Bill Connelly’s preliminary 2020 returning production figures

Georgia’s standing is neither as dire (offense) or as great (defense) as you might expect.  But Dragon*Con Nation will be excited.

Screenshot_2020-01-27 Bill Connelly on Twitter 2020 RETURNING PRODUCTION (preliminary) Top 10 GT, Okla St, Houston, USC, NW[...]

At least until they remember that “returning” is a concept that cuts both ways.

Among the big boys, still no Georgia sighting.

Bill did get asked why no Georgia on defense and here’s his response.

He didn’t address a similar question about the offense, but if he had, I doubt “not terrible” would be his response.

I assume this will be fleshed out at some point.  It’ll be interesting to see the details.



Filed under Georgia Football, Stats Geek!

15 responses to “Bill Connelly’s preliminary 2020 returning production figures

  1. W Cobb Dawg

    Nineteen is a insult to his reader’s intelligence. Connelly is good most of the time, but then he completely blows his credibility with junk like that.


  2. Russ

    This is where his system falls down. Our defense was one of the top defenses in the league and every draft eligible player returned. Our production on defense was spread among 22 players so no huge contributor left, nor returned.

    Bama is in the same position except for injuries. They had numerous starters injured so of course they didn’t contribute. They’ll be back this year and will obviously be better because of it, yet they rank at the bottom of contributors returning.

    His stats show him (and us) exactly what he asked them to show us, but the headings of “top 5” and “bottom 5” are easily misconstrued.


  3. As long as Jort Nation can use Bill C’s stats as a reason to say “This is the year” Dopey beats Kirby straight up, I’m fine with whatever he says. I really enjoyed all of the crowing up to the season and the game and then how they scattered like cockroaches when the light of another loss shined on them.


  4. Texas Dawg

    Let the insects enjoy their moment in the sun. Unfortunately for them, all of this statistic twisting (which is their forte) means absolutely nothing when they run on the field. They play the game on paper, we play it on grass (in the real world, not some fantasy league).


    • Will (the other one)

      I mean the fine print on their returning production is the obvious “defensive production back from a unit that gave up 500 yds and 40+ points to a UGA offense so disappointing the OC was let go after the season.”


  5. Hmmm…lead the SEC and was, what, top 15 nationally in most every defensive statistical category?
    Whatever, Connelly.


    • You guys aren’t getting this.

      UGA finished first in defensive SP+ last season.

      Bill isn’t downgrading UGA’s defense; he’s ranking teams based on returning production.


      • Connor

        And this is just one component of his overall defensive rating. Uga will be very high on his projected overall D for next year. Shocked if we aren’t top 3. But overall production, 19 sounds about right. We lose impact players from each level of the D (reed, crowder, Clark) and a number of bodies off the d line.
        The biggest problem with Connelly’s work is people don’t understand it.


      • Texas Dawg

        Since the insects did not really produce, is it fair to call it returning production? Maybe returning warm bodies?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Dylan Dreyer's Booty

          I agree. I think I do understand it, but to me it is a meaningless stat. If 100% of a shitty defense returns is that good?


          • Connor

            It’s an indicator that improvement is likely. UGA returns a good bit of production from an elite defense and has recruited exceptionally well. I think Connelly’s metrics will show he expects it to be a top unit next year. GT is returning most of the production from a bad defense and is recruiting a bit better than they were. It’ll be reasonable to expect a good bit of improvement.


      • Otto

        Agreed he isn’t saying UGA will slide to 19th in defense.