re: Texas Tech run defense (by the numbers)

quote:

---

No, they did not. They had a weak rushing defense, which was exploited by a top 10 rushing offense. We rushed for our season average, which was top 10. In what world would you say letting someone do what they have done consistently during the season be held in check?

---

Giving up your season average YPC is the exact opposite of being exploited, actually.

quote:

---

Again, they allowed 20% more than their already poor average. That is not holding anything in check, and was in fact the reason they lost the game.

---

Total yards.

quote:

---

And I'm saying that that "relatively" is wrong because we ran the ball 15 times in the first half vs. 32 in the second when LSU pulled away with it

---

"Relatively" refers to the game, as a whole, where LSU did not meet it's season average against the worst run D in the conference. Hell, they didn't even meet their conference average.

Therefore, relative to the rest of their season, LSU was held in check.

quote:

---

Being held below your season average in being held in check, yes. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about.

---

no, you don't know what you are talking about.

quote:

---

Giving up your season average YPC is the exact opposite of being exploited, actually.

---

No, it isn't. When that average indicates a weakness, which 5.1 would be considered, and you match that, it is exploitation of said weakness. Besides, they were giving up more like 4.9 yards before that game.

quote:

---

Total yards.

---

It is relevant here, especially considering we ran the clock out for the first time I can remember all season. We won the game by running the ball, therefore they did not hold us in check. Sure, relative to our season average of 5.8, 5.1 is less. But I fail to see how that is at all relevant.

You can spin it however you want. The fact is, LSU did not meet their season average against the worst run defense in the conference.

That is being held in check.

quote:

---

You can spin it however you want. The fact is, LSU did not meet their season average against the worst run defense in the conference.

That is being held in check.

---

By this logic, we were held in check 8 out of 11 games (we failed to rush for 5.8 ypc in all but 4 games: Aub, Syr, EMU, USC)

Looked at another way, we failed to rush for our running average ypc in 7 games, including our last 6. And of course, in this scenario, MSU could not have held us in check because we didn't have a season average to compare to.

So, in either scenario, by the logic you have just revealed, the number 10 rushing team in the country was held in check running the ball the majority of the games.

Can you see why I don't think what you are saying makes sense? The baseline you are comparing to includes a minority of the games.

(I would include the chart but it looks like shite.)

quote:

---

Buga finna eat????

---

What up Q

quote:

---

Do you really not understand the difference in being held below their average by teams like Alabama, Florida, Ole Miss and even Arkansas vs. being held below the average by aTm?

I'll give you a hint:

YPC against:

Alabama (2.38)
Florida (3.39)
Ole Miss (3.41)
Arkansas (3.77)

---

Yes, I do. Those would be the teams you could say held us in check. The difference is reflected in the averages you yourself just posted. The better the rush defense on average, the lower our actual ypc. aTm gives up a lot of yards on the ground each game, and gave up more than usual against us. I doubt they are happy with that performance.

Can you please just say that you had to backtrack from that original statement because of a poor choice of words?

The difference you are talking about is not material, they did not hold us in check because we ran on them and won the game because of it. We are a running team, ran for almost exactly our average production on the year, ran for over 5 a try 47 times, held the ball for 5 minutes more than they did and beat them.

I will concede to the fact that as compared to our season average YPC, we were held to about 88% of that in the aTm game. I will not however concede that stat has any meaning whatsoever, and that our definitions of being in-check are much different. Thats like saying, "Man I really held that Floyd Mayweather in check he usually knocks people out in the second round and thats exactly when I did! I usually get knocked out in the first round so I held that fool in check....relatively speaking, of course."

The entire definition of "In check" comes from Chess as far as I am concerned. When you are in check, you are subdued, you are under control and you have lost because of a superior effort/strategy.

Busta Rhymes wouldn't have proclaimed "Woo Hah!" if all he had done was allow a group to do slightly worst than they typically do, while he also performed more poorly than usual which was pretty poor to start with.

Fournette runs for 150. No need to have him in the game trying to get 300 yards in a meaningless game. Let the young guys take the lead in the 2nd half.