ESPN SEC Offensive Unit Ranking Average

#1
Ericvol2096

Ericvol2096

Quiz'N'Vol
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Messages
17,434
Likes
27,085
#1
ESPN over this week has released the QB, RB, WR/TE and OL ranking. I averaged it out..list was surprising to me after I calculated it.

1 - Tennessee - 4.75
1 - Auburn - 4.75
3 - Arkansas - 5
3 - A&M - 5
5 - Georgia - 5.25
6 - LSU - 5.5
7 - Miss St - 6.25
8 - Bama - 6.75
9 - Missouri - 7.5
10 - South Carolina - 9.5
11 - Ole Miss - 9.75
12 - Florida - 10.5
13 - Kentucky - 10.75
14 - Vandy - 13.75

Pretty interesting...Looks like DeBord has the pieces in place for a great offense!:rock::rock:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#3
#3
Ericvol2096 said:
Here are the SEC average Unit Ranking..list was surprising to me after I calculated it.

1 - Tennessee - 4.75
1 - Auburn - 4.75
3 - Arkansas - 5
3 - A&M - 5
5 - Georgia - 5.25
6 - LSU - 5.5
7 - Miss St - 6.25
8 - Bama - 6.75
9 - Missouri - 7.5
10 - South Carolina - 9.5
11 - Ole Miss - 9.75
12 - Florida - 10.5
13 - Kentucky - 10.75
14 - Vandy - 13.75

Pretty interesting...Looks like DeBord has the pieces in place for a great offense!:rock::rock:
Click to expand...


Ok. I'll be the first to admit my stupidity. What am I looking at? I'm assuming it's good and we're tied for first, but I don't know what it means.


I'm preparing myself to feel pretty stupid, so go ahead, let me have it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#4
#4
BaldBiker said:
Ok. I'll be the first to admit my stupidity. What am I looking at? I'm assuming it's good and we're tied for first, but I don't know what it means.


I'm preparing myself to feel pretty stupid, so go ahead, let me have it.
Click to expand...

This is volnation, you don't have to worry about people making you feel stupid!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#5
#5
BaldBiker said:
Ok. I'll be the first to admit my stupidity. What am I looking at? I'm assuming it's good and we're tied for first, but I don't know what it means.


I'm preparing myself to feel pretty stupid, so go ahead, let me have it.
Click to expand...

ESPN has been ranking offensive units for each team in the SEC

We ranked 4th for rbs, 2nd for wrs, 2nd I think for QB'S, and 10 or 11 for oline. So the op averaged up everyone's ranking.
 
#6
#6
Ericvol2096 said:
Here are the SEC average Unit Ranking..list was surprising to me after I calculated it.

1 - Tennessee - 4.75
1 - Auburn - 4.75
3 - Arkansas - 5
3 - A&M - 5
5 - Georgia - 5.25
6 - LSU - 5.5
7 - Miss St - 6.25
8 - Bama - 6.75
9 - Missouri - 7.5
10 - South Carolina - 9.5
11 - Ole Miss - 9.75
12 - Florida - 10.5
13 - Kentucky - 10.75
14 - Vandy - 13.75

Pretty interesting...Looks like DeBord has the pieces in place for a great offense!:rock::rock:
Click to expand...

I don't understand... What do the numbers represent and what stats are being calculated? Pardon my ignorance.
 
#7
#7
Are there break down on the offensive units? Are the units listed as far as strengths of each unit?

Edit: I'm glad I wasn't the only one that didn't understand the numbers.:)
 
Last edited:
#8
#8
Vol8188 said:
ESPN has been ranking offensive units for each team in the SEC

We ranked 4th for rbs, 2nd for wrs, 2nd I think for QB'S, and 10 or 11 for oline. So the op averaged up everyone's ranking.
Click to expand...

Ohhhhhhhh. Ok. :good!:
 
#13
#13
The guy that did these "Rankings"...is the same Goober from last year's "We gonna go 10 & 2" video...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#14
#14
List looks about right. I expect Tennessee and Auburn to play in the SEC championship game. I think Alabama is in for a down year (9-3).
 
#16
#16
TAF said:
The guy that did these "Rankings"...is the same Goober from last year's "We gonna go 10 & 2" video...
Click to expand...

Now all we need is one of 0 star generals threads about the vols of the field. Let the debate :)
 
#17
#17
This is going to incite some of you negagurus, but there are some of us who're anticipating the 2015 Vols to vie for the SEC championship with a hard running, high scoring offense, kept on the field by an even tougher defense than their predecessors. This group will prove to be very, very special for years to come. No "pumping brakes" or drumming out "not quite yet." If you're still crying about Coach DeBord, just don't bother to respond. I'm not pumping sunshine here...just pumped!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 people
#19
#19
That assumes all 5 rankings are equally weighted. That's an erroneous assumption. OL is far more important than WR andiMO more important than RB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#21
#21
Volinnooga said:
That assumes all 5 rankings are equally weighted. That's an erroneous assumption. OL is far more important than WR andiMO more important than RB.
Click to expand...

#1 Yeah, were this strategy to be accurate, then each position groups importance would have to be identical. Who knows what that value is for each group?

#2 The second issue I see with this type of ranking is that it as a "ranking". #1 could be 40% better than #4, or it could just as well be 1.25% better than #4. One would mean "drastically better" while the other means "statistically equal". So, just looking at the rankings might naturally distort ones opinion of actual value.

That being said, if your going to be listed in a ranking, #1 is the place to be. Happy as heck that somebody actually thinks so. Maybe just maybe they know what they are talking about. :pepper:
 
#23
#23
Ericvol2096 said:
ESPN over this week has released the QB, RB, WR/TE and OL ranking. I averaged it out..list was surprising to me after I calculated it.

1 - Tennessee - 4.75
1 - Auburn - 4.75
3 - Arkansas - 5
3 - A&M - 5
5 - Georgia - 5.25
6 - LSU - 5.5
7 - Miss St - 6.25
8 - Bama - 6.75
9 - Missouri - 7.5
10 - South Carolina - 9.5
11 - Ole Miss - 9.75
12 - Florida - 10.5
13 - Kentucky - 10.75
14 - Vandy - 13.75

Pretty interesting...Looks like DeBord has the pieces in place for a great offense!:rock::rock:
Click to expand...

There is a very telling 5 positions omitted from the analysis, namely the entire OL. Now, if we can get those guys playing well next year, we will be good.
 
#25
#25
So we have good rankings for QB, RB's and WR's, and a poor ranking for OL. An argument could be made that taking an average of the four individual "rankings" is not accurate as it assumes an equal number of players on the field for each of those "ranking groups" which is clearly not the case.

Perhaps it would make more sense to consider the QB, RB and WR groups all as one ranking (e.g. they combine to equal 5-6 players on the field) which would then have an average ranking of 3. The OL group also includes 5-6 players so now there are two relatively equal "ranking groups" with an average score of 7.

Perhaps the OP, or anyone with a little more time, could update the list using this formula instead to see how we compare with the other teams.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top