Inside the Numbers: Clemson's Offensive Playcalling vs Georgia Tech
by FIGUREFOUR on Oct 26, 2010 11:58 PM EDT
in FUTBAW
Email
PrintWe have repeatedly had complaints about the Clemson playcalling. Please do not get me wrong, we are pleased to get a win against Tech, were happy about the overall offensive numbers (yards and points), and were pleased with the way that our defense played last Saturday. Thus, there was plenty to be pleased about, including shutting up the Jacket faitful who were quick to tell us how superior Tech is/was at the game of football.
I do however, think that we are not utilizing all of our weapons as well as possible. Let's give this one a look.
We will start with Andre Ellington:
|
Quarter |
Rush Att. |
Tot Yards |
YPC |
|
1 |
7 |
78 |
11.1 |
|
2 |
1 |
42 |
42 |
|
3 |
2 |
5 |
2.5 |
|
4 |
10 |
41 |
4.1 |
|
Total |
20 |
166 |
8.3 |
After ripping it up with 7 carries for 78 yards in the first quarter, Ellington carried the ball a mere three times in quarters 2 and 3 combined, with his lone second quarter carry going for 42 yards. These numbers tell me one thing: Ellington needs to touch the ball, preferably more than eight times a half especially when the man has 120 yards on those eight carries.
After seeing this 1st half production, the Tigers came out and rewarded the ACC's most productive back with a whopping two carries in the third quarter. I understand that there were a couple of things we may have been trying to work on and players that needed reps, but 2 carries? That seems way too few. Ellington then came back and got to the magic number of 20 carries in a game on a long 4th quarter drive that we were all happy to see. We need to see Ellington get more carries throughout the game. (more after the jump)
One thing that we heard here from many places is how Clemson ran the ball 37 times and threw a mere 27 times (obviously a +10 in the number of rushes category). First I would like to look at the overall play breakdown per quarter then give you a cumulative percentage as the game progressed. You will notice that the majority of our rushing attempts outside of the 1st quarter occurred only when we were trying to run the clock out to preserve the victory.
Hence, here is a play breakdown per quarter:
|
Quarter |
No. of Rushing Plays |
No. of Passing Plays |
Total Plays |
% Rush |
% Pass |
|
1 |
12 |
12 |
24 |
50% |
50% |
|
2 |
3 |
7 |
10 |
30% |
70% |
|
3 |
2 |
6 |
8 |
25% |
75% |
|
4 |
20 |
2 |
22 |
91% |
9% |
|
Total |
37 |
27 |
64 |
58% |
42% |
Clemson was definitely balanced in the first quarter but was extremely pass happy in the 2nd and 3rd periods. Clemson then needed to burn time and ran the ball effectively in the fourth quarter. Clemson has to do a better job than we did Saturday with mid-game playcalling. 70-75% of the plays in the 2nd/3rd quarter passes? Especially when we ran the ball so well with Ellington? I understand that Ellington's long run in the 2nd took away possible future running attempts but this ratio seems extremely out of whack.
We put together cumulative stats (totalled at the end of each quarter) and these statistics tell a clearer tale:
|
|
% Rushing Plays (Cumulative) |
% Passing Plays(Cumulative) |
|
Through 1Q |
50% |
50% |
|
Through 2Q |
44% |
56% |
|
Through 3Q |
40% |
60% |
|
Final |
58% |
42% |
Through three quarters, Clemson, which had been able to run at will, passed the ball on 60% of its plays. This negates the arguement that Clemson repeatedly ran the ball just because the end statistics showed nearly 40 rushing attempts on the afternoon.
Another statistic that I thought was interesting was the yardage gained quarter by quarter and cumulatively over the course of the football game. Even with the limited number of carries in the 2nd quarter, we were able to gain over 50 yards in this period and had more yards on the ground despite the fact that we threw the ball 70% of the time in this quarter. I will say that we did throw the ball 3 times as much as we ran in the third period and pulled in 64 of our 69 yards through the air here. The fourth quarter was dominated by the ground game.
|
Quarter |
Rush (yards) |
Pass (yards) |
Total (yards) |
% Rush |
% Pass |
|
1 |
103 |
71 |
174 |
59% |
41% |
|
2 |
51 |
46 |
97 |
53% |
47% |
|
3 |
5 |
64 |
69 |
7% |
93% |
|
4 |
78 |
3 |
81 |
96% |
4% |
|
Total |
237 |
184 |
421 |
56% |
44% |
The final statistic I will share is the cumulative (after each quarter) yardage gained. Here you will see that despite the near abandonment of the running game in the middle of the contest, rushing yards were a major contributor for this team through the 3rd period and, obviously, through the 4th:
|
|
% of Totlal Yardage Gained Rushing (Cumulative) |
% of Total Yardage Gained Passing (Cumulative) |
|
Through 1Q |
59% |
41% |
|
Through 2Q |
57% |
43% |
|
Through 3Q |
47% |
53% |
|
Final |
56% |
44% |
The long and the short of this article is that I believe that we cannot abandon the run, especially when we have a lead. Additionally I would love to see our best rusher, Ellington, get consistent carries throughout the football game.
27 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Playing devil's advocate...
I agree 100% that Ellington is this years Spillar and needs more touches but I was considering these stats. After Ellington lit them up with that first TD run, did GT make defensive changes to sell out to stop the run?
It seemed like for most of the second and third quarters that when we attempted to run, it just wasn’t there. Could the pass plays not just be Napier taking what the D was obviously giving us? There is still no excuse for Ellington only getting three touches, but using him in screens and flares would need to be done when teams sell out like that.
The fourth quarter we imposed our will on them and ran no matter what their scheme, but that was also after fatigue, etc had set in. I’m just saying, it is something to consider.
That argument doesn't hold much water
because Ellington broke off his lone run in the 2nd quarter for 42 yards. It is also hard to say that when we attempted to run in the 2nd and 3rd quarter it wasn’t working, because we only tried to run 5 times total in those quarters, but yet were still able to gain 56 yards. 4 for 14 yards if you want to take out Ellington’s long run, which still isn’t too bad.
No, Tech did not sell out to stop the run
and it wouldnt have done them any good because their front is still garbage.
Isn't BC great against the run?
Typically, BC is a bit heavier and better at stopping the run. So, this week, it would seem that we need to pass as much as we have been. What do you guys think about that? If we are running for 2 yards every time and not passing and Dabo says ‘I told you so’ after a close loss, how pissed are you going to be? This would be a typical Bowden move . . . I hate to compare, but Dabo still has to shake that monkey off his back.
The usual I-formation plays will probably not succeed
things like Power or Iso are taken away by slanting your lines, plus they are very good at gap control. You will see more zones where the OL just lets the defender go where he wants, and attempts to create a hole.
But I do believe we’ll need to try establishing the run early, and then if that doesnt work we have to set up the run with the pass.
BC is much better against the run than Georgia Tech, especially after seeing Clemson completely dominate GT up front last week. You have to understand your strengths AND your opponent’s weaknesses and utilize a combination of the two to put yourself in the best situation to win.
Last week against Tech I thought we should have run Ellington a good bit more earlier. This week against BC we won’t have the luxury of playing against a very bad defensive line and may need to throw the ball more.
Not trying to dodge your question but I simply want Clemson to do what it takes to maximize its chances of winning. I also believe that Clemson’s biggest offensive strength is Ellington with the football. Now if BC lines up this week with 8 in the box determined to stop the run, the strategy more than likely has to change in order to move the football.
Do I personally like to see teams run the ball well? Yes. I also believe that if you can run the ball there is no reason to throw it, simply line up and run run run. However, I will not advocate something dumb just to prove a point, as winning football games and putting your team in the best position to be successful are obviously the most important items.
Clemson Sports Analysis and Insight
www.shakinthesouthland.com
Just a Devil's Advocate Question
I’ve watched the game twice now and remember when I was watching it ‘live’ thinking that we surely were throwing the ball a lot considering we ran the ball so well. Your points are well taken and it seems to me that it was OBVIOUS that we could have run the ball the entire game and probably rushed for 350-400 yards. Hell even Harper lowered the pads and ran pretty hard vs GT.
This begs the question… Why didn’t we? I HOPE our coaches were smart enough to realize that the run was there all day. So they are either fools or they were doing what they were doing for a reason. I do know that we are a pretty crappy passing team. I also know that we’ve improved greatly from week 1. Do you think our coaches are passing the ball to improve our passing game and help us out down the road (say if FSU or NC State lines up to completely shut down the run)?
The think I am reminded of is 2006. We were running the shit out of the ball. We’d get up on teams and run it some more. We never even attempted to get a downfield passing game going (and the staff HAD to know we couldn’t throw the ball). Then we hit Blacksburg and VT said: You aren’t running the ball here. Beat us with the pass if you can. Of course we know the story from there on. Could our coaches be remembering this as well?
That may not be the reason at all. DS loves to throw the ball. Maybe he’s just calling the plays. What do you think?
I hope not.
I’ve had the same thoughts, but it does not make sense work on your passing game in a close game that you are losing. It may slightly excuse the GT passes but for the history of passing we have seen this season. So, I would say no.
As to the 1st question, yes I think there may be something to that
But as to the general sense of being a shotgun passing team, I believe thats Dabo calling plays (or gameplanning that for Billy) because he wants us to be a passing team.
Your not wrong, but...
Did we pass too much in the 2nd and 3rd quarters? Probably. However, those 3rd quarter stats are all from a single drive, which is all we got in the 3rd due to GT hogging the ball. Despite all the passing on this drive, we scored a TD!
Running the ball is by far our strength, and we should never throw the ball 37 thousand times like we did at UNC, but the passing plays called against GT were, with some exceptions, smart and effective. The screens, in small doses, were effective. Also there was the nice fake screen call that netted a 15-20 yard completion.
Had we run the ball some in the 2nd quarter, we'd have had the ball longer
My vote will always go to the safe route and put the game away. We’re not saying we should run 65 plays out of 65, but that you can work on the passing game while maintaining ball control.
The key is giving Ellington (6.3 YPC) more carries than Harper (3.8 YPC).
However, I’d say that Harper ran better against GT than any other game that I recall.
BC has the #4 run-D and the #80 pass-D. I’m OK with keeping them honest with a rushing attack, and using it if it works. But I’d be OK with Clemson beating BC through the air.
I painfully remember Clemson’s 2007 loss (of the Atlantic) to BC when Spence spent most of his play-calls trying to run the ball against BC’s #2 ranked run defense for 1.5 YPC even though Cullen Harper was lighting up BC’s #110 ranked pass defense for 5.7 YPA (67% completion rate). Even the ESPN announcers repeatedly expressed their incredulity at the stupidity of Spence.
The Spence years were particularly tough on everyone and I will be the first to tell someone not to do something stupid just to do it or to prove a point (similarly, don’t go out and repeatedly bang your head against a wall). The goal is simple: identify our strengths/weaknesses and our opponent’s strengths/weaknesses then put together a gameplan that maximizes our probability of success. As the game progresses, make adjustments when necessary to put Clemson in the best position to be successful. Last week I thought a heavy dose of Ellington early was that solution. BC is much better against the run than GT, so we may not be able to just come out and run them over so throwing the ball will probably be more of a necessity this week, and there is nothing wrong with that if it maximizes Clemson’s chances of success.
Clemson Sports Analysis and Insight
www.shakinthesouthland.com
Ellington is 5th in TDs per carry, but 52nd in number of carries!
Among RBs, Andre Ellington’s national rank is:
5th in rushing TDs per carry.
10th in TDs scored.
21st in yards per carry.
But thanks to our coaches Ellington is:
52nd in number of carries.
43rd in carries per game.
35th in yards per game.
Ellington is averaging 6.3YPC.
Spiller averaged 5.6 YPC in 2009.
Harper is averaging 3.3 YPC.
Harper is not ranked in the top 100 in any category, but he is getting 40% of Clemson’s carries.
The coaches raise the issue of durability for Ellington. But to give you some idea…
235lb Harper is averaging 10 carries/game.
190lb Ellington is averaging 15 carries/game.
195lb LaMichael James (Oregon) is averaging 22 carries/game. (When he was needed in tough games, he rushed 31 times against Stanford, and 28 times against ASU.)
Oregon is undefeated and ranked #1.
Clemson is thrice defeated and unranked.
Makes me wonder where Clemson would be ranked if we had a coaching staff like Oregon.
I think Clemson would have 2-3 fewer losses this season if the coaches had run Ellington more (and especially more than Harper).
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2010&rpt=IA_playerrush&site=org&div=IA&dest=O
There is some upper limit on the number of carries for Ellington, or any back
before they begin to bcome less effective. I don’t know what that is for him. Maybe he does not have a lot of endurance.
Suppose he had gotten many more carries in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. Would he still have been able to execute the long drive in the 4th? Would he have been as effective running the ball? Possibly not.
On the other hand, if he had gotten early carries, and we had scored more points earlier because of it, it may have been possible to sub him out for less effective runners later, when the game was more or less decided.
I get the feeling the staff is holding him back to make sure that he is fresh late in the game, and sometimes (when we get behind and need to pass) he may not get the opportunity.
“I get the feeling the staff is holding him back to make sure that he is fresh late in the game, and sometimes (when we get behind and need to pass) he may not get the opportunity.”
This is a possibility. You also need to chart Ellington’s punt and kick returns and return yardage by quarter as well. I’m pretty sure those factor into considering a RBs fatigue level and fitness for duty.
Also, I’ve seen the boy run- no doubt he is incredibly talented. But maybe his YPA is so high because he is so fresh.
There is no point in keeping him fresh
for the 4th quarter if you don’t have the lead. That’s why that excuse doesn’t make any sense. Use Ellington to build you a lead and then rotate backs in the 4th quarter when you’ve worn down the defense.
Yep, at which point even your third stringer looks great.
Defenses get demoralized fast when you run up the gut, if we had such success on the ground and kept going, you could put in just about anybody in the 4th and get 5 a clip.
Possibly not, but if a RB can't carry the ball 30 times
then move him somewhere else to keep the speed on the field.
I saw Andre play at Sumter, I know he’s a 4-quarter guy. Maybe not a 35 carry horse on the NFL level because of his size, but he’s in great shape and can do the job against the paltry schedule we face.
And with The Skirt actually running hard this weekend, I’d even let him carry the ball another couple times.
Ellington's late carries when given many are better than Harper's early carries.
Powell said, “I’m not so sure his [Ellington’s] 23, 24, 25th carries will be as good as Jamie’s 12th and 13th carry.”
Really? Ellington’s largest number of carries came against Auburn (22 carries). Let’s look at the stats from the Auburn game:
Harper: 19 carries for 2.3 YPC.
Ellington: 22 carries for 6.4 YPC.
Harper’s first 5 carries: 2 yards (0.4 YPC).
Ellington’s last 5 carries: 62 yards (12.4 YPC).*
- I actually excluded a 2-yard TD run from Ellington’s last 5 carries because he couldn’t officially gain any more yards after crossing the goal line.
The NCAA rushing leader board several small RBs carrying more than Ellington.
If you look at the NCAA rushing leader board, there are several examples of sub-200lb running backs who are getting more carries than Ellington. Some examples follow. (I ignored RBs from The Big East, WAC, MWC and other weaker conferences in order to pre-empt any replies that getting tackled in those conferences isn’t as punishing.)
Carries per game among sub-200lb backs in the toughest 5 AQ conferences:
190lb Andre Ellington (Clemson): 15
195lb LaMichael James (Oregon): 22
193lb Denard Robinson (Michigan): 20
197lb Kendall Hunter (Okla St.): 23
198lb Jonathan Franklin (UCLA): 19
191lb Jacquizz Rogers (Oregon St.): 24
200lb Montel Harris (Boston College): 21
In the big games where they’re needed, some of these guys are carrying the ball around 30 times per game. I think it’s safe to say that Ellington could get a few more carries per game than our coaches are willing to give him.
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2010&rpt=IA_playerrush&site=org&div=IA&dest=O
I like (and agree) with this, especially Robinson's classification as a running back, he'll have to do that if he's going to make it in the NFL.
Really though, some of the talents to go pro lately at QB seem to scream at least a part-time option QB system, like Vick, Pat White, and several others. No one seems to be noticing that at the pro level though. I know they think they’ll take too many hits as a running QB, but I would advocate at least a part-time option system. I have a feeling that Robinson is going to be utterly wasted as a talent at the pro level unless he can successfully convert to a full-time RB, but that means picking up blocks on passing downs and receiving the ball. Dantzler’s waste still irks me.
Back on topic, Ellington did seem to be feeling it for a while there in the middle of the game, really sweating and panting. Do we need better conditioning training? I would love to see him be a 25-carry back.
Great breakdown
This is a great post. I’d also like to add to the detractors who say: “GT had the ball for most of the 2nd quarter”: We passed the ball 5 times and ran it once in the 2nd quarter. Perhaps if we had kept going to our strength (Andre Ellington) then we wouldn’t have given the ball back to GT with so much time left on the board.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Shakin The Southland
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
