MESS named OC

[jbhtexas]

http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i468/isuagronomist/WRStats.jpg

Here is the condensed WR stat sheet I posted earlier in the "More on the Passing Game" thread (Thanks again ISUAgronomist for getting the formatting down for me).

James White caught 75% of his passes for an average of 7.9 yards.
Jarvis West caught 66% of his passes for an average of 5.9 yards.
Kurt Hammerschmidt caught 67% of his passes for an average of 9.7 yards.
Branderhorst caught 62% of his passes for an average of 5.5 yards.
Shontrelle Johnson caught 100% of his passes for an average of 8.0 yards.
Jeff Woody caught 80% of his passes for and average of 7.5 yards.

These guys caught the ball consistently, while close to the line of scrimmage where it is so "congested." We posed enough of a deep threat that these guys were all able to catch the ball underneath effectively. Reynolds, Lenz, Horne, Young, Gary and Darks all averaged >=10 yards per catch.

2011 Overall Football Statistics - Big 12 Conference - Official Athletic Site

For 12 games, if I sum your Catches column, I get 232 catches, which matches the number of completions listed on the Big 12 website. However, if I sum your Targets column, I get 374, where the Big 12 website says ISU had 445 attempts. I guess there were a number of incompleted passes to other players? Were they short passes or long passes? That's about 16% of the passes that are not accounted for in your table. I suppose the 15 interceptions and any deflections at the LOS would be in that group. Perhaps I don't understand your table.

I don't think you can draw the conclusion you have from the stats you posted above. You are assuming that because the yards/catch is small that your group of six were primarily thrown short passes. For the six above, I don't have a problem with that assumption, but for an accurate analysis, we really need to know how many short passes were thrown to Reynolds, Lenz, Horne, and Darks. Because they were thrown longer passes, their yard/catch averages could be skewed up even though they may have been thrown a significant number of short passes.

If I did the math right, using your table and the data above, that group of 6 averaged 7.2 yards/catch with a 70% completion rate. Given the small number of passes thrown to Johnson and Woody (who are primarily running backs), I question whether they should be included in the analysis. If those two are taken out, the remaining 4 average 7.1 yards/catch at 68%.

You conclusion seems to be those are good completion percentages for a short pass, thus there was minimal congestion on the routes. I would contend that 68%-70% completion rate for a short pass like that is not really that good. OSU and BU were hitting 72+% on all passes, and TT was hitting 68% on all passes.

Furthermore, the context of the pass has to be taken into account. For example, was the pass thrown on third and short, or was the pass thrown on third and long? Was the expectation that there should be YAC? For the case of third and long, even though a short pass was completed, if a first down is not achieved, the pass is not really a successful pass if it was expected to gain enough YAC to obtain the first down. Then one needs to ask if the lack of YAC was due to a congested area, inadequte skills by the receiver, etc.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

That stat came right out of the ISU webpage and includes every completed pass, regardless of "congestion." It doesn't take coverage, route depth, etc into account. We don't even know if they were all 1 yard passes with 10 YAC or 11 yard passes with 0 YAC. It is simply the average yards gained when a certain receiver caught the ball. I disagree that it is biased.

Exactly why your bias was showing, taking a worthless stat and skewing it to support your erroneous claim.

So you want more receivers to run farther away from what CF proclaims is an "inaccurate and weak armed" quarterback in Barnett (or at least inaccurate in Jantz's case)? There is likely going to be a better return by upgrading the QB ability. And that wouldn't require all 10 other players to learn a new system either.

Yep, having 1 or 2 WRs go more vertical, and thus bringing at least an equivalent number of defenders with them, will allow both our inaccurate QB more success with the then more open underneath WRs. Never-mind the more advanced passing game causing a breakdown in the defense on those deeper WR, and scoring easier than 15 short passes.

Our overall completion rate was abyssmal as well, 51%, which brings down the YPA stat. We had two receivers (Lenz and Gary) average almost 9 yards per target (not ypc, but yards each time the ball was thrown to them) with a greater than 65% catch rate. That isn't great but it's good enough. Money still averaged ~7.7 yards/target with only a 48% catch rate. My spreadsheet on receiver data is on my laptop so I cant give you the exact numbers right now though I had put it in other posts. Our QB's aren't great at getting the receivers the ball, and when they do the receivers drop it too often. The only "scheme" that fixes that is the one where you use better players.

See previous response. It is not mainly about hitting on deep passes. As long as defenders must cover more of the field, it makes our average athletes more athletic and QB accuracy better by getting open space. Pass routes should not be implemented like you are playing checkers, but chess.

Despite the overall lack of output from the QB position, Meyer saw something he liked about the way the Herman develops QB's. . If Meyer feels that Herman can adequately develop a QB, I will assume he is right. If Meyer turns out to be wrong, I'll start listening to you.

Meyer will develop the QB's just as much as he will call the plays. The quality of the candidates for such a redundant job is limited. Meyer must feel like Herman will do a good job repeating his (Meyer's) thoughts and ideas. Herman should be competent enough to do that. We need more at ISU.

 

[besserheimerphat]

Is there any place that keeps statistics of "droped passes"? I mean I see that Money had a 50% catch rate but how many of the passes to him were "uncatchable" and how many were drops.

Not questioning you just wondering if some of our WR look a bit worse than they should because of some bad passes. Example if Money was our typical deep target (seems that he was) it makes sense that he would have lower % catch rate than Horne/West who we used a lot of Screens etc.

I've not seen "drops" listed anywhere. Part of the problem with something like drops is that it is pretty subjective.

Reynolds had 81 targets and was the target on 22% of ISU's passes. I looked at the 2010 receivers who had 60 - 100 targets and were targeted 15% - 29% of the time. That group of receivers had an average catch rate of 60.6% (stdev 8.9%) - Reynolds 50.6% catch rate is the 13th percentile in that group. The average yards/target was 8.2 yards (stdev 2.3 yards) - Reynolds 8.09 in in the 48th percentile of that group.

I agree that deeper passes are harder to complete than short passes. Reynolds' yards/catch was good (16.2 ypc), so it seems like most of the passes he caught were downfield. Maybe he wasn't used on enough short routes - if DB's had to watch for him breaking into a short route, they wouldn't be able to drop so quickly. That slight hesitation to drop back might have helped him get seperation when he did go deep.

I know there were a number of uncatchable screen passes too, so that also effects Horne's, West's and White's stats. I have to assume that the uncatchable balls were evenly distributed to all receivers. That might not have been the case, but it seems like a reasonable assumption.

And there's nothing wrong with questioning the numbers I post. Either I find out I did something wrong and fix it, or everybody learns something. It's a win-win.

 

[besserheimerphat]

For 12 games, if I sum your Catches column, I get 232 catches, which matches the number of completions listed on the Big 12 website. However, if I sum your Targets column, I get 374, where the Big 12 website says ISU had 445 attempts. I guess there were a number of incompleted passes to other players?

I think I covered this in an earlier post - I took my incompletions data from ESPN, and I acknowledged that it wasn't complete. Each game had a few entries that said "incomplete" instead of "incomplete to..."

I don't think you can draw the conclusion you have from the stats you posted above. You are assuming that because the yards/catch is small that your group of six were primarily thrown short passes. For the six above, I don't have a problem with that assumption, but for an accurate analysis, we really need to know how many short passes were thrown to Reynolds, Lenz, Horne, and Darks. Because they were thrown longer passes, their yard/catch averages could be skewed up even though they may have been thrown a significant number of short passes.

I agree, but I don't have that information - need game film and to generate my own data set for that. I don't have game film or the time. I'm just working with what I can find online.

If I did the math right, using your table and the data above, that group of 6 averaged 7.2 yards/catch with a 70% completion rate. Given the small number of passes thrown to Johnson and Woody (who are primarily running backs), I question whether they should be included in the analysis. If those two are taken out, the remaining 4 average 7.1 yards/catch at 68%.

Again, I don't disagree and I debated whether or not to include them. I thought I'd include them for completeness, but you're right they just weren't thrown to enough. Anyway, the question is really regarding WR not RB.

You conclusion seems to be those are good completion percentages for a short pass, thus there was minimal congestion on the routes. I would contend that 68%-70% completion rate for a short pass like that is not really that good. OSU and BU were hitting 72+% on all passes, and TT was hitting 68% on all passes.

I wasn't meaning that there wasn't congestion - I actually meant to say that those players were able to catch the ball while in the congested area. I think that anything close to or over 70% completion rate for a receiver is pretty darn good as a general rule - with all that goes into completing a pass in a game, anybody that can catch 70+% of the passes thrown to them is doing well in my opinion. I agree that RB's should catch almost all of their passes since they are usually check-downs that are uncovered and not far from the QB, but most receivers aren't used in that manner so they have a different criteria for success in my opinion.

Furthermore, the context of the pass has to be taken into account. For example, was the pass thrown on third and short, or was the pass thrown on third and long? Was the expectation that there should be YAC? For the case of third and long, even though a short pass was completed, if a first down is not achieved, the pass is not really a successful pass if it was expected to gain enough YAC to obtain the first down. Then one needs to ask if the lack of YAC was due to a congested area, inadequte skills by the receiver, etc.

There is a website (FootballOutsiders.com) that does some situational type of analysis. They use a metric called Success Rate, and they break it down by total offense, rushing offense and passing offense (same thing for defense). Basically they ask "Was the play a success?" with success being defined as 1) half the necessary yardage on 1st down, 2) 70% of the necessary yardage on 2nd down and 3) 100% of the necessary yardage on 3rd and 4th down. They divide the number of successful plays by the total plays and then rank the teams. As far as I know they don't do individual player analysis and I haven't taken the time to do it myself.

There's also a stat called Expected Points (AdvancedNFLStats.com), which is based on field position - getting closer to the endzone increases your Expected Points - so it accounts for game situation a little bit. You can also calculate an Expected Points Added for each player based on how many yards the gain or lose. The final situational evaluation I'm aware of is Win Probability which is the likelihood of winning the current in-process game based on field position, score margin and time remaining. Again, you can calculate a Win Probability Added for each player as they alter the team's Win Probability on each play. However, as far as I know the baseline data has only ever been generated for the NFL and I don't have the data or time to do that for BCS schools on my own.

 

[Cycsk]

Do you really think, based on his hiring track record that Rhoads just thought "well, ****. Court's a nice guy. Let's give him the job"?

There are plenty of reasons in this thread. He's not the sexy hire we all were hoping for, but he's had success as a position coach, knows the system the head coach wants to run, has been a good recruiter, sets a precedent of hard work/good results being rewarded under Paul Rhoads, and has had his hands in pretty much every part of the offense over the years.

Given the publicity we've gotten in the past couple years, I have no doubt that we could have hired the "next Tom Herman" or a guy like Tony Franklin. Rhoads made this decision for a reason, and it wasn't because he couldn't get anyone outside of the program.

It seems that there are probably different kinds of Offensive Coordinators. Some Head Coaches might hire an OC to import an offense. I don't think that is what Rhoads wants. He probably wanted a different kind of OC, namely, one who will implement the offense he wants and work with players to embrace it. Messingham seems like he probably this kind of coach. Others have egos where the offense needs to be "theirs." Rhoads knows that Messingham is going to embrace the offense that they already have.

Whether this is a good hire depends upon whether Rhoads' offense is good or not. And it depends on whether Messingham can recruit the right players and keep them in the system. The more I think about both of these, the more I like the hire.

 

[megamanxzero35]

@_@ at you people.

 

[ISUAgronomist]

@_@ at you people.

 

[CykoAGR]

I've not seen "drops" listed anywhere. Part of the problem with something like drops is that it is pretty subjective.

Reynolds had 81 targets and was the target on 22% of ISU's passes. I looked at the 2010 receivers who had 60 - 100 targets and were targeted 15% - 29% of the time. That group of receivers had an average catch rate of 60.6% (stdev 8.9%) - Reynolds 50.6% catch rate is the 13th percentile in that group. The average yards/target was 8.2 yards (stdev 2.3 yards) - Reynolds 8.09 in in the 48th percentile of that group.

I agree that deeper passes are harder to complete than short passes. Reynolds' yards/catch was good (16.2 ypc), so it seems like most of the passes he caught were downfield. Maybe he wasn't used on enough short routes - if DB's had to watch for him breaking into a short route, they wouldn't be able to drop so quickly. That slight hesitation to drop back might have helped him get seperation when he did go deep.

I know there were a number of uncatchable screen passes too, so that also effects Horne's, West's and White's stats. I have to assume that the uncatchable balls were evenly distributed to all receivers. That might not have been the case, but it seems like a reasonable assumption.

And there's nothing wrong with questioning the numbers I post. Either I find out I did something wrong and fix it, or everybody learns something. It's a win-win.

I wasn't questioning as much as asking for my own info. You obviously are into stats and this was one that I could never find. Probably for the subjective reason that you mentioned.

Good stuff keep it up

 

[FootballinTexas]

Good OC's do not simply design and call plays. Usually this guy is the QB coach at this level and their main responsibility is teaching the "why", "when", and "how" of the execution part of the play. Every guy that has the possibility of touching the football on given plays should know defensive tendencies on certain down and distances. In my observations over the past few years, we have lacked in player knowledge of tendencies. That's teaching. We have lacked in player execution. That's coaching.
So, from what I know about Mess, he knows this offense very well. He knows the players and what CPR wants to see. That gave him advantage in getting this job. But, the qualities that truly put him over the top is his ability to teach. Now, I still think we lack some coaching. The WR's need to do a better job of getting open on passes and stalk blocking on runs. I know Mess has coached those things but hard-headed players limit execution. IMO, that's why CPR is taking his time on a WR coach. It needs to be someway willing to work within Mess's philosophy and is not afraid to keep a guy on the bench when he's not doing his job!

 

[bigsag]

Good OC's do not simply design and call plays. Usually this guy is the QB coach at this level and their main responsibility is teaching the "why", "when", and "how" of the execution part of the play. Every guy that has the possibility of touching the football on given plays should know defensive tendencies on certain down and distances. In my observations over the past few years, we have lacked in player knowledge of tendencies. That's teaching. We have lacked in player execution. That's coaching.
So, from what I know about Mess, he knows this offense very well. He knows the players and what CPR wants to see. That gave him advantage in getting this job. But, the qualities that truly put him over the top is his ability to teach. Now, I still think we lack some coaching. The WR's need to do a better job of getting open on passes and stalk blocking on runs. I know Mess has coached those things but hard-headed players limit execution. IMO, that's why CPR is taking his time on a WR coach. It needs to be someway willing to work within Mess's philosophy and is not afraid to keep a guy on the bench when he's not doing his job!

Good comments.... Thanks for sharing your opinion.

 

[BACyclone]

New Offensive Coordinator - Coach Courtney Messingham.mov - YouTube

Thanks for posting that video, Clones21.

You know at first when I read the byline of the article, I was underwhelmed like I guess most fans would be -- of course you want ISU to go out and get some incredible hire, in a way like it was hiring Tom Herman.

But to be honest I struggled with seeing that as a strategy. How can you go out and hire someone like that, when Coach Rhoads openly said the system would not change? That's a bit more difficult.

Further from a program standpoint, I don't think this is just about internal politics but I like that Coach Rhoads has people on his staff as position coaches who he is either 1) comfortable promoting upwards and/or 2) grooming them to be promoted upwards. That is just good leadership from Coach Rhoads.

Finally when I read Coach Messingham's resume -- sure he doesn't have a lot of high-major experience, but my goodness he has quite a breadth of experience at playing AND coaching. He was a QB himself for crying out loud! I can't say I knew that before now. He has the roots, the background, and I think the *attitude* that fits the program that Coach Rhoads is developing at Iowa State.

Overall after some reflection, I like the hire. It makes too much sense. I don't think there is any reason to think Coach Messingham cannot be successful at this. Coach Herman installed an offensive system we can win with here, and Coach Rhoads and now Coach Messingham are going to keep developing it according to the players we are able to recruit and sign.

 

[isugcs]

Thanks for posting that video, Clones21.

You know at first when I read the byline of the article, I was underwhelmed like I guess most fans would be -- of course you want ISU to go out and get some incredible hire, in a way like it was hiring Tom Herman.

But to be honest I struggled with seeing that as a strategy. How can you go out and hire someone like that, when Coach Rhoads openly said the system would not change? That's a bit more difficult.

Further from a program standpoint, I don't think this is just about internal politics but I like that Coach Rhoads has people on his staff as position coaches who he is either 1) comfortable promoting upwards and/or 2) grooming them to be promoted upwards. That is just good leadership from Coach Rhoads.

Finally when I read Coach Messingham's resume -- sure he doesn't have a lot of high-major experience, but my goodness he has quite a breadth of experience at playing AND coaching. He was a QB himself for crying out loud! I can't say I knew that before now. He has the roots, the background, and I think the *attitude* that fits the program that Coach Rhoads is developing at Iowa State.

Overall after some reflection, I like the hire. It makes too much sense. I don't think there is any reason to think Coach Messingham cannot be successful at this. Coach Herman installed an offensive system we can win with here, and Coach Rhoads and now Coach Messingham are going to keep developing it according to the players we are able to recruit and sign.

I concur. This is just yet another shrewd move by CPR. MESS is a known quantity to CPR and he is confident in his vision for the offense. He's a teacher and an Iowan. This hire is very much in line with CPR's philosophy.

 

[isuforlife]

I concur. This is just yet another shrewd move by CPR. MESS is a known quantity to CPR and he is confident in his vision for the offense. He's a teacher and an Iowan. This hire is very much in line with CPR's philosophy.

so being an Iowan makes him a good coach?:skeptical:

 

[RustShack]

so being an Iowan makes him a good coach?:skeptical:

It increases the chances of him being All In and not bailing. CPR could easily get a better job, but he loves ISU and being close to all his family. Obviously being from Iowa doesn't mean Mess is here forever, but it increases the chances of him wanting to stick around.. especially if hes as good as CPR thinks and helps take ISU to the next level.

 

[Stormin]

so being an Iowan makes him a good coach?:skeptical:

No. But Mess has done a great job at every job he has been given. I have no problem with giving him a chance to be the OC. Mess seems to be a great teacher. Our Special Teams have been pretty special in their execution in some difficult situations. No doubt that Mess is All IN. I actually think that Mess will field a much better Offense than we saw under Herman. Just a hunch.

 

[cybsball20]

No. But Mess has done a great job at every job he has been given. .

Except for his previous stints as an OC.

 

[Al_4_State]

Except for his previous stints as an OC.

I think Stormin meant at ISU.

 

[CP44]

Except for his previous stints as an OC.

Paul Rhoads wasn't his boss for his previous stints :yes:

 

[bosco]

Except for his previous stints as an OC.

I don't know if Mess will work out at OC but there are a few examples of highly successful coaches who didn't "work out" in their first stints.

Gene Chizik is just one that comes to mind.

 

[RustShack]

Except for his previous stints as an OC.

So he got promoted to HC by being a bad OC?