Oline Returning Starts

One of the top attributes in ranking projecting future performance in college ball is number of returning starters. Here's a cool listing for offensive line, but includes total starts returning. Depending on how much weight you give to this attribute, even psu fans could be somewhat sympathetic to only modest projections of our offensive performance.

5 months ago jtothep 4 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

ok

strikethrough not behaving, nor is the edit function…sigh…

When I say to a kid, ‘Hey, get ready to get knocked on your rear end,’ I also tell him, ‘Learn. Learn why you got knocked on your rear end. --jvp

by jtothep on Jun 1, 2009 1:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i'm like totally meh on these:

alabama and florida each only have about 10 more career starts on o-line than us.

Indiana has more than double our starts on the O-line.

I know one thing is for sure, do not expect Royster to average 7 ypc and do not expect Clark to have all day back there. We’re going to win a lot of games by a 10 or less this year, instead of blowing people out of the water in the 2nd quarter and having our 3rd string mop things up.

This raises an interesting point: career starts are one thing, but last year in 7 different games we had our backups mopping up the 4th quarter or earlier. That is invaluable game time for kids we’re relying on now, going up against first string players from teams like Oregon St, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Michigan St.

Another point: look back at last year’s final scores, and take 2 TD’s off our points scored from each game and we’re still 8-3-2. Think about that, even with out all those TD’s we’d still have been at least 8-5. If we win the ties we’re 10-3.

"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.

by millzners on Jun 1, 2009 2:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Good Point Para#4

When you get to grittier data analysis, career starts could be drilled down into starts, quarters, series and plays, which would be the most meaningful. Imagine drilling down this list of teams’ returning starters, down into players, then number of plays, then for each play looking at team opponent, individual opponent, score, down & distance pre-snap, down & distance post-snap.

Thanks for the cfbdatawarehouse reference. Had never seen that place, but that’s the structure that all this loose data should be headed (cept for the separate links for sorts; why not make the column heads sortable?). Anyway, cool site, thanks.

When I say to a kid, ‘Hey, get ready to get knocked on your rear end,’ I also tell him, ‘Learn. Learn why you got knocked on your rear end. --jvp

by jtothep on Jun 1, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I came to make the same point

basically we had a lot of playing time by non-starters last year. This sort of analysis would be MUCH better if “significant downs” were used, and maybe even have “insignificant downs” (ie blowouts) thrown in as well, with a lesser weight.

by The JuggerNitt on Jun 2, 2009 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs