Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

mugtang

Nevada at Fresno State

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, NevadaFan said:

I don’t think anyone is disagreeing. I think Pack fans collectively cringed with that decision. I think Norvell wishes he had it back. What can you do? Fresno is pretty damn good. They were better than nevada on sat. It is what it is. 

Right, and  after Saturday. the next time some stats nerd talks that stuff to Norvell or Pack ppl they'll tell them to shove it. 

But it doesn't change the fact that analytics is replacing analysis in the game as a whole. That's really reckless, IMO. 

 

ezgif-5-959914ff2250.gif.f0cc4fc558f5a154dc6ff5904c80bf34.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Maynard Delecto said:

Right, and  after Saturday. the next time some stats nerd talks that stuff to Norvell or Pack ppl they'll tell them to shove it. 

But it doesn't change the fact that analytics is replacing analysis in the game as a whole. That's really reckless, IMO. 

I'm not a math dude but it's always seemed to me that applying analytics to a game like football is dicey because of the sheer number of moving parts and the much smaller sample size in terms of games.  Now, i am a proponent of being aggressive, don't get me wrong, but that is largely confined to coaches being cowards on 4th and short in the no-man's land between the 40s.  Chasing points is different and a lot riskier, especially if you can't run and Nevada wasn't able to get yards in crunch time on the ground all night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, NMpackalum said:

Like I said on the replace Norvell thread, he makes some head scratching in game decisions like this and high risk play calls when the team has momentum. Overall as a program builder, he's good. You have to take the bad with the good.

He did a lot of head scratching calls in his 1st 3 years.  Like 4th & 6 on the 50 & going for it.  Fortunately it's mostly been beat out of him but that risk taker is still lurking in there.  I wasn't surprised when he went for 2.  He's grown a lot as a head coach though.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, wolfan said:

He did a lot of head scratching calls in his 1st 3 years.  Like 4th & 6 on the 50 & going for it.  Fortunately it's mostly been beat out of him but that risk taker is still lurking in there.  I wasn't surprised when he went for 2.  He's grown a lot as a head coach though.  

I don't know if it's been beat out of him. He has an QB and receivers that keep him out of trouble. We'll see next year if he's still here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its easy to say that decision cost them the game but it really didn't. If the defense could stop the run that would have changed the entire game. If they stopped Fresno on one of their scoring drives they could have won, if they make the two point conversion at the end of the game they could have won in overtime. 

You know just saying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Maynard Delecto said:

I hear you guys, and I'm not trying to beat a dead horse. Just trying to point out the inherent flaw of the analytics approach. 

Analytics is a card some in the hand of a coach who may or may not have passed 8th grade math

Analysis allows logic (common sense, hopefully) processing of the data by the man who is paid to know WTF is going on, not hold a card. "We're down by five points to the opponent. I can run the play that will most likely get my team a point, and see how the rest of the game plays out. That way, if the opponent gets another FG, it's still a 7 point game. Or, I can go for the higher risk 2 point conversion...

" Since we are already trailing, that's a good indicator the opponent has been successful at stopping our high risk PFS. After all, if our PFS were as successful as extra point tries, we wouldn't be trailing by 5 right?"

And yet, you are. I said I don't know if he's an analytics guy or not.....it was all speculation on my part in an effort to explain a head-scratcher of a decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Slapdad said:

And yet, you are. I said I don't know if he's an analytics guy or not.....it was all speculation on my part in an effort to explain a head-scratcher of a decision. 

dead horse I wasn't trying to beat = Norvell decision

not dead horse = continued reliance upon analytics in coaching decisions.

 

ezgif-5-959914ff2250.gif.f0cc4fc558f5a154dc6ff5904c80bf34.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2021 at 4:23 PM, ziggy29 said:

And perfect timing, too.  Too early and it’s PI.  Too late and he gets a foot down.

I think any objective analysis would say contact was early with no attempt to play the ball.   It's pass interference plain and simple.  Alas, poor calls are part of the game and Nevada did not make enough adjustments to win.   But any objective analysis of that play results in pass interference.  Again, we lost the game for reasons other than the last play, but by no means was that perfect timing

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2021 at 4:04 PM, thelawlorfaithful said:

We just need somebody to beat Fresno, doesn’t matter who it is. The Aztecs are our buds this week.

Ah yes, I was looking too far down the road not seeing that Fresno St plays San Diego St this weekend. That'll work too, then I don't have to root for Boise yet :) Lets go Aztecs!

Pack just needs to win out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wolfhomie said:

I think any objective analysis would say contact was early with no attempt to play the ball.   It's pass interference plain and simple.  Alas, poor calls are part of the game and Nevada did not make enough adjustments to win.   But any objective analysis of that play results in pass interference.  Again, we lost the game for reasons other than the last play, but by no means was that perfect timing

 

Not the reason we lost by any means and if we even got it to OT I’m not sure we could have stopped them but they could have easily called PI.

2C24A74D-8B10-408C-B0F6-84C954DAB474.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, NevadaAllStar said:

Not the reason we lost by any means and if we even got it to OT I’m not sure we could have stopped them but they could have easily called PI.

2C24A74D-8B10-408C-B0F6-84C954DAB474.png

This was a really, really bad ref crew and everyone knew it before kickoff - our 247 guy texted me to expect dumb calls as it was the crew from SJSU/SDSU.  They fell for flops from both teams, threw weird cheap flags, swallowed their whistles on holding all game and then decided to start calling it in the 4th quarter.  

 

I'm not going to bother, but i can drag up a few equally egregious calls/no calls that went against fresno.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rofl_copter_dos said:

This was a really, really bad ref crew and everyone knew it before kickoff - our 247 guy texted me to expect dumb calls as it was the crew from SJSU/SDSU.  They fell for flops from both teams, threw weird cheap flags, swallowed their whistles on holding all game and then decided to start calling it in the 4th quarter.  

 

I'm not going to bother, but i can drag up a few equally egregious calls/no calls that went against fresno.

Yea, I agree there were a lot of bad calls on both sides & not likely we would have won in OT but the game was on the line with this missed call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...