Bulls ranked #2 in fewest penalties

[NovaBull]

I 

[puc86]

48 minutes ago, Triple B said:

If you don't think penalties can affect the outcome of individual games, you're being delusional. Coaches talk about penalties because some are a lack of discipline, false starts, offsides, etc, and lack of discipline can bleed over into other parts of play. It's natural to want to cut down on them .........but if CJS has somewhere along the line said that as soon as we start getting less penalties we'll start winning, you're right that the data doesn't support it. So has he actually said that to warrant all this righteous indignation from you?

Of course a misplaced penalty can have an adverse impact on a game, I believe that my argument is that if your strive to eliminate penalties you will be in worse shape than you were.

[Bull94]

4 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I think everyone has agreed that there are definitely some penalties that a team is better off without, but what is typically presented is that we have less penalties and that equals good. The only reason anyone is talking about the nuances of penalties is because of my take that it’s not a good in and of itself in response to the lazy and factually untrue take that not having penalties is somehow good and leads to winning.

Teams with more offensive penalties generally lose more games, but there is no correlation between defensive penalties and losses.

Specific defensive penalties of course lose games; we’ve all sworn at the television when the cornerback on our favorite team gets flagged for a 50-yard pass interference penalty. Yet overall, there is no correlation between losses and the total of defensive penalties or even the total yardage on defensive penalties. One reason is that defensive penalties often represent good play, not bad. Cornerbacks who play tight coverage may be just on the edge of a penalty on most plays, only occasionally earning a flag. Defensive ends who get a good jump on rushing the passer will gladly trade an encroachment penalty or two for ten snaps where they get off the blocks a split-second before the linemen trying to block them.

In addition, offensive penalties have a higher correlation from year to year than defensive penalties. The penalty that correlates highest with losses is the false start, and the penalty that teams will have called most consistently from year to year is also the false start.

• Pro Football Prospectus 2007, St. Louis chapter
• 

  Football Outsiders Basics (a.k.a. "Pregame Show") | Football Outsiders

  ---

  A basic introduction to what we've learned since we started Football Outsiders in 2003.

[Triple B]

4 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Of course a misplaced penalty can have an adverse impact on a game, I believe that my argument is that if your strive to eliminate penalties you will be in worse shape than you were.

That statement makes you sound like a nut. God forbid I should ask you to expound but ....

[puc86]

8 minutes ago, Triple B said:

That statement makes you sound like a nut. God forbid I ask you to expound but ....

The easiest way to get zero penalties is to not move, that of course would be bad. If you try too hard to not get penalized you will play horribly, life is about balance. We would be more inclined to be winning if we had more aggressive defensive penalties than we are trying to compete with BYU for the most disciplined team. Penalty free is a a bad cultural fit for our program and people need to get lit up every once and while even if that costs 15 yards sometimes.

Edited September 27, 2021 by puc86

[puc86]

4 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

Teams with more offensive penalties generally lose more games, but there is no correlation between defensive penalties and losses.

Specific defensive penalties of course lose games; we’ve all sworn at the television when the cornerback on our favorite team gets flagged for a 50-yard pass interference penalty. Yet overall, there is no correlation between losses and the total of defensive penalties or even the total yardage on defensive penalties. One reason is that defensive penalties often represent good play, not bad. Cornerbacks who play tight coverage may be just on the edge of a penalty on most plays, only occasionally earning a flag. Defensive ends who get a good jump on rushing the passer will gladly trade an encroachment penalty or two for ten snaps where they get off the blocks a split-second before the linemen trying to block them.

In addition, offensive penalties have a higher correlation from year to year than defensive penalties. The penalty that correlates highest with losses is the false start, and the penalty that teams will have called most consistently from year to year is also the false start.

• Pro Football Prospectus 2007, St. Louis chapter
• 

  Football Outsiders Basics (a.k.a. "Pregame Show") | Football Outsiders

  ---

  A basic introduction to what we've learned since we started Football Outsiders in 2003.

I think that’s entirely my argument. As trip pointed out I driven to look into because of the cjl penalty problem vs our current move to penalty free. I think if we had a defense that had more penalties we would have a better defense. And I’ve said from the beginning I couldn’t think of a single time having a false start would be a good sign but I also think your defense is going to be unquestionably bad if it never has an offsides, personal foul or pass interference.

[Triple B]

9 minutes ago, puc86 said:

The easiest way to get zero penalties is to not move, that of course would be bad. If you try too hard to not get penalized you will play horribly, life is about balance. We would be more inclined to be winning if we had more aggressive defensive penalties than we are trying to compete with BYU for the most disciplined team. Penalty free is a a bad cultural fit for our program and people need to get lit up every once and while even if that costs 15 yards sometimes.

So striving to eliminate mistakes, which is really what penalties fall under, will put you in worse shape than you already are ...... I know it would be terribly painful, but do you ever go back and actually re-read some of the nonsensical stuff you post here?

[puc86]

Oh wait I thought of one on offense, if your line goes an entire year without a holding penalty I’m pretty sure you just finished a pretty rough season 

[puc86]

Just now, Triple B said:

So striving to eliminate mistakes, which is really what penalties fall under, will put you in worse shape than you already are ...... I know it would be terribly painful, but do you ever go back and actually re-read some of the nonsensical stuff you post here?

It’s not nonsense it’s the absolute truth which can be proven empirically and also is common knowledge to anyone that’s ever played anything or done anything in life. You think penalties are always mistakes which is the wrong take and would lead to bad results. If you play hard and you play to the whistle sometimes you miss that whistle and sometimes you get a penalty for that but that’s life. If you play for a soft coach that is worried about saying they are disciplined instead of saying they won, you wont play to the whistle which will lead to worse results. Thinking penalties are in a vacuum bad and need to be removed is the nonsense take. Take basketball for example penalties are literally part of the strategy to winning, the same can be said for football but it’s a bit less overt.

[Triple B]

26 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Thinking penalties are in a vacuum bad and need to be removed is the nonsense take.

Thinking that a coach actually thinks or believes that is the nonsense take. It's all part of the process of eliminating mistakes. Stick to slamming CJS's W/L record, it's the only place you don't sound completely ridiculous ....