Crazy,GD's record when winning the big play and turnover battle. Then why??

U

uihawk82

Well-Known Member
I was just watching replay of Pitt game.

Just before rudock missed wide open Hillyer on that rollout pass before halftime the announcers gave a stat that GD gave them.

Per GD, in his last 18 years as OC/headcoach he is 93-0 when winning the battles of more explosive plays and less turnovers. And he is 0-20 when losing those battles.

Explosive plays the announcers said were runs of 10+ yards and passes of 16+ yards.

So tell me why we are doing this short passing game (yes I know he had more explosive players at Georgia or Georgia Tech, NCarolina maybe, and definitely at texas).

We have tight ends who can get open up seams and be 15+ yards downfield.

We have powell, smith and willies with good speed and KMM should be able to double move a guy to get 20 yards.

So why hasnt GD been making Rudock focus more downfield since practice started in spring and August? Scratch my head rather than where it itches.
 


The funny thing is this was going to be his first win under those circumstances but the interception at the end made the game not qualify.
 


uihawk82 said:
I was just watching replay of Pitt game.

Just before rudock missed wide open Hillyer on that rollout pass before halftime the announcers gave a stat that GD gave them.

Per GD, in his last 18 years as OC/headcoach he is 93-0 when winning the battles of more explosive plays and less turnovers. And he is 0-20 when losing those battles.

Explosive plays the announcers said were runs of 10+ yards and passes of 16+ yards.

So tell me why we are doing this short passing game (yes I know he had more explosive players at Georgia or Georgia Tech, NCarolina maybe, and definitely at texas).

We have tight ends who can get open up seams and be 15+ yards downfield.

We have powell, smith and willies with good speed and KMM should be able to double move a guy to get 20 yards.

So why hasnt GD been making Rudock focus more downfield since practice started in spring and August? Scratch my head rather than where it itches.
Click to expand...

"Big play" means a lot of different things to different people. A 27-yard run by Weisman in the 4th quarter is infinitely "bigger" than a QB keeper for a TD in the 1st quarter. TO GD, a 3-yard out with 22 YAC is the biggest play ever, while to KF, blocking a punt and getting a FG out of it is "huge". Koehn's 52-yard FG, in light of recent place-kicking struggles, was almost equal to the lesser of Rob Houghtlin's (numerous) game-winning kicks (obviously not Michigan 1985!).

All relative, I guess.
 


hawkeyebob62 said:
"Big play" means a lot of different things to different people. A 27-yard run by Weisman in the 4th quarter is infinitely "bigger" than a QB keeper for a TD in the 1st quarter. TO GD, a 3-yard out with 22 YAC is the biggest play ever, while to KF, blocking a punt and getting a FG out of it is "huge". Koehn's 52-yard FG, in light of recent place-kicking struggles, was almost equal to the lesser of Rob Houghtlin's (numerous) game-winning kicks (obviously not Michigan 1985!).

All relative, I guess.
Click to expand...

True but in this case it was Greg's stat therefore his qualifications.
 


I'd like to hear Greg's qualifiers for a "big play". 93-0? Child please........

Are you sure you heard this right?
 




uihawk82 said:
I was just watching replay of Pitt game.

Just before rudock missed wide open Hillyer on that rollout pass before halftime the announcers gave a stat that GD gave them.

Per GD, in his last 18 years as OC/headcoach he is 93-0 when winning the battles of more explosive plays and less turnovers. And he is 0-20 when losing those battles.

Explosive plays the announcers said were runs of 10+ yards and passes of 16+ yards.

So tell me why we are doing this short passing game (yes I know he had more explosive players at Georgia or Georgia Tech, NCarolina maybe, and definitely at texas).

We have tight ends who can get open up seams and be 15+ yards downfield.

We have powell, smith and willies with good speed and KMM should be able to double move a guy to get 20 yards.

So why hasnt GD been making Rudock focus more downfield since practice started in spring and August? Scratch my head rather than where it itches.
Click to expand...


I'm willing to bet that stat by GD is complete BS..
 


I'm pretty sure Davis' quip was aimed at Iowa's QB and HC. Maybe it shows the disparity in philosophies between Davis and KF? And some QBs?
 


HawkPrdatr40 said:
I'm willing to bet that stat by GD is complete BS..
Click to expand...

That's what I said in the game thread - something in the"duh" category. But I also think it was a calculated way of him saying that we need to get more explosive on offense...which was pretty much proven in the Pitt game.
 


hawkeyebob62 said:
"Big play" means a lot of different things to different people. A 27-yard run by Weisman in the 4th quarter is infinitely "bigger" than a QB keeper for a TD in the 1st quarter. TO GD, a 3-yard out with 22 YAC is the biggest play ever, while to KF, blocking a punt and getting a FG out of it is "huge". Koehn's 52-yard FG, in light of recent place-kicking struggles, was almost equal to the lesser of Rob Houghtlin's (numerous) game-winning kicks (obviously not Michigan 1985!).

All relative, I guess.
Click to expand...

No, the announcers said GD gave the measure a very objective, measureable value.
 


PCHawk said:
The funny thing is this was going to be his first win under those circumstances but the interception at the end made the game not qualify.
Click to expand...

Yes, it was saved by the bell with that last interception by Gair. Nice catch , Anthony!
 


This stat probably isn't unique to GD.

Big plays should lead to lots of scoring
Turnovers should limit chances of opponents scoring

If you outscore your opponent... you win.
 




thetrza said:
Remember who the announcers were who read this stuff on the air.
Click to expand...

Late in the replay they put up a graphic showing big runs are 15+ and big passes are 20+, which I wasnt sure I heard it that way earlier.

But whatever. GD would like to have receivers who can take a short pass, a slant and go for 20+.

Anyone would want that, safe pass and big YAK.

It also helps to have running backs like Texas had.
 


uihawk82 said:
Late in the replay they put up a graphic showing big runs are 15+ and big passes are 20+, which I wasnt sure I heard it that way earlier.

But whatever. GD would like to have receivers who can take a short pass, a slant and go for 20+.

Anyone would want that, safe pass and big YAK.

It also helps to have running backs like Texas had.
Click to expand...


Not just RB's but athletes in general. It's amazing what you can do when your scheme matches your personnel. Or, in some cases, you adjust your scheme to fit what you have.
 


1hawkeye1 said:
I'd like to hear Greg's qualifiers for a "big play". 93-0? Child please........

Are you sure you heard this right?
Click to expand...

A run of 10 or more yards is a big play for GD. A pass of 16 or more yards is a big play. When his team wins both the big play battle and the turnover battle, he's undefeated (according to the announcers, anyway). When he loses both, he's winless.
 


In the end of the Pitt game the graphic showed Iowa and Pitt each with one turnover and Pitt won the explosive play category by 2 plays.

So if GD was charting his games correctly and not making this stuff up like one poster said then this would be the first game he has won out of 21 when basically losing in this criteria
 


uihawk82 said:
In the end of the Pitt game the graphic showed Iowa and Pitt each with one turnover and Pitt won the explosive play category by 2 plays.

So if GD was charting his games correctly and not making this stuff up like one poster said then this would be the first game he has won out of 21 when basically losing in this criteria
Click to expand...

The way I understood his criteria was this game would fall in neither category since he did not lose the turnover battle. It would be a little more interesting to know how well he did in those games that don't meet his criteria because that is where KF is shooting for, i.e. explosive plays are not in KF's criteria but turnovers are. So how did GD do when he won the turnover comparison but lost the explosive plays. I'm guessing but it would not surprise me if it's around .500.
 


I'm pretty sure GD uses runs of 12, passes of 16.

All teams do well when they have big plays and win the turnover battle. A better stat to measure offensive efficiency would be what percentage of games does your team put themselves in this category.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top