https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JU...une13.html
Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (12) 32
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
(06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (120)
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
Did he not get the information on Cincinnati?
(06-15-2017 12:32 PM)rosewater Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (120)
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
Did he not get the information on Cincinnati?
Apparently...on my very quick and rough count we've got 45.
My bad. Fixed along with adding a link to the blog.
(06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JU...une13.html
Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (12) 32
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
Considering UCFs o line performance since 2014 it might be better that we just start over
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using
CSNbbs mobile app
Tulsa's O line should be a human steam roller this season.
(06-15-2017 01:13 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote: [ -> ]Tulsa's O line should be a human steam roller this season.
That is an awesome number of returning starts
(06-15-2017 12:51 PM)Kruciff Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JU...une13.html
Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (12) 32
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
Considering UCFs o line performance since 2014 it might be better that we just start over
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using CSNbbs mobile app
They're not getting any worse. We have been young the last few years on the line and its one of the toughest positions to play early in your college career. Injuries to key players and a lack of depth didn't help either. I expect a big improvement this year.
(06-15-2017 01:19 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017 01:13 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote: [ -> ]Tulsa's O line should be a human steam roller this season.
That is an awesome number of returning starts
It's not just the starts for Tulsa. It's the production and the depth too. They produced two of the top running backs in the nation last season and they managed to keep Dane Evans pretty clean despite his deficiencies scrambling. Add that to the fact that we're really confident in the backups as well and I think the online should take over games at times next season. DL's will be gassed.
Huh.
80 returning starts for SMU. Better than I had thought, although half of those probably come from Evan Brown alone.
Thanks for the stat.
Much better than I thought for Temple too. Excited about R-FR Matt Hennessy, the next great Temple offensive lineman.
(06-15-2017 01:22 PM)zfred12 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017 12:51 PM)Kruciff Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JU...une13.html
Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (12) 32
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
Considering UCFs o line performance since 2014 it might be better that we just start over
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using CSNbbs mobile app
They're not getting any worse. We have been young the last few years on the line and its one of the toughest positions to play early in your college career. Injuries to key players and a lack of depth didn't help either. I expect a big improvement this year.
Doesn't help that we lost our highest touted O-line commit from last year.
We still have to wait a year for Parker Boudreaux, and unless we see a newcomer make unprecedented strides, depth will continue to be our bane. Lack of depth can clearly be attributed to our second half season slump, almost coincidentally to when Hudanick went down.
I didn't see any freshman recruit that implied they could start right away, and the only remaining Oline recruit from 2016 is Boman Swanson (excluding the already starting Jordan Johnson, who's now Center).
I'm still very worried because it looks like best case scenario, we're still a year away.
(06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JU...une13.html
Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (12) 32
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
I'd be interested to see these stats going into last year, to see how they line up with final standings. i.e. I don't have the attention span to wait until after this season to see if the stat equates to wins.
(06-16-2017 07:55 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JU...une13.html
Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (12) 32
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
I'd be interested to see these stats going into last year, to see how they line up with final standings. i.e. I don't have the attention span to wait until after this season to see if the stat equates to wins.
A better indicator of this stat would be last years returning o line starts and offensive production. You could have an awesome o line but lose games because your defense sucks. I don't have time to break it down or analyze the info but you could use the two links below to take a look. Obviously there are outliers both ways and circumstances where o line previous starts don't play a factor.
https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2016/JU...une13.html
http://www.espn.com/college-football/sta...stat/total
(06-16-2017 09:30 AM)zfred12 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 07:55 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JU...une13.html
Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (12) 32
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
I'd be interested to see these stats going into last year, to see how they line up with final standings. i.e. I don't have the attention span to wait until after this season to see if the stat equates to wins.
A better indicator of this stat would be last years returning o line starts and offensive production. You could have an awesome o line but lose games because your defense sucks. I don't have time to break it down or analyze the info but you could use the two links below to take a look. Obviously there are outliers both ways and circumstances where o line previous starts don't play a factor.
https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2016/JU...une13.html
http://www.espn.com/college-football/sta...stat/total
That's pretty interesting. Just comparing the Oklahoma schools you get:
# of Starts Ranking
10. Oklahoma St.
81. Tulsa
113. Oklahoma
Total Offense Ranking
3. Oklahoma
6. Tulsa
14. Oklahoma St.
One could say talent and injuries probably has more to do with offensive production than returning starts does.
(06-16-2017 11:55 AM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 09:30 AM)zfred12 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 07:55 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JU...une13.html
Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (12) 32
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
I'd be interested to see these stats going into last year, to see how they line up with final standings. i.e. I don't have the attention span to wait until after this season to see if the stat equates to wins.
A better indicator of this stat would be last years returning o line starts and offensive production. You could have an awesome o line but lose games because your defense sucks. I don't have time to break it down or analyze the info but you could use the two links below to take a look. Obviously there are outliers both ways and circumstances where o line previous starts don't play a factor.
https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2016/JU...une13.html
http://www.espn.com/college-football/sta...stat/total
That's pretty interesting. Just comparing the Oklahoma schools you get:
# of Starts Ranking
10. Oklahoma St.
81. Tulsa
113. Oklahoma
Total Offense Ranking
3. Oklahoma
6. Tulsa
14. Oklahoma St.
One could say talent and injuries probably has more to do with offensive production than returning starts does.
Aaaaand there we go.
Championships are won in the trenches. In the "predict the record" thread I said Memphis would beat UCF for the AAC title, so I am not surprised to see them #1 and #2 on this list.
(06-16-2017 12:33 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 11:55 AM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 09:30 AM)zfred12 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 07:55 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017 12:27 PM)coogrfan Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2017/JU...une13.html
Nat'l rank School(conf rank) Career starts
4. MEMPHIS (1) 103
5. UCF (2) 101
13. TULSA (3) 91
22. HOUSTON (4) 86
30. SMU (5) 80
57. UCONN (6) 68
72. TEMPLE (7) 61
93. ECU (8) 46
108. USF (9) 40
115. TULANE (10) 37
116. NAVY (11) 36
119. CINCINNATI (12) 32
Discuss. Note that a low ranking is not always fatal. Case in point: Navy, who entered last season dead last in the country.
I'd be interested to see these stats going into last year, to see how they line up with final standings. i.e. I don't have the attention span to wait until after this season to see if the stat equates to wins.
A better indicator of this stat would be last years returning o line starts and offensive production. You could have an awesome o line but lose games because your defense sucks. I don't have time to break it down or analyze the info but you could use the two links below to take a look. Obviously there are outliers both ways and circumstances where o line previous starts don't play a factor.
https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2016/JU...une13.html
http://www.espn.com/college-football/sta...stat/total
That's pretty interesting. Just comparing the Oklahoma schools you get:
# of Starts Ranking
10. Oklahoma St.
81. Tulsa
113. Oklahoma
Total Offense Ranking
3. Oklahoma
6. Tulsa
14. Oklahoma St.
One could say talent and injuries probably has more to do with offensive production than returning starts does.
Aaaaand there we go.
Navy in 2016:
OL Starts returning #128, dead last
Total yards #23
Points per game #20
Rushing yards per game #4
(06-16-2017 01:22 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 12:33 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 11:55 AM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 09:30 AM)zfred12 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017 07:55 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote: [ -> ]I'd be interested to see these stats going into last year, to see how they line up with final standings. i.e. I don't have the attention span to wait until after this season to see if the stat equates to wins.
A better indicator of this stat would be last years returning o line starts and offensive production. You could have an awesome o line but lose games because your defense sucks. I don't have time to break it down or analyze the info but you could use the two links below to take a look. Obviously there are outliers both ways and circumstances where o line previous starts don't play a factor.
https://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2016/JU...une13.html
http://www.espn.com/college-football/sta...stat/total
That's pretty interesting. Just comparing the Oklahoma schools you get:
# of Starts Ranking
10. Oklahoma St.
81. Tulsa
113. Oklahoma
Total Offense Ranking
3. Oklahoma
6. Tulsa
14. Oklahoma St.
One could say talent and injuries probably has more to do with offensive production than returning starts does.
Aaaaand there we go.
Navy in 2016:
OL Starts returning #128, dead last
Total yards #23
Points per game #20
Rushing yards per game #4
Yeah. I feel like the conventional wisdom, that a group of mediocre linemen that have been playing together for years is better than a group of great linemen on their first day, makes sense in the NFL, but not necessarily in college ball. The skill level is much more consistent in the NFL.
In college, there is a big disparity between good, mediocre, and terrible O-linemen. Sometimes, it's better to get the new guys in if they are better.
In the preseason Athlon AAC All Conference 2016 team, Navy had no offensive linemen on the four deep teams. In the final AAC All Conference team, Navy had one 1st team, two 2nd team, and one Honorable mention.