Started By
Message
Bill Connelly's 2024 Returning Production
Posted on 2/5/24 at 12:21 pm
Posted on 2/5/24 at 12:21 pm
ESPN.com
Returning Production Pct (FBS RK)
18. Texas A&M - 72%
25. Texas - 70%
31. Missouri - 68%
32. Florida - 68%
47. Georgia - 65%
50. Auburn - 65%
59. S. Carolina - 63%
60. LSU - 63%
67. Oklahoma - 62%
68. Ole Miss - 61%
76. Vanderbilt - 60%
94. Tennessee - 52%
102. Kentucky - 49%
109. Arkansas - 46%
115. Alabama - 44%
122. Miss St - 41%
Returning Offense
16. Missouri - 79%
22. Texas A&M - 77%
25. Georgia - 76%
27. Auburn - 74%
30. Texas - 74%
35. Ole Miss - 71%
39. Florida - 70%
83. Alabama - 56%
84. LSU - 55%
87. Vanderbilt - 54%
89. Miss St - 54%
94. S. Carolina - 52%
99. Arkansas - 50%
107. Tennessee - 46%
110. Kentucky - 45%
111. Oklahoma - 44%
Returning Defense
8. Oklahoma - 79%
18. S. Carolina - 74%
26. LSU - 71%
35. Texas A&M - 67%
38. Texas - 66%
41. Florida - 66%
46. Vanderbilt - 65%
66. Tennessee - 58%
68. Missouri - 58%
78. Auburn - 55%
80. Georgia - 55%
89. Kentucky - 52%
94. Ole Miss - 52%
115. Arkansas - 41%
126. Alabama - 33%
132. Miss St - 27%
For reference, the top 10 last year ( LINK):
1. Florida St. - 87%
2. Kansas - 85%
3. FAU - 83%
4. Wyoming - 83%
5. Michigan - 81%
6. UConn - 80%
7. Texas A&M - 80%
8. Boston Coll. - 78%
9. Missouri - 78%
10. Temple - 77%
Returning Production Pct (FBS RK)
18. Texas A&M - 72%
25. Texas - 70%
31. Missouri - 68%
32. Florida - 68%
47. Georgia - 65%
50. Auburn - 65%
59. S. Carolina - 63%
60. LSU - 63%
67. Oklahoma - 62%
68. Ole Miss - 61%
76. Vanderbilt - 60%
94. Tennessee - 52%
102. Kentucky - 49%
109. Arkansas - 46%
115. Alabama - 44%
122. Miss St - 41%
Returning Offense
16. Missouri - 79%
22. Texas A&M - 77%
25. Georgia - 76%
27. Auburn - 74%
30. Texas - 74%
35. Ole Miss - 71%
39. Florida - 70%
83. Alabama - 56%
84. LSU - 55%
87. Vanderbilt - 54%
89. Miss St - 54%
94. S. Carolina - 52%
99. Arkansas - 50%
107. Tennessee - 46%
110. Kentucky - 45%
111. Oklahoma - 44%
Returning Defense
8. Oklahoma - 79%
18. S. Carolina - 74%
26. LSU - 71%
35. Texas A&M - 67%
38. Texas - 66%
41. Florida - 66%
46. Vanderbilt - 65%
66. Tennessee - 58%
68. Missouri - 58%
78. Auburn - 55%
80. Georgia - 55%
89. Kentucky - 52%
94. Ole Miss - 52%
115. Arkansas - 41%
126. Alabama - 33%
132. Miss St - 27%
For reference, the top 10 last year ( LINK):
1. Florida St. - 87%
2. Kansas - 85%
3. FAU - 83%
4. Wyoming - 83%
5. Michigan - 81%
6. UConn - 80%
7. Texas A&M - 80%
8. Boston Coll. - 78%
9. Missouri - 78%
10. Temple - 77%
4
Posted on 2/5/24 at 12:25 pm to The_Ultimate_Warrior
I'd be far more interested in absolute returning production (e.g. total yards responsible for, first downs, points responsible for on offense; and tackles, PBU's, INT's, etc. for defense) than production percentages.
e.g. aTm's 79% returning offensive production is 79% of frick all
e.g. aTm's 79% returning offensive production is 79% of frick all
Posted on 2/5/24 at 12:34 pm to biclops
Well this is Bill's reasoning behind what the pct means and why he breaks it down the way he does:
quote:
Pct of returning WR/TE receiving yards: 24% of the overall number
Pct returning QB passing yards: 23%
Pct returning OL snaps: 47%
Pct returning RB rushing yards: 6%
Pct returning tackles: 70%
Pct returning passes defensed: 14%
Pct returning tackles for loss: 12%
Pct returning sacks: 4%
quote:
Broken out by position/player, you're looking at roughly 29% for the quarterback, 6% for the running back and each of four wide receivers and/or tight ends and 9% for each offensive lineman. With each year of data, offensive line snaps become a heavier piece of the equation, which I find interesting.
It's a bit trickier on defense, where units aren't as strictly defined and the percentage of returning production is derived both from position units and types of stats (tackles, tackles for loss, sacks, passes defensed).
Perhaps surprisingly, turnover in the back of the defense causes far more of a shift in a team's SP+ rating from year to year than turnover up front. By position, defensive backs make up about 46% of the defensive formula, while linebackers are at 40% and the defensive line is at 14%.
(Remember: This is not based on my personal opinion of positional importance -- it's all about what impacts the numbers the most. On average, teams can evidently overcome turnover upfront more easily than turnover in the back.)
Posted on 2/5/24 at 12:41 pm to The_Ultimate_Warrior
Using prior year SP+ and returning production, which includes transfers, is not really a very good formula for initial rankings (which comes out next week I guess).
For instance, the article notes A&M finished #18 in SP+ last year and has high returning production. Except their returning production had nothing to do with that #18 because the production was done at other schools. A&M barely returns any production from that #18 team. They are importing a new team, so whatever happened last year at A&M is pretty irrelevant.
Not sure how you tweak that. Really isn't much you can do with so many moving pieces.
For instance, the article notes A&M finished #18 in SP+ last year and has high returning production. Except their returning production had nothing to do with that #18 because the production was done at other schools. A&M barely returns any production from that #18 team. They are importing a new team, so whatever happened last year at A&M is pretty irrelevant.
Not sure how you tweak that. Really isn't much you can do with so many moving pieces.
This post was edited on 2/5/24 at 12:42 pm
Posted on 2/5/24 at 1:51 pm to The_Ultimate_Warrior
quote:
84. LSU - 55%
Lose Daniels Nabors Jackson and Diggs (80% of yardage)
Posted on 2/5/24 at 1:55 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
For instance, the article notes A&M finished #18 in SP+ last year and has high returning production. Except their returning production had nothing to do with that #18 because the production was done at other schools. A&M barely returns any production from that #18 team. They are importing a new team, so whatever happened last year at A&M is pretty irrelevant.
I agree it can be deceiving. I think returning starters is often a better measure. A&M does not return Max Johnson, but it does return Weigmann. Johnson had more production last season, but Weigmann is the guy they are much better off returning.
Posted on 2/5/24 at 3:25 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Yea. Quantifying this with the growing insanity that is the transfer portal feels like a fruitless effort at this rate.
I do applaud Connelly for continuing this attempt, giving more numbers to discuss during the offseason. Otherwise, all we would have is "gotta wait and see how this team with 75% of its entire roster turning comes together in September." Though, that may be the only sane response.
I do applaud Connelly for continuing this attempt, giving more numbers to discuss during the offseason. Otherwise, all we would have is "gotta wait and see how this team with 75% of its entire roster turning comes together in September." Though, that may be the only sane response.
Posted on 2/5/24 at 3:26 pm to The_Ultimate_Warrior
Agree - it's better than nothing.
It's just not a sport super conducive to that sort of analytical analysis and prediction because of how much a team unit matters more than collections of individuals, as well as the super small sample size of games.
It's just not a sport super conducive to that sort of analytical analysis and prediction because of how much a team unit matters more than collections of individuals, as well as the super small sample size of games.
Posted on 2/5/24 at 3:30 pm to MetryMauler
quote:
A&M does not return Max Johnson, but it does return Weigmann. Johnson had more production last season, but Weigmann is the guy they are much better off returning
Yep. Honestly using more of PFFs stats (not the grades) that are deeper (QB Rating when targeted for DB, pressure rate, missed tackle %, blocking grade for OL, etc) as a basis for what you are returning would seem to make more sense than the basic stats of yards, tackles, etc.
Connelly used to be a lot more experimental in the SB Nation days. I'm guessing ESPN doesn't want that now, but it stinks that he's stopped being that way now that he's at a place where he probably has more data than he's ever had.
Posted on 2/5/24 at 4:04 pm to The_Ultimate_Warrior
quote:
Returning Defense
26. LSU - 71%
It should be a crime to use the term ‘production’ when discussing the 2023 LSU defense.
Posted on 2/6/24 at 10:36 am to The_Ultimate_Warrior
quote:
Returning Offense
107. Tennessee - 46%
quote:
Everyone's excited about the possibilities of blue-chip quarterback Nico Iamaleava replacing the outgoing Joe Milton III, but that will still produce a drop in experience levels, and despite the addition of explosive Tulane receiver Chris Brazzell II...
Tennessee is swapping Nico for Joe Milton, which he does mention, but they also, get Bru McCoy back (injured in 2023, but 2nd leading receiver in 2022). I couldn't imagine mentioning the receivers as a weakness, yet not mentioning the return of McCoy.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News