forums

Miami Hurricanes Mario Cristobal's MISSION in 2023 SIAP

Advertisement
In my opinion, Big Manny is looking to manhandle "lesser" opponents this campaign.

If we listen to what he has been saying since he arrived, his milestones for this year don't align with alot of porster's wishlist for this year.
 
Empirical Cane said:
In my opinion, Big Manny is looking to manhandle "lesser" opponents this campaign.

If we listen to what he has been saying since he arrived, his milestones for this year don't align with alot of porster's wishlist for this year.
Click to expand...
So 10-2 if we analyze based on talent re "lesser."
But if we include development and deployment, some how it'll be 7-5? 6-6?
Some career backup LB from Louisville won't fix the missed tackles and slow pursuit
11798809.png
 
Ironmanfootball said:
So 10-2 if we analyze based on talent re "lesser."
But if we include development and deployment, some how it'll be 7-5? 6-6?
Some career backup LB from Louisville won't fix the missed tackles and slow pursuit
11798809.png
Click to expand...
Our coaching staff is worth -4 games I guess.
 
Advertisement
Ironmanfootball said:
Very intrigued as to whether we see the 150 play camp scrimmages again or not. Spring game was soft on contact for a Mario team
Click to expand...
Since we played most of the spring with like 2 defensive tackles, it's probably for the better. Hopefully half our roster doesn't end up injured again this year.
 
Ironmanfootball said:
So 10-2 if we analyze based on talent re "lesser."
But if we include development and deployment, some how it'll be 7-5? 6-6?
Some career backup LB from Louisville won't fix the missed tackles and slow pursuit
11798809.png
Click to expand...
Here's the thing...

We are assuming the blue chip ratio is actually correctly identifying "blue chips"...

Outside the top 3-sh, I'm becoming more convinced it is very inaccurate.
 
Empirical Cane said:
Here's the thing...

We are assuming the blue chip ratio is actually correctly identifying "blue chips"...

Outside the top 3-sh, I'm becoming more convinced it is very inaccurate.
Click to expand...
Where does the BCR really miss outside of Texas A&M in '22, Florida, Auburn and Miami? A&M has a chitload of talent, no culture.

LSU finished BK's first year with one bad loss- Texas A&M. Losing to FSU in their 1st game, then UGA, and Tenn last year weren't bad losses.
Texas lost 5 games, three by 7 points, one by 1 to Bama, and one in OT by 3
Oregon lost to UGA, Washington, and choked away a win vs Oregon St in Lanning's 1st year as a HC
Michigan lost one game by 6 whole points
Clemson = the QB/OC being chit effect. They'll bounce back this year. Finished 11-3, a dream season for Miami.
[BGCOLOR=initial]ND had a 1st time HC with a backup QB. Still finished 9-4 and lost those 4 by 29 total points? [/BGCOLOR]
USC got worked by Utah in the re-match but went 11-3 in Riley's year 1, lost the other two by 2 combined points.
[BGCOLOR=initial]PSU went 11-2 and suffered Manny chitting the bed 2x + no elite QB [/BGCOLOR]
[BGCOLOR=initial]Oklahoma lost their HC and QB, and had a 1st time HC come in. New QB was injured last year. Losing to TT, FSU, KSU, TCU and Texas isn't bad. Losing to '22 Baylor and WVU is. [/BGCOLOR]

Tx A&M is poorly coached as a program culture, poorly coached on O and has too many "me" players. Wonder what Petrino can fix there for '23.
[BGCOLOR=initial]Florida and Auburn have holes on the roster, like Miami. But UF beat Utah, and Auburn has changed coaches [/BGCOLOR]

[BGCOLOR=initial]Only team for '23 that I think is a top-15 they missed is FSU, maybe Kansas State? [/BGCOLOR]
 
Maybe we flip the script for once in the past 20 years. Picked to finish practically last in the Coastal, maybe we over achieve and go 10-2. Hope is all we got.
 
Ironmanfootball said:
Where does the BCR really miss outside of Texas A&M in '22, Florida, Auburn and Miami? A&M has a chitload of talent, no culture.

LSU finished BK's first year with one bad loss- Texas A&M. Losing to FSU in their 1st game, then UGA, and Tenn last year weren't bad losses.
Texas lost 5 games, three by 7 points, one by 1 to Bama, and one in OT by 3
Oregon lost to UGA, Washington, and choked away a win vs Oregon St in Lanning's 1st year as a HC
Michigan lost one game by 6 whole points
Clemson = the QB/OC being chit effect. They'll bounce back this year. Finished 11-3, a dream season for Miami.
[BGCOLOR=initial]ND had a 1st time HC with a backup QB. Still finished 9-4 and lost those 4 by 29 total points? [/BGCOLOR]
USC got worked by Utah in the re-match but went 11-3 in Riley's year 1, lost the other two by 2 combined points.
[BGCOLOR=initial]PSU went 11-2 and suffered Manny chitting the bed 2x + no elite QB [/BGCOLOR]
[BGCOLOR=initial]Oklahoma lost their HC and QB, and had a 1st time HC come in. New QB was injured last year. Losing to TT, FSU, KSU, TCU and Texas isn't bad. Losing to '22 Baylor and WVU is. [/BGCOLOR]

Tx A&M is poorly coached as a program culture, poorly coached on O and has too many "me" players. Wonder what Petrino can fix there for '23.
[BGCOLOR=initial]Florida and Auburn have holes on the roster, like Miami. But UF beat Utah, and Auburn has changed coaches [/BGCOLOR]

[BGCOLOR=initial]Only team for '23 that I think is a top-15 they missed is FSU, maybe Kansas State? [/BGCOLOR]
Click to expand...
You make strong points to be sure.

My gut tells me the "blue chip" ratio for most teams beyond the ultra elite is more inaccurate than it is accurate in terms of quality players on that team vs other teams with similar or less blue chips. I think the difference is marginal at best.

Totally get my gut isn't the empirical evidence necessary, but been thinking on how best to articulate it.

Perhaps a comparison of draft entered designated blue chip players vs % of those who are actually drafted/make NFL roster.

What would be great would be metrics (a touch subjective I suppose) where an analysis is done categorizing play calling and play execution as "perfect", "satisfactory", and "unsatisfactory" similar to how chess moves are evaluated.

Gotta think.about this...
 
Advertisement
Empirical Cane said:
You make strong points to be sure.

My gut tells me the "blue chip" ratio for most teams beyond the ultra elite is more inaccurate than it is accurate in terms of quality players on that team vs other teams with similar or less blue chips. I think the difference is marginal at best.

Totally get my gut isn't the empirical evidence necessary, but been thinking on how best to articulate it.

Perhaps a comparison of draft entered designated blue chip players vs % of those who are actually drafted/make NFL roster.

What would be great would be metrics (a touch subjective I suppose) where an analysis is done categorizing play calling and play execution as "perfect", "satisfactory", and "unsatisfactory" similar to how chess moves are evaluated.

Gotta think.about this...
Click to expand...
My main beef with the blue chip ratio is that it considers all 5 and 4 star players to be equal. A 99.9 rated 5 star quarterback is the same player as a 89.1 rated 4 star linebacker. There were over 400 4 star rated players last year. The gap between player #1 and player #448 is huge in the real world but according to the blue chip ratio, they're the same.
 
I’d like to see the teams in the top 15 of blue chip ratio ranked based on average player rating.
 
Back
Top