In
this one article TOB points out the faulty logic of “returning starters” and then, in the very next sentence, places importance on experience. I think experience is important. However, it doesn’t trump talent. It doesn’t trump coaching and “returning starters” is a weak stat. For example: we are replacing two offensive linemen and two linebackers. That would seem to be a big worry. It’s not. Why? Because we have known, experienced players filling those voids. It doesn’t matter that they were not officially starters. They’ve seen enough action for me to feel comfortable.
To further expose the weak correlation between returning starters and winning, take a look at the chart below.
| Year | Returning Starters | Winning Pct |
| 1997 | 13 | .364 |
| 1998 | 10 | .364 |
| 1999 | 13 | .667 |
| 2000 | 11 | .583 |
| 2001 | 15 | .667 |
| 2002 | 17 | .692 |
| 2003 | 15 | .615 |
| 2004 | 11 | .750 |
| 2005 | 17 | .750 |
Our most recent and successful seasons included an experienced team and one that was relatively green. It didn’t really matter in the end.
Posts
1 comment:
I remember writing an article a few years ago about Carolina's football team.
They had one of the worst OLines in America the previous season and were suddenly predicted to be much better the next year.
Why?
Just because they were returning players didn't mean that they were returning talent. Experience & maturity are definitely nice to have...but, they don't make up for bad talent.
Post a Comment