The Dabo Swinney/Clemson model

[chaseball]

Dabo Swinney took over at Clemson, hired some really good assistant coaches that turned into the best coaching staff in college football. As those coaches profile grew, Swinney took a massive pay-cut to retain them, thus opening the door for 7 figure coordinator contracts that are the norm now. He and his staff developed mid-teens talent into national title contention, and then leveraged their growing popularity into top 10 and ultimately top 5 classes.

A lot of people will look at Clemson as an example of a program that ND can replicate. But there's a reason why Dabo Swinney is an auto lock for the college football HoF. He's the only example of this model working. Every other national title winner in the modern era of college football took over a program, leveraged the "new coach" hype into multiple elite recruiting classes, and then won a national title within their first several seasons as their classes matured.

You know what you have in a coach in the modern era of college football after 3-4 years. Once a coach establishes a baseline it's very rare for that coach to suddenly deviate from that baseline one way or the other. What you see is what you get.

The idea that Brian Kelly after 10 years is going to either A. suddenly start recruiting top 5 classes or B. suddenly start producing elite football seasons (without elite talent) is so minuscule/low probability at this point that it's silly that people are hanging their hats on this. If nothing else, it should be crystal clear that Brian Kelly is no Dabo Swinney.

I repeat in order for ND to win a national title THEY MUST neutralize the huge talent gap that the current top ~3-4 programs have on them. And in order to do that, it's going to require a head coach not named Brian Kelly.

 

[Golson5]

Dabo Swinney took over that program, hired some really good assistant coaches that turned into the best coaching staff in college football, took a massive paycut to retain those coaches as their profile grew (this was back before assistant coaches started making 7+ figure contracts), and then developed mid-teens talent into national title contention, and then leveraged their growing profile as a program into top 10 & top 5 classes.

A lot of people will look at Clemson as an example of a program that ND can replicate. But there's a reason why Dabo Swinney is an auto lock for the college football HoF. He's the only example of this model working. Every other national title winner in the modern era of college football took over a program, leveraged the "new coach" hype into multiple elite recruiting classes, and then won a national title within their first several seasons as their classes matured.

You know what you have in a coach in the modern era of college football after 3-4 years. Once a coach establishes a baseline it's very rare for that coach to suddenly deviate from that baseline one way or another. What you see is what you get.

The idea that Brian Kelly after 10 years is going to either A. suddenly start recruiting top 5 classes or B. suddenly start producing top F/+ seasons is so minuscule/low probability at this point that it's silly that people are hanging their hats on this. If nothing else, it should be crystal clear that Brian Kelly is no Dabo Swinney. Moreover, there are no other examples of the Clemson model working anywhere else in college football.

I repeat, in order for ND to win a national title in our lifetime THEY MUST neutralize the huge talent gap that the current top 3-4 programs have on them. And in order to do that, it's going to require a head coach not named Brian Kelly. And this point should be unequivocal by now.

^^^ Still an irrelevant tool

 

[HillRock86]

^^^ Still an irrelevant tool

Like yourself. A goof who in the space of less than one year has put over 2500 posts on a free message board. How about being productive with some of that time Golson. At least what Chase says is true. Either Kelly brings in better talent or he leaves here in year 14 or 15, whenever his extension ends, without a title. That would be a disgrace. But hey maybe you and the other Kelly supporters can convince Notre Dame to honor those two teams that posted 12-0 regular seasons that ended in blowouts. (Alabama and Clemson). Maybe that's what Notre Dame has become. I'm sure there are enough of you on this board to petition Jack to get it going in time for 2022.

 

[nemeth#5]

^^^^^^Probably a Chase alias

 

[hvillebill]

Dabo Swinney took over at Clemson, hired some really good assistant coaches that turned into the best coaching staff in college football, took a massive paycut to retain those coaches as their profile grew (starting the era of 7 figure contracts to coordinators/assistant coaches), and then developed mid-teens talent into national title contention, and then leveraged their growing popularity into top 10 and ultimately top 5 classes.

A lot of people will look at Clemson as an example of a program that ND can replicate. But there's a reason why Dabo Swinney is an auto lock for the college football HoF. He's the only example of this model working. Every other national title winner in the modern era of college football took over a program, leveraged the "new coach" hype into multiple elite recruiting classes, and then won a national title within their first several seasons as their classes matured.

You know what you have in a coach in the modern era of college football after 3-4 years. Once a coach establishes a baseline it's very rare for that coach to suddenly deviate from that baseline one way or the other. What you see is what you get.

The idea that Brian Kelly after 10 years is going to either A. suddenly start recruiting top 5 classes or B. suddenly start producing elite football seasons (without elite talent) is so minuscule/low probability at this point that it's silly that people are hanging their hats on this. If nothing else, it should be crystal clear that Brian Kelly is no Dabo Swinney.

I repeat in order for ND to win a national title THEY MUST neutralize the huge talent gap that the current top ~3-4 programs have on them. And in order to do that, it's going to require a head coach not named Brian Kelly.

If it was that easy, every other team out there would be doing something to get up to Dabo's standard. No coach would survive more than 3-4 years at any program unless they win a Natty. Would you want Notre Dame to constantly change coaches? A revolving door never works in any business.

Musical chairs, anyone?

 

[twalsh]

Dabo Swinney took over at Clemson, hired some really good assistant coaches that turned into the best coaching staff in college football, took a massive paycut to retain those coaches as their profile grew (starting the era of 7 figure contracts to coordinators/assistant coaches), and then developed mid-teens talent into national title contention, and then leveraged their growing popularity into top 10 and ultimately top 5 classes.

A lot of people will look at Clemson as an example of a program that ND can replicate. But there's a reason why Dabo Swinney is an auto lock for the college football HoF. He's the only example of this model working. Every other national title winner in the modern era of college football took over a program, leveraged the "new coach" hype into multiple elite recruiting classes, and then won a national title within their first several seasons as their classes matured.

You know what you have in a coach in the modern era of college football after 3-4 years. Once a coach establishes a baseline it's very rare for that coach to suddenly deviate from that baseline one way or the other. What you see is what you get.

The idea that Brian Kelly after 10 years is going to either A. suddenly start recruiting top 5 classes or B. suddenly start producing elite football seasons (without elite talent) is so minuscule/low probability at this point that it's silly that people are hanging their hats on this. If nothing else, it should be crystal clear that Brian Kelly is no Dabo Swinney.

I repeat in order for ND to win a national title THEY MUST neutralize the huge talent gap that the current top ~3-4 programs have on them. And in order to do that, it's going to require a head coach not named Brian Kelly.

Yeah ok Chase. Labor Day can’t get here soon enough.

 

[tbonesays]

If it was that easy, every other team out there would be doing something to get up to Dabo's standard. No coach would survive more than 3-4 years at any program unless they win a Natty. Would you want Notre Dame to constantly change coaches? A revolving door never works in any business.

Musical chairs, anyone?

Did BK put an addition on his house?

 

[Catholicfan95]

Chase, you lose credibility with every post. At some point you just start to look like the crazy guy who talks to the moon.

 

[NDSMC78]

What is Chase gonna say if ND beats Clemson this season?

 

[chaseball]

What is Chase gonna say if ND beats Clemson this season?

It's going to take more than a one-off victory vs Clemson or a one-off higher ranked class to really start changing the perception of the football program at this point.

 

[d1042]

Dabo has benefited greatly by the California exodus. If the Ca. schools were competitive talent might be more widely dispersed.

 

[chitown sot]

Dabo Swinney took over at Clemson, hired some really good assistant coaches that turned into the best coaching staff in college football, took a massive paycut to retain those coaches as their profile grew (starting the era of 7 figure contracts to coordinators/assistant coaches), and then developed mid-teens talent into national title contention, and then leveraged their growing popularity into top 10 and ultimately top 5 classes.

A lot of people will look at Clemson as an example of a program that ND can replicate. But there's a reason why Dabo Swinney is an auto lock for the college football HoF. He's the only example of this model working. Every other national title winner in the modern era of college football took over a program, leveraged the "new coach" hype into multiple elite recruiting classes, and then won a national title within their first several seasons as their classes matured.

You know what you have in a coach in the modern era of college football after 3-4 years. Once a coach establishes a baseline it's very rare for that coach to suddenly deviate from that baseline one way or the other. What you see is what you get.

The idea that Brian Kelly after 10 years is going to either A. suddenly start recruiting top 5 classes or B. suddenly start producing elite football seasons (without elite talent) is so minuscule/low probability at this point that it's silly that people are hanging their hats on this. If nothing else, it should be crystal clear that Brian Kelly is no Dabo Swinney.

I repeat in order for ND to win a national title THEY MUST neutralize the huge talent gap that the current top ~3-4 programs have on them. And in order to do that, it's going to require a head coach not named Brian Kelly.

Absolutely, love it. Couldn't have said it better. Here come the bk apologists........can i hear a One........a two........a three.....

 

[chitown sot]

^^^ Still an irrelevant tool

the truth hurts butter cup

 

[chitown sot]

What is Chase gonna say if ND beats Clemson this season?

It wont happen. Why??? Because bk doesn't know how thats why

 

[chitown sot]

It's going to take more than a one-off victory vs Clemson or a one-off higher ranked class to really start changing the perception of the football program at this point.

It will never happen chase, bk has no clue. Well???? Maybe he does, he says he has to recruit better. How about coaching better???

 

[NDSMC78]

It's going to take more than a one-off victory vs Clemson or a one-off higher ranked class to really start changing the perception of the football program at this point.

Interesting. ND is a top 10 program now, but beating Clemson won't move the needle at all?

 

[W8LNXYR]

What is Chase gonna say if ND beats Clemson this season?

If ND wins, it’s because Clemson beats themselves. Sorry to say. 60% Clemson wins by 2 touchdowns, 25% Clemson wins closer game, 13% ND wins a close game, 2% ND wins by 2 touchdowns.

 

[NDSMC78]

If ND wins, it’s because Clemson beats themselves. Sorry to say. 60% Clemson wins by 2 touchdowns, 25% Clemson wins closer game, 13% ND wins a close game, 2% ND wins by 2 touchdowns.

You don't mind if I actually wait and see how the game plays out, do you?

 

[Patrirish]

Dabo Swinney took over at Clemson, hired some really good assistant coaches that turned into the best coaching staff in college football, took a massive paycut to retain those coaches as their profile grew (starting the era of 7 figure contracts to coordinators/assistant coaches), and then developed mid-teens talent into national title contention, and then leveraged their growing popularity into top 10 and ultimately top 5 classes.

A lot of people will look at Clemson as an example of a program that ND can replicate. But there's a reason why Dabo Swinney is an auto lock for the college football HoF. He's the only example of this model working. Every other national title winner in the modern era of college football took over a program, leveraged the "new coach" hype into multiple elite recruiting classes, and then won a national title within their first several seasons as their classes matured.

You know what you have in a coach in the modern era of college football after 3-4 years. Once a coach establishes a baseline it's very rare for that coach to suddenly deviate from that baseline one way or the other. What you see is what you get.

The idea that Brian Kelly after 10 years is going to either A. suddenly start recruiting top 5 classes or B. suddenly start producing elite football seasons (without elite talent) is so minuscule/low probability at this point that it's silly that people are hanging their hats on this. If nothing else, it should be crystal clear that Brian Kelly is no Dabo Swinney.

I repeat in order for ND to win a national title THEY MUST neutralize the huge talent gap that the current top ~3-4 programs have on them. And in order to do that, it's going to require a head coach not named Brian Kelly.

Why don’t you start by comparing the academic standards and entrance requirements, then tell us how you can level a very uneven playing field.

 

[mirer03]

Dabo Swinney took over at Clemson, hired some really good assistant coaches that turned into the best coaching staff in college football, took a massive paycut to retain those coaches as their profile grew (starting the era of 7 figure contracts to coordinators/assistant coaches), and then developed mid-teens talent into national title contention, and then leveraged their growing popularity into top 10 and ultimately top 5 classes.

A lot of people will look at Clemson as an example of a program that ND can replicate. But there's a reason why Dabo Swinney is an auto lock for the college football HoF. He's the only example of this model working. Every other national title winner in the modern era of college football took over a program, leveraged the "new coach" hype into multiple elite recruiting classes, and then won a national title within their first several seasons as their classes matured.

You know what you have in a coach in the modern era of college football after 3-4 years. Once a coach establishes a baseline it's very rare for that coach to suddenly deviate from that baseline one way or the other. What you see is what you get.

The idea that Brian Kelly after 10 years is going to either A. suddenly start recruiting top 5 classes or B. suddenly start producing elite football seasons (without elite talent) is so minuscule/low probability at this point that it's silly that people are hanging their hats on this. If nothing else, it should be crystal clear that Brian Kelly is no Dabo Swinney.

I repeat in order for ND to win a national title THEY MUST neutralize the huge talent gap that the current top ~3-4 programs have on them. And in order to do that, it's going to require a head coach not named Brian Kelly.

Another garbage post. Shocking.

 

[NotreDame du Lac]

I don’t understand the Chase haters. He makes some bad points but for his good points it’s clear that people just don’t want to hear literally anything negative. We need to recruit better to beat Clemson and win 2 playoff games. I don’t think any logical person would disagree.

 

[hvillebill]

I don’t understand the Chase haters. He makes some bad points but for his good points it’s clear that people just don’t want to hear literally anything negative. We need to recruit better to beat Clemson and win 2 playoff games. I don’t think any logical person would disagree.

It's probably because he starts a new thread and says the same thing on a daily basis.

 

[TDIrish27]

It's probably because he starts a new thread and says the same thing on a daily basis.

Which at least shows he's taking his meds on a regular basis

 

[BGI User 1596]

I don’t understand the Chase haters. He makes some bad points but for his good points it’s clear that people just don’t want to hear literally anything negative. We need to recruit better to beat Clemson and win 2 playoff games. I don’t think any logical person would disagree.

Chase should be made one of the board moderators.

 

[Kontiki09]

It's going to take more than a one-off victory vs Clemson or a one-off higher ranked class to really start changing the perception of the football program at this point.

So let me get this straight. You clearly aren’t happy with ND football because we can’t compete with the top teams in the country. Then a poster says he/she is curious what you’ll say if we beat Clemson this year. Then you say that beating Clemson this year isn’t good enough.

Makes total sense.

 

[irishalice]

Yeah ok Chase. Labor Day can’t get here soon enough.

208 days till the Irish kickoff in Ireland.

 

[irishalice]

Interesting. ND is a top 10 program now, but beating Clemson won't move the needle at all?

The Irish could go undefeated in 2020 and win the natty over an undefeated team but the board malcontents would think the season and championship were nothing but a fluke and complain even louder.

 

[Kontiki09]

The Irish could go undefeated in 2020 and win the natty over an undefeated team but the board malcontents would think the season and championship were nothing but a fluke and complain even louder.

If we win a Natty and people still complain on this board, they should be permanently banned lol.

 

[twalsh]

I don’t understand the Chase haters. He makes some bad points but for his good points it’s clear that people just don’t want to hear literally anything negative. We need to recruit better to beat Clemson and win 2 playoff games. I don’t think any logical person would disagree.

It's the same crap, droning on and on. Chase just uses various premises to say the exact same thing.

 

[NotreDame du Lac]

If we win a Natty and people still complain on this board, they should be permanently banned lol.

Nobody would complain. The fact is, winning a natty is Mission impossible. To think it’s possible is so naive it’s absurd. We won’t be favored to compete with Clemson in a regular season game let alone beat the likes of Ohio State and Bama in back to back playoff games. Get real.

 

[Kontiki09]

Nobody would complain. The fact is, winning a natty is Mission impossible. To think it’s possible is so naive it’s absurd. We won’t be favored to compete with Clemson in a regular season game let alone beat the likes of Ohio State and Bama in back to back playoff games. Get real.

Calm down man, lol

 

[BGI User 1596]

Nobody would complain. The fact is, winning a natty is Mission impossible. To think it’s possible is so naive it’s absurd. We won’t be favored to compete with Clemson in a regular season game let alone beat the likes of Ohio State and Bama in back to back playoff games. Get real.

Ouch!

 

[IrishInOntario]

I can only speak for myself, but the reason why I often disagree with Chase is because his "big picture" view rarely allows for nuance. For example, I can't remember a time that he watched the film of a 3 star kid that was clearly under-valued and said "wow. That kid is going to be a great player, despite his ranking." Rather, he'll cling to rankings, regardless of the individual situation. Him and I agree that you need to recruit near the top of college football to win multiple national championships and compete with the big boys, but where we tend to disagree is in cases such as Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah.

"People like me" watch that film and see why he's ranked as a 3 star tweener, but also see how he could be a homerun in Clark Lea's defense as a Rover. Three years later, he plays like a 5 star player, despite his ranking. "People like Chase" don't want to recruit Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah type players because of where they rank, but sure do cheer for them when they prove the rankings system wrong and become stars down the road.

I respect the fact that Chase understands that you need to recruit at a high level to win. What I struggle with is that he is so attached to rankings that he doesn't allow himself to see a JOK, or a Tranquill, or a Tremble, or a Claypool coming.

 

[tbonesays]

Dabo has benefited greatly by the California exodus. If the Ca. schools were competitive talent might be more widely dispersed.

How many CA kids went to South Carolina?

 

[d1042]

How many CA kids went to South Carolina?

a bit back there were stats and like 3/4 of Ca top players left Ca.
DJU and Young (@ 1 time USC ‘locks’) both left Ca. The Two top QB’s nationally.

 

[chaseball]

I can only speak for myself, but the reason why I often disagree with Chase is because his "big picture" view rarely allows for nuance. For example, I can't remember a time that he watched the film of a 3 star kid that was clearly under-valued and said "wow. That kid is going to be a great player, despite his ranking." Rather, he'll cling to rankings, regardless of the individual situation. Him and I agree that you need to recruit near the top of college football to win multiple national championships and compete with the big boys, but where we tend to disagree is in cases such as Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah.

"People like me" watch that film and see why he's ranked as a 3 star tweener, but also see how he could be a homerun in Clark Lea's defense as a Rover. Three years later, he plays like a 5 star player, despite his ranking. "People like Chase" don't want to recruit Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah type players because of where they rank, but sure do cheer for them when they prove the rankings system wrong and become stars down the road.

I respect the fact that Chase understands that you need to recruit at a high level to win. What I struggle with is that he is so attached to rankings that he doesn't allow himself to see a JOK, or a Tranquill, or a Tremble, or a Claypool coming.

I welcome disagreement. All I ask is that if you disagree that you back up your point of view with a well thought out/articulate argument in response. Which you always do and I appreciate that.

As for the point that you are making here, I think it's fair criticism that I focus more on the big picture and don't really get into the weeds with individual evaluations and thus can overlook some underrated players. But I let the experts (yourself included) educate me by highlighting potential high upside project guys who might have overlooked film and be good system fits. I'm hearing a lot of that type of feedback about a guy like Xavier Watts in this 2020 class.

I will say though that every program takes their version of a JOK (a guy who might be a pass to a lot of other programs but be the perfect fit in their specific system like NDs 4-2-5). My point is, I don't see how this gives Notre Dame a unique advantage over any other program in college football who all have their own version of unheralded recruits that are perfect system fits.

Alabama takes 3 star players all the time who beat out much higher rated talent to earn a spot on their 2 deep (as an example).

This leads to an important point that I don't think gets enough emphasis with our fan base and media people specifically: it isn't enough to point out what ND does well (e.g. how much NFL players they are developing, how much 4 star players they are recruiting, how many NFL prospects they have on their roster, etc. etc. WITHOUT benchmarking/comparing it to other football programs.). That last part gets overlooked way too often.

For example, if ND is developing 5 NFL prospects every year it looks good in isolation (we have 5 NFL prospects on our roster!) but if 10 competing programs are developing 10-15 NFL players on their respective rosters every year then ND obviously has some catching up to do and it isn't so good after all.

 

[Catholicfan95]

I can only speak for myself, but the reason why I often disagree with Chase is because his "big picture" view rarely allows for nuance. For example, I can't remember a time that he watched the film of a 3 star kid that was clearly under-valued and said "wow. That kid is going to be a great player, despite his ranking." Rather, he'll cling to rankings, regardless of the individual situation. Him and I agree that you need to recruit near the top of college football to win multiple national championships and compete with the big boys, but where we tend to disagree is in cases such as Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah.

"People like me" watch that film and see why he's ranked as a 3 star tweener, but also see how he could be a homerun in Clark Lea's defense as a Rover. Three years later, he plays like a 5 star player, despite his ranking. "People like Chase" don't want to recruit Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah type players because of where they rank, but sure do cheer for them when they prove the rankings system wrong and become stars down the road.

I respect the fact that Chase understands that you need to recruit at a high level to win. What I struggle with is that he is so attached to rankings that he doesn't allow himself to see a JOK, or a Tranquill, or a Tremble, or a Claypool coming.

I think it is pretty clear that you have two sides of the aisle here. Chase operates strictly analytically. It is all about numbers, formulas and equations/algorithms. While those things are important it is clear that when and where that data is applicable alludes him, as do the data points collected to create these suggested points. Personally, I feel like everything you present is tangible while everything chase presents is theoretical, and while some of the theory could make sense, it just does not stand or compete against what you present. I guess for me, as a someone who has coached football and has been around the game I have seen first hand what you say or use to make your point so that is why it is tangible to me, it has relevance. In my opinion when you lack credibility while trying to make a point it just further proves you do not want to learn, you just want to be told you are right or you are looking for validation that what you are presenting is good research. Based off of everything you post and present I can trust you credibility because it is clearly applicable in a majority of conversations that are discussed. In short, I appreciate your view point as I share a lot of the same ideologies and practices you do.

 

[Patrirish]

Dabo Swinney took over at Clemson, hired some really good assistant coaches that turned into the best coaching staff in college football. As those coaches profile grew, Swinney took a massive pay-cut to retain them, thus opening the door for 7 figure coordinator contracts that are the norm now. He and his staff developed mid-teens talent into national title contention, and then leveraged their growing popularity into top 10 and ultimately top 5 classes.

A lot of people will look at Clemson as an example of a program that ND can replicate. But there's a reason why Dabo Swinney is an auto lock for the college football HoF. He's the only example of this model working. Every other national title winner in the modern era of college football took over a program, leveraged the "new coach" hype into multiple elite recruiting classes, and then won a national title within their first several seasons as their classes matured.

You know what you have in a coach in the modern era of college football after 3-4 years. Once a coach establishes a baseline it's very rare for that coach to suddenly deviate from that baseline one way or the other. What you see is what you get.

The idea that Brian Kelly after 10 years is going to either A. suddenly start recruiting top 5 classes or B. suddenly start producing elite football seasons (without elite talent) is so minuscule/low probability at this point that it's silly that people are hanging their hats on this. If nothing else, it should be crystal clear that Brian Kelly is no Dabo Swinney.

I repeat in order for ND to win a national title THEY MUST neutralize the huge talent gap that the current top ~3-4 programs have on them. And in order to do that, it's going to require a head coach not named Brian Kelly.

The number of players who go on to play in the NFL is an indication of the quality of your recruits/recruiting program !

 

[IrishInOntario]

I think it is pretty clear that you have two sides of the aisle here. Chase operates strictly analytically. It is all about numbers, formulas and equations/algorithms. While those things are important it is clear that when and where that data is applicable alludes him, as do the data points collected to create these suggested points. Personally, I feel like everything you present is tangible while everything chase presents is theoretical, and while some of the theory could make sense, it just does not stand or compete against what you present. I guess for me, as a someone who has coached football and has been around the game I have seen first hand what you say or use to make your point so that is why it is tangible to me, it has relevance. In my opinion when you lack credibility while trying to make a point it just further proves you do not want to learn, you just want to be told you are right or you are looking for validation that what you are presenting is good research. Based off of everything you post and present I can trust you credibility because it is clearly applicable in a majority of conversations that are discussed. In short, I appreciate your view point as I share a lot of the same ideologies and practices you do.

In defense of Chase, and as you alluded to, there is a place for analytics and a place for tangible discourse, so I think he has half the equation correct.

Analytics often fail to adequately perceive the elements of the game that cannot be measured statistically. They do a fabulous job of breaking down factors that you can attach numerical value to. Where numbers struggle to be of value in areas where there is applicable nuance.

On the other hand, "the eye test" has holes as well. In particular, we all have a tendancy towards bias and we often struggle to "see through" that bias once we've developed it. Therefore, numbers and analytics can be a great way of confirming our suspicions, or refuting our pre-conceived notions. Ian Book is a perfect example of where my bias led me to believe that he'd never be the starter at ND, let alone a good one. I had to take a step back from my bias, realize that his barely 6'0 frame, and lack of deep ball ability aren't everything and that his numbers supported him being a really solid college quarterback.

We all lack the ability to see the full picture at times. I'm as guilty as anyone.

 

[Catholicfan95]

In defense of Chase, and as you alluded to, there is a place for analytics and a place for tangible discourse, so I think he has half the equation correct.

Analytics often fail to adequately perceive the elements of the game that cannot be measured statistically. They do a fabulous job of breaking down factors that you can attach numerical value to. Where numbers struggle to be of value in areas where there is applicable nuance.

On the other hand, "the eye test" has holes as well. In particular, we all have a tendancy towards bias and we often struggle to "see through" that bias once we've developed it. Therefore, numbers and analytics can be a great way of confirming our suspicions, or refuting our pre-conceived notions. Ian Book is a perfect example of where my bias led me to believe that he'd never be the starter at ND, let alone a good one. I had to take a step back from my bias, realize that his barely 6'0 frame, and lack of deep ball ability aren't everything and that his numbers supported him being a really solid college quarterback.

We all lack the ability to see the full picture at times. I'm as guilty as anyone.

Pro Football Focus is the best analytical data that I have seen presented that is almost 100% applicable and relevant. For me, the information that is presented by Chase most of the time is just irrelevant and it just seems like it forced into conversations. Of course I do understand the methodology and the process Chase is trying to convey, but the data is just not credible or applicable most of the time and its hard to follow how or why the data collected can be applied to situations. Like I said, PFF for me is great and everything they present (almost) pairs well with the eye test and also challenges you look deeper which I enjoy.