be put out to pasture with #risetogether.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Aug 8, 2017 8:20:45 GMT -5
#dumphashtags
how did we survive without them ?
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Aug 8, 2017 8:22:23 GMT -5
#LetsWin!!
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Aug 8, 2017 9:54:04 GMT -5
Nice video, but #wewilll needs to be put out to pasture with #risetogether. We seriously have some lame, anti-football-sounding, vague hashtags. Howabout: #kickass #win #cross #saders ...or nothing.
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Aug 8, 2017 9:58:07 GMT -5
And it's not even all about TIME of possession alone, I'm talking about number of plays. That's what wears out a defense.
If anyone knows how to look it up, I wonder if we could analyze number of snaps on O vs D per game and then break it down by quarter. I think this would be interesting. Equally as interesting would be run v pass in the 4th quarter and compare that to our opponents.
In the grand scheme, this is an eyeball test. I've watched the HC games, all of them, and many games of our opponents. Championship teams almost always have a 4th quarter running game at our level. Had we had one as well, we would have won most of the games we blew at the end, and there were so many of these games that our W/L record would have been decent. Can't lean on a QB not named Dom Randolph that much. Look what happens when said QB gets hurt. It's called risk management. Good skill to learn. And as KY points out even with Dom in '09 we still had a strong running game. Maybe even with Dom, as good as he was, we wouldn't have won the PLC that year without the presence of the run. Joe-- I'll bet you'll be as surprised as I am by the numbers Year= HC PLAYS VS OPPONENT PLAYS= HC Advantage or (deficit) = Extra Plays per game 2003= 846 vs 893 = (47) = (4) plays per game 2004= 796 vs 774= +18= +1 play per game 2005= 736 vs 809= (73)= (7) per game 2006= 765 vs 792= +73= +7 per game 2007= 828 vs 766= +62= + 6 per game 2008= 831 vs 714 = +117= + 11 plays per game! 2009= 809 vs 918=(109) = (9) plays per game, an amazing anomaly for our 9-3 season 2010= 736 vs 845 = (109) = (10) per game 2011= 784 vs 769= +15= + 1 per game 2012= 778 vs 794= (16)= (1) per game 2013= 890 vs 857= +33= + 3 per game 2014= 875 vs 813= + 62 = +5 per game 2015= 807 vs 802= +5= Even 2016= 780 vs 762= +18= + 2 per game Very surprising to see that we typically have more plays per game than our opponents I'm actually not surprised. It's an inexact science, but think back again to the time of possession stat and my response to it. Teams that run successfully (often against HC) will make solid progress down the field, while burning the clock against us. When HC is playing from behind, staying pass-wacky, throwing all over, the clock is stopping for any incompletion or first down. Think of playing behind with 5 yard check downs and receivers running out of bounds too. I think a really eye-opening stat could be time burned per play, or per possession. In that examination, you'd likely find our opponents have a higher number, or greater amount of time occupied per play, due to a couple of factors: -- A better balanced offense would include more running plays, and more successful running plays than HC -- Playing with leads against HC skews the plays more towards selecting the run, and a willing effort to burn the clock/waste time -- Relative to the second bullet point, HC playing from behind would be doing everything possible to run the maximum number of plays and waste the least amount of time (run OOB, call timeouts, hurry-up offense, etc) That's why I love the expression to "control" the clock rather than simply time of possession. It's nuanced, but I think it makes sense.
|
|
|
Practice!
Aug 8, 2017 10:40:46 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Aug 8, 2017 10:40:46 GMT -5
WCHC--no doubt you are correct on "time burned per play" as HC typically had more plays and our opponents greater time of possession. Not st home now, will do calculations later
|
|
|
Post by joe on Aug 8, 2017 12:18:04 GMT -5
I think you guys are honing in on it.
But like I said it's an eyeball test. We come out loose, slice and dice with the passing game for 2 or 3 quarters, get a lead, opponent's defense adjusts, opponent's offense creeps back in slowly and then changs momentum with a big play or two, we get ancy, pass game falls apart, we try to run to control the clock but we can't because we have no established run game, so we get ancier, now out of our wheel house, then usually we'll go back to passing but the defense has already figured this out, we start turning the ball over way too quickly, all of this compounded by clock mismanagement, other team digs down and goes old school, runs the ball, challenging us to stop them, but now out defense has been on the field for a while and is gassed, we can't stop it now, old fans and alumni cry out in anguish, they score a couple of TDs and it's over.
What the stat for that?
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Aug 8, 2017 12:31:52 GMT -5
I think you guys are honing in on it. But like I said it's an eyeball test. We come out loose, slice and dice with the passing game for 2 or 3 quarters, get a lead, opponent's defense adjusts, opponent's offense creeps back in slowly and then changs momentum with a big play or two, we get ancy, pass game falls apart, we try to run to control the clock but we can't because we have no established run game, so we get ancier, now out of our wheel house, then usually we'll go back to passing but the defense has already figured this out, we start turning the ball over way too quickly, all of this compounded by clock mismanagement, other team digs down and goes old school, runs the ball, challenging us to stop them, but now out defense has been on the field for a while and is gassed, we can't stop it now, old fans and alumni cry out in anguish, they score a couple of TDs and it's over. What the stat for that? 90 % of the HC games I have ever seen in person?
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Aug 8, 2017 12:42:41 GMT -5
I wish the Fordham game had followed that formula
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Aug 8, 2017 14:43:54 GMT -5
I vote for "or nothing."
|
|
|
Post by deep Purple on Aug 8, 2017 17:05:06 GMT -5
#MakeHolyCrossgreatagain
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Aug 9, 2017 8:42:47 GMT -5
Not opposed. If it isn't a real eye-catcher, why do it and make it a head-scratcher.
|
|