Duke Football 2021

[budwom]

I just finished listening to the Coach Faris interview and recommend everyone give it a listen. He emphasized he is young and aggressive and expects to be aggressive calling plays. Coach Faris will be the offensive coordinator up in the box this season. He discusses depth extensively talking about position battles on the offensive line both inside and out. In response to a question, Coach Faris acknowledged Jack Wohlabaugh at center is critical. He also commented on the depth at wide receiver.

Jim Sumner has an article on turnovers posted on the front page. His normal excellent work:

https://www.dukebasketballreport.com...cro-durant-acc

We'll see how it goes. Someone aggressive calling plays would be nice...but it seems that every time I get my hopes up concerning the offense, I realize we're stilling running the same, fairly predictable system. I want so much to be wrong.

[sagegrouse]

Speaking of turnovers.

For those of you who don't read the front page.

https://www.dukebasketballreport.com...cro-durant-acc

This fascinating (terrifying?) article deserves a thorough read by the DBR posters and a money quote:

There were 127 teams playing FBS football last season. Duke ranked 127th in turnovers, with 39. Georgia Tech and Mississippi State tied for 125th, with 25.

Let me restate this -- we had 50 percent more turnovers than either of the next two worse teams in college football! Looks like a place to start improvement.

[Bob Green]

We'll see how it goes. Someone aggressive calling plays would be nice...but it seems that every time I get my hopes up concerning the offense, I realize we're stilling running the same, fairly predictable system. I want so much to be wrong.

I believe we are all in the “show me” frame of mind.

[hustleplays]

This fascinating (terrifying?) article deserves a thorough read by the DBR posters and a money quote:



Let me restate this -- we had 50 percent more turnovers than either of the next two worse teams in college football! Looks like a place to start improvement.

I always appreciate Jim S's excellent work, including his article on turnovers being the clear [sounds like #1] focus for the team.

Should reducing turnovers be our #1 focus? I think I understand how critical turnovers are in football. They are often decisive. Over a season, a winning team must win the turnover battle.

But what causes turnovers? Sure, there are specific fundamentals to focus on for running backs to maintain ball security. And for QBs not to throw to the wrong spot/person. Etc., etc. But turnovers are symptoms, "lagging indicators" in finance parlance. When play calling is numbingly predictable and/or the OL is not doing its job, running backs are stopped before the line of scrimmage, try too hard to get an extra yard, and get fatigued if they have to run too much. QBs throw to the wrong spot/person for a variety of reasons, including having to rush the throw, routes not being run accurately, separation not being achieved and receivers not fighting for the ball.

Also, we all watched some inscrutable play calling and some knuckle-head plays. Were those due to a lack of focus on reducing turnovers? Not buying it.

Was last year's team's horrific turnover stats primarily due to a lack of focus on reducing turnovers or was it due to a variety of deficiencies that led to too many turnovers?

For a team that doesn't appear to have any systemic talent advantage, I can understand why Cutcliffe and staff decided to focus on reducing turnovers. Teams that believe they have inherent strengths and competitive advantages focus on those. Reducing mistakes is not the #1 focus for winning teams.

[DoubleBlue]

For a team that doesn't appear to have any systemic talent advantage, I can understand why Cutcliffe and staff decided to focus on reducing turnovers. Teams that believe they have inherent strengths and competitive advantages focus on those. Reducing mistakes is not the #1 focus for winning teams.

Very good analysis. Turnovers are the symptom and not the cause. Talent alone is not the cause since many teams do not have superior talent. So it is most likely a systematic deficiency... lack of organization, lack of execution, lack of game planning, etc.

Preventing turnovers as a goal seems backwards. Psychologically, its always better to use a positive term, such as 'ball security' not 'don't fumble', which could make players tight and indecisive.

Its probably a lack of fundamentals as a team, which was worsened by the pandemic-induced schedule. But all teams had to deal with that, to varying degrees. Maybe Duke has coddled their athletes too much since the school tries to be on the leading edge of the medical environment.

[sagegrouse]

Jeff Faris has big plans for 2021 play-calling. Per Jim Sumner. Definitely worth a read.

[Dr. Maturin]

Before every game Cut has the team recite General Neyland's game maxims. The first of them is: "The team that makes the fewest mistakes will win."

That is perhaps an exaggeration. But when Cut's teams were winning, it often came down to the "hidden yardage" on the margins: field position, penalties, and yes, turnovers. We realize most Duke teams aren't going to line up and smash the opposition. A disciplined, well-coached team can play above its talent level. For various reasons, that formula has failed over the last two years. Turnovers are the biggest culprit, as our special teams were excellent in 2020 and should be again this fall.

The good news is that you often see huge swings in turnover margin from year to year. Here are a few of examples from recent years: In 2017, Syracuse was -12 in TO, which was 123th in the country. The next year, they were +13 (5th). In 2018, Maryland was +10 in TO (15th). In 2019, they were -5(97th). In 2019, Northwestern was -10 in TO (121st). In 2020, they were +4 (36th). In 2018, Wake was -3 (85th). In 2019, they were +8 (19th). There's no reason Duke can't make a similar turnaround. I will take much better decision-making from our QB, as well as other players, plus some luck.

[Acymetric]

The good news is that you often see huge swings in turnover margin from year to year. Here are a few of examples from recent years: In 2017, Syracuse was -12 in TO, which was 123th in the country. The next year, they were +13 (5th). In 2018, Maryland was +10 in TO (15th). In 2019, they were -5(97th). In 2019, Northwestern was -10 in TO (121st). In 2020, they were +4 (36th). In 2018, Wake was -3 (85th). In 2019, they were +8 (19th). There's no reason Duke can't make a similar turnaround. I will take much better decision-making from our QB, as well as other players, plus some luck.

That's what everyone was saying last offseason...and, well...

[Nepos]

Its probably a lack of fundamentals as a team, which was worsened by the pandemic-induced schedule. But all teams had to deal with that, to varying degrees. Maybe Duke has coddled their athletes too much since the school tries to be on the leading edge of the medical environment.

If the last sentence was adjusted to the following, it would match my thoughts: Maybe Duke, as a national leader in public health and medicine with a large hospital on campus, took more significant steps than most others to protect their athletes, coaches, staff, students, and community, and proceeded cautiously when weighing the need to help prevent the rapid spread of a pandemic disease against the need for entertainment. I most consistently follow four men's teams: basketball, soccer, lacrosse and football. All four looked less cohesive and fundamentally sound than they have in the recent past, and to my eyes the extent of this difference was greater for Duke than for most other schools with similar levels of talent.

[arnie]

Jeff Faris has big plans for 2021 play-calling. Per Jim Sumner. Definitely worth a read.

Didn’t see bubble screen mentioned once. Should I start to get excited?

[budwom]

Didn’t see bubble screen mentioned once. Should I start to get excited?

yes, Arnie, you may! I think we proved last year that we can maintain our record without resorting to bubble screens.

My personal benchmark for this season is how many times will we throw third down passes (e.g. on third and eight) that are three yards short of the first down marker? I am fully confident we led the league in that.

[JasonEvans]

USA Today Coaches Poll just came out... it just hasn't been the same since the old ball coach retired.



Oh, and if you care about the teams at the top...

[jimsumner]

USA Today Coaches Poll just came out... it just hasn't been the same since the old ball coach retired.



Oh, and if you care about the teams at the top...

Who ever thought we'd see the day when Florida State was behind Liberty, Appalachian State, UAB and Nevada in a preseason football poll?

[CameronBornAndBred]

That Northwestern game is going to be huge for this team. While I of course would like to win, I will accept a decent showing in a loss. At least that would show progress.

PS, Duke plays a total of 5 teams listed. (Miami is #16, just doesn't show up in Jason's list.)
NU, UNC, VT, Miami, Pitt

[CameronBornAndBred]

Full list of teams and voters. (Which includes David Cutcliffe.)

https://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaa...22/2021-08-10/

[hustleplays]

yes, Arnie, you may! I think we proved last year that we can maintain our record without resorting to bubble screens.

My personal benchmark for this season is how many times will we throw third down passes (e.g. on third and eight) that are three yards short of the first down marker? I am fully confident we led the league in that.

After I posted late last night, my mind did an Auto-Correct: Jim's article clearly stated that "a clear focus" :-) for this year's team is reducing turnovers. I morphed that to #1 focus and that's not accurate. Sorry for the precision fail.

That said, I think the larger points of the importance of having positive goals and of focusing on fundamentals still stand. Thank you, DoubleBlue, Dr Maturin, Nepo and others for making those points.

And I am encouraged [Please, Lucy, do not snatch that football again...you promised!] by Jim's report on Faris's plan to play call aggressively. This really could be fun!

Now, more aggressive play calling might result in more turnovers than cautious, defensive play calling. Several years ago, I got hammered by a certain poster for lamenting the pedestrian, unimaginative and too predictable play calling. I don't believe that I have mentioned this [forgive me if I have], but the next year I was able to raise my point with Cut directly, in a respectful way. To his credit, he essentially agreed, with the proviso that when they go further out on the aggressive play calling curve, more mistakes happen. As always, he took full accountability for preparing the staff and players to execute whatever plays are called.

If I recall correctly, a similar phenomenon occurred last year, in that there was a period of rather imaginative play calling, and many of us were excited...but not by the too numerous mistakes. Cut said they they were cutting back the playbook to simpler and fewer plays. Mistakes were reduced, but at the cost of more predictability. Lucy be darned, I am hopeful that Faris and the entire staff can prepare our guys to execute well an imaginative offense.

[arnie]

After I posted late last night, my mind did an Auto-Correct: Jim's article clearly stated that "a clear focus" :-) for this year's team is reducing turnovers. I morphed that to #1 focus and that's not accurate. Sorry for the precision fail.

That said, I think the larger points of the importance of having positive goals and of focusing on fundamentals still stand. Thank you, DoubleBlue, Dr Maturin, Nepo and others for making those points.

And I am encouraged [Please, Lucy, do not snatch that football again...you promised!] by Jim's report on Faris's plan to play call aggressively. This really could be fun!

Now, more aggressive play calling might result in more turnovers than cautious, defensive play calling. Several years ago, I got hammered by a certain poster for lamenting the pedestrian, unimaginative and too predictable play calling. I don't believe that I have mentioned this [forgive me if I have], but the next year I was able to raise my point with Cut directly, in a respectful way. To his credit, he essentially agreed, with the proviso that when they go further out on the aggressive play calling curve, more mistakes happen. As always, he took full accountability for preparing the staff and players to execute whatever plays are called.

If I recall correctly, a similar phenomenon occurred last year, in that there was a period of rather imaginative play calling, and many of us were excited...but not by the too numerous mistakes. Cut said they they were cutting back the playbook to simpler and fewer plays. Mistakes were reduced, but at the cost of more predictability. Lucy be darned, I am hopeful that Faris and the entire staff can prepare our guys to execute well an imaginative offense.

Should I expect a name change to “Lucy” if we finish 2-10 or worse?😀😀

[budwom]

The first logical step towards aggressive playcalling would be to throw more often on first down. So many times we ran between the tackles on the first two downs, to little avail. I get the wonderfulness of establishing the run, but if you repeatedly show you can't establish the run plan B is required.

[Bob Green]

Didn’t see bubble screen mentioned once. Should I start to get excited?

You must have missed this statement:

We’ve got to make the defense defend every blade of grass.

[Acymetric]

Bubble screens are fine a) when used in moderation, and b) when you have the right personnel (ideally an extremely sure-handed receiver with a wide catch radius and some shiftiness to make a guy or two miss, plus a QB that can put the ball in the right place). Even under Cut the years where we have had both of those things are few and far between, hence the frustration with bubble screens as receivers drop easy catches and QBs sail the ball high or throw it behind the receiver so they can't catch it in stride (or can't catch it at all).