Early line

[USF_Bullsharks]

I'm down with whatever wins us games, and right now we are 3-2 and in the driver's seat for a great season. Let's keep it going. 

[BDYZR]

Just now, Bull94 said:

true. you're right.

only people who don't understand analytics or math still go with their gut

Highly doubt that one as well. 

[BDYZR]

1 minute ago, BDYZR said:

Highly doubt that one as well. 

coach+uses+analytics+but+goes+with+his+gut - Google Search

WWW.GOOGLE.COM

 

[IBulleve]

11 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

it's the way all successful sports organizations are run now. they all have analytics departments. even nfl teams.

nobody goes by their gut instincts anymore.

I’m very aware. Pounding the table that analytics are important, useful, and even critical to a functioning sports organization today isn’t the conversation we’re having. We’re discussing whether or not to blindly use %’s in game theory. 

I’m very pro-analytics, especially when it comes to roster construction in baseball.

But game theory isn’t a perfect science, especially not at the lower collegiate level where there’s more variables than the pro game. 

Example - a lot of these generic game theory models would tell you to go for it on 4th and 1 whether you’re facing Navy or the New England Patriots. Surely we can agree there’s matchups and factors that need to be considered in these potential different circumstances, correct?

Thus, why you don’t blindly trust the numbers

note: I say “lower” in terms of a relatively bad football team that doesn’t execute at the level of a professional team.  

 

Edited October 3, 2023 by IBulleve

[Bull94]

6 minutes ago, BDYZR said:

coach+uses+analytics+but+goes+with+his+gut - Google Search

WWW.GOOGLE.COM

 

From the top article in your search:

But don't forget, Harbaugh still trusts his gut above all else. It's just that his gut believes in his players, and his nature believes in being aggressive. Thus, he often aligns with the analytics.

 

Many of those articles were from 3+ years ago. What you need to understand is that the younger more innovative coaches will use analytics even more. Harbaugh is an old school coach that realizes it gives him an edge. Older coaches tend to be too conservative when managing games.

[Bull94]

7 minutes ago, IBulleve said:

I’m very aware. Pounding the table that analytics are important, useful, and even critical to a functioning sports organization today isn’t the conversation we’re having. We’re discussing whether or not to blindly use %’s in game theory. 

I’m very pro-analytics, especially when it comes to roster construction in baseball.

But game theory isn’t a perfect science, especially not at the lower collegiate level where there’s more variables than the pro game. 

Example - a lot of these generic game theory models would tell you to go for it on 4th and 1 whether you’re facing Navy or the New England Patriots. Surely we can agree there’s matchups and factors that need to be considered in these potential different circumstances, correct?

Thus, why you don’t blindly trust the numbers

note: I say “lower” in terms of a relatively bad football team that doesn’t execute at the level of a professional team.  

 

never said it was perfect science and honestly the odds say it's barely above a coin flip as to whether or not it increases your chances of winning.

I'd rather a coach that is considered too aggressive than the opposite.

and our fans better get used to it because CAG seems like a risk taker.

[Triple B]

17 hours ago, Triple B said:

I think he has some kind of grizzly bear thing ....

 

17 hours ago, Rocky Style said:

I just think the reasoning to "be aggressive" is not enough. That argument was silly to me.

I do agree that's not enough on its own, but going back to your grizzly analogy, what if slapping the bear, while aggressive, is also a strategy to help you get away to save your life..... making it not only aggressive but a strategy.

[CousinRicky]

2 hours ago, Bull94 said:

absolutely.

not every risk will be rewarded but never taking a risk assures you to never be rewarded.

Do you know what the analytics say about going for it on 4th and 2 from your own 28?  I don't remember the exact scenario but let's just go with those numbers just for fun.  What play call does the analytics say will work best for USF in that scenario?  Run it up the gut? With which RB?  QB sneak with push from behind?  To the left, right or directly over center? Quick toss to your RB? Left, right? Again which RB?  Play action then toss to a TE veering toward the sideline?  You can say it's analytics but it could be a gut call hoping to boost the team's moral.  

What do you do with a starting pitcher who has thrown 98 pitches in the 7th inning, runners on base with one out? Who's pitching? Is it Verlander or Quackenbush?  You may leave Verlander in there but probably not the other guy. 

I can't believe analytics has seen every scenario play out in the past.  There are trends and numbers supporting how long to leave a pitcher in but not all pitchers are the same. 

In USF's case maybe they make the 1st down with a different play call.  

Don't think anyone is saying not to take risk. Believe most of us have said that closer to midfield you take the risk. 

Edit: And after writing all that I see your post on this page. Oh well.

Edited October 3, 2023 by CousinRicky

[Rocky Style]

11 minutes ago, Triple B said:

 

I do agree that's not enough on its own, but going back to your grizzly analogy, what if slapping the bear, while aggressive, is also a strategy to help you get away to save your life..... making it not only aggressive but a strategy.

Haha I anticipated that argument.  To me that would be more in the 4th QTR when you don't have options and time is running out.

Again talking about your own 30 yard line in the 1st QTR.

Edited October 3, 2023 by Rocky Style

[Bull94]

17 minutes ago, CousinRicky said:

Do you know what the analytics say about going for it on 4th and 2 from your own 28?  I don't remember the exact scenario but let's just go with those numbers just for fun.  What play call does the analytics say will work best for USF in that scenario?  Run it up the gut? With which RB?  QB sneak with push from behind?  To the left, right or directly over center? Quick toss to your RB? Left, right? Again which RB?  Play action then toss to a TE veering toward the sideline?  You can say it's analytics but it could be a gut call hoping to boost the team's moral.  

What do you do with a starting pitcher who has thrown 98 pitches in the 7th inning, runners on base with one out? Who's pitching? Is it Verlander or Quackenbush?  You may leave Verlander in there but probably not the other guy. 

I can't believe analytics has seen every scenario play out in the past.  There are trends and numbers supporting how long to leave a pitcher in but not all pitchers are the same. 

In USF's case maybe they make the 1st down with a different play call.  

Don't think anyone is saying not to take risk. Believe most of us have said that closer to midfield you take the risk. 

I believe it was 4th and 1 from our 30 down by 7 in the 1st quarter. Like I said the scenario is just better than a coin flip as to whether or not going for  it improves our chances to win.

You will never have perfect information and there will always be a reason not to go for it.

The Rays pulled Snell in a playoff game where he was about to go through the lineup for a 3rd time. Had a 1 hitter going if I remember correctly. Everybody railed against the decision when it didn't work out but the rays made the correct decision according to their analysis. the Rays are so successful because they stick to the analytics.

we are 11 of 19 in going for it on 4th down this year. we went for it on 4th down later near our own 40 and made it. actually we went for it again on 4th and 4 during the same drive and we made that one too.that drive led to a TD.

funny nobody ever says it's the wrong thing to do when we make it.

Coaches like CAG understand possessions are more important than field position. Coaches like charlie strong believe field position is more important. we have had plenty of coaches that have cost us wins over the years for being too conservative.

Fact is CAG is a risk taker and if it even gives him a slight edge he will go for it. People better get used to it because we won't always make it.

Edited October 3, 2023 by Bull94