Ed. Note, this is a user FanPost
So, last week I posted the first iteration of the Stats Deeper Dive. I'm back for more this week with a couple of small tweaks to what was included last week. First up, YTD stats that include the national averages, top 10% percentile, national leader in Points Per Game (Scored for Offense and Allowed for Defense), Clemson's stats and Clemson's national rank.
| OFFENSE | DEFENSE | ||||||||||
| Avg. | Top 10% | Okie St | Clemson | RANK | Avg. | Top 10% | FSU | Clemson | RANK | ||
| Plays/G | 72 | 86 | 89 | 80 | 27 | 71 | 60 | 54 | 67 | 42 | |
| Poss/G | 12.6 | 14.3 | 15.0 | 12.3 | 65 | 12.7 | 14.2 | 12.7 | 12.3 | 49 | |
| Pts/Poss | 2.4 | 3.6 | 4.2 | 3.2 | 21 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 0.1 | 1.4 | 36 | |
| Red Zone Opps/Poss | 32% | 46% | 44% | 35% | 44 | 27% | 14% | 8% | 22% | 42 | |
| Plays/Poss | 5.8 | 6.9 | 5.9 | 6.5 | 23 | 5.6 | 4.7 | 4.3 | 5.4 | 50 | |
| Scores/Poss | 40% | 57% | 64% | 57% | 13 | 32% | 18% | 3% | 30% | 53 | |
| TDs/Poss | 31% | 47% | 56% | 38% | 37 | 24% | 10% | 0% | 14% | 24 | |
| Negative Plays/G | 7.3 | 4.4 | 3.3 | 6.3 | 42 | 8.2 | 5.0 | 12.3 | 6.3 | 29 | |
| 3rd Down Convs/G | 5.9 | 8.2 | 9.0 | 8.0 | 14 | 5.6 | 3.7 | 1.7 | 3.0 | 7 | |
| TDs/G | 4.0 | 6.0 | 8.3 | 4.7 | 34 | 3.0 | 1.3 | 0.0 | 1.7 | 21 | |
| Red Zone Opps/G | 4.0 | 5.7 | 6.7 | 4.3 | 45 | 3.3 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 2.7 | 31 | |
The Clemson offense is currently ranked in the top 25 in 4 different offensive categories--Points per Possession, Plays per Possession, Scores per Possession and 3rd Down Conversions/Game. Again, as mentioned last week, all of these factors correlate very highly with scoring points. Of course, strength of schedule (or lack thereof) plays a role, but it's also important to note that around 70% of the top 25 PPP offenses have played a FCS school already. Only 3 teams in the Top 25 have played 2 games against BCS conference opponents (Bama vs. Arkansas and Michigan; Louisville vs. Kentucky and UNC and Georgia Tech vs. UVa and Va Tech).
On the defensive side of the ball, the Tigers rank in the Top 25 in 3 categories: TDs per possession, 3rd down conversions and TDs/Game. Dr. B referenced the 3rd down percentage in his stats post yesterday. Those are the only encouraging stats for Brent Venables' crew thus far, especially considering the quality of competition. We can say that at least the Tigers D is better than average in every category--but slightly better than average does not meet expectations.
Below, for comparison purposes, I've included the offensive and defensive stats for the AP Top 5...
| OFFENSE | DEFENSE | ||||||||||
| BAMA | LSU | Oregon | FSU | UGA | BAMA | LSU | Oregon | FSU | UGA | ||
| Plays/G | 59.7 | 68.3 | 86.3 | 64.7 | 66.3 | 59.0 | 59.3 | 76.0 | 54.0 | 73.7 | |
| Poss/G | 11.7 | 12.7 | 14.7 | 13.0 | 15.0 | 11.7 | 12.7 | 15.3 | 12.7 | 14.7 | |
| Pts/Poss | 3.7 | 3.8 | 3.7 | 4.5 | 3.2 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 0.1 | 1.4 | |
| Red Zone Opps/Poss | 34% | 45% | 45% | 59% | 31% | 11% | 8% | 22% | 8% | 18% | |
| Plays/Poss | 5.1 | 5.4 | 5.9 | 5.0 | 4.4 | 5.1 | 4.7 | 5.0 | 4.3 | 5.0 | |
| Scores/Poss | 57% | 61% | 52% | 69% | 49% | 6% | 13% | 30% | 3% | 25% | |
| TDs/Poss | 49% | 50% | 52% | 62% | 42% | 6% | 11% | 17% | 0% | 18% | |
| Negative Plays/G | 7.7 | 5.7 | 8.7 | 4.3 | 6.7 | 9.7 | 8.0 | 9.3 | 12.3 | 8.3 | |
| 3rd Down Convs/G | 4.3 | 6.0 | 8.0 | 5.0 | 5.7 | 3.7 | 4.0 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 6.3 | |
| TDs/G | 5.7 | 6.3 | 7.7 | 8.0 | 6.3 | 0.7 | 1.3 | 2.7 | 0.0 | 2.7 | |
| Red Zone Opps/G | 4.0 | 5.7 | 6.7 | 7.7 | 4.7 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 3.3 | 1.0 | 2.7 | |
Obviously, the number of plays run on offense, will dictate the number of plays on defense--in fact, UGA has had to defend more plays than they've run thus far this year. Oregon has run nearly 30 more plays per game and 3 full possessions compared to Bama, yet the PPP is the same--you could argue, based on that, that Bama's offense is even more efficient than Oregon's (especially when you consider they have not played an FCS team yet and have played 2 BCS conference teams).
A few additional comments...
Last week, there some questions about adding in a strength of schedule component. I've toyed with this over the past week, but with such a small sample size and, frankly, most of the top teams having played weak components it didn't make sense to include at this time. That will be a work in porgress thorugh the year.
I have, however, included this strength of schedule factor into my game prediction model, but that is a post for another day. Stay tuned...
There are 3 Comments. Load Now.
Shortcuts to mastering the comment thread. Use wisely.
C - Next Comment
X - Mark as Read
R - Reply
Z - Mark Read & Next
Shift + C - Previous
Shift + A - Mark All Read
Comment Settings
Live comment alert: Hide it!
Comments for this post are closed.