Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Rushing attempts by QBs this season -- 250

Rushing attempts by non-QBs this season -- 255

Seeing opposing defensive coordinators beam during BG preparations -- priceless.

Speaking of statistics, I am baffled how this can happen. We were ranked 55th in total offense in Div I-A. That is based on yards. So you would think gaining yards would equate to points. Not so with us. We were ranked 91st in scoring. A difference of 36 places. Only UCF (44 and 98)and La Tech (63 and 102) had bigger discrepencies betweeen their ranking in yards and points.

What makes this even more amazing is that we were such a good rushing team. You usually see teams that can pass like crazy but struggle in the red zone. Seldom do you see a rushing team that has as much trouble as we did trying to score. My two gueses as to why? First, field position. We were not an explosive team. Our best plays seemed to go for 6 to 8 yards. It is hard to finish off drives when you have to go 70 or 80 yards all the time and are only getting about 5 or 6 yards per. That means having everything go right for 12-14 plays in a row. The long field makes that difficult.

Second, play calling. After we have run 8 or 10 decent plays in a drive, the defense knows what we are doing. We get down inside the 20 or 30 and keep running the same three or four plays that got us there. We need more variety in the red zone.

Warthog wrote:Speaking of statistics, I am baffled how this can happen. We were ranked 55th in total offense in Div I-A. That is based on yards. So you would think gaining yards would equate to points. Not so with us. We were ranked 91st in scoring. A difference of 36 places. Only UCF (44 and 98)and La Tech (63 and 102) had bigger discrepencies betweeen their ranking in yards and points.

What makes this even more amazing is that we were such a good rushing team. You usually see teams that can pass like crazy but struggle in the red zone. Seldom do you see a rushing team that has as much trouble as we did trying to score. My two gueses as to why? First, field position. We were not an explosive team. Our best plays seemed to go for 6 to 8 yards. It is hard to finish off drives when you have to go 70 or 80 yards all the time and are only getting about 5 or 6 yards per. That means having everything go right for 12-14 plays in a row. The long field makes that difficult.

Second, play calling. After we have run 8 or 10 decent plays in a drive, the defense knows what we are doing. We get down inside the 20 or 30 and keep running the same three or four plays that got us there. We need more variety in the red zone.

TRUE, VERY TRUE. Does anyone from the team read this web site? Any players or coaches out there?

We underutilized our FB this year. We didn't run him enough and we didn't throw to him at all. We relied waaaaay too much on QB draws and short sideline routes to the WR's.

We didn't capitalize on our opportunities because we were not a very precise offense. Sloppy routes, bad reads, poor thorws, missed blocks, repetitive play calling. All those things hurt us badly.

And now here is a similar analysis on the defensive side. We ranked 52nd in yards allowed per game, yet were 98th in points allowed, a drop of 46 positions. Only FIU, Illinois, Oregon, and Wyoming had bigger differences in yards allowed rank and points allowed rank.

Here's another one, not sure if this makes sense, but I think it is interesting. Average yards allowed per game divided by average points allowed per game. This number tells me, on average, how many yards did the defense allow per point.

For example, our number comes in at 11.25. So for every 11.25 yards the defense allowed, the opponent scored one point. Only Temple allowed fewer yards per point, on average (10.95).

To lend some validity to this statistic, Ohio State is best at 26.25 yards per point. So if an offense gained 350 yards against Ohio State, that meant they probably scored about 13 points. If we gave up 350 yards of offense, that meant the opponent probably scored about 31 points. Is that crazy, or what?

Other teams at the OSU end of the spectrum are Va Tech, BYU, Florida, Auburn, Wake Forest, Boston College, Wisconsin, USC, and Wisconsin. Obviously some of the best teams in the country. Teams at our end of the spectrum: Temple, Utah St, Idaho, FIU, Buffalo, Illinois, Wyoming Duke, and Tulane. Not a decent team amoung them.

So what does this mean? It means we gave up way too many points where the opponent scored without our defense even being on the field. SPECIAL TEAMS, SPECIAL TEAMS, SPECIAL TEAMS. Can it get any more obvious? Take away the 8 returns for TDs we allowed, and we fall about 40 places in the ranking of this stat. And that doesn't take into account all the field position we gave up on special teams at all.

Can you tell it's the day before Thanksgiving and I don't want to work?

Warthog, those are some absolutely amazing statistics. They scream underachievement.

San Diego Falcon wrote:Warthog, those are some absolutely amazing statistics. They scream underachievement.

Any guesses as to why we underachieved? My first and only one is coaching.

Warthog wrote:And now here is a similar analysis on the defensive side. We ranked 52nd in yards allowed per game, yet were 98th in points allowed, a drop of 46 positions. Only FIU, Illinois, Oregon, and Wyoming had bigger differences in yards allowed rank and points allowed rank.

Here's another one, not sure if this makes sense, but I think it is interesting. Average yards allowed per game divided by average points allowed per game. This number tells me, on average, how many yards did the defense allow per point.

For example, our number comes in at 11.25. So for every 11.25 yards the defense allowed, the opponent scored one point. Only Temple allowed fewer yards per point, on average (10.95).

To lend some validity to this statistic, Ohio State is best at 26.25 yards per point. So if an offense gained 350 yards against Ohio State, that meant they probably scored about 13 points. If we gave up 350 yards of offense, that meant the opponent probably scored about 31 points. Is that crazy, or what?

Other teams at the OSU end of the spectrum are Va Tech, BYU, Florida, Auburn, Wake Forest, Boston College, Wisconsin, USC, and Wisconsin. Obviously some of the best teams in the country. Teams at our end of the spectrum: Temple, Utah St, Idaho, FIU, Buffalo, Illinois, Wyoming Duke, and Tulane. Not a decent team amoung them.

So what does this mean? It means we gave up way too many points where the opponent scored without our defense even being on the field. SPECIAL TEAMS, SPECIAL TEAMS, SPECIAL TEAMS. Can it get any more obvious? Take away the 8 returns for TDs we allowed, and we fall about 40 places in the ranking of this stat. And that doesn't take into account all the field position we gave up on special teams at all.

Can you tell it's the day before Thanksgiving and I don't want to work?

I think you are missing something in your conclusion, but it does say special teams, sts sts.....That is field position. We are always giving our opponnet a short field.

Globetrotter wrote: I think you are missing something in your conclusion, but it does say special teams, sts sts.....That is field position. We are always giving our opponnet a short field.

Very true. A factor of average starting field would normalize the numbers.

Rightupinthere wrote:

Globetrotter wrote: I think you are missing something in your conclusion, but it does say special teams, sts sts.....That is field position. We are always giving our opponnet a short field.

Very true. A factor of average starting field would normalize the numbers.

We lost the game last night from the opening kickoff. Field position, field position, field position.

Bleeding Orange wrote:

Rightupinthere wrote:

Globetrotter wrote: I think you are missing something in your conclusion, but it does say special teams, sts sts.....That is field position. We are always giving our opponnet a short field.

Very true. A factor of average starting field would normalize the numbers.

We lost the game last night from the opening kickoff. Field position, field position, field position.

Actually, we lost the game last night on Dec 19th, 2002.

The worst rushing coaching I have ever seen in my life. Why do you run into your lineman when you can cut to the left where there is no one?

The QB draw is dead... especially when you run it every other play.

BG deserves a better coach than GB.

What happened to giving Bullock and Macon like a total of 30 carries a game? The running game should be what sets the tempo of your offense and controls the ball, instead we run the ball on 1st and 10, get 5 yards, then throw on 2nd and 5 to force a 3rd and 5 situation and usually a horrendous pass.

If we have a solid RB in Bullock and a good backup in Macon, why the hell don't we utilize them? I guess that's why I'm not a coach...or something like that?

jpfalcon09 wrote:What happened to giving Bullock and Macon like a total of 30 carries a game?

That's just to throw off the other teams. A ruse de guerre, if you will.

It worked like a broken clock.