Offensive Coordinator Search

beryirish

Dry Land Is Not A Myth!
Messages
5,949
Reaction score
539
angry_grinch.gif


I'm down with moving on if anyone else is...
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,128
Reaction score
11,077
Koon tried to imply that the passing game got worse under Rees, but he was wrong.

We can move on lol
 
K

koonja

Guest
Koon tried to imply that the passing game got worse under Rees, but he was wrong.

We can move on lol

False. Why are you pedaling this too? You're better than that.

Lucci said it got significantly better based on YPA. I said it didn't, it was the same or worse.

Numbers don't lie.
 
Last edited:

Cali_domer

Banned
Messages
3,569
Reaction score
296
False. Why are you pedaling this too? You're better than that.

Lucci said it got significantly better based on YPA. I said it didn't, it was the same or worse.

Numbers don't lie.
Dude just drink the kool-aid and go sit in the corner. It will all be over soon (Rees is getting the job).
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,128
Reaction score
11,077
False. Why are you pedaling this too? You're better than that.

Lucci said it got significantly better based on YPA. I said it didn't, it was the same or worse.

Numbers don't lie.

You said "yikes, they only passed above the season average once under Rees"

I then showed you that their passing average was significantly better under Rees.

That was your first metric, and you were wrong.

I rest my case.
 
K

koonja

Guest
Dude just drink the kool-aid and go sit in the corner. It will all be over soon (Rees is getting the job).

I've seen the mods spin false narratives and if you "don't like it you're open for being bullied" too often.

More people should have the balls to challenge the perceptions being pushed im certain cases.
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,128
Reaction score
11,077
If true, does it concern anyone we averaged 273 passing yards per game on the year.. And only eclipsed that average ONCE in the final 5 games?

Against the easiest part of the schedule? Yikes.

I've seen the mods spin false narratives and if you "don't like it get lost" too often.

More people should have the balls to challenge the perceptions being pushed im certain cases.

There is no perception. It's fine if you think there are better options. I agree with that.

But you implied that the passing game got worse under Rees in the post that started this all, and you were wrong:

If true, does it concern anyone we averaged 273 passing yards per game on the year.. And only eclipsed that average ONCE in the final 5 games?

Against the easiest part of the schedule? Yikes.

Passing average in first 7 games (Long): 215
Passing average in last 6 games (Rees): 257

Even if you took out the scUM game, the team still averaged better passing numbers under Rees. #TommyThaGawd
 
K

koonja

Guest
You said "yikes, they only passed above the season average once under Rees"

I then showed you that their passing average was significantly better under Rees.

That was your first metric, and you were wrong.

I rest my case.

You're right. I was wrong about that because I forgot to include the bowl game.

I quickly acknowledged my calculation mistake.

Will a mod do the same? I suppose you could just clean it up for him.
 

zelezo vlk

Well-known member
Messages
18,013
Reaction score
5,055
Funny enough if you remove the tomato cans (BG & NM) from the first half of the schedule, Y/A is only 5.97 vs the second half of 7.64...
 
K

koonja

Guest
There is no perception. It's fine if you think there are better options. I agree with that.

But you implied that the passing game got worse under Rees in the post that started this all, and you were wrong:

See above post.
 

Pops Freshenmeyer

Well-known member
Messages
5,112
Reaction score
2,457

NDdomer2

Local Sports vBookie
Messages
17,050
Reaction score
3,875
i think if you want to show how someone did against a team and show improvement you have to compare how we did to said team vs average against said team and then compare how we did from that perspective to the 7/6 game splits

you cant just do straight ypa vs ypa.
 

Free Manera

Well-known member
Messages
2,949
Reaction score
3,547
So any updates on oc position?

Based on inferences I made from II pod yesterday
#1 choice is Moorhead (all 3 guys say home run and far and away best option)
#2 choice is Monken

If both fall through, consolation prize is Rees or combo of Rees and Taylor.
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,128
Reaction score
11,077
Funny enough if you remove the tomato cans (BG & NM) from the first half of the schedule, Y/A is only 5.97 vs the second half of 7.64...

Now take out the scUM game... I bet it was still better under Rees lol
 

Pops Freshenmeyer

Well-known member
Messages
5,112
Reaction score
2,457
You're right. I was wrong about that because I forgot to include the bowl game.

I quickly acknowledged my calculation mistake.

Will a mod do the same? I suppose you could just clean it up for him.

You argued that the passing game got worse because ND failed to exceed their average yards per game an acceptable number of times. When your statistical claim was demonstrated to be objectively false did you reexamine your conclusion? No, the proper measure for passing game quality changed from passing yards per game to passing yards per attempt (except we still measure defensive quality by unadjusted passing yards allowed per game because that gave you the conclusion you already settled on).

Is your conclusion actually derived from the arguments you're making? Or is it based on something else that you don't want to put forward as an argument?
 

Rizzophil

Well-known member
Messages
2,431
Reaction score
579
Based on inferences I made from II pod yesterday
#1 choice is Moorhead (all 3 guys say home run and far and away best option)
#2 choice is Monken

If both fall through, consolation prize is Rees or combo of Rees and Taylor.

Thank you for the summary
 
K

koonja

Guest
You argued that the passing game got worse because ND failed to exceed their average yards per game an acceptable number of times. When your statistical claim was demonstrated to be objectively false did you reexamine your conclusion? No, the proper measure for passing game quality changed from passing yards per game to passing yards per attempt (except we still measure defensive quality by unadjusted passing yards allowed per game because that gave you the conclusion you already settled on).

Is your conclusion actually derived from the arguments you're making? Or is it based on something else that you don't want to put forward as an argument?

This is also a lie.

Here's what I said, verbatim: "So if you look at defensive rankings based on "passing yards allowed", the first 7 teams average ranking is 69, and we averaged 213 YPG.

The final 6 teams defensive rankings are 72nd and we averaged 214 YPG.

Yet somehow the OC was so bad everyone was offering to "pack his bags", yet the predecessor with no experience had virtually the SAME production relative to ranking, and we think we found a silver bullet.
".

I then admitted my math on passing yards was wrong (because I can admit when I'm wrong). But I never said "Got worse". I said "virtually the same".

I then said YPA is probably the best measure of the passing game (which no one has disagreed with). And Lucci said "if you look at YPA you'd see we saw a significant increase in YPA".

This is also not true.

Now the mob is moving the goal post by saying: Using other defensive rankings... then saying "The defensive rankings don't matter"... then saying "yeah but if you remove some games it changes"....

I know you're on the mods back because that's the culture enforced here -- but can you just admit when you were wrong like I did?
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,128
Reaction score
11,077
You argued that the passing game got worse because ND failed to exceed their average yards per game an acceptable number of times. When your statistical claim was demonstrated to be objectively false did you reexamine your conclusion? No, the proper measure for passing game quality changed from passing yards per game to passing yards per attempt (except we still measure defensive quality by unadjusted passing yards allowed per game because that gave you the conclusion you already settled on).

Is your conclusion actually derived from the arguments you're making? Or is it based on something else that you don't want to put forward as an argument?

source.gif
 

FightingIrishLover7

All troll, no substance
Messages
12,704
Reaction score
7,516
So you found an alternative source that has the rankings adjusted like 1 spot.

Again, what's the point? I didn't need to include defensive rankings to show Lucci was misstating a fact, but it's the most relevant metric to the measure so I included it.

Take it out if you don't like it. My point remains.

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/TNtW4tnMRbqP6" width="480" height="320" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/steve-bannon-TNtW4tnMRbqP6">via GIPHY</a></p>

Koon telling y'all to get your "alternative facts" outta here!
 

Pops Freshenmeyer

Well-known member
Messages
5,112
Reaction score
2,457
I know you're on the mods back because that's the culture enforced here -- but can you just admit when you were wrong like I did?

I don't feel personally responsible for the arguments made by other people. Perhaps that's why you have this issue persistently. The rest of the website is not a monolith.

I hope ND makes an outside hire but every framing of your position is based on rolling New Mexico and Bowling Green and giving those stats equal weight. Notre Dame threw for 1,705 yards through the Michigan game (that's 7 games). 774 of those yards came against two of the worst teams in FBS. Otherwise the passing offense was 186.2 yards per game (and fewer than six yards per attempt).

In the back half of the schedule ND was only below their P5 AVERAGE from the first half once (just five yards below it against Duke) which is also the only game where ND's yards per attempt was lower than their P5 average through the Michigan game.
 

Luckylucci

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
27,770
Reaction score
10,153
Books stats via ESPN: https://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/4046678/ian-book

Books stats via Sports Reference: https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/ian-book-1.html

Same numbers outside of 5 yards on the season. But if I had to guess, Koon is going to include pass attempts by QB’s that aren’t Ian Book because those are extremely relevant. Haha.

Nailed it. Koon including garbage times stats with 2nd and 3rd stringers to ‘prove his point’. That’s too bad.
 
K

koonja

Guest
Nailed it. Koon including garbage times stats with 2nd and 3rd stringers to ‘prove his point’. That’s too bad.

You claimed "if you look at YPA, we saw a significant increase in that". It's 2 pages back, untouched.

You didn't qualify your statement at all.

It dropped from 8.3 to 7.6, I included the defensive rankings as an ancillary data point (showing a slight drop as well).

This is a weak, weak response. Just say you were wrong. I was wrong about passing yards and it took me 1 second to admit that.
 

TheRealLynch51

Well-known member
Messages
1,500
Reaction score
1,656
Can we get a separate thread for Koons molten hot takes and leave the actual OC discussion in here?
 

Luckylucci

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
27,770
Reaction score
10,153
You claimed "if you look at YPA, we saw a significant increase in that". It's 2 pages back, untouched.

You didn't qualify your statement at all.

It dropped from 8.3 to 7.6, I included the defensive rankings as an ancillary data point (showing a slight drop as well).

This is a weak, weak response. Just say you were wrong. I was wrong about passing yards and it took me 1 second to admit that.

None of the stats I posted were wrong. You moved from 6 to 5 games when you dropped passing yards for YPA because VT drastically affects both metrics. All numbers I put together were for Book (because that’s all that’s relevant) and were 100% accurate. Sorry this isn’t working out for you. You’ll get em next time.
 
Top