WSU @ BYU RBER

RBER (Running Back Efficiency Ratings) is a CougarCorner exclusive statistical analysis of the effectiveness of running backs in game. A score of 100 is considered to be an efficient running back.



Results:



JD Falslev: 98

D. Foote: 81.4

J. Williams: 71.67

M. Alisa: 60.86



As a team, including Riley Nelson, Taysom Hill, and Iona Pritchard, we were 64.25 correction: 65.29.



Now, JD gets some bump in his score because of his receiving yards. A BYU running back is expected to catch the ball out of the backfield, which is why receiving yards are weighted into it. He only had 2 carries for 7 yards, so it's safe to disqualify him.



Foote, as is typical, leads the RBER. But again he is under utilized with only has 4 carries for 26 yards.



Williams had a good game, for a freshman at 15 yards late in the game.



Alisa strugged to run on the WSU defense after half time finishing with a mere 54 yard game when it looked like he was on pace to break the century mark at halftime.



The numbers show that while it wasn't a terrible outing running the ball, we were not as effective as we need to be.

This is a real concern and why we are will not be favored in any of our tough away games.



In my opinion it is the biggest problem our team has at the moment and what will stop us from being elite this year.



i suspect agaisnt weber state our line will look like world beater. on the other hand at utah i think our running game will be non existent. our greatest hope agaisnt boise state and utah is our defense.

Very legitimate concerns that I echo. I think we need more game data though, before we throw in the towel as to whether or not this team can run the ball. They certainly were below standard for the Washington St. game though, and likely will be way above standard for the Weber St. game. Utah game will tell us a lot.

hawkwing wrote:
Very legitimate concerns that I echo. I think we need more game data though, before we throw in the towel as to whether or not this team can run the ball. They certainly were below standard for the Washington St. game though, and likely will be way above standard for the Weber St. game. Utah game will tell us a lot.

You are correct. I think WSU's front seven were somewhat better than people were expecting as well. It is too early to tell. The sings however are not encouraging.



this does not mean we lose our tough road games though. I really think our defense is legit. i also think riley and the receiers/tight ends are looking good. Doman's play calling is getting better as well. If our d can hold utah's offense to a low scoring game (very possible) then our offense even with a weak running game can still pull off a win if we avoid turnovers.

I haven't gone back and rewatched/analyzed the game, so maybe I'm up in the night, but it seemed to me that WSU was committed to making Riley beat them with his arm, which he did (Hello Kane Friel and Skyler Ridley!)



They were ready to stuff Riley and the RBs on runs.

hawkwing wrote:
RBER (Running Back Efficiency Ratings) is a CougarCorner exclusive statistical analysis of the effectiveness of running backs in game. A score of 100 is considered to be an efficient running back.



Results:



JD Falslev: 98

D. Foote: 81.4

J. Williams: 71.67

M. Alisa: 60.86



As a team, including Riley Nelson, Taysom Hill, and Iona Pritchard, we were 64.25 correction: 65.29.



Now, JD gets some bump in his score because of his receiving yards. A BYU running back is expected to catch the ball out of the backfield, which is why receiving yards are weighted into it. He only had 2 carries for 7 yards, so it's safe to disqualify him.



Foote, as is typical, leads the RBER. But again he is under utilized with only has 4 carries for 26 yards.



Williams had a good game, for a freshman at 71.67 yards late in the game.



Alisa strugged to run on the WSU defense after half time finishing with a mere 54 yard game when it looked like he was on pace to break the century mark at halftime.



The numbers show that while it was a terrible outing running the ball, we were not as effective as we need to be.

Hawk - you have a couple of typos that reverse what you meant to say - I believe. Williams did not have 71.67 yards. You probably meant to say rber on yards he gained late in the game.



You probably meant to also say that while it was "NOT" a terrible outing.



On another note - why dismiss Falslev so quickly. Receptions are in the formula because they matter. The other backs did not show much in that area which makes it easier to defend against them and shut down their running.

hawkwing wrote:
Very legitimate concerns that I echo. I think we need more game data though, before we throw in the towel as to whether or not this team can run the ball. They certainly were below standard for the Washington St. game though, and likely will be way above standard for the Weber St. game. Utah game will tell us a lot.

Coaches indicated that our new center - remember Oklahoma's new center - did a good job of snapping the ball and directing assignments - now needs to focus on mastering his own blocking assignments. How well that development goes - may make a difference running the ball inside the tackles.

Cougarbib wrote:

Very legitimate concerns that I echo. I think we need more game data though, before we throw in the towel as to whether or not this team can run the ball. They certainly were below standard for the Washington St. game though, and likely will be way above standard for the Weber St. game. Utah game will tell us a lot.

Coaches indicated that our new center - remember Oklahoma's new center - did a good job of snapping the ball and directing assignments - now needs to focus on mastering his own blocking assignments. How well that development goes - may make a difference running the ball inside the tackles.

Probably a lot going through the guy's head.



My guess is we won't see any dramatic improvement until midway through the season, you know after we've played our toughest games.

Thanks for pointing out the typos. That's what happens when you're calculating RBER and working at the same time...

Cougarbib wrote:
On another note - why dismiss Falslev so quickly. Receptions are in the formula because they matter. The other backs did not show much in that area which makes it easier to defend against them and shut down their running.

I dismiss those because the majority of his receptions did not originate him in a running back position. If there were any easy way to discount any receptions made from when Falslev lined up outside, I would do it.

hawkwing wrote:
Thanks for pointing out the typos. That's what happens when you're calculating RBER and working at the same time...

anybody who takes the time to point out typos is stupid. Maybe i am biased because i type too fast and am usually in the middle of doing work when i make my posts but seriously, consider the context.

Good point about the center snapping the ball. That wasn't an issue this game.



The numbers show the way the game played. Foote was better than Alisa. He hit the outside faster. The middle was log jammed, and Alisa had nothing good there to work with . The Oline is a major concern, as it was last year. With sub par running numbers, again, and 3 sacks on Riley to boot.



Williams numbers are even more impressive to me, because at the time he got those numbers (late in the game with a 2+ TD lead, and our starting qb still in) it was painfully obvious to everyone in the stadium that we were done passing for the night, and they were stacking the box accordingly.



I don't think that Alisa is the next big thing like everyone thinks he is. He has been non existent against good teams, almost every game. That might be a product of the Oline, but it might not.



I mean, what are his numbers against teams with a better than .500 winning percentage? He goes from gaining almost 200 yards one week against "the little sisters of the poor", and then the next week he gets like 52 yards on 17 carries, or something like that.

Agree with you Blue.



Alisa's biggest asset is his size and strength. Against the smaller teams he's able to punch his own hole and get some yards as he drags defenders behind him. Not so much against better teams with bigger/stronger defenders.



I like Foote much better and think he should get snaps ahead of Alisa. I also like Falslev as he can actually make defenders miss.



Jury is still out for me on Williams.

jonnylingo wrote:

Thanks for pointing out the typos. That's what happens when you're calculating RBER and working at the same time...

anybody who takes the time to point out typos is stupid. Maybe i am biased because i type too fast and am usually in the middle of doing work when i make my posts but seriously, consider the context.

Just trying to be helpful. Hawk had some good points but inadvertently stated the opposite. I screwed up one of my posts on a different thread and happily fixed it when my error was pointed out.



Now name calling - that is ST.....



Could get you a time out if someone complains.

BlueIsBetter wrote:
Good point about the center snapping the ball. That wasn't an issue this game.



The numbers show the way the game played. Foote was better than Alisa. He hit the outside faster. The middle was log jammed, and Alisa had nothing good there to work with . The Oline is a major concern, as it was last year. With sub par running numbers, again, and 3 sacks on Riley to boot.



Williams numbers are even more impressive to me, because at the time he got those numbers (late in the game with a 2+ TD lead, and our starting qb still in) it was painfully obvious to everyone in the stadium that we were done passing for the night, and they were stacking the box accordingly.



I don't think that Alisa is the next big thing like everyone thinks he is. He has been non existent against good teams, almost every game. That might be a product of the Oline, but it might not.



I mean, what are his numbers against teams with a better than .500 winning percentage? He goes from gaining almost 200 yards one week against "the little sisters of the poor", and then the next week he gets like 52 yards on 17 carries, or something like that.

Iirc - Alisa had a huge game when he was still a surprise, but was looking pretty ordinary by the 2nd half of the next game. He has had some OK outings since but mostly average. We agree on Alisa. He still has a lot to prove - better blocking cannot hurt - but it remains to be seen if that will make a huge difference.



We also agree about Foote being under utilized last year and last week.

http://www.cougarboard.com/board/message.html?id=9121541

Here is a former coach analysis of our OL.

Someone should invite him to post over here.

Here is a question from a football watcher (fan) but not much of an X's & O's guy.



How do you know the O-line is performing poorly vs the defense "stuffing the box" or taking away the inside run up the middle? I'd like to hear from you who have coached or played the game at some level.

vancouvercougar wrote:
Here is a question from a football watcher (fan) but not much of an X's & O's guy.



How do you know the O-line is performing poorly vs the defense "stuffing the box" or taking away the inside run up the middle? I'd like to hear from you who have coached or played the game at some level.

It's usually considered loading the box if there are eight or more guys in there. That means, given a normal defense, you'll usually see a safety sneaking all the way up by the linebackers. I didn't notice Wash. St. bringing up their safeties very often, but I very well could have missed it since I was having such a good time in the Cougar Corner corner of the stadium (a HUGE thanks to Spiff for hooking me up with the ticket, BTW).

scott715 wrote:
http://www.cougarboard.com/board/message.html?id=9121541

Here is a former coach analysis of our OL.

Best post I have ever seen on cougarboard. Hawk, I invited him.