UC Davis Predictions.

[AZGrizFan]

Coming into last weekend, the Bengals were allowing 7.0 YPC and 291 YPG on the ground.

The Griz only managed 3.4 and 174 respectively, despite making the transition to McDowell and being at home. The narrative among some commentators coming out of this game that UM ran the ball well is totally false. It was frankly an embarrassing showing, given the opponent.

U.C. Davis' run defense allows 4.2 YPC and 145 YPG. Unless there is just a crazy jump in week 2 of the McDowell "era," I think the Griz get totally stifled on offense and this one gets really ugly.

Take out the three sacks and ACTUAL running plays averaged 4.25. That’s a more effective measure of the performance…and I know, I know, sack yards count and certainly impact a drive’s success, but if the discussion is quality of the run game, I’ll take 205 yards rushing and 220 yards passing. We do THAT and we should win.

I don’t expect us to do that though. :lol:

 

[Lord Vigo]

Coming into last weekend, the Bengals were allowing 7.0 YPC and 291 YPG on the ground.

The Griz only managed 3.4 and 174 respectively, despite making the transition to McDowell and being at home. The narrative among some commentators coming out of this game that UM ran the ball well is totally false. It was frankly an embarrassing showing, given the opponent.

U.C. Davis' run defense allows 4.2 YPC and 145 YPG. Unless there is just a crazy jump in week 2 of the McDowell "era," I think the Griz get totally stifled on offense and this one gets really ugly.

Take out the three sacks and ACTUAL running plays averaged 4.25. That’s a more effective measure of the performance…and I know, I know, sack yards count and certainly impact a drive’s success, but if the discussion is quality of the run game, I’ll take 205 yards rushing and 220 yards passing. We do THAT and we should win.

I don’t expect us to do that though. :lol:

The problem with that is that the sack yards are baked into the cake for everybody. So if you factor them out for the Griz's performance, you'd have to do the same for everyone else in order to have a valid comparison. ISU has had 6 or 7 total TFL in every FCS game they've played so far.

The bottom line for me is that averaging 3.4 (w/ sacks) or 4.3 (w/out sacks) against a team that allows 7.0 (w/ sacks) and probably ~7.5 (w/out sacks) does not portend good things! If your running game can't dominate ISU, then who can they dominate?

 

[Lord Vigo]

Coming into last weekend, the Bengals were allowing 7.0 YPC and 291 YPG on the ground.

The Griz only managed 3.4 and 174 respectively, despite making the transition to McDowell and being at home. The narrative among some commentators coming out of this game that UM ran the ball well is totally false. It was frankly an embarrassing showing, given the opponent.

U.C. Davis' run defense allows 4.2 YPC and 145 YPG. Unless there is just a crazy jump in week 2 of the McDowell "era," I think the Griz get totally stifled on offense and this one gets really ugly.

I agree with the general point you're making, but you're including 2 FBS games in there, which is a little bit of a stretch.

Against FCS teams, they allowed 4.8 ypc and 190 on the ground on average before they played us, granted that was pass-happy UNI and allegedly poop UNC.

Davis has also played Cal Poly and SUU, both teams who are near the bottom of all of FCS in rushing per game.

They could very well stymie our ground game, but the raw stats are a little misleading.

This is true. The samples aren't very strong yet. But given that it's ISU, I'm inclined to believe what they're indicating-- that they're a terrible run defense. Last year, they allowed 5.0 YPC and nearly 200 YPG.

 

[uofmman1122]

I agree with the general point you're making, but you're including 2 FBS games in there, which is a little bit of a stretch.

Against FCS teams, they allowed 4.8 ypc and 190 on the ground on average before they played us, granted that was pass-happy UNI and allegedly poop UNC.

Davis has also played Cal Poly and SUU, both teams who are near the bottom of all of FCS in rushing per game.

They could very well stymie our ground game, but the raw stats are a little misleading.

This is true. The samples aren't very strong yet. But given that it's ISU, I'm inclined to believe what they're indicating-- that they're a terrible run defense. Last year, they allowed 5.0 YPC and nearly 200 YPG.

Again, I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but they are almost literally a completely different team from last year. They averaged 198 passing yards per game last year, and are at #7 in the FCS this year at 315 per game. Last year has nothing to do with this year, especially for ISU.

 

[Robsnotes4u]

Take out the three sacks and ACTUAL running plays averaged 4.25. That’s a more effective measure of the performance…and I know, I know, sack yards count and certainly impact a drive’s success, but if the discussion is quality of the run game, I’ll take 205 yards rushing and 220 yards passing. We do THAT and we should win.

I don’t expect us to do that though. :lol:

The problem with that is that the sack yards are baked into the cake for everybody. So if you factor them out for the Griz's performance, you'd have to do the same for everyone else in order to have a valid comparison. ISU has had 6 or 7 total TFL in every FCS game they've played so far.

The bottom line for me is that averaging 3.4 (w/ sacks) or 4.3 (w/out sacks) against a team that allows 7.0 (w/ sacks) and probably ~7.5 (w/out sacks) does not portend good things! If your running game can't dominate ISU, then who can they dominate?

There were rated 121 in rushing defense, second from the bottom, so there is only one other to dominate.

That game moved them to 119

 

[Lord Vigo]

This is true. The samples aren't very strong yet. But given that it's ISU, I'm inclined to believe what they're indicating-- that they're a terrible run defense. Last year, they allowed 5.0 YPC and nearly 200 YPG.

Again, I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but they are almost literally a completely different team from last year. They averaged 198 passing yards per game last year, and are at #7 in the FCS this year at 315 per game. Last year has nothing to do with this year, especially for ISU.

I hear you, but don't we generally expect that terrible programs will produce bad teams? It's believable that ISU's defense will be a doormat. That's typically the case at that school. In any case-- time will tell.

 

[uofmman1122]

Again, I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but they are almost literally a completely different team from last year. They averaged 198 passing yards per game last year, and are at #7 in the FCS this year at 315 per game. Last year has nothing to do with this year, especially for ISU.

I hear you, but don't we generally expect that terrible programs will produce bad teams? It's believable that ISU's defense will be a doormat. That's typically the case at that school. In any case-- time will tell.

Yeah, like I said, I don't disagree with you. I think ISU is overall a bad team, and that their defense isn't great. It's concerning that we couldn't run for more on them.

I just don't think the justifications you gave for why we also couldn't run on UC Davis are very strong. The stats aren't really clear on that, so it kind of just comes down to "I think UC Davis is better at defending the run than ISU, who I think is bad at defending the run", which I actually agree with, despite there not being a good delineation in the stats that shows that lol.

It's very similar to anyone looking at our defense's rushing stats and concluding that we're a really good run defense. The raw stats suggest that, but digging deeper shows that people just don't run on us because everyone has been able to pass on us pretty consistently.

 

[Tony Clifton]

UCD - 45
Griz 17

If we cant score more than 17 on Idaho state we definitely are not going to do it against Davis. We need 5 turnovers to even be close in this one

 

[uofmman1122]

UCD - 45
Griz 17

If we cant score more than 17 on Idaho state we definitely are not going to do it against Davis. We need 5 turnovers to even be close in this one

We scored 28 on Idaho State.

 

[41>37]

55-10 Davis

 

[AZGrizFan]

Take out the three sacks and ACTUAL running plays averaged 4.25. That’s a more effective measure of the performance…and I know, I know, sack yards count and certainly impact a drive’s success, but if the discussion is quality of the run game, I’ll take 205 yards rushing and 220 yards passing. We do THAT and we should win.

I don’t expect us to do that though. :lol:

The problem with that is that the sack yards are baked into the cake for everybody. So if you factor them out for the Griz's performance, you'd have to do the same for everyone else in order to have a valid comparison. ISU has had 6 or 7 total TFL in every FCS game they've played so far.

The bottom line for me is that averaging 3.4 (w/ sacks) or 4.3 (w/out sacks) against a team that allows 7.0 (w/ sacks) and probably ~7.5 (w/out sacks) does not portend good things! If your running game can't dominate ISU, then who can they dominate?

Yes, hence my statement that “I know sack yards count”. I wish they didn’t and i wish they kept track of ACTUAL running plays and their success/failure and not make fans do the math…

 

[The.Real.2506]

The problem with that is that the sack yards are baked into the cake for everybody. So if you factor them out for the Griz's performance, you'd have to do the same for everyone else in order to have a valid comparison. ISU has had 6 or 7 total TFL in every FCS game they've played so far.

The bottom line for me is that averaging 3.4 (w/ sacks) or 4.3 (w/out sacks) against a team that allows 7.0 (w/ sacks) and probably ~7.5 (w/out sacks) does not portend good things! If your running game can't dominate ISU, then who can they dominate?

Yes, hence my statement that “I know sack yards count”. I wish they didn’t and i wish they kept track of ACTUAL running plays and their success/failure and not make fans do the math…

Where do you propose those negative sack yards go. What about the passing scramble positive yards, should those be subtracted from rushing yards. :thumb:

 

[AZGrizFan]

Yes, hence my statement that “I know sack yards count”. I wish they didn’t and i wish they kept track of ACTUAL running plays and their success/failure and not make fans do the math…

Where do you propose those negative sack yards go. What about the passing scramble positive yards, should those be subtracted from rushing yards. :thumb:

I believe they should. It wouldn’t be that difficult to track plays that started out as a pass play and the QB ends up scrambling (whether it was for positive or negative yards). And yes, RPO throws a bit of a wrinkle into it, which may be why they don’t bother…

 

[oldrunner]

Where do you propose those negative sack yards go. What about the passing scramble positive yards, should those be subtracted from rushing yards. :thumb:

I believe they should. It wouldn’t be that difficult to track plays that started out as a pass play and the QB ends up scrambling (whether it was for positive or negative yards). And yes, RPO throws a bit of a wrinkle into it, which may be why they don’t bother…

There are team stats and then there are inividual stats. You seem to be arguing about why they aren't mixed. I really don't have a problem separating the two. Now days it seems like they have a stat for just about everything. In a way, I'm glad that some things are still left to subjectivity. :clap:

 

[The.Real.2506]

Where do you propose those negative sack yards go. What about the passing scramble positive yards, should those be subtracted from rushing yards. :thumb:

I believe they should. It wouldn’t be that difficult to track plays that started out as a pass play and the QB ends up scrambling (whether it was for positive or negative yards). And yes, RPO throws a bit of a wrinkle into it, which may be why they don’t bother…

I have always thought it was a little deceptive that sack yards are included with rushing yards, but I think that the current system, yards gained/lost on the ground vs yards gained/lost due to forward pass takes any judgment of the statistician out of it.

When does a play become a scramble and when is it a QB draw.

Another issue is the fly sweeps being a pass, I understand the reasoning but it just seems wrong including them in passing yards.

 

[Lord Vigo]

The problem with that is that the sack yards are baked into the cake for everybody. So if you factor them out for the Griz's performance, you'd have to do the same for everyone else in order to have a valid comparison. ISU has had 6 or 7 total TFL in every FCS game they've played so far.

The bottom line for me is that averaging 3.4 (w/ sacks) or 4.3 (w/out sacks) against a team that allows 7.0 (w/ sacks) and probably ~7.5 (w/out sacks) does not portend good things! If your running game can't dominate ISU, then who can they dominate?

Yes, hence my statement that “I know sack yards count”. I wish they didn’t and i wish they kept track of ACTUAL running plays and their success/failure and not make fans do the math…

I understand the frustration; it's a terrible way to keep rushing stats. And of course I know that you understand how yards factor into the metric. My point is simply that we typically judge stats by comparison. The reason we know, for instance, that being under 4.0 YPC is a bad showing is because that level of production is on the low end of the bell curve for rushing efficiency. So if you take the sack yardage out for UM and say "this is what they really did on the ground against ISU," that's fine. But for that number to mean anything, comparatively, you'd have to do it for all of ISU's opponents as well.

 

[AZGrizFan]

I believe they should. It wouldn’t be that difficult to track plays that started out as a pass play and the QB ends up scrambling (whether it was for positive or negative yards). And yes, RPO throws a bit of a wrinkle into it, which may be why they don’t bother…

I have always thought it was a little deceptive that sack yards are included with rushing yards, but I think that the current system, yards gained/lost on the ground vs yards gained/lost due to forward pass takes any judgment of the statistician out of it.

When does a play become a scramble and when is it a QB draw.

Another issue is the fly sweeps being a pass, I understand the reasoning but it just seems wrong including them in passing yards.

Yep. The distinction between run and pass just isn’t as clear as it was 25 years ago. Between the RPO, the fly sweep, the QB draw, the scramble, etc., etc. I mean we ran the play Saturday where McDowell handed off to Gillman, who ran into the interior line, turned and pitched it back to McDowell for a pass. Does that play count as rushing or passing? :lol:

 

[The.Real.2506]

I have always thought it was a little deceptive that sack yards are included with rushing yards, but I think that the current system, yards gained/lost on the ground vs yards gained/lost due to forward pass takes any judgment of the statistician out of it.

When does a play become a scramble and when is it a QB draw.

Another issue is the fly sweeps being a pass, I understand the reasoning but it just seems wrong including them in passing yards.

Yep. The distinction between run and pass just isn’t as clear as it was 25 years ago. Between the RPO, the fly sweep, the QB draw, the scramble, etc., etc. I mean we ran the play Saturday where McDowell handed off to Gillman, who ran into the interior line, turned and pitched it back to McDowell for a pass. Does that play count as rushing or passing? :lol:

I don't remember what game it was, but a few years back when MSU's passing game was really bad, we had a game that we had just under 200 yards passing, it looked pretty good for us on the stat sheet. I went back and found 4 fly sweeps that accounted for nearly half the passing yards. :lol:

 

[mtgrizfankb]

Tried to sell my tickets to this game but nobody cares about UCD football. Griz 10 - UCD 31. It’s gonna be ugly my friends.

 

[AZDoc]

38-13 UCD