So I did a little work today (Mo vs Sean Tyler...)

Donate To GopherHole
T

touchdownvikings

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
729
Reaction score
672
Points
93
Mo vs Sean.png

This is a histogram of Mo's carries (maroon) vs Sean Tyler's carries (blue) based on the regular season of last year. Since Mo had 1.5x the quantity of carries (209 vs 320), I multiplied Sean's carries in each category by 1.5 in order to control for volume.

Some takeaways:
-They are equally likely to lose yards. I thought Sean would be much more likely to lose yards, but i was wrong -- they do it at the same rate. The difference is that Sean loses 6 or 9 yards at a clip. Mo loses 1. But they do it at the same rate of frequency. It's just that Sean's are oftentimes definitive drive-killers.
-Sean will give you more 0 and 1 yard carries.
-Mo will give you more 2 and 3 yard carries.
-Mo's median carry is 4 yards; Sean's is 3.
-20% (on the dot!) of Mo's carries went for 6-10 yards; 11% of Sean's went for 6-10 yards.
-10% (almost on the dot) of Mo's carries went for 11-20 yards; 5% of Sean's went for 11-20 yards.
-Mo is much more likely to give you plays of "moderate success."
-If you define an explosive play as more than 20 yards, then Mo had 10, and Sean would have had 8. BUT, if Sean does manage to get at least 20 yards, then he's MUCH more likely to go all the way.
-I didn't quantify it, but Sean is considerably more involved in the passing game.
 

Interesting. Might expect more of a drop off with 50% more workload too. Or maybe he sat more 3rd downs with tired defenses.
 


touchdownvikings said:
View attachment 25993

This is a histogram of Mo's carries (maroon) vs Sean Tyler's carries (blue) based on the regular season of last year. Since Mo had 1.5x the quantity of carries (209 vs 320), I multiplied Sean's carries in each category by 1.5 in order to control for volume.

Some takeaways:
-They are equally likely to lose yards. I thought Sean would be much more likely to lose yards, but i was wrong -- they do it at the same rate. The difference is that Sean loses 6 or 9 yards at a clip. Mo loses 1. But they do it at the same rate of frequency. It's just that Sean's are oftentimes definitive drive-killers.
-Sean will give you more 0 and 1 yard carries.
-Mo will give you more 2 and 3 yard carries.
-Mo's median carry is 4 yards; Sean's is 3.
-20% (on the dot!) of Mo's carries went for 6-10 yards; 11% of Sean's went for 6-10 yards.
-10% (almost on the dot) of Mo's carries went for 11-20 yards; 5% of Sean's went for 11-20 yards.
-Mo is much more likely to give you plays of "moderate success."
-If you define an explosive play as more than 20 yards, then Mo had 10, and Sean would have had 8. BUT, if Sean does manage to get at least 20 yards, then he's MUCH more likely to go all the way.
-I didn't quantify it, but Sean is considerably more involved in the passing game.
Click to expand...
Thanks for compiling. Always love a good histogram.
 

Interesting but not sure how useful it is considering they faced different opponents and played on different teams. I know WMU had a bad offense, they scored over 21 points just three times last year.
 


There are so many variables in this comparison that there is no way of being able to predict how Tyler is going to perform.
 

btowngopher said:
Interesting but not sure how useful it is considering they faced different opponents and played on different teams. I know WMU had a bad offense, they scored over 21 points just three times last year.
Click to expand...
Well, it's never the case that all things are equal. So there's undoubtedly distortion.

If I were to offer interpretation, it would go like this:

(1) If, in the context of a given play, there's just "nothing there," then for Tyler, there's nothing there. Mo gets you 2-3 yards.

(2) Tyler loses yards volitionally out of taking chances to hit a home run, hence the large yardage losses. (Although he doesn't actually post a losing rush more often than Mo -- Mo just doesn't retreat, and therefore won't lose 9 yards or 6 yards, etc.)

(3) Tyler is simply faster and more gifted in the open field, and if he gets to open field, he will very likely go all the way.

(4) In terms of overall contribution to the offense, I did not account for receiving yardage/TDs. I believe that if that were to be included, Tyler would produce more explosive plays, and probably TDs resulting from explosive plays. But I didn't count -- i was looking at rushing only. Tyler is a much better receiver out of the backfield and will add more dimensions to the offense.

(5) Mo is more likely to keep an offense on schedule. This is likely because Mo has better vision and a better first cut. That's why he gets something out of nothing (see point #1), and why he is more likely to gain anywhere from 6 to 20 yards (see previous post).

(6) And, to agree with what has been said in this thread and others, he is not the same sort of work horse back that Mo was. But he definitely will add more dimensions.
 
Last edited:






touchdownvikings said:
Well, it's never the case that all things are equal. So there's undoubtedly distortion.

If I were to offer interpretation, it would go like this:

(1) If, in the context of a given play, there's just "nothing there," then for Tyler, there's nothing there. Mo gets you 2-3 yards.

(2) Tyler loses yards volitionally out of taking chances to hit a home run, hence the large yardage losses. (Although he doesn't actually post a losing rush more often than Mo -- Mo just doesn't retreat, and therefore won't lose 9 yards or 6 yards, etc.)

(3) Tyler is simply faster and more gifted in the open field, and if he gets to open field, he will very likely go all the way.

(4) In terms of overall contribution to the offense, I did not account for receiving yardage/TDs. I believe that if that were to be included, Tyler would produce more explosive plays, and probably TDs resulting from explosive plays. But I didn't count -- i was looking at rushing only. Tyler is a much better receiver out of the backfield and will add more dimensions to the offense.

(5) Mo is more likely to keep an offense on schedule. This is likely because Mo has better vision and a better first cut. That's why he gets something out of nothing (see point #1), and why he is more likely to gain anywhere from 6 to 20 yards (see previous post).

(6) And, to agree with what has been said in this thread and others, he is not the same sort of work horse back that Mo was. But he definitely will add more dimensions.
Click to expand...
I have admittedly not watched a ton of Tyler, but Mo was ultra elite at yards after contact. Tyler I think we’ll need to get out in space or open holes to get him to the second level, do that and watch him run. I could see Evans taking the bulk of the short yardage and goal line work.
 

RememberMurray said:
Exactly. You nailed it.

Mo Ibrahim deserves to be mentioned among the greatest all-time Gopher runners, in my book. Players like Mo don't come along all that often.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%. Sine I’ve been a fan in the mid 80s there have been a lot of really good backs here: Thompson, Darkins, Hamner, Cobb, Barber, Maroney, Russell, and Smith to name a few…I’m not sure if Mo is the best ever but I have a hard time saying any of those mentioned are better than he was.
 

gopherbadgerman said:
Agree 100%. Sine I’ve been a fan in the mid 80s there have been a lot of really good backs here: Thompson, Darkins, Hamner, Cobb, Barber, Maroney, Russell, and Smith to name a few…I’m not sure if Mo is the best ever but I have a hard time saying any of those mentioned are better than he was.
Click to expand...

Yes. You're correct again.

All of the names you mentioned deserve accolades. But Mo is the only one of that group who had an entire (and fairly successful, in terms of wins and bowl success) offensive scheme built around his abilities. Mo, along with a physical, mauling offensive line, was in effect the Gopher offense for much of the past few seasons.

This will change — and change pretty dramatically — in 2023.
 



touchdownvikings said:
View attachment 25993

This is a histogram of Mo's carries (maroon) vs Sean Tyler's carries (blue) based on the regular season of last year. Since Mo had 1.5x the quantity of carries (209 vs 320), I multiplied Sean's carries in each category by 1.5 in order to control for volume.

Some takeaways:
-They are equally likely to lose yards. I thought Sean would be much more likely to lose yards, but i was wrong -- they do it at the same rate. The difference is that Sean loses 6 or 9 yards at a clip. Mo loses 1. But they do it at the same rate of frequency. It's just that Sean's are oftentimes definitive drive-killers.
-Sean will give you more 0 and 1 yard carries.
-Mo will give you more 2 and 3 yard carries.
-Mo's median carry is 4 yards; Sean's is 3.
-20% (on the dot!) of Mo's carries went for 6-10 yards; 11% of Sean's went for 6-10 yards.
-10% (almost on the dot) of Mo's carries went for 11-20 yards; 5% of Sean's went for 11-20 yards.
-Mo is much more likely to give you plays of "moderate success."
-If you define an explosive play as more than 20 yards, then Mo had 10, and Sean would have had 8. BUT, if Sean does manage to get at least 20 yards, then he's MUCH more likely to go all the way.
-I didn't quantify it, but Sean is considerably more involved in the passing game.
Click to expand...
I hope you did this on company time.
 





Our running backs are solid and deep. Dont worry
 

I find it hard to believe that each time Tyler takes a loss, it’s 6-9 yards average. Explain that stat…
 

highwayman said:
I find it hard to believe that each time Tyler takes a loss, it’s 6-9 yards average. Explain that stat…
Click to expand...
It's not every time. Off the top of my head, I saw those loss figures come up several times. I didn't think to track the actual yards lost.

From watching their game against Michigan State, I could see that he lost a big chunk of yards by retreating to loop around a DE in order to get to the edge. But he didn't make it to the edge -- he was tackled probably 4-5 yards deep. Mo didn't do that sort of thing, primarily because he knew he wasn't fast enough to get to the edge. LOL. So he'd just cut it up inside the DE and take what was there.
 





The unknown variable is the Offensive Line play. They need to gel quickly with the tough schedule ahead of them.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom