Claeys Announces Changes To Staff - Limegrover & Zebrowski are gone per U

Donate To GopherHole
GophersInIowa said:
Not defending Limegrover as I am fine with the change, but those numbers alone don't tell the whole story. The type of offense we have run affects these numbers because we have never run an uptempo offense like many others do. Less plays during a game means less yardage and less points scored. In 2014 the offense was 48th in the country in points per play. Teams like Northern Illinois and North Carolina averaged more points per game but less points per play because of their style of play. You also have to consider that the style of offense helped the defensive numbers as well.

Of course this year we went down to 94th in points per play which is not good.
Click to expand...
Point per play is a meaningless Stat and seem like a made up th in ng to make someone feel good. If we run one play for the entire game and kick a fg, we could be #1 in points.per play. But I doubt we would win many games. It might only matter if we were scoring a td every 4 plays.
Besides I would not consider a #48 ranking very impressive.


The simple fact is Games are based on points per game. A top 40 defense should be good enough to win 2/3 of your Games consistently. We are not there because our offense can't hold up their end of the deal.
 

WHB Brewer said:
Point per play is a meaningless Stat and seem like a made up th in ng to make someone feel good. If we run one play for the entire game and kick a fg, we could be #1 in points.per play. But I doubt we would win many games. It might only matter if we were scoring a td every 4 plays.
Besides I would not consider a #48 ranking very impressive.


The simple fact is Games are based on points per game. A top 40 defense should be good enough to win 2/3 of your Games consistently. We are not there because our offense can't hold up their end of the deal.
Click to expand...

By your (ridiculous) logic, our offense doesn't need to score at all because our defense can score all the points we'll ever need.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Teams with 8-5 records are ranked all the time. Auburn was ranked 22 in last year's final AP poll with an 8-5 record. Michigan was ranked 24 in the final 2012 AP poll at 8-5. FSU was 23rd in the final 2005 AP poll at 8-5. Florida 24th in final 2003 AP Poll at 8-5. And so on.
Click to expand...
But gets you fired at places like Nebraska and Georgia. ...... [emoji2]

We all would have been jumping for joy if we were 8-5 this year. Unbelievable how some people's expectations for win now can skew perspective
 

I wonder how much claeys will take recruiting ability into account when looking at the positions, maybe that's why he's mentioned about wanting to meet face to face first. I know he wants them to fit into the family, but I wonder if he'll be trying to get a feel for how they'll be in the living room as well.
Also wonder how tough this will be on the remaining coaches to recruit being down two coaches. Seems like a lot of extra travel and phone calls for them probably. Didn't want to put this on the recruiting thread since I would be disappointed to see a new post on that thread and not it actually be recruiting news.
 

leadpipegopher said:
So five years to win something significant or you're out, I think that's a tough gig at the U, especially given salary we pay, recent history, traditional support from administration, facilities. That's one of the things I loved about kill is that he fought tooth and nail to open the administration's eyes to a lot of things. You may not think he was a great coach, but he knew what it took to run a program. Had us playing for a west division crown in fourth year. Plus ran a clean program, liked his values. It was something I was proud of and want to see if claeys can build on.
I can tell EG is really upset about the Wisconsin game, yes they were using redshirt freshman on the line, they manhandled our depleted line in the first half, but I don't think it's nearly as egregious given the crazy circumstances this year.
Totally respect your opinion, I just come at it from a different view. Looking forward to what claeys can do the next couple years, I'm willing to let things play out.
Click to expand...
Agree with you on this. Kill produced back to back 8 win seasons for the first time in 50 some yrs with a very below average offense. I would call that significant. I'm willing to continue to ride this out to see what happens with the possibility of becoming a competitive on offense.
 


WHB Brewer said:
Point per play is a meaningless Stat and seem like a made up th in ng to make someone feel good.
Click to expand...

It's not made up. It is a real stat.

If we run one play for the entire game and kick a fg, we could be #1 in points.per play.
Click to expand...

Just about any stat can be skewed one way or the other when just looking at one game. I could say that for one game the offensive output can look better than it really was because the offense started drives inside the opponent's 20 yard line a few times.

Besides I would not consider a #48 ranking very impressive.
Click to expand...

I never said it was great. But it is a lot better than the rankings you were posting.

The simple fact is Games are based on points per game.
Click to expand...

I guess we will just have to disagree that points per game is the only thing that matters. For instance, this season Indiana averaged more points and yards per game than Michigan St. I personally would rather have Michigan St's offense because they only average a few points less per game yet are much more efficient. They use up more clock (have the ball about 6 minutes more per game than Indiana). Indiana's defense gives up a lot of points. No doubt they are a bad defense. But at the same time the tempo their offense plays at hurts them some too. More possessions gives you more opportunity to score but also gives the opponents more opportunity to score. Points per possession might be a better stat to look at but I cannot find it anywhere.

I'm not saying all slow paced offenses are better. Just that there are situations where points scored per game can be a little deceiving.
 

dtrain19 said:
We're breaking down scenarios in which Claeys would be fired after next year? Really? We have OC and QB coaches to hire, a possible bowl, signing day 2 months away, the trio tweeting about Seth Green and other recruits, and we're gonna focus on what kind of record it would take for Claeys to be canned from his first HC gig. Unreal
Click to expand...

Sad but so true. It speaks volumes about how pathetic some of the posters here are.
 

GophersInIowa said:
It's not made up. It is a real stat.



Just about any stat can be skewed one way or the other when just looking at one game. I could say that for one game the offensive output can look better than it really was because the offense started drives inside the opponent's 20 yard line a few times.



I never said it was great. But it is a lot better than the rankings you were posting.



I guess we will just have to disagree that points per game is the only thing that matters. For instance, this season Indiana averaged more points and yards per game than Michigan St. I personally would rather have Michigan St's offense because they only average a few points less per game yet are much more efficient. They use up more clock (have the ball about 6 minutes more per game than Indiana). Indiana's defense gives up a lot of points. No doubt they are a bad defense. But at the same time the tempo their offense plays at hurts them some too. More possessions gives you more opportunity to score but also gives the opponents more opportunity to score. Points per possession might be a better stat to look at but I cannot find it anywhere.

I'm not saying all slow paced offenses are better. Just that there are situations where points scored per game can be a little deceiving.
Click to expand...
Cherry pick stats all you want. Find me any Stat where the Gopher offense finished in top 40 in FBS.

The bottom line is the offense has been far below average for the past 4yrs. The defense is consistently above average in FBS for the past 4 yrs.Easily good enough to win. Any sort of competence on offense would likely result in 1 or 2 more wins the past 2 seasons. If we had consecutive 9 or 10 win seasons would we be even having these discussions ?
 

This is the same fan base that ran Bierman out of town after a losing season in 1950, dumped garbage on Warmath's
lawn in 1959, thought Cal Stoll couldn't cut it despite a .500 overall record with for-bleep facilities and budget, and
still thrashes Mason on occasion. Face it, this is what you get from this crowd, regardless of the generation......lol
 



WHB Brewer said:
Cherry pick stats all you want. Find me any Stat where the Gopher offense finished in top 40 in FBS.

The bottom line is the offense has been far below average for the past 4yrs. The defense is consistently above average in FBS for the past 4 yrs.Easily good enough to win. Any sort of competence on offense would likely result in 1 or 2 more wins the past 2 seasons. If we had consecutive 9 or 10 win seasons would we be even having these discussions ?
Click to expand...

I'm not cherry picking because I never said the offense was good or even above average.

I was just saying that I don't think points alone are the best way to judge an offense. That is all.
 

metrolax said:
This is the same fan base that ran Bierman out of town after a losing season in 1950, dumped garbage on Warmath's
lawn in 1959, thought Cal Stoll couldn't cut it despite a .500 overall record with for-bleep facilities and budget, and
still thrashes Mason on occasion. Face it, this is what you get from this crowd, regardless of the generation......lol
Click to expand...

What are you even talking about? This program has some of the most pathetic "standards" of any high major football program. Where else does a coach get TEN years to go 32-48 in conference play? Where else does a coach get FIVE years to produce the records Jim Wacker produced? We have a flag for "Jerrysota" for a coach that had one winning conference season and never defeated the programs biggest rival.

Maybe there were standards in 1959, but there haven't been since then. They've hired one coach (ONE) in the past 40-50 years who had a career winning record in a conference play at a BCS level school (Holtz).

Its ridiculous that someone could look at the results of Gopher football over the past 40 years and conclude the problem is the fans have been "too demanding". We're getting our ass kicked year after year by freaking Iowa and Wisconsin...and the problems is the fans expect too much.
 

Claeys Announces Changes To Staff - Limegrover & Zebrowski are gone per U

metrolax said:
This is the same fan base that ran Bierman out of town after a losing season in 1950, dumped garbage on Warmath's
lawn in 1959, thought Cal Stoll couldn't cut it despite a .500 overall record with for-bleep facilities and budget, <B>and
still thrashes Mason on occasion<\B>. Face it, this is what you get from this crowd, regardless of the generation......lol
Click to expand...

Totally. I still can't believe people wanted more than Glenn produced in 10 years.
/s
smh
 

WHB Brewer said:
Agree with you on this. Kill produced back to back 8 win seasons for the first time in 50 some yrs with a very below average offense. I would call that significant. I'm willing to continue to ride this out to see what happens with the possibility of becoming a competitive on offense.
Click to expand...

Just as an aside, Mason went 8-5 in 2002 and 10-3 in 2003.
 



Take out the first couple of years of Mason's tenure and what was his Big 10 record? Those were
building years.
 

Spoofin said:
Totally. I still can't believe people wanted more than Glenn produced in 10 years.
/s
smh
Click to expand...

Come to think of it, the fanbase was giving Williams and Spears grief as well.....lol
 

metrolax said:
Take out the first couple of years of Mason's tenure and what was his Big 10 record? Those were
building years.
Click to expand...

29-35 after 1-7 and 2-6 first two years. All records except one year (2-6) were between 3-5 and 5-3 after that.
 

Ozzy&Ray said:
29-35 after 1-7 and 2-6 first two years. All records except one year (2-6) were between 3-5 and 5-3 after that.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the quick response. A bit more accurate, especially given his budget.
 



You cannot get Cadillac results with Chevrolet dollars. With the dome, the U was near the bottom in
football budget each year Mason was here. You need to understand that, at least. It didn't start then, either.
You should hear the tales of the facilities that Stoll had to deal with, and Salem for that matter. If your
school is not supporting your sport to the degree your neighbors are, it will more often than not show up on the
field. Only now is the school up to middle of the pack in the league in terms of budget. Its a fact of life. Mase did
a good job with what we could.
 

In other words, if you want better results, bang the administration. Its starts and ends there.
 

If you want more success in Gopher football, lower the bar on education in K12 and promote the sport as the venue out of poverty. Works for Alabama. It should work for us as well. Race to the bottom!

Oh, and it is the administrations fault for not subsidizing football
 


dpodoll68 said:
Teams with 8-5 records are ranked all the time. Auburn was ranked 22 in last year's final AP poll with an 8-5 record. Michigan was ranked 24 in the final 2012 AP poll at 8-5. FSU was 23rd in the final 2005 AP poll at 8-5. Florida 24th in final 2003 AP Poll at 8-5. And so on.
Click to expand...
Coaches Polls disagree with you.
 

GoldenUMNGopher said:
Coaches Polls disagree with you.
Click to expand...

Oh really? That's why Auburn was #23 in the final 2014 coaches poll at 8-5, eh? 2005 - Florida St., #23. 2004 - Florida, #25 (at 7-5, even worse than 8-5). 2003 - Florida, #25. Yeah, good call.
 

Never said Coaches poll never ranked an 8-5. Just don't rank them "all the time" as you stated.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
 


GoldenUMNGopher said:
Never said Coaches poll never ranked an 8-5. Just don't rank them "all the time" as you stated.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Hmmm....anecdotally that seems accurate to me. All the time would be correct. Perhaps it would be more digestible to you if he said "with much frequency" or "more often than not?"
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom