neat third down graphic

[mad dog]

http://mgoblog.blogspot.com/2006/02/diy-th...down-stats.html

Apparently, we're as good at converting with between 1 and 3 yards to go on third down as we are from 10-14. Go figure.

And don't look at the defensive side of the graph unless you want an ulcer.

[pollock]

Apparently, we're as good at converting with between 1 and 3 yards to go on third down as we are from 10-14.  Go figure. 

←

Not exactly..... but it does indicate that we were above the NCAA average (represented by the black curve) in both of those ranges. For example, we converted about 80% of the time on 3rd and 2, and 30% of the time on 3rd and 10.

And yes, the defensive one is depressing.

[mad dog]

Not exactly..... but it does indicate that we were above the NCAA average (represented by the black curve)

←

I suppose there's a semantic difference between "above average" and "good." I'd say you can call yourself good if you're above the NCAA average, and bad if you're below it. You can call it an oversimplification, but that's my take.

I didn't mean to say that we convert as much, if that's what you thought I meant. Just that we're good, relative to the rest of the NCAA, at those two points.

Edited February 20, 2006 by illuvius32