Interesting objective slant on team/bowl

[Home Slice]

Miami was 65th in the country in sacks allowed. The OL was not problem #1 for this team. QB was/is.

OC or lack thereof

 

[Home Slice]

Won’t argue with you, nor would I if someone wanted to bet Wisky or punt Miami. Was just shining light on the article and saying that I’m not sure miami is quite as far away as a lot of people think. Good way to prove that staring us in the face tomorrow.

You may be right, but we're trending down.

 

[1LuvCane]

Thor Nystrom is a phenomenal name and he might even be right but you're always going to have a tall order of an argument to make regarding balls bouncing the wrong way when a yuge overlying issue with a team is mediocre to sometimes atrocious QB play. People will tend to dismiss any "woulda/shouldas" when you have no consistency at that position.

Exactly. Why leave it up to a bounce of the ball? When you can grab lady luck by the neck.

 

[OrangeBowlMagic]

OC or lack thereof

Vehemently disagree. Absolutely a problem. No doubt about it in the least bit. But put a good QB on this team and watch how quickly the OC fire cools.

Again, I can’t stress enough how much blame richt deserves and this is in no way an apologist thread. But players make coaches just as much if not more than the other way around. Good players make coaches look a whole lot smarter.

 

[BWCD]

Vehemently disagree. Absolutely a problem. No doubt about it in the least bit. But put a good QB on this team and watch how quickly the OC fire cools.

Again, I can’t stress enough how much blame richt deserves and this is in no way an apologist thread. But players make coaches just as much if not more than the other way around. Good players make coaches look a whole lot smarter.

I think any of Roman's "From the Perch" threads has illustrated in vivid detail how bad our playcalling and play design is...so I can't fully agree w/this premise you're laying out here. You say a good QB makes the coaches look smarter - yes, in some cases. I think the overall point is that we either 1) don't have a good QB on this roster, or 2) the good QB is Jarren and Richt isn't ready to play him yet. But what about an OC tweaking things to maximize the talent and skill sets that he has at his disposal? We're not seeing that because of Richt's stubbornness.

Also, the play design sucking means that our below-average QBs have to make great throws on a regular basis, and that our WRs have to run great routes to beat their guy. The better fix is that Richt be the one to change up the scheme to make the reads/throws/routes easier on everyone to execute, but that's not what we're doing, which is why Richt isn't a popular guy right now.

There are worse/less-talented players at other schools playing in offensive systems that set them up to make plays and take advantage of the defense. We don't do that here, even though we have more talent. Using scheme to put guys in position to make plays is an equalizer if you aren't as talented as the opposing D. Using scheme to put guys in position to make plays when your offensive guys are more talented than the opposing D is what you see the elite teams doing currently (see: Oklahoma/Clemson/etc). We could do that...but our "plays have worked for more than 30 years".

 

[OrangeBowlMagic]

I think any of Roman's "From the Perch" threads has illustrated in vivid detail how bad our playcalling and play design is...so I can't fully agree w/this premise you're laying out here. You say a good QB makes the coaches look smarter - yes, in some cases. I think the overall point is that we either 1) don't have a good QB on this roster, or 2) the good QB is Jarren and Richt isn't ready to play him yet. But what about an OC tweaking things to maximize the talent and skill sets that he has at his disposal? We're not seeing that because of Richt's stubbornness.

Also, the play design sucking means that our below-average QBs have to make great throws on a regular basis, and that our WRs have to run great routes to beat their guy. The better fix is that Richt be the one to change up the scheme to make the reads/throws/routes easier on everyone to execute, but that's not what we're doing, which is why Richt isn't a popular guy right now.

There are worse/less-talented players at other schools playing in offensive systems that set them up to make plays and take advantage of the defense. We don't do that here, even though we have more talent. Using scheme to put guys in position to make plays is an equalizer if you aren't as talented as the opposing D. Using scheme to put guys in position to make plays when your offensive guys are more talented than the opposing D is what you see the elite teams doing currently (see: Oklahoma/Clemson/etc). We could do that...but our "plays have worked for more than 30 years".

Agree with you. Again, not arguing for Richt in any way. I’m just trying to say if you have 5 leaks in a boat, they all contribute to it sinking. Your boat will not sail until all 5 are plugged. But if you’re going to attempt to repair it, you’d attack the biggest hole first and go from there. To me, the biggest hole is the lack of an even servicable QB. Not that the other holes can or should be ignored. But the lowest hanging fruit, IMO, is getting a QB here who can somewhat play.

Its the same guy calling the offense this year as has been since he arrived. And the offense has gotten considerably less diverse and more predictable. So there’s 2 possible causes. 1) The person calling the plays is senile and has forgotten his offense or 2) he doesn’t trust the players he has to expand it to where its been in the past. I’m going with #2, which again falls Richt’s shoulders. I don’t think a great QB makes this a top 10 offense, but a good QB easily wins the coastal even while being handcuffed by the archaic scheme being run here.

 

[Hoyacane1620]

Thankfully (or maybe not so, if you want richt fired) Wisky is a much bigger dumpster fire and their backup QB is probably worse than Rosier and the team around him is much worse than Rosier’s. If the kids are motivated to play, which they should be considering the season and losing to this same team a year ago, Miami should get after these kids pretty good.

But yes, of course, Rosier scares me a lot more than Perry does.

Do not underestimate Jack Coan. I watched the kid play in HS. He was the NY State player of the year in 2015. Kid has a cannon for an arm. Used to train with Eli or Payton Manning through some family connection. He was an EE who played a little his freshman season and then took a red shirt his sophomore year. This is his 3rd season on the team. BTW - Miami offered him. I remember when Al Golden came up to NY to watch him play. He was also a very smart kid.

 

[Home Slice]

Vehemently disagree. Absolutely a problem. No doubt about it in the least bit. But put a good QB on this team and watch how quickly the OC fire cools.

Again, I can’t stress enough how much blame richt deserves and this is in no way an apologist thread. But players make coaches just as much if not more than the other way around. Good players make coaches look a whole lot smarter.

Valid

 

[jsy]

Unless, of course, you're trying to discredit Mark Richt for his 10-0 start.

I’m not the type to discredit last years success by trying to downplay this years failures

The issue is the problems from last year cont to plague the program and team and nothing is done to address those issues

 

[mdpcane]

saying a team is better than the record is as stupid as saying a 400 pound woman is skinnier than her weight.

 

[deleted21041]

Miami wasn’t as good as last year’s performance suggested (#2 in the county for a time)

Miami was exceptionally lucky with turnovers last year, very low on OFF considering what kind of QB was playing

this year wasn’t as bad as what’s perceived by people who see W-L record as the singular barometer for a football team

It's literally the only way we have to judge a season that ends with a title game. I understand the point, but JFC to say that losing to Duke, Virginia and GT wasn't that bad because we finished with a high win probability on the box score is being stubborn.

The Hurricanes’ second-order win total of 8.8 tells us that S&P+ believes this team is closer to 9-3 quality than 7-5

I don't think that you can find a single poster on here that would consider a 9-3, with this schedule, a good season. Miami should be 10-1, the only good team they faced all year was LSU. They didn't even play the good teams on the ACC.

Overrall I agree that Miami should have a better record next year, but I think this analysis misses the point some. We lost way too many games that with better coaching on offense and more talent on OL/QB would be easy wins. As far as we know this is not going away next season, Ritch will be the mastermind and playcaller on offense and we can only hope for development on OL, by a coach that hasn't shown that ability

Canes defense will probably regress next season (elite defenses rarely carries year to year), especially because we faced some really weak offenses this year. Couple with the fact that a first time starter (JW or transfer QB) will probably be the one leading the team next year = growing pains and turnovers + the receivers corp took 2 big hits this year with AR82 and JT4 leaving, idk man.

I think we'll have better QB play and i want to believe CMR ,although public denying, will look for help on offense I really don't know what to expect next season. What makes me sad is knowing that whatever it happens we are not ready to even compete with Clemson still

 

[DamnLiesAndStatistics]

Football is the most interesting sport from a statistical perspective. You get 12 regular season games that have a binary win or loss outcome. However, the game as a whole has 120+ discrete plays, each of which can be good/bad/neutral without putting points on the board and significantly affecting the outcome. I believe that we have a higher win expectancy than our record, but saying our win expectancy in those games was 60% means that those losses aren't unexpected.

There are just so few drives per game, weird stuff is bound to happen every season. Last season, we definitely won a few games we had no business winning, for example.

At the end of the day, records between middling teams are pretty interchangeable. Only truly dominant and terrible teams have enough talent and coaching (or lack of) to really separate themselves in games, and earn that win or loss.

If we want to compete for a championship, we need to get to the point where our average win expectancy is 90%+. That's the only way to pretty much guarantee an 11-1 or 12-0 record. The best part is that, when you're that good, your record and advanced stats probably agree that you're having a good season.

 

[deleted21041]

EDIT - I will say the only thing in the passing game I've seen lately that I like is running the RB out on the wheel route to the boundary. We've not hit it as often as it has been open, but when we have - it's gone for BIG yardage. I think that has to be in the gameplan, and Rosier had better be ready to make that throw.

Remembered this quote from Mike Leach on wheel routes

 

[NE Canes]

Not only all that, but I’m here to tell you that Miami is better than its 7-5 record. Miami was an eight- or nine-win team that dropped multiple games the boxscore says it should have won. In fact, the Hurricanes finished with a 60% or higher postgame win expectancy in three of its five losses. That’s absurd.

Blame coaching if you want, but the numbers don’t lie: Miami objectively played well enough to win all three games. The Hurricanes’ second-order win total of 8.8 tells us that S&P+ believes this team is closer to 9-3 quality than 7-5. The Canes match up well enough in this game that a normalization of luck alone could lead to a double-digit win against a Wisconsin team that looks a lot different than we thought it’d look in August.

This is just window dressing.

They lost to vastly inferior teams. Of course the numbers are going to be in the Canes favor. When you lose to inferior teams you tend to still put up numbers but usually lose due to a series of bad decisions or poor coaching.

They played so many poor teams this year that even if they won 3 more games it would still be as meaningless at last year’s #2 ranking.

The sad part in all this is that the talent was there to beat every team on the schedule. They still would have lost to Clemson but losing these games was not just a few plays away from being a great team.

They lost to such bad teams that to win those games would only place them as an average team at best. They have light years to go before they beat a Clemson

 

[Empirical Cane]

Thor is a moron.

The ultimate measure for competitve sports...

W vs L

Thats it, there are no moral victories or "they are better than their record".

Where is Denny Green when you need him?

 

[Shogungts]

you are what your record says you are

You must be a UCF fan

 

[The Franchise]

Agree with this totally. And I’ve said it consistently all year. Richt gets no pass here in the least...he should have been better than what he was with the pieces he does have, it’s his team, it’s his offense, and he’s not getting the most out of his talent. This is all on him, it’s his show, his kids, his scheme. But as bad as everything seems, I am firmly of the belief that if somehow, some way this team had just a decent to pretty good QB, the attitude surrounding this program right now would be VASTLY different.

It’s the most important position in sports, period. So this isn’t exactly cutting edge opinion. The team with the better QB usually wins. But I think it was magnified at Miami this year. For example, a good QB doesn’t help FSU much. They have myriad problems, and need massive help basically everywhere. I think Miami really was 1 player away from being a very good football team, even with Richt’s archaic system. Not national championship good by any means, but much better than 7-5.

Problem with this “analytics” approach is that it disregards the fact that Rickety is responsible for acquiring and teaching QBs. Some of you guys act like he’s just an innocent bystander whose plays and philosophy is being ruined by interloper bad QBs.

So the analytics say we could be a 9 win team in year 3? That’s still a failure.

 

[The Franchise]

The defense is closer to 10-2 quality. The offense and special teams is closer to 6-6. Everyone on the outside looking in knew changes had to be made in those areas. If the team had good punting and a competent offense we're not too different than say LSU.

So if we were better in two of the three phases of football we’d have a better record? That’s probably true for every bad team.

 

[acento]

Agree with this totally. And I’ve said it consistently all year. Richt gets no pass here in the least...he should have been better than what he was with the pieces he does have, it’s his team, it’s his offense, and he’s not getting the most out of his talent. This is all on him, it’s his show, his kids, his scheme. But as bad as everything seems, I am firmly of the belief that if somehow, some way this team had just a decent to pretty good QB, the attitude surrounding this program right now would be VASTLY different.

It’s the most important position in sports, period. So this isn’t exactly cutting edge opinion. The team with the better QB usually wins. But I think it was magnified at Miami this year. For example, a good QB doesn’t help FSU much. They have myriad problems, and need massive help basically everywhere. I think Miami really was 1 player away from being a very good football team, even with Richt’s archaic system. Not national championship good by any means, but much better than 7-5.

Agree with a lot of this. However, I think better QB play would be nothing more than a bandage on this massive, hemorrhaging wound of an offense.

Improved ball placement, accuracy and decision making would certainly help and maybe account for another win or two. But once opposing D’s figure out how to game plan for this archaic offense, it’s game over. Richt won’t adapt within games or from game to game. Even his boy Rosier said it.

 

[OrangeBowlMagic]

Agree with a lot of this. However, I think better QB play would be nothing more than a bandage on this massive, hemorrhaging wound of an offense.

Improved ball placement, accuracy and decision making would certainly help and maybe account for another win or two. But once opposing D’s figure out how to game plan for this archaic offense, it’s game over. Richt won’t adapt within games or from game to game. Even his boy Rosier said it.

Don’t disagree with this and have said many times in this thread that Richt obviously needs an innovative OC. But I will add that that need wouldn’t be as glaringly obvious if he had a competent QB to run this system, as bad as it is. I’ve also said many times that I’m not insinuating that inserting a good QB puts this program over the top. I just think the deafening roars from the fan base over the OC situation would be much quieter with a QB who could make plays within this offense. He’s running a poor system, unwilling to change, and putting it in the hands of kids who have no business directing it. Bad recipe.