Its great to be all about analytics. And I understand that Football coaches and staffs don’t watch games other than the ones they play in, and are working all the time on their own program to get better. But football is a game of emotion and momentum. Sports in general are that way.
We scored 4 straight times in the second half. As soon as we called off the dogs we lost our edge and the game.
I don’t think analytics have become that sophisticated yet. But I would put a 5 figure wager that the team that voluntarily gives up the momentum and plays not to lose, loses more than they win.
So just like last week, I put this loss on the coaches. I’m sure all hell will rain down on me. “ST cost us the game.” “Turnovers cost us the game.” “Broncos shield was not protected, and so we lost.”
I was never in the US military, but as a history major at UVA and a broad reader of military history, I don’t think history rewards the commander who commands not to lose. Fortune rewards the bold.
So as head coach and creator of the culture, as a man, I don’t see how Bronco can stand in front of that team and not take the blame. I couldn’t.
But millions of coaching salary $$ are at stake and lots of jobs. So, I’m sure we will hear directly or leaked out in some spin controls about execution and we didn’t make enough plays, and a handful of plays change the game, and not enough ACC players yet, Hall should have just knocked the ball down, Nelson should have just fallen on the ball and Harris just cut back, etc., etc... But it’s all bullshit, directly from the Clinton White House.
The truth is, you called off the dogs, relied on the defense. And that subtle emotional change lost the game. It sent the message to your players that the game was over. We have done enough to win.
So my only and last question is whether any reporters have the balls to ask Bronco that question and push him to the wall. “Why do you as an analytical coach, after coming all the way back, or even with an apparently comfortable lead, did you start calling the game not to lose?” And the follow up question if the answer is the OC runs the offense and makes the calls is, “f you are an analytical based coach and you hold the program to that standard, why do you let the OC ignore your bedrock foundational principles and flaunt it in your face by not following them and calling a game like that?”
In the culture where reporters curry favor with those they question, I doubt it.
And so it goes on .....
Ultimately, as I’ve said many times, just fire Anae and hire a young gunslinger or just promote Beck to OC. And don’t ever play to lose again.
Ok. I feel better. Don’t fire Bronco. We will beat VT next year. It’s basketball season now.
We scored 4 straight times in the second half. As soon as we called off the dogs we lost our edge and the game.
I don’t think analytics have become that sophisticated yet. But I would put a 5 figure wager that the team that voluntarily gives up the momentum and plays not to lose, loses more than they win.
So just like last week, I put this loss on the coaches. I’m sure all hell will rain down on me. “ST cost us the game.” “Turnovers cost us the game.” “Broncos shield was not protected, and so we lost.”
I was never in the US military, but as a history major at UVA and a broad reader of military history, I don’t think history rewards the commander who commands not to lose. Fortune rewards the bold.
So as head coach and creator of the culture, as a man, I don’t see how Bronco can stand in front of that team and not take the blame. I couldn’t.
But millions of coaching salary $$ are at stake and lots of jobs. So, I’m sure we will hear directly or leaked out in some spin controls about execution and we didn’t make enough plays, and a handful of plays change the game, and not enough ACC players yet, Hall should have just knocked the ball down, Nelson should have just fallen on the ball and Harris just cut back, etc., etc... But it’s all bullshit, directly from the Clinton White House.
The truth is, you called off the dogs, relied on the defense. And that subtle emotional change lost the game. It sent the message to your players that the game was over. We have done enough to win.
So my only and last question is whether any reporters have the balls to ask Bronco that question and push him to the wall. “Why do you as an analytical coach, after coming all the way back, or even with an apparently comfortable lead, did you start calling the game not to lose?” And the follow up question if the answer is the OC runs the offense and makes the calls is, “f you are an analytical based coach and you hold the program to that standard, why do you let the OC ignore your bedrock foundational principles and flaunt it in your face by not following them and calling a game like that?”
In the culture where reporters curry favor with those they question, I doubt it.
And so it goes on .....
Ultimately, as I’ve said many times, just fire Anae and hire a young gunslinger or just promote Beck to OC. And don’t ever play to lose again.
Ok. I feel better. Don’t fire Bronco. We will beat VT next year. It’s basketball season now.
