PDA

View Full Version : DBR Podcast #124 - Duke Football Report



blazindw
09-03-2018, 09:07 PM
That's right, Episode 124 (https://soundcloud.com/dbrpodcast/dbr-podcast-124-football-is-here) is all about the footbaw! On this one, we recap DukeGang's victory in Week 1 against Army and preview the upcoming game against Northwestern. Parting shots and the Duke Band take us home!

0:00 Thanks BC!

0:30 Jason is the host and he has no idea what he is doing. Luckily, Sam is there to save him.

2:05 We are all about football right now. Our recap of the Duke-Army game begins with Jason asking Sam about the running game of Brittain Brown.

4:00 Time to talk about the turnovers and how they change the complexion of a game.

6:50 Donald tells us about the impressive Duke D.

8:25 Jason talks about Daniel Jones’ super efficient game.

12:10 Jason with a quick shout-out to the new Duke offensive line.

13:20 Donald says he’s glad we played a legit opponent to start the season.

14:45 Byrd Campbell has a few words about Duke Football and Coach Cut.

16:00 Previewing Northwestern, Sam starts by talking about the QB shuffle.

20:25 Jason corrects Sam about Northwestern’s winning streak which diverts us into a conversation about Alabama.

21:35 Donald’s key to the NW game – defense against the run. Jason thinks the key is turnovers.

23:55 Parting Shots- Donald on Serena William’s fashion sense.

25:40 Parting Shots – Sam talks tailgating at Duke.

27:20 Parting Shots – Jason talks about the end of the RPI and the rise of the NET.

33:50 Goodbye and don’t forget to rate us and reach out to us!

OldPhiKap
09-03-2018, 09:09 PM
Hell yeah!!!! Look forward to listening to this tomorrow to and from work.

Thanks in advance, guys!

OZZIE4DUKE
09-04-2018, 08:15 AM
Nice meeting you, Sam. Can’t wait to listen to your review of our tailgate! See you at the VT game?

UrinalCake
09-04-2018, 11:50 AM
Great pod! I like having dedicated episodes for football rather than splitting them in half. In Jason's parting thoughts he posed the question of whether the NCAA's metric should have the goal of evaluating a team's entire season OR whether the goal should be to evaluate where the team is at the current moment in time. This is basically the difference between qualitative metrics and predictive metrics. Qualitative metrics (the old RPI, KPI, and SOR) look at the team's entire season and come up with a number defining how well they did. Predictive metrics (BPI, Pomeroy, Sagarin) try to project how well a team will do moving forward. It takes into account things like "luck" that would indicate why past results would differ from future results.

I heard a great explanation on another podcast (sorry, can't recall which one it was). Imagine the scenario where team A is trailing team B by one point and they are down to their final possession. Team A puts up a shot and as the ball is in the air time expires. At this point there are two possible outcomes - either the shot goes in or it doesn't. For the qualitative metrics, there is a huge difference in whether or not that shot goes in, as it obviously determines the difference between winning or losing the game. And a team's record is the ultimate result that the metric cares about. But for the predictive metrics, whether or not that one shot goes in is not any more meaningful than whether some other shot went in at any other point in the game. It's just two points, and every point counts the same. It's an interesting thought exercise to ask yourself how much value SHOULD be placed on that shot going in when evaluating a team in preparation for the tournament.

Under the previous system, all six of the above metrics (three qualitative, three predictive) were included on each team's "Team Sheet" that the selection committee uses in seeding the tournament. But only the RPI was used in determining the quadrant records, so it was clearly deemed the most important. The new NET metric has not been disclosed, but based on their description of the use of artificial intelligence, I would assume it has some predictive components. For a team like Duke I honestly don't think it will make a huge difference. But one of the goals was to eliminate "outliers" in the RPI, so we'll have to wait and see as we approach February and March if there are some teams that look good under NET but wouldn't have looked good under the RPI, or vice versa (interestingly, the RPI was the only one of the six previous metrics whose formula was actually made public, so if anybody wants to they could apply it to teams this coming season).

JasonEvans
09-04-2018, 02:24 PM
In Jason's parting thoughts he posed the question of whether the NCAA's metric should have the goal of evaluating a team's entire season OR whether the goal should be to evaluate where the team is at the current moment in time. This is basically the difference between qualitative metrics and predictive metrics. Qualitative metrics (the old RPI, KPI, and SOR) look at the team's entire season and come up with a number defining how well they did. Predictive metrics (BPI, Pomeroy, Sagarin) try to project how well a team will do moving forward. It takes into account things like "luck" that would indicate why past results would differ from future results.

I'm so glad you brought this up. I briefly said on the pod that I am fine with "look at the whole season" versus "look at how we think they will do over the next few weeks" as a way of picking teams for the tournament. I do think games played in November and December should have some meaning. The ACC routinely plays games in December and they count in the standings the same as a game played in late February or early March. I have no problem with that and am fine with the NCAA selection committee feeling the same.

Now, that said I know it creates potential problems. Lets say a team posts a great record through the end of January but then 3 starters and 2 key subs are declared ineligible for cheating on tests. Clearly, that team is not going to be nearly as good without those players. I suppose I am fine with the committee making adjustments in cases like that or when there has been a significant injury. I don't think there is any perfect system, but would love to hear how others feel about this issue.

-Jason "personally, I think whether the shot goes in does matter... I get that efficiency is little affected, but the goal is to win and there should be some recognition of the value of Ws versus Ls" Evans

Bob Green
09-04-2018, 04:22 PM
You guys did an excellent job talking Duke football. I enjoyed listening but, of course, a verbose fellow like myself has to make a couple of observations:

1. Aaron Young did not come out of nowhere. No argument Friday night was his best performance to date; however, he has made an impact previously:

a. Two years ago, as a redshirt freshman, in a 13-6 win over Army in a hurricane, Duke scored two touchdowns with Aaron Young accounting for one on a 22 yard touchdown reception. He also had three receptions for 27 yards and a touchdown against Miami.
b. Last year, as a redshirt sophomore, Young had a fast start with five receptions for 89 yards including a 54 yard touchdown against NCCU. The next week Young recorded three receptions for 43 yards against Northwestern. Then he disappeared for a bunch of games before reappearing with three receptions for 32 yards against Army and three receptions for 40 yards against Wake Forest. I've no idea if he was banged up mid-season or just a victim of the general offensive swoon.

Young is a big, physical receiver with good hands and speed (those are Coach Cutcliffe's words) so it is easy to see how he won a spot in the starting line-up. Now he needs to demonstrate consistency.

2. Thank you for the positive commentary on the offensive line. I stated in the Off Season Thread that I am more bullish on the offensive line than the typical Duke fan as I believe they will prove to be a team strength this season. Again, consistency is the key.

Thanks for the football podcast guys! Please keep up the hard work you all are doing a great job. :cool: