I don’t think you can make good decisions without considering both teams. You could have a simulation which has all the performance perameters of each team and then match them up. So if your plays that gain a lot of yardage correspond to their plays that they can’t defend well you run those plays. The problem with those simulations is they a built from season statistics so once you get enough data, it’s outdated.

It depends what the stats are. If they are like Eastern Washington gives up 4 yards on average run plays on third down and less than 3. Maybe that’s useful. but if so the coach has probably sensed that from watching film.

I think the type of stats you’re looking for are taken from the set of all college teams, and as such would be unlikely to apply to one team. Whether to kick an extra point would depend on a lot of variables specific to the two teams. How the average teams do in that situation would be of little relevance. Those generic stats would be productive reading for future decisions but using them for game time decisions would be giving them more weight than they deserve.

We had severe depth issues during 2019 at running back and wide receiver. Remember Niko Harris having to play running back and then he got injured? We lost Kraft and Crawford to season ending injuries by mid season.
On the other side of the ball we had a freshman all American become academically ineligible, lost most the veteran linebackers to graduation or injury, and filled in with JC transfers. Lots of reasons besides losing Doss for 2019’s falloff.

That’s not a movie about a guy saying we're happy to miss the medal round.

if we were competitive with everyone we would have beat some of them when the playoffs were on the line. We’re 0-8 against Eastern and what is it, maybe losing the last five to Weber? Weber’s coach says their freshmen class this year is the best they’ve ever had. We will have a struggle to make the playoffs this fall.

Rebuilding from Maier definitely, But not from Doss. How many years do we want to be missing a wide receiver who was a undrafted free agent. Every team we play losses players of that caliber frequently, it’s not something to dwell on two years later.

Liking what you got is a key to happiness.

On the other hand, if, perchance, we had qualified, isn’t winning a championship a goal? We have no guarantee of making the playoffs in the fall; indeed the odds are against it. If we had made the playoffs it would have been a net positive.

The evolution is interesting because the single wing first gained popularity when the forward pass was made legal, but retained the ability to run the ball. Being the predominate offense for forty years or so there are almost an infinite number of variations. After it lost favor to the T, and then colleges started favoring spread formations with the direct snap and wing backs. there was a realization that the ideas behind the single wing run plays could work from the spread. With teams like ours that line up in multiple formations, why not throw in some wildcat or single wing type formations? Offenses are getting harder to classify as they're not wedded to a formation but can chose different ones. This is nothing new. Notre Dame used to switch between a T and a single Wing variant just before the snap, The wildcat, as used originally in the pros usually used the same personnel and just moved the QB out as a flanker. so a team could change with the same personnel. It’s all just a way to try to either fool the opponent or to get double team blocks at the point of attack.

So none of the Idaho QBs made the trip but they used a guy who was 3000 yard passer in high school and was Washington State 3A player of the year. Also a star wrestler in high school, and won a bronze medal in Judo representing team USA in junior Pan Am games. Looked like Tompkins out there, tough to tackle and sense of where the open field was. 6’0” 203 lb.
They ran out of the pistol mostly. They had some direct snaps to other running backs.

we need Crawford involved in that play.

The thing about the rule is that it’s broad enough that people don’t know what the infraction was, and assume it was some dangerous or dirty play. No way the play involved possible head injury to the ball carrier, his head was not involved. No way was it intended to injure. In my opinion it was t even forceable contact beyond making a legal tackle.
The issue of the review with no flag in order to protect players is pretty questionable. If a players play is excessively dangerous or forceful, that should be apparent on the field. Looking at a tackle in slow motion to determine in a legalistic way if a rule was violated is overkill.

I guess I shouldn’t rely on my memory.
That’s really a joke this season with so few teams playing in the MEAC.
Cal Poly would be a contender in that league.

Thare are 10 automatic qualifiers and six at large teams. So in theory they pick the six best teams that don’t automatically qualify, but it’s their opinion, not any poll.

I think we need to withhold judgement on who should be our QB. We’ve seen Tompkins play maybe two drives where he’s thrown any passes..
We don’t know how the QBs compare in seeing the open guy and making the right pass. Can’t tell that from TV.
We need a QB to get the ball into the hands of Babb, Hutton, Crawford Castles etc. I think Tompkins might be very good at doing that but too soon to tell. Same with Rodrigues although there is more film on him so coaches have more to evaluate. Hopefully we can win with either guy and can have a QB controversy for the ages.

That’s really key. If you can review aspects of a play without a flag, why don’t we see that with holding and pass interference, uncalled infractions that show up often in replays?

I don’t think they passed

That’s exactly right, literally enforcing the rule makes football impossible. That’s why they say in the beginning of the rule;
Note 1: "Targeting" means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball.
Someone in the booth who called fot the review of that play ignored that,

I agree with your interpretation, I posted that section of the rule almost simultaneous as you did, but with the opinion the rule is a mess.
I think it’s slanderous to call someone for a personal foul and an ejection for this kind of play
What is particularly egregious was it didn’t seem to be called on the field. I bet you could make the case for rule being called on a large percentage of plays where the ball carrier is running toward the defensive player.

They ignore ergonomics. How do you lean forward, get low, and put your shoulder into a guy, which is what you need to do to stop a runner coming straight at you without lowering your head? If you lower your shoulder your head lowers also. if you pull your head back and lower your shoulder you’ll break your neck if your head makes contact
This part of the rule should be limited to contact with the opponents head, or to a defenseless player, in line with most of the sections of the rule.