Old Man Mike
Fast as Lightning!
- Messages
- 8,975
- Reaction score
- 6,464
This "football study hall" post-game assessment indicated that without the turnovers, Notre Dame outscores USF [viewed as to standard down play success] by twelve and a half points. Curiously, this is almost the exact middle of the 10-to-17 point range that most experts, and most of us, were predicting on the basis of what we thought we saw "on paper". I suppose that makes me feel a little better as not being a complete idiot.
This method's way of estimating the impact of turnovers weighed in favor of USF by a whopping 33+ points! The analyst said that given this horrendous turnover impact, ND was "lucky" to lose by three. [the method said that the loss "should have" been more like twenty.] What that also means to me is that we [again excepting the turnovers] outplayed USF by significantly more than the twelve point advantage from "standard plays" to shrink the turnover deficit down to three points at the buzzer.
So once again: we lost the game. And once again, almost everything about that game says: you guys are pretty damm good if you could just get your heads out of your butts on a few plays and into the game.
This method's way of estimating the impact of turnovers weighed in favor of USF by a whopping 33+ points! The analyst said that given this horrendous turnover impact, ND was "lucky" to lose by three. [the method said that the loss "should have" been more like twenty.] What that also means to me is that we [again excepting the turnovers] outplayed USF by significantly more than the twelve point advantage from "standard plays" to shrink the turnover deficit down to three points at the buzzer.
So once again: we lost the game. And once again, almost everything about that game says: you guys are pretty damm good if you could just get your heads out of your butts on a few plays and into the game.
Last edited: