ADVERTISEMENT

You be the judge....

extragreen

Platinum Buffalo
Jan 2, 2007
73,145
4,184
113
Cato sophomore year:
comp att pct. yds y/a td int rating
2012 406 584 69.5 4201 7.2 37 11 147.1

Green sophomore year:
comp att. pct yds y/a td int rating
2019 189 336 56.3 2438 7.3 15 11 125.4

******* 328 584 56.3 4099 6.7 26 19 *******

The last row ^^^ is the theoretical results (if I've done the math correctly)
if Green had made the same number of pass attempts in his soph year
as Cato did in his soph year.

Would you trade the 1600 more yards of offense and 11 more touchdowns
versus 8 more interceptions by the theoretical Green that would have
resulted from throwing as many times as Cato??

I would make that trade off, and I think our season would have been more
successful.

Would your perception of Green be changed with those theoretical results??
 
A crazy thing to think about with Cato's stats above is that Tommy Shuler had a quarter of those catches and yards their sophomore year. He had other options on the boundary, but he had this ESP-like relationship with his slot receiver that made the whole thing work.

I've been curious as to what the issue with Willie Johnson was. Fastest guy on the field, averaging almost 27 yards a catch and 17 yards a carry, and he touched the ball 21 times all season. He had more catches his sophomore year than he had the rest of his career at Marshall.

Of course, when you come out with three TE's every play, its hard for a slot receiver to find a spot on the field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HerditAllBefore
No it would not have changed. He is no cato in any form, he's not even a Litton. So we throw it more and lose more and give this board more reason to bitch. There is a reason we didn't throw it more......

That's weird.

Theoretically, Green would have had the 4th most passing yards in the nation this year. He would have been the 25th in most passing touchdowns. Despite being without his best wide receiver for 9 of 13 games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mlblack16.
That's weird.

Theoretically, Green would have had the 4th most passing yards in the nation this year. He would have been the 25th in most passing touchdowns. Despite being without his best wide receiver for 9 of 13 games.
Doc has slowed the offense down. You either have a system or you dont. It is apparent the direction has come from the top.
 
Does anyone really know the style of offense we play? It used to be fairly simple but I have no idea what we actually call this style of offense.

Having watched the games this season... It appears that the normal pattern is...

1st/10 - Read option (give it to RB 99% of the time)
2nd/8 - Pass outside the numbers (far too often an incompletion or sack)
3rd/8 - Delay draw up the middle (fools no one)
4th/3 - Punt

What's crazy is, we put up ridiculous offense against the worst team in the SoCon (VMI)... If you take that JV game out, our offensive numbers this year were really bad... Without the VMI padding, Marshall averaged 23 points per game and 187 yards per game passing.
 
Does anyone really know the style of offense we play? It used to be fairly simple but I have no idea what we actually call this style of offense.

Call conservative plays which don't require much talent, cross your fingers and hope for the best when you have to call any other type of play.
 
A crazy thing to think about with Cato's stats above is that Tommy Shuler had a quarter of those catches and yards their sophomore year. He had other options on the boundary, but he had this ESP-like relationship with his slot receiver that made the whole thing work.

I've been curious as to what the issue with Willie Johnson was. Fastest guy on the field, averaging almost 27 yards a catch and 17 yards a carry, and he touched the ball 21 times all season. He had more catches his sophomore year than he had the rest of his career at Marshall.

Of course, when you come out with three TE's every play, its hard for a slot receiver to find a spot on the field.

Why did Xavier Gaines only touch the ball 53 times for a total of less than 500 yards? I think the answer is quite obvious. Anyone wanna take a guess?
 
Bottom line...whatever the stats or style of offense, etc. When you watch the games Green doesn't have that IT factor. When we are down you don't have confidence he will pull something out of nowhere and win it. I am by no means a talent evaluator but he's middle of the pack, which with a decent defense and running game gets you 7-8 wins and a bowl game. Coaches obviously feel the same way or we would open it up more. Not to say Green doesn't come out of the gate next year on fire, who knows, but as of now I would expect more of the same. I've seen some posters wanting a QB coach. That could make a difference in my opinion.
 
Does anyone really know the style of offense we play? It used to be fairly simple but I have no idea what we actually call this style of offense.

I believe it is called the DAS offense which is Dull As ....... .
 
Fact....if Green had thrown as many passes as Cato did in his soph year, and using the same percentages of every other stat. No one would be so quick to chastise Green. With over 4,000 yards and 26 TDs the only thing people would say is "man if Green can cut down on his interceptions thrown we're in good shape at QB". But we won't know if he's not give the green light.
 
I would make that trade off, and I think our season would have been more
successful.

I have the completely opposite belief.

Cato’s offense was a hyper speed system. They ran over 90 plays/game. I believe this season’s Marshall team ran about 66 plays per game.

When you have a high tempo offense all of the time, as Marshall did in 2012, it leaves your defense susceptible. The 2012 Marshall defense defended about 79 plays per game. This season’s Marshall defense defended about 68 plays per game. How come a much better offense of 2012 put their defense in the field a lot more than the below average offense of 2019 did? Tempo.

Sure, there is an advantage for an offense to go faster, as defenses can’t get their personnel in (assuming the offense doesn’t sub) and can’t rest. But at the same time, your defense is destined to perform worse.

There are two philosophies to take which are opposite from each other.

1) Do whatever you can to help give your weakest part of the geek advantages regardless of it hurting other aspects of your team. In this scenario, it would mean going fast, throwing a lot more, and trying to help your offense while hurting your defense.

2) Find the strongest part of your team and ride that group to as much success as you can get. In this scenario, it would be playing a ball control style, taking time off of the clock with a more methodical approach, and using your defense to win closer, lower scoring games.

By doing what you suggested (throwing a lot more), you’re not just going faster/prolonging the game/putting your defense in the field more, but you’re also using a weakness of the team (Green’s inability to throw and not turn the ball over) and trying to risk a lot more of it.

I’m fine with going faster as long as it’s more of a running attack (even with Green) and quick game passing which is frequently pre-determined for the QB. But wanting him to throw just because he’d have more yards? I don’t suggest it considering his ability to this point.
 
I agree with the rushing tempo attack given our current situation at QB. If we are effective with that on offense I don't think that 11 plays per game on average should hurt the defense. Especially if we have decent rotations. Given our current strengths I would almost go with a Rich Rod type of run spread quick tempo.
 
I don’t think our issues offensively have as much to do with lack of tempo as they do a need in more creative plays. Green has plenty of liabilities in his game, but what’s the old saying? Accentuate the positives, hide the negatives. A little (or a lot) more effort in getting creative offensively would make Green’s life easier. Plus, we really need a couple quick-impact, new WR’s next year.
 
I don't think that 11 plays per game on average should hurt the defense.

It would. Marshall’s defense allowed 5.5 yards per play this season. Giving a defense an extra 11 plays would be over 60 more yards of offense for them, which is points, and doesn’t include the average being higher since more plays wear out a defense.

So not only more than 60 yards, but that also allows their offense to have the ball more which means less time for Marshall’s offense.

It’s a balancing act. Far too many coaches don’t understand it.

For years, I would look at the fastest and slowest offenses (determined by the more logical plays per second of possession instead of plays) compared with their win-loss record.

Pokey used to vehemently argue that going faster increased your ability to win. I argued that not to necessarily be true. The breakdown of each season’s fastest and slowest offenses showed the records to be very similar.

Look at Oklahoma- they used to be one of the fastest offenses. They also used to be one of the best producing offenses. However, in going fast, they put their defense at an extreme disadvantage, and that was exposed against teams with similar talent levels.

So what did Lincoln Riley do? He slowed down their offense tremendously. Under Stoops, Oklahoma would average around 76 plays per game, and that number was only that low because they’d take their foot off of the pedal with 20+ leads in the 4th quarter. Under Riley over the last two years, they average 67 plays per game. Their offense is still lethal (550+ yards/game which is only behind LSU), but their defense defends far fewer plays and, partly as a result, is the best they’ve had in years.
 
It would. Marshall’s defense allowed 5.5 yards per play this season. Giving a defense an extra 11 plays would be over 60 more yards of offense for them, which is points, and doesn’t include the average being higher since more plays wear out a defense.

So not only more than 60 yards, but that also allows their offense to have the ball more which means less time for Marshall’s offense.

It’s a balancing act. Far too many coaches don’t understand it.

For years, I would look at the fastest and slowest offenses (determined by the more logical plays per second of possession instead of plays) compared with their win-loss record.

Pokey used to vehemently argue that going faster increased your ability to win. I argued that not to necessarily be true. The breakdown of each season’s fastest and slowest offenses showed the records to be very similar.

Look at Oklahoma- they used to be one of the fastest offenses. They also used to be one of the best producing offenses. However, in going fast, they put their defense at an extreme disadvantage, and that was exposed against teams with similar talent levels.

So what did Lincoln Riley do? He slowed down their offense tremendously. Under Stoops, Oklahoma would average around 76 plays per game, and that number was only that low because they’d take their foot off of the pedal with 20+ leads in the 4th quarter. Under Riley over the last two years, they average 67 plays per game. Their offense is still lethal (550+ yards/game which is only behind LSU), but their defense defends far fewer plays and, partly as a result, is the best they’ve had in years.
I think oklahaoma is being underestimated and I think they can beat LSU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: putnam green
The key to life, no matter the pace, is third down conversion rate for both the offense and defense. A slow offense that has too many three and outs is no better than a fast offense that gets a first down or two each drive even if they don't score.

My thought is that it's more important to be able to vary tempo to match situational opportunities within the game. If you covert a 3rd and medium, or long, against a defense that had an extra DB on the field, have the ability to get to the line and exploit that with your run game (since we always had 2-3 TE on the field anyway). Things like that.
 
******* 328 584 56.3 4099 6.7 26 19 *******

The last row ^^^ is the theoretical results (if I've done the math correctly)
if Green had made the same number of pass attempts in his soph year
as Cato did in his soph year.


The math is mostly correct. Just a little off in one area. If you are going from 336 to 584 you would be looking at a factor about 1.738% larger. Using that factor on Greens original stats to extrapolate totals based on 584 attempts should give you:

******* 328 584 56.3 4237 7.3 26 19 *******

Green has a slightly higher yards per attempt average so given the same amount of attempts as Cato, he would naturally have a slightly higher total yardage stat. That being 4237 vs 4201



Would you trade the 1600 more yards of offense and 11 more touchdowns
versus 8 more interceptions by the theoretical Green that would have
resulted from throwing as many times as Cato??

Absolutely not because you are still looking at a TD to INT ratio of 1.36 for Green in comparison to Cato who threw 3.36 TDs for every int. That's a huge difference. You also need to look at completion percentage. Cato was at 69.5, Green finished at 56.3. Again that's another huge difference. Completing only 56 percent of your passes and having a TD to INT ratio of 1.36 is horrible.




I would make that trade off, and I think our season would have been more
successful.

Would your perception of Green be changed with those theoretical results??

No because those stats are bad and so was Greens play on the field. Just because you nearly double those stats still doesn't make those stats good. You are still looking at a QB that completed just 56 percent of his passes with 1 interception every 1.36 TDs he threw. Those kind of things kill drives and is the very reason Green didn't have more attempts.

Green would have had more attempts if he had completed more of his throws and kept drives going instead of killing the drive with his inaccurate throws and interceptions. Greens bad play at QB is the very reason he didnt have more attempts. You cant play bad then say "well if he had more attempts he would be better" You would just be getting the same bad play only more of it.
 
I don’t know the stats, but we would have had a lot more plays if we didn’t have so many 3 and outs. Some of the games, we ran fewer plays and the defense was still on the field for a long time because we went 3 and out.
 
You also need to look at completion percentage. Cato was at 69.5, Green finished at 56.3. Again that's another huge difference. Completing only 56 percent of your passes and having a TD to INT ratio of 1.36 is horrible.

Yeah, Green finished at 56.3 and Cato was at 69.5. But you're making way too big a deal about that. The only beef you can have with Green is the interceptions. If Green had completed a total of 12 more passes this entire season with the same number of attempts, he would have had a better completion percentage than Cato's jr and sr years, so that does away with your "Those kind of things kill drives and is the very reason Green didn't have more attempts." nonsense. Furthermore, using your "4237" correction for total yards passing, he would have bested any year Cato had for total yards passing. I'll say it again, the only beef you can have with Green is the interceptions.
 
I wonder what the breakdown of called pass plays versus passes thrown was? Just feels like passing plays wound up with scrambles a whole lot this year.

Where I disagree with extragreen in this is that it was rare for a pass play to be thrown on time this year. The last three games especially. Nearly every pass play involved Green running around in the pocket and throwing late to a broken field. A very high percentage of pass plays turned out that way, and I’m not sure it can be statistically tracked with the types of numbers in box scores.
 
I wonder what the breakdown of called pass plays versus passes thrown was? Just feels like passing plays wound up with scrambles a whole lot this year.

Where I disagree with extragreen in this is that it was rare for a pass play to be thrown on time this year. The last three games especially. Nearly every pass play involved Green running around in the pocket and throwing late to a broken field. A very high percentage of pass plays turned out that way, and I’m not sure it can be statistically tracked with the types of numbers in box scores.
Remember when Byron was our qb? He had a broken leg, yet still played. He could have built a house back in the pocket. No scrambling, few sacks. Great protection. And then we come to Green where it's an adventure on every pass play.
 
Where I disagree with extragreen

Then you are disagreeing with the facts. It's a fact that had Green completed a total of 12 more passes this entire season with the same number of attempts, he would have had a better completion percentage than Cato's jr and sr years. If we keep all other relevant stats as they actually are, and Green would have thrown the ball as many times as Cato in his soph year, Green would have thrown for more yardage than Cato's best year. The problem is interceptions. Fix the interceptions, and then let him throw the ball.
 
Then you are disagreeing with the facts. It's a fact that had Green completed a total of 12 more passes this entire season with the same number of attempts, he would have had a better completion percentage than Cato's jr and sr years. If we keep all other relevant stats as they actually are, and Green would have thrown the ball as many times as Cato in his soph year, Green would have thrown for more yardage than Cato's best year. The problem is interceptions. Fix the interceptions, and then let him throw the ball.

What I am saying is that Green ran the ball 57 more times this year than Cato did in 2012. Marshall had 52 more rushing attempts this season than 2012, and that includes playing one more game in 2019 than 2012.

Your numbers are not wrong. What I’m saying is that simply calling passing plays didn’t result in passes being thrown as often this season as opposed to 2012.

Whomever plays QB next year must be far more efficient. Many of the QB maneuvers within the pocket happened without pressure necessarily getting through. The running game was good enough to ease the strain on the QB, but it didn’t show statistically. Marshall punted 22 more times in 2019 than 2012. Marshall also tried and made 5 more FG’s in 2019 opposed to 2012. Marshall was 12/23 on 4th downs in 2012, versus 6/14 this year.

A more telling number is that Marshall was 55% on 3rd downs in 2012, while being 39% this season. In real numbers, that is 44 more conversions in 2012, which led to between 132-176 additional chances to run offensive plays.

My main point is that there’s a lot of work to be done there, regardless of who takes the first snap at ECU next season. Efficiency and execution are far more of a concern to me than simply play calls at this point.

But that’s just explaining my opinion, not trying to sway yours or anyone else’s. I think we all agree, the offense must improve its output to have a more successful season.
 
I have to admit, I never thought to extrapolate Green's passing numbers based on Cato's attempts. It certainly makes one consider our QB from a different perspective. If nothing else, it's given rise to some interesting debate. I've enjoyed this thread. Nice job, @extragreen.

As intriguing as this speculation is, though, the bigger problem with Green’s smaller number of attempts is why they were so many less than Cato’s at a similar time. The coaching staff has an obvious lack of confidence in Green’s ability to play the position. I know some on here complain about the play-calling, and there may be times that is an appropriate criticism. But what I saw in most games this season was an OC whose hands were tied by a QB who was as likely to do something bad as he was to do something good.

Green’s positive this season has been his running. He still isn’t fast by any means, but he has developed a decent instinct for knowing when to run. Since he doesn’t read the zone read, he should be about 50% on his flip-a-coin decision strategy. But he isn’t. He’s much better than that, which shows that he does have a feel for the flow of the game and when it is best to pull the ball out or pull the ball down, and use his feet.

Will Green improve his skills next season? Maybe…in some aspects of the game. I would love for him to work on his throwing mechanics – get that elbow up so his throws wouldn’t sail as much – but I’m not optimistic. It would be nice if he read the read. That’s on Green, but also on a coaching staff who needs to be willing to make him do it. Can he improve on his downfield reads? Yes. Experience is a great teacher. He does a pretty good job with a pre-snap, single-receiver set up. It’s when you get to the post-read RPO (which is one way the playbook got smaller this season) and checking down to hot reads or the #2 option. He tends to decide who he’s throwing to before the snap. He can definitely improve here.

Will Green improve on the intangibles of being a good college QB? His leadership qualities were suspect as a freshman, and not just because he was a freshman. He lacked the humility to listen to those upperclassmen who could have helped him make better decisions, or at least understand the game from a wider perspective. I hear he has made strides in this area. Now, it's always been my opinion that a good QB also finds ways to make the others around him better. Sometimes it’s what’s said in the huddle or on the sideline, sometimes it’s the example set in the weight room, sometimes it’s a hand on a shoulder when a guy is down. It’s how a QB carries himself, and how he handles being the face of the team. I haven’t seen any evidence of this yet, but he’s still young.

Next season, Green won’t be young. He will need to improve on all aspects of the job. He has grown up some since he first stepped foot on the field. But now he has to grow the rest of the way up. No excuses next year. He won’t be young, he won’t be inexperienced, he will not have the ridiculous sophomore slump to point to. He’s either the man or he isn’t.

Sorry, this got a little long. I just got typing and the next thing I knew…
 
Last edited:
What I am saying is that Green ran the ball 57 more times this year than Cato did in 2012.

That's 2x as many rushes for Green than Cato.
Green scored 5x as many rushing TDs than Cato.
Green yards per carry was 5x better than Cato.

What I’m saying is that simply calling passing plays didn’t result in passes being thrown as often this season as opposed to 2012.

Cato pass plays 584
Green pass plays 336
Difference 248

If all 57 rushes by Green were called pass plays, you still have a difference of 191 more pass plays called for Cato in 1 less game for Cato.

A more telling number is that Marshall was 55% on 3rd downs in 2012, while being 39% this season. In real numbers, that is 44 more conversions in 2012, which led to between 132-176 additional chances to run offensive plays.

Would be interesting to know if the reason for that in 2019 is how many times we ran the ball on 3rd and long as opposed to 2012. With 248 less pass plays this year, I'd say that was consequential.

Marshall was 12/23 on 4th downs in 2012, versus 6/14 this year.

12/23 2012
10/23 2019 if extrapolated as a percentage

My main point is that there’s a lot of work to be done there, regardless of who takes the first snap at ECU next season.

Agree.

Efficiency and execution are far more of a concern to me than simply play calls at this point.

Disagree.

the offense must improve its output to have a more successful season.

Agree.
 
extragreen said:





Then you are disagreeing with the facts. It's a fact that had Green completed a total of 12 more passes this entire season with the same number of attempts, he would have had a better completion percentage than Cato's jr and sr years. If we keep all other relevant stats as they actually are, and Green would have thrown the ball as many times as Cato in his soph year, Green would have thrown for more yardage than Cato's best year. The problem is interceptions. Fix the interceptions, and then let him throw the ball.Click to expand...

What I am saying is that Green ran the ball 57 more times this year than Cato did in 2012. Marshall had 52 more rushing attempts this season than 2012, and that includes playing one more game in 2019 than 2012.

Your numbers are not wrong. What I’m saying is that simply calling passing plays didn’t result in passes being thrown as often this season as opposed to 2012.

Whomever plays QB next year must be far more efficient. Many of the QB maneuvers within the pocket happened without pressure necessarily getting through. The running game was good enough to ease the strain on the QB, but it didn’t show statistically. Marshall punted 22 more times in 2019 than 2012. Marshall also tried and made 5 more FG’s in 2019 opposed to 2012. Marshall was 12/23 on 4th downs in 2012, versus 6/14 this year.

A more telling number is that Marshall was 55% on 3rd downs in 2012, while being 39% this season. In real numbers, that is 44 more conversions in 2012, which led to between 132-176 additional chances to run offensive plays.

My main point is that there’s a lot of work to be done there, regardless of who takes the first snap at ECU next season. Efficiency and execution are far more of a concern to me than simply play calls at this point.

But that’s just explaining my opinion, not trying to sway yours or anyone else’s. I think we all agree, the offense must improve its output to have a more successful season.
[/quote]
ECU also has whom I think was the best QB recruit in the state of South Carolina this year, 4 star Mason Garcia. Luke Doty won the awards and went to South Carolina, but Garcia has a much better arm. We didn’t even offer Garcia, because Sammons had already committed is what I was told.
 
Then you are disagreeing with the facts. It's a fact that had Green completed a total of 12 more passes this entire season with the same number of attempts, he would have had a better completion percentage than Cato's jr and sr years. If we keep all other relevant stats as they actually are, and Green would have thrown the ball as many times as Cato in his soph year, Green would have thrown for more yardage than Cato's best year. The problem is interceptions. Fix the interceptions, and then let him throw the ball.

So what you are saying is if Green had completed more passes, thrown less interceptions and thrown for more TDs this year he would have comparable numbers to Cato? Wow that's enlightening. The problem is he didn't. You could say the same for lots of QBs out there. Do you know what Jimmy Skinner's stats would be from his Senior season if Snyder had given him the same amount of attempts as Doc did with Cato?

2006 ------ 104 --- 62 --- 59.6 --- 872 --- 8.4 --- 8 --- 4

2019 ------ 584 -- 348 -- 59.6 -- 4,896 -- 8.4 -- 45 -- 22

You are looking at hundreds more passing yards than Cato or Green with several more TDs than either Cato or Green all while playing in a tougher CUSA than either one of them had to play in. The problem I guess was Skinner just didnt have enough attempts?

..and one last thing even if Green had completed 12 more passes on the same amount of attempts this year like you are claiming, you would be looking at 201 completions on 336 attempts which is a completion percentage of 59.8 which is still almost 10% lower than Cato's 69.5. To get to Cato's completion percentage Green would need to have completed 234 passes on 336 attempts which would be 69.6% That's a difference of 45 additional completions not 12. And Green would still have 11 less TDs and 8 more ints.
 
I'm saying if Green had thrown as many passes as Cato's soph year while extrapolating the other of Green's actual stats for this year, we would have ended up with a team result of 9 more touchdowns and 800 more yards of offense than what we actually managed in 2019.
 
I'm saying if Green had thrown as many passes as Cato's soph year while extrapolating the other of Green's actual stats for this year, we would have ended up with a team result of 9 more touchdowns and 800 more yards of offense than what we actually managed in 2019.

The problem is you cant just say give him more attempts because it would boost his total number of yards and TDs while ignoring all the additional bad things that you boost as well. That is true for any QB. Like I pointed out, you could just as easily claim Jimmy Skinner should have gotten more attempts in 2006 as he would have ended up with significantly more yards 4,896 vs Cato and Green while throwing for more TDs 45 than either Cato or Green.

Would you rather have a QB that threw for 4,896 yards with 45 TDs and 22 INTs with a 59.6 completion percentage or one that threw for 4,237 yards with 26 TDs and 19 INTs with a 56.3 completion percentage? You would pick Skinner over Green. The problem is you cant just extrapolate numbers as proof someone has done a good job or a even comparable job to someone else. One of the very reasons they don't have the same amount of attempts is because of other variables that prevented this. In this case you are talking about low accuracy and turnovers which kill drives and limit total opportunity of attempts. If only Skinner had been given more attempts in 2006 just imagine how much better the offense would have been doesnt hold water anymore than Green having more attempts in 2019.
 
Cato sophomore year:
comp att pct. yds y/a td int rating
2012 406 584 69.5 4201 7.2 37 11 147.1

Green sophomore year:
comp att. pct yds y/a td int rating
2019 189 336 56.3 2438 7.3 15 11 125.4

******* 328 584 56.3 4099 6.7 26 19 *******

The last row ^^^ is the theoretical results (if I've done the math correctly)
if Green had made the same number of pass attempts in his soph year
as Cato did in his soph year.

Would you trade the 1600 more yards of offense and 11 more touchdowns
versus 8 more interceptions by the theoretical Green that would have
resulted from throwing as many times as Cato??

I would make that trade off, and I think our season would have been more
successful.

Would your perception of Green be changed with those theoretical results??


There’s a reason Green didn’t have as many passing attempts. That’s where this illogical argument begins and ends.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT