Me thinks Mad Max is bigger than 6'3"-214.

I watched the games last year, too, and there's no question in my mind that Irons graded out lower than AJ or Daz, and that it wasn't close. It has nothing to do with saying that the coaches are infallible, and everything to do with what I saw on the field. Sure, he had some nice runs late in a couple games, against scrub defenses, and that's all good, and shows his future potential. Bo Hardy had a couple nice runs, too, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't have been 5th string.

The fact is that when he was playing early in games, against first string defenses, Irons performed worse than either AJ or Daz. The numbers clearly show that. That doesn't mean that he won't have improved substantially by this fall. I still believe he has a ton of talent, and I'm hoping that he can harness that talent, and earn his way to the top this fall.

His hypothetical was merely a strawman, of course, but it is certainly true that second teamers often think they should be starting. That's normal, and a good thing. That's why coaches have systems for grading players, so that the choices don't appear arbitrary. That way players all know what they need to improve at in order to move up.

To me that's actually good news. The receivers, we know who they are, and what they can do, but the defensive backs are all new. If the new defensive backs are able to stick with our receivers, they must be pretty good, so that answers my biggest defensive concern.

My only two defensive questions for 2016 were the backup linebackers and the all new defensive backs. Early indications are that neither will be a problem.

Putting it another way, in scrimmages you never are quite sure where you are. Is the offense good and the defense better? Or is the defense bad, and the offense worse? In this case I have a pretty good idea what to expect from the receivers, so I will judge the defensive backs based on my knowledge of the receivers. In the case of the offensive line versus the defensive line, I have a pretty good idea what to expect from the defensive line, so I will use that to judge the offensive line.

"....maybe it wasn't just..." What "it?"

From what I hear, it is, and was not about what the coaches "know", but what he did not "know". Others in this thread have heard the same. There are challenges coming from a small high school that has a limited set of plays and competes against poor competition. It takes a time to learn to play the game at the college level. Not having a full grasp can put others in harms way. My understanding is that he is now getting there and will see the field often, and ahead of most (if not all) next year.

While it's true that he had a good game against Ball State's first defense, that game was an outlier. To get some more hard data for you, I analyzed the play by play for games in which he played early, those being Miami, BG, Buffalo, and Ball State. I treated as contested time the entire first half, and the first half of the third quarter. The data for the various running backs in this time was:
Daz 36 carries, 162 yards, 4.5 yards/carry
AJ 32 carries, 131 yards, 4.09 yards/carry
Irons 12 carries, 48 yards, 4.08 yards/carry
White 2 carries, 8 yards, 4.0 yards/carry
Brown 0 carries, 28 yards, 3.11 yards/carry

What about success rate? If you define a run of 4 yards or more as a success, and a run for <4 yards, but which is a TD as a success, the success rates were:
Daz - 16/36 44.4%
AJ - 18/32 56.3%
Irons - 6/12 50.0%
White - 1/2 50%
Brown - 4/9 44.4%

This data is fair because it's the various backs, all running against the stame defenses, with the same plays and the same offensive line. Based on this data, Daz should probably have been the starter based on the most yards/carry, while AJ should have been ahead of Irons based on his higher success rate. If someone wants to argue that AJ's high success rate more than offset Daz's higher yards/carry, and that AJ should actually have been the starter, I wouldn't have an issue with that opinion.

Note one additional thing that is very, very important: Irons had a very good game against Ball State, a game that substantially boosted his data. Prior to Ball State, Irons had 7 carries against first team defenses for an average of 2.42/carry and had a success rate of 2/7, or 28.6%. That data placed him firmly in last among the running backs prior to the Ball State game. Against Ball State he averaged 6.4 yards/carry, with a 60% success rate. The Ball State game was really the first time he really played well against a first team defense, and his performance would probably have earned him more playing time, except that, unfortunately, he got hurt, and was unable to play in the games that came after that, NIU, and the bowl.

On the topic of limiting playtime of talented freshmen running backs:

I'm still waiting for the allens' and Monroes' of the world to explain why the black football coach at Stanford allowed this to happen in 2014:

Stanford RBs, 2014:

ATTs: rushing attempts
YPC: yards per attempt

#1 135 ATTs 4.5 YPC (black)
#2 66 ATTs 5.0 YPC (black)
#3 59 ATTs 5.3 YPC (black)
#4 42 ATTs 7.1 YPC (white freshman running back, 2015 heisman trophy finalist as a sophomore)

Again, in their infinite wisdom, none of the allens' or Monroes' of the world have addressed this stated phenomenon. I would like their feedback.

I'm not by any means suggesting Stanford's head coach is racist.

I do however expect the allens' and Monroes' opinions on coaching Ohio football are mostly transferable to coaching Stanford football through a parallel situation (that literally happened).

NOTE: Maleek Irons is not currently a heisman finalist

Situation, your data tells me nothing. To be comparable you have to only look at carries in times when it matters, against the other team's first string defense. Also, in evaluating runs you want to see two things. The first is a high average yards per carry, but perhaps more important is a high success rate, where a success is defined as four yards or more, or a first down or TD.

Thus a back that gets four carries, all for 8 yards is more valuable than one that gets four carries, three for no gain, and the other for 32 yards. Those 8 yard plays keep the chains moving, and keep the drive alive, while the no gain plays force you into passing situations, and risk the drive.

Are all of you who have traces of inside info ('from what I hear') really that blind to the inherent bias in that?

Throw up all the statistical analysis you want.

But, first, football is not that complicated. Heck, no sports are. If you have a guy who physically outperforms, you play him. Especially when 1) there's no reason to believe that there are character issues (if there are, you don't even put him or her in uniform) and 2) your team is really mediocre as evidenced by really significant losses against reallly mediocre teams.

I suggest that you SFB's go back and read the threads after each of the three 'stank' games of last year. You'll see a log of anger by people who get the magnitude of the stanks and who are not biased for reverence for Solich and staff.

Y'know, the same people who'd be going nuts for big wins (see the huge threads after hoops MAC title and NCAA wins) if we footballed up some big wins--because they're free of the coaching-staff-is-infallible bias.

You do it: You support mediocre, you put up mediocre argument.


Of course, you can go with all the predictions about how great we're going to be..because we all know that predictions = reality.

Not throwing up any stats, but as you know through PMs my comment has been presented. It has been further communicated by others. Again, he is said to have accelerated and is now on a solid track to be where you wish him to be come fall.

To close, yes games are simple, mastering them is not. At the college level, you get in a situation where raw talent is only part of the requirement.

On Christian McCaffery's 43rd carry he started his heisman campaign. It took him one year of eligibility to get there.

allen and Monroe,

You both have these God given gifts.

Yet you use these powers only to address the hypothetical Maleek Irons situation and not the literal Christian McCaffery situation.

#sharethewealth

#shinethelight