FB: Region 4 fan poll

[thunderdog]

I'll take Olyphant playing a cowboy-ish dude every day and twice on Sunday.

For sure. All the words I'd use to describe him aren't allowed here...

[jamtod]

I'll take Olyphant playing a cowboy-ish dude every day and twice on Sunday.

For sure. All the words I'd use to describe him aren't allowed here...

Tim Gutterson is the real star of that show though. Raylan is really just a supporting actor.

[smedindy]

Same scenario in the Wash U - IWU game. What's crazy is if Wash U QB Johnny Davidson doesn't go down in the beginning of the first quarter against IWU, it's entirely probable the Bears win that game - then what?!?!

WU actually dominated the Wheaton game - held them to -3 yards rushing...

No they didn't. 63 yds rushing and minus 66 on 10 sacks. Wheaton's defense dominated WashU's offense. 10 sacks is pretty impressive though, you guys must have a dominant DLine.

-3 yards is -3 yards, no matter rushing or sacks. 63 yards rushing isn't that great either.

The Thunder-Colored glasses must be working overtime...

No it's not. It's widely understood by anyone that has a clue about football statistics that sack yards are not rush yards. They are called passes. It's one of the bigger flaws in college statistics.

Yards are yards. 63 yards rushing still isn't great, as I said.

And it's not a pass if they never passed the ball, ya know. It's a pass PLAY.

[thunderdog]

Tim Gutterson is the real star of that show though. Raylan is really just a supporting actor.

Hmmm... you're lucky, I won't tell Raylan you said that. What happens in the NRFP, stays in the NRFP.

[smedindy]

And Wash U held Wheaton to 140 yards UNDER their average - their third lowest of the season.

Overall, yardage was close to even (.5 yards per play better for Wheaton). Wheaton had one more turnover, and a bad punt and penalties (10-114) hurt them.

[Ryan Stoppable]

Any chance we can institute a new rule where if you beat an RRO as an unranked team, you automatically get their ranking?*

*This post may self-destruct in approximately 5 days from now if circumstances warrant.

[smedindy]

Any chance we can institute a new rule where if you beat an RRO as an unranked team, you automatically get their ranking?*

*This post may self-destruct in approximately 5 days from now if circumstances warrant.

Ha! Then there will be a big upset one year and North Park or Anderson will be ranked!~

[Gregory Sager]

Hey! Why are you picking on us? NPU isn't going to be the last-place team in the CCIW this year. And the Vikings didn't finish last in 2017, either.

For that matter, neither did Anderson in the HCAC. In fact, Anderson's got two HCAC wins this season.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Hey! Why are you picking on us? NPU isn't going to be the last-place team in the CCIW this year. And the Vikings didn't finish last in 2017, either.

For that matter, neither did Anderson in the HCAC. In fact, Anderson's got two HCAC wins this season.

Well, he didn't want to be completely off-the-wall and use Earlham for the punchline!

[HOPEful]

Same scenario in the Wash U - IWU game. What's crazy is if Wash U QB Johnny Davidson doesn't go down in the beginning of the first quarter against IWU, it's entirely probable the Bears win that game - then what?!?!

WU actually dominated the Wheaton game - held them to -3 yards rushing...

No they didn't. 63 yds rushing and minus 66 on 10 sacks. Wheaton's defense dominated WashU's offense. 10 sacks is pretty impressive though, you guys must have a dominant DLine.

-3 yards is -3 yards, no matter rushing or sacks. 63 yards rushing isn't that great either.

The Thunder-Colored glasses must be working overtime...

No it's not. It's widely understood by anyone that has a clue about football statistics that sack yards are not rush yards. They are called passes. It's one of the bigger flaws in college statistics.

Yards are yards. 63 yards rushing still isn't great, as I said.

And it's not a pass if they never passed the ball, ya know. It's a pass PLAY.

The NFL subtracts sack yardage from the team's PASSING yardage. Never understood why the NCAA continues to subtract them from rushing yards.

[HScoach]

Because it's easier.  Tracking it as negative passing yards requires the on site folks to evaluate whether it was intended to be a pass or run.  With 300+ college teams playing with variable amounts of oversight and attention, it's much easier to track a pass if it's thrown forward and counting everything else as a rush.

Not saying it's overly logical, but it is easier.

[USee]

Not saying it's overly logical, but it is easier.

But yards are yard right? SMH

[HOPEful]

Not saying it's overly logical, but it is easier.

But yards are yard right? SMH

Doesn't seem that difficult to make a quick judgment on whether the play appeared to be an intended run or pass. Even if they got it wrong from time to time, the end totals would still be a better representation than taking all sack yardage away from the rushing total.

[Kira & Jaxon's Dad]

Not saying it's overly logical, but it is easier.

But yards are yard right? SMH

Doesn't seem that difficult to make a quick judgment on whether the play appeared to be an intended run or pass. Even if they got it wrong from time to time, the end totals would still be a better representation than taking all sack yardage away from the rushing total.

HS follows the college way on this.  It makes a Non-Running QB look bad at the end of the season with a ton of negative rushing yards.  In my opinion it should go against the offense.  Hard to blame the QB if the Line doesn't block.  Hard to blame the Line when the QB holds on to the ball too long.  Hard to blame the Offense if the Defense has good coverage.  Easiest to just have TEAM Negative Rushing Yards for Sacks.

[USee]

Actually the NFL not only counts sacks as negative pass yds, they count as team sack yds and don't affect the QBs stat line