For many decades, certain statistics have been used to evaluate or gauge a team's performance. However, in the past most teams operated in the same way: huddle up, then line up an snap. variance in speed in doing these things was much greater in different quarters within one game than between two different teams. Everyone pretty much did things the same way, so "time of possession" was meaningfully comparable. It indicated a team was preventing the other team from being able to score. With the proliferation of "hurry up", no-huddle offenses, this stat is no longer a useful one because it doesn't compare across teams of wildly different styles. But further, this skews any defensive "per game" stats. Ask Kentucky's Levis about the 130th pass defense in CFB. 98 passing yards, 3 int's. Yet, if one looks at pass yards per attempt, suddenly Tennessee is a top 50 pass defense. Tennessee is also tied for 31st in tackles for a loss. The defense is far more stout than it appears in a stat line because time of possession is not being corrected for or assumed to be intrinsically a positive/desired statistic. What do you get when you combine the 26th scoring defense with the 1st scoring offense? A great team. In 1998, Tennessee finished with the 19th ranked scoring offense and 8th ranked scoring defense. Technically, the 2022 team is performing at the same combined rank level as the 1998 team finished (13.5 average scoring rank).
This is the kind of thinking I am talking about. This person is typing true things and drawing seemingly meaningful conclusions. But they are wrong.
Red zone touchdowns means a lot. This defense forces a lot of field goals and this offense has no let up at all
Especially to a team like Tennessee, they're looking for an extra possession or two, they're going to be points
I think it's moving that way, but the people driving media tend to be a little older and slower to change their gouges. Analytics have really shown that the "counting" stats don't tell a good story.
This oughta get you riled up, IP: https://www.espn.com/college-footba...03711/college-football-playoff-case-no-1-no-4
Also, love how a road win over then #17 Pittsburgh is now a negative. Can't wait til next week, when they beat #22 Syracuse and it becomes a positive again.
It’s really silly to label the skill of a current team based off 2 months ago. Teams change. Leaders fade and new ones emerge. Injuries. Development. We’d beat Pitt by 35 if we played today. Remember, we dropped multiple passes, including tds, dropped a punt and had at least 7 penalties that negated our first downs and/or extended their drives on 3rd down.
It's why I made the thread. I see it everywhere. The only reason Vols are not sole #2 is because of a voter from the South Bend Tribune who thinks Bama having more yards and TOP than UT in that game means they are still better. Also gives them credit for winning tough games on the road, but holds the Pitt game against Tennessee. Not joking. That's what he has explicitly written.
The case would have to lean on history and roster talent. It isn't in anything on the field this season. Better wins, more wins, win head-to-head.
You could base a case on them cleaning up all the penalties, not missing the field goal, and just handling that final offensive series better altogether to not give us time. Also, the fact that it was a road loss helps them quite a bit. A loss on the road from a last second field goal is about as close as you can get to saying "these teams were even." Personally, I would argue that our WTF fumble late in the game that handed them a free TD cancels out all of their penalty stuff. And even if it doesn't, add in that nonsense PI call that kept one of their drives alive, and it more than balances things. I think there's a stronger argument that we were pretty easily the better team and should have won by more.
