I Hope I’m Wrong … But
- Thread starter Patrish
- Start date
If you ask people who know a lot about football, they will tell you that bad field conditions favor the receivers, that’s universally accepted by knowledgeable football people, how could you not know that?
The opening line was never nine points
I just see Indiana as an incredibly motivated team, kinda like NIU
Is this for real, blustery, shifting winds, with possible snow flurries, maybe even sleet, in sub freezing temperature makes for an equally predictable four quarters of football, as to impeccably idyllic conditions, within which every single play you call can be run to perfection, and you have only yourself to blame for any failure of execution? And really they're exactly the same? I guess both teams are equally afflicted by inclement weather, but doesn't that just mean both sides' carefully laid strategies could be equally, and abruptly thrown way off course on the vagaries and whims of old man winter?
I guess no one here knows football then. No one else is making the claim that's its an advantage to pass, as opposed to running when the weather is bad.
We're not talking about game planning or execution. The guy said the game is more unpredictable when there is bad weather. I don't see how that's true. ND lost to NIU on a perfect sunny day. But somehow tomorrow's game will be even more unpredictable because there's bad weather?
My passing percentage goes way down in Madden in the rain or snow. So that should settle it.
Oh. I guess I don't know what unpredictable means. You mean even factoring in bad weather you can still reliably predict the outcome of the game, or at least no appreciably less than in perfect weather? I still definitely feel like saying bad, inclement weather featuring winds and precipitation in a football game reduces every aspect of predictability, when compared with ideal weather, presumably in direct proportion to just how bad the weather is. Because teams might fail to execute in an inherently more unpredictable fashion. Fumbles, bad snaps, dropped passes, missed tackles, missed blocks, mental lapses, you name it. All of them happening whenever they happen, more or less totally unpredictable, because the players cannot sufficiently account for nor accommodate the suboptimal conditions in their performance. To say nothing of any sudden, ad hoc tactical rearranging and rejiggering done on the fly, that would definitely increase the unpredictability. Necessitated by the all the unpredictable miscues, or at least the fear of them, and the regular playbook and strategies cannot be reliably predicted to work as originally planned and usually do. All because of the bad weather. You could safely predict that overall, execution will be markedly reduced in terrible weather, but what sort of final outcome that will end up in is what's so unpredictable.
But It probably won't be 'bad' weather, just cold, and not even all that cold. Hopefully it doesn't snow, but it might! If you had to make a prediction, if there was like, a blizzard, with snow on the ground and snow falling, that a run-first team is likely to do better. But maybe not, that's what makes it unpredictable. You don't really know.
NFL statistics show that passing production decreases by 12% in rain/light snow. The QB accuracy gets impacted and the routes get impacted.
In fact the running back in such weather gets the advantage you are talking about, a minute advantage because he knows where he is going and the defender reactions have more risk in slipping.
Nice try at trying to change the narrative
I was specific in referring to field conditions
When field conditions are compromised, it favors the receivers significantly
Not really
What happens to your percentage when the rain or snow stops, but the field is in bad condition
Bad weather usually causes turnovers, which are unpredictable, and turnovers influence outcomes
I was clear in stating that the receivers have an advantage when field conditions are compromised, that’s irrefutable
But doesn’t favor the QB, or completion percentage. The receivers can’t throw it to themselves
Even if that's true, that doesn't mean it's favorable to pass. You ignored my comments about the QB having a harder time passing, as setting his feet is difficult and the ball is wet, so it's harder to get a grip. WRs have a harder time catching the ball, as the ball is wet. The timing between QB and WRs are off. WRs are just as susceptible to slipping on the wet grass as any other player. So who is the person that "know a lot about football" that says passing is an advantage to running the ball in bad weather? Never mind the stats that BGI just posted about passing production decreasing. That can't possibly be true.
maybe
Did you see the other snow bowl? Raiders @ Pats 2001. Belichek figured out that passing, not running was needed to move the ball in the second half. It was very hard to change direction on the field but not hard for Brady to throw in a straight line.
FWIW. Snow typically correlates with more points and benefits the passing game depending on other factors
ND not motivated ? First home playoff game ever ? Comparing it to NIU is laughable. ND was coming off a huge road win against a team they should have beaten rather handily. The weather looks fine. Not supposed to snow after early afternoon. I hope it is windy though as that will effect the Indiana passing attack way more than temperatures in the 20s. I haven't felt this good about a big game since FSU in 93.
Wow, some information that has absolutely nothing to do with the game, thanks.
You think our current players who have never played for a title are less motivated because previous players have? What a bunch of BS Haha.
The argument that the weather favors the offense is that the quarterback and receivers know their routes...and the defense has a harder time reacting in slippery conditions...giving the passing game the edge. Now, if you look at how IU operated in snow against Purdue...there is some validity to that. The difference is, this is Notre Dame's defense...so how much gap is erased? The same is true with ND's offense....they know where they are going to. So weather conditions can favor the offenses.
Notre Dame lost to NIU because they didn't show up.
I typically don’t agree with people that use bold font to make a point. Unfortunately, I find myself in the anxious camp with this game. I don’t like the matchup and this is a classic lose lose situation for Notre Dame. Win and most of thecountry will claim that Indiana was simply a fraud. Lose and ND is the fraud. I don’t feel good about this game at all.
Holy shit, you mean when IU destroyed Purdue by an almost identical but even slightly greater margin than we did, that was in the snow??? I just saw the box score, I didn't see the highlights. Alright well, that is a bad omen. That's definitely not what we wanted. Hopefully it doesn't snow.
And just to repeat, even though it's not weather related, IU is obviously very good. ND will totally have to play their best to win, in any weather. This is a pick 'em game if there ever was one. If it means that much to you to swagger around beforehand and say we got this, and these guys are a distinctly inferior bunch, then you do what you gotta do. But undeniably IU is really good, and I just wish they already hadn't played in a snow game, and totally dominated a common opponent even worse than us.
And just to repeat, even though it's not weather related, IU is obviously very good. ND will totally have to play their best to win, in any weather. This is a pick 'em game if there ever was one. If it means that much to you to swagger around beforehand and say we got this, and these guys are a distinctly inferior bunch, then you do what you gotta do. But undeniably IU is really good, and I just wish they already hadn't played in a snow game, and totally dominated a common opponent even worse than us.
Really, so it's the post-game narrative and potential for disgrace or ridicule or something that has you all concerned, and mainly because it could actually affect the outcome of the game itself? Like, the fact that we have nothing to gain from a win, with regard to the currently reigning CFB narrative of who's hot and who's not and all that, that it will hinder our performance, I guess because we don't have anything to play for or something. For the team itself, and obviously not the fans who won't be playing. And so there's no motivation. And the actual mood in the locker room, amongst the players and coaches themselves, is that everyone's expecting us to win, and so we can only go down from there, and that's just going to paralyze us. It will get under our skin, and we'll play tight and not to lose.
It's possible I suppose. MF has been pretty good with keeping motivation good and performance levels high. It is totally fair to say that IU is a team of destiny more than we are. But that's just the narrative, it doesn't really mean anything. As long as the players themselves are pumped and ready to roll like they have been all season, I think we'll be okay. I just hope it doesn't snow.
Stats also show that running game stats improve only slightly in snow and rain....and this is attributed to reduced passing attempts. I tend to think that how individual players handle the weather matters. Rourke won't be bothered by the snow...he as demonstrated that. How Notre Dame covers his receivers matters a great deal. Can the D pressure Rourke in these conditions? He isn't particularly mobile....so does the D front gain a step or lose a step with this weather to disrupt him?
Notre Dame has already been labeled a fraud for years in big games. IU hasn't had to fight that stigma. The pressure to win is on Notre Dame, without question. Its been 20 years since this program has legitimately sniffed a title. There has always been a talent gap, especially at quarterback.
