2011 Rose Bowl: how FEI and S&P see the game
[Advanced Stats, especially with teams so different as Oregon and Wisconsin, will be key to predicting this matchup. Kalon does an excellent job compiling and explaining where the two teams fall, and what it means for the Rose Bowl -jtlight]
I'm sure Bill Connelly will do this eventually, but I was really curious about how Oregon matches up with Wisconsin. From the normal stats it looks like a dominating destruction as far as Oregon is concerned. Here's some flavor on that:
Total offense: Oregon #3, Wisconsin #9
Passing: Wisconsin 48, Oregon 58
Rushing: Oregon 2, Wisconsin 8 (by 800 yards!)
Defense: Oregon #3 in sacks, Wisconsin 59th
And it goes on and on like that. While they're somewhat close offensively, on defense Wisconsin looks horrible; more yards given up, more first downs, more points.
Except all of that is wrong. Turns out that Wisconsin and Oregon are about as closely matched as any BCS bowl teams can be, and certainly one of the closest matchups there is right now. More on all of that after the jump. And if you expected that Oregon is going to win the day because of great...special teams and defense? You get a shiny nickel.
S&P
First we'll go to S&P. I'm not going to get into a ton on what S&P is or the methodology; it's been done several times here and elsewhere. The most important things to note about S&P is that it is a stat that looks at every play, and it takes into account the opponent's strength. So running for 4 yards a carry is okay, but doing it against the best team in the nation on run defense is actually pretty awesome.
First off, the totals: Oregon is #4 in S&P, but Wisconsin is #5. And they're very close at that - only 2 points separate them. What might surprise you is why - Oregon is #4 in the nation in offense but Wisconsin is the #1 team in the nation. And that isn't close at all - Wisconsin is ahead by almost 22 full points. We're closer to Baylor (who is also ahead of us) than we are Wisconsin. The difference is made up for by our defense - Oregon is 10th in the nation in S&P, Wisconsin is 49th - and Oregon is ahead by almost 24 points there.
So that leads us to the first conclusion: the biggest battle is going to be Oregon's strength (defense) vs. Wisconsin's strength (offense), but the reverse is essentially exactly the same battle with the same difference in points. Both teams have a significant advantage over the other as far as offense vs. defense - about a 30 point differential.
How about the specifics? First on offense. Okay, here's another surprise. Wisconsin is #2 in the nation in rushing efficiency via S&P but #1 in passing efficiency. Even more interesting they're hugely ahead of the next team - 20 points more than LSU, 30 more than Baylor. Oregon breaks down as you might expect - 5th in rushing (and only 3 points away from Wisconsin) and 12th on passing. Wisconsin also is the best everywhere - on rushing downs (#1) and passing downs (#1) - Oregon is #3 in rushing downs but a woeful #50 in passing downs. That leads me to the second conclusion: the way that Oregon is going to win is by making sure they stay out of passing downs. This has been true for us over and over this year, but it's especially true here. Wisconsin doesn't care as far as that goes, which means it's very likely we'll not stop them all that often except through big negative plays - penalties, sacks, and causing them to make mistakes.
Next, onto defense. Oregon is significantly better on passing defense (6) than on rushing (18) with a difference of more than 20 points of ranking. Despite this, Oregon is fairly even as far as it goes - they're good at rushing downs (9th) and passing (11th). Again, Wisconsin's strengths and Oregon's strengths match up well here; Oregon doesn't have a glaring weakness at any part of their statistical defense any more than Wisconsin does on their offense.
But here's where it gets interesting. Wisconsin's bad defense (by comparison) is almost entirely due to how they perform on rushing downs. They are 71st against the run, 56th against the pass, but here's the big key - 19th on passing downs but 70th on rushing downs. Remember strengths vs. strengths? Well, that's a big weakness for Wisconsin that plays directly into an Oregon strength. If Oregon doesn't get cute and plays good football on first down Wisconsin is going to have a very very hard time getting them off the field.
FEI
Onto FEI: FEI, unlike S&P, is a drive-based stat. It doesn't care about things like running or passing or how much you gained on a specific down; it cares only about whether or not you were successful on a drive and how good your opponent was. That's a bit simplistic, but you get the idea. FEI also rates very highly turnovers compared to S&P; turnovers mean a drive end on the offense (a positive for a defense) and potentially more offense (a positive for the offense). This was one of the big reasons that S&P didn't like Oregon last year and FEI did, and FEI didn't like Oregon that much this year and S&P did: that LSU game and its horrible 4-1 turnover ratio. Bah.
FEI paints a very similar tale, at least at the top: FEI says Wisconsin is 5th, Oregon 6th. And it's within 1% point. By comparison, Alabama/LSU are separated by 6 points. The big thing is game efficiency here - Wisconsin is #1. That means that when they drive they often score or stop the other team from scoring. It's not opponent adjusted though, but it does mean they dominate often.Similar to S&P, Oregon's offense isn't as highly ranked as Wisconsin's (14th vs #2, with a very large difference between the two) and Oregon's defense is much higher than Wisconsin (8th vs 24th). Here's another bit of info: special teams. Oregon has a huge advantage in special teams - 25th vs 61st here. Oregon and Wisconsin have similar field position advantage, which tends to be how well the defense gives short fields, they get good returns and turnovers.
On offense, FEI sees Wisconsin as dominant, only behind Baylor (who is absurdly dominant; hope you're having fun, Nick Holt). Wisconsin is strong everywhere here - first down rate, adjusted yard rate (getting a lot of yards per drive) except one big place - methodical drives. That means that Wisconsin does not run a lot of methodical drives (10 or more plays). Don't get too excited though; this can be because they go three and out a lot, or because they tend to get a ton of yards and don't need 10 or more plays to get scores. About 11% of their drives are methodical, which is very low (91st in the nation). What this tends to lend itself towards is the notion that Wisconsin won't want to grind the ball out and might not do well if forced to; limiting explosive plays may work okay in stopping them. If you thought that was some mystical disadvantage Wisconsin had, think again - Oregon is even worse at that, having methodical drives only 10.7% of the time.That goes well with what a lot of fans see - that Oregon tends to explode or they tend to stop, but they don't tend to march down the field slowly but surely. In that respect Wisconsin and Oregon are very, very similar teams. Wisconsin just appears to be better in all of these things.
On defense Oregon is kind of how you'd expect them to be. They've played a hard schedule of offenses and done fairly well.Their biggest strength is against explosive drives, limiting other teams to a drive like that 6.2% of the time. The biggest weakness, if you like, is methodical drives - Oregon allows 12.6% of all drives to be 10 or more plays, which is 46th best in the nation. Now, here's another interesting thing - Oregon has faced the 16th hardest strength of schedule against their defense; Wisconsin 99th! That media note about how Wisconsin hasn't faced Oregon speed is very true, but it's more accurate to say that Wisconsin hasn't consistently faced anything as good as the Oregon offense, whereas Oregon has at least tangled with some great offenses along the way. Wisconsin is also not nearly as good as Oregon at stopping explosive drives, with a 10% chance per drive. They are better for methodical drives, causing them about 13% of the time and 36th. What this means is that Oregon has a good chance to do more damage in big chunks than little ones, I suspect.
How about special teams? Oregon is bad at field goals (ya think) ranking 73rd. Punt returns are only 44th and punts against them are 50th. Where they are good - not great, but good - is on kicks - 26th on kick returns and 28th on kick defense. Also, oddly, teams are good against them efficiency-wise for field goals. Wisconsin is excellent at punt returns (ranking 6th) but absolutely horrible at stopping punt returns - 95th! Sadly that's not something that Oregon can exploit all that well. Where they can exploit it is on Kick returns - Wisconsin is very bad at kick return defense (81st), so I would expect DAT and Huff to get some good yardage.
Conclusions
So how can Oregon win the day here? Feeding the horse that brung us, mostly. Oregon has a very good chance to dominate on rushing downs against a bad Wisconsin defense in that regard. If Oregon can keep out of passing downs by getting good yardage on first, chances are Oregon will be able to drive the ball easily and often. However, if we stall expect a big stall and not a lot of DT heroics. This game is going to be won by how well we do on first down I think. On defense, it's going to be very, very hard; they do everything well. Getting them into passing downs won't help that much as Oregon often gives up big conversions; it's almost better to dare them to get those 3rd and 4s instead of 3rd and 9 and risk a big explosive play. Another big factor in winning is in getting good field position via special teams. Both teams are likely to be kicking off a lot; holding them to long fields while getting short fields of our own will be a big factor.
So who is going to win this game for us? Unlike the last two BCS games where teams could shut down our running game I'm going to say that this is all about LMJ and to a lesser extent Barner and DAT. DT can help, but chances are if we're in long 3rd downs we're already hosed. The other factor as to who can win this is who can get turnovers. Kaddu, Jordan, Boyett, and most of all Pleasant, I'm looking at you. They'll get their yards and their points, but we need to get stops. We need ball hawking and stripping.
Thanks for reading, and thanks especially to Brian Fremeau and Bill Connelly for their superlative work over the years. I admire the hell out of you guys; please keep up the good work :)
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or the Addicted To Quack Moderators. FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable Oregon fans.
57 comments
|
10 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well done!
Follow me at @SBN_BillC!
SB Nation
Rock M Nation
Football Outsiders
Football Study Hall
by Bill C. on Dec 5, 2011 9:02 PM PST reply actions 7 recs
kalon got a "Well done!" from Bill C
That’s something to be cherished right there. That’s like the Pope complimenting someone on their understanding of the Sermon on the Mount.
"the putz from that UO blog, Matt Daddy" - Steve Tannen
The Daily Faberian
by Matt Daddy on Dec 5, 2011 10:00 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
That would be like Matt Daddy getting a rec from Steve Tannen?
"the putz from that UO blog, Matt Daddy" - Steve Tannen
The Daily Faberian
Oregon has a very good chance to dominate on rushing downs against a bad Wisconsin defense in that regard.
I honestly think that this is the matchup that determines the game. Wisconsin is great offensively, but both teams can put up a lot of points. Oregon’s defense will get some stops. But Oregon absolutely has to move the ball on the ground, and win the early downs.
The funny thing is, as much as Wisconsin is known for the plodding and dominating style, that is what Oregon needs to do. And I think Oregon has a very good shot to beat Wisconsin at their own game, even when Wisconsin has the ball. Also, with how Wisconsin wants to move the ball, the field position advantage that Oregon should have could prove very, very important. Every extra yard they have to go helps the Oregon defense almost exponentially.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Yep, on all of that
One side effect of this oddity is that for the first time they’re going to have a more talented offense than we do, which means we’re going to be the ones that want to reduce the game’s possessions and eat clock. That’ll minimize the damage they can do overall and minimize the chances of us getting burned on a big play. It’s a weird place to be in.
And gods, their offense is good. I mean…wow. I haven’t checked on if it’s historically excellent or merely just the best ever right now, but wow is it good.
Thanks for doing this research
Good job on this.
by MarineCorpsDuck on Dec 5, 2011 9:13 PM PST via mobile reply actions
I think we match up better defensively with Wisconsin that they do with our offense.
Wiscy just doesn’t have the personnel to match Oregon’s pace and speed, month of preparation or no. And if we can play Wisconsin’s accurate/semi-scramble QB and pro-style rushing attack the same way we did Stanford’s, I like the Ducks in a game that might not be as close as most here are predicting.
For some reason I feel extremely confident in this match up and see Oregon winning comfortably by 10-14 points.
This is in stark contrast to the last 2 bowl games + LSU early in the season. In addition, this is the first time we have an advantage in recruiting rankings over our nonconference/bowl opponents by a significant margin.
Anyway either way I can’t wait for this game!
Super informative
Thanks for putting in the work!
by WeeJa on Dec 5, 2011 10:51 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Ugh. I was gonna tackle this topic once finals ended
But loved the work. Thanks for putting this together.
by jcgoducks on Dec 5, 2011 11:57 PM PST via mobile reply actions
This was awesome.
I love the migration of advanced stats to the college football context. Kudos and a well-earned rec.
"One of the bright spots of the young season has been rookie point guard Jonny Flynn, whose name sounds like he should be the lead character in a Broadway Musical. "What are you doing here, Jonny Flynn?" "Why I'm here to court trouble, and woo a girl, and build the most fantastical contraption the world has ever seen!" -- Dave, Game 7 Blazers versus Timberwolves preview
"It was bad reffing...but not rip apart the fabric of time bad." -- The Arkitect, Game 79 Blazers versus Mavericks Post-Game Thread
Excellent writeup
…and everything you and the stats reflect sounds about right to me. I think most Badger fans like myself aren’t real jazzed about having to play Oregon. Your crazy, uptempo offense and LMJ are going to be a really tall order for our defense, which is good but on the slow side. My gut reaction is that our best strategy is to try and keep our offense on the field as much as possible, and pray for defensive stops. I’ll be really surprised if this game is NOT a total shootout, something like 49-35 or something like that. Don’t see either team’s defense really slowing down the opponent’s offense too much. Hope our special teams don’t hurt us too much – for being the #10 team in the country our special teams are awful.
Good luck to the Ducks and we’ll see you in Pasadena!
Enjoyed this analysis
It makes me even more excited for this game. Not necessarily because I think Bucky is going to win, but because I think it may exceed even our two games with Michigan State in sheer ridiculousness. It’s going to be awesome.
Those were probably the two best games I watched this year, by the way.
I am hoping for more of the same come Jan 2.
Now with mustache guarantee!
by HoodRiverDuck on Dec 6, 2011 3:00 PM PST up reply actions
2nd that. Along with the SC game those were the most entertaining games of the year.
Well, TCU beating the Hoerses was fun.
Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.
by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Dec 6, 2011 8:29 PM PST up reply actions
I swear if they are anything like your games with MSU, I'm going to need cardiac attention
Oregon loves you, Chip Kelly!
One other thought...
I really wish we had home and away data for these stats. Wisconsin has been a very, very different team away from Camp Randall, which should benefit the Ducks greatly.
Unlike 2009 (and to a large degree 2010), the Ducks arguably as good on the road this season as they are at home. They’re about where they were offensively in the home/road splits as last season, but their defense has been way better on the road this season.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Yeah, that's a good thought
I agree – our best games, by far, have been on the road. Even the LSU game was one of our best this season statistically, marred almost entirely by turnovers. Arizona, Stanford, Washington were very good. Colorado was…fine. (also, we had a total of 4 ‘away’ games this year…we really are big time). Both of wisconsin’s losses came on the road.
They also should have lost to Illinois, getting outgained and out first downed, again on the road. But Illinois pulled their typical Zook, and turned the ball over 4 times. Their only decent road game was at Minnesota.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Is this where the PANIC resides today?
Kalon, very nicely done but can you massage the numbers to lower my panic level a bit?
by builds character on Dec 6, 2011 2:46 PM PST via mobile reply actions
we have a request to lower the massage here, massage a little lower
Euler's #1 fan
by Bill Musgrave on Dec 6, 2011 5:49 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Massage my number!!!!!
"What you are entrusted to do as a coach is to create an environment where your players have a chance to be successful." CHIP KELLY
More stuff to get a bit less panicked
Other than the stuff below (our great matchups, their inexperience at facing offenses like ours, home/road splits and how well we’re doing) here’s a couple more.
Wisconsin has not done well defending running QBs. Braxton Miller gained 99 yards on his way to the team gaining over 250 rushing yards – and that was the anemic offense of Ohio State. Illinois rushed for 150 yards and almost beat Wisconsin and really would have were it not for 4 turnovers.
The biggest “OMG really” is that their defense is similar to Arizona State’s, USC and significantly worse than Stanford, Cal or LSU. Their offense is similar (though much better) than Stanford, USC and LSU. that alone should make you feel better.
Fire Ernie Kent.
"What you are entrusted to do as a coach is to create an environment where your players have a chance to be successful." CHIP KELLY
Badger alum here.
Incredibly interesting write-up, thanks. Three quick points:
First, our defense is atrocious. Backers play up and get beat deep, or sit back while a runner carves out 5-6 yards per carry. Even so, we usually come up with an interception and fumble recovery every game. If our defense can get two, hell, even one big stop, our offense can carry this team.
Second, our special teams sucks. We have this odd punt formation that usually allows too many guys through, resulting in some miffed punts or a blocked one. Every time the special teams takes the field Badgers everywhere hold their collective breath.
Finally, Bielema has proven himself time and time again to be a very poor big-game manager. You can look at Chryst & Bielema’s decision to abandon the run in last year’s Rose Bowl against TCU, when we were clearly dominating their d-line, or the lack of defensive backs in the endzone in either the MSU or OSU game this year, but Bret is simply not known as a very good big-game preparation kinda guy.
That said, if Russell Wilson can continue to play error-free ball and Montee can play game-clock manager, we have a chance. Our offense needs to be on the field significantly longer than yours for us to win this game. We’re known for pounding the ball early and wearing down opposition’s defensive lines, but in this game it will be especially critical to control your explosive and unexpected attack.
Good luck!
Dan
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
I saw how that punt formation worked at the end of your last game. That formation works great when you have a punter with 6’8" legs.
Speed Endurance Talent is how Track Town USA plays football. Win The Day
Well I'm not handing out sympathy points for our playing doing something that is well within the rules of the sport,
and for MSU stupidly rushing. I don’t think it’s irrational to think that if these two teams played another two times it would end in another tie. MSU has UW’s number, yet they have been shafted for playing a 13th game and overlooked by the BCS. Even so, the balance of power has shifted (at least for a moment) to UW and MSU as the dominant B1G teams.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
MSU deserved the BCS bid over Michigan. I have much respect for them for how well they played you guys. I look forward to our match.
by INducktrination on Dec 6, 2011 7:33 PM PST up reply actions
To me this game the big variable in this game is coaching.
Bielema isn’t very highly-regarded around Wisconsin for his in-game calls, but Chryst is the wildcard. I don’t have any visions of grandeur that our defense can all-of-a-sudden get better over the next month, but Chryst’s play calling can be as innovative as Chip Kelly’s when it comes to mixing it up for particular game situations. Paul’s going to be gone after this season for some sort of a big school head coaching job, so this will be his last hurrah as coordinator for UW.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
I don't see how anybody complains about that call
It was obviously RITK; even if he flopped hard enough to try and draw roughing (and every punter is coached to do just that), it was still first down, game over.
Now with mustache guarantee!
by HoodRiverDuck on Dec 6, 2011 9:11 PM PST up reply actions
Other than a couple derpfests, we don't turn it over much.
From my point of view, both fanbases are bullish about their offenses and worried about their defenses. Other than occasional bouts of “punt return follies” our ST’s are pretty solid, so that could factor in. Well, aside from the fact our PK is good to about 35 yards and no farther.
Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.
by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Dec 6, 2011 8:32 PM PST up reply actions
My take on Oregon's things
Oregon’s special teams are one of the biggest sources of turnovers. We’ve also been uncharacteristically bad at turning the ball over when running the ball this year. We do not turn it over very much passing (fumbling or interceptions), and we have an absurdly low sack rate, so big turnaround plays are almost certainly going to happen on runs or on special team gaffes. If you hold your breath every time you punt the ball, we hold ours every time we go back to catch the stupid thing.
Oregon’s offense is stellar but often takes time to get into a groove. Oregon can often come out flat or as I like to say it, ‘cute’ and try a bunch of things that don’t work before settling on a few that we know are going to. We’ll abandon the run for a while because…I don’t know. Chip Kelly likes playing on high-difficulty mode? I have no idea.
Oregon’s defense is great when they can make a team one-dimensional. Regardless of any of that they are very strong against the run and often make it a key point to be beaten by the pass. They thrive on pass stopping via very interesting exotic blitzes combined with zone coverage. This has tended to mean that great WRs have very good days against Oregon as they beat the man coverage over and over after a blitz, but great TEs and RBs do not have nearly the success. And if you don’t have that kind of receiver that can just go nuts, Oregon can be rough. However, if you can keep Oregon guessing on running/passing it’ll be a long, long day and Oregon will give up very long, methodical, painful drives that end in scores.
On coaching: this is a huge strength for Oregon. With Bellotti (the coach before Kelly) Oregon fans would often wonder about decisions made, especially erring on the side of conservation. Kelly is not like this at all. He isn’t wedded to anything specific and will try a whole lot to see what works and then kill you with it until you show you can beat it, and then kill you with a version of it that forces your overextension. He is fearless (Big Balls Kelly) on 4th down. The team tends to be very focused, driven and well-prepared when given time or when it’s understood what the stakes are; Auburn’s woeful offensive performance last year is a good example. The biggest thing that kills us is penalties. Oregon is bad, bad bad at penalties.
OK, I just finally went through all of that post in greater detail, and yes, I'm fully in PANIC! mode.
Oregon loves you, Chip Kelly!
Don't panic, and have your towel handy.
I kinda panicked too, until I realized something.
Oregon is comparable to many of the defenses that they’ve faced so far. Michigan State (7) and Oregon(10) are very close. We’re better than Illinois, worse than Penn State, much better than Ohio State (27). While it’s nothing insane we’re certainly right there, so we shouldn’t expect them to do much better or worse than what they did against Michigan State or ohio State.
Where we are special compared to the Badgers (as other posters have pointed out) is on offense. The only team in their conference that comes close to us is Michigan – and they didn’t play Michigan. The best offense that they played all year was Northern Illinois. Michigan State was the best in-conference. Seriously. And they’re ranked #47th in S&P offense; Oregon is 4th. The difference between those two teams is 40 points of S&P, which is as ridiculous as it sounds. The offensive rankings of the teams: UNLV (114), Oregon State (93), Northern Illinois (23), Nebraska (48), Indiana (103), Ohio State (68), Purdue(84), Minnesota (91), Illinois (94) and Penn State (75). So not only have they played fairly weak offenses (I’m still baffled at the NIllinois ranking) they’ve kind of sucked at playing them. They gave up 33 points to OSU, 37 and 39 to MSU, At the very least they’re inconsistent at it.
As to us – while we’ve not played anyone as great as Wisconsin we’re used to playing against good to great offenses: LSU (7), Stanford (11), USC, Arizona State (31) and Washington (35). This shouldn’t be something especially new to our defense. Wisconsin does it better than anyone we’ve faced, but it’s not nearly the gulf that Wisconsin has against our offense.
As to Wisconsin’s defense – Oregon’s faced the toughest defense in the nation (LSU, #1) and still did well against them. Stanford(22), Cal (24), USC were all better than Wisconsin (49). Wisconsin’s defense is between the value of USC and Arizona State, basically. If that makes you worried, it probably shouldn’t. Again, this is where the game should be a significant advantage for Oregon – Wisconsin has faced nothing remotely like Oregon’s offensive prowess and is especially vulnerable to big runs on first and second down. Not to mock the juju too much, but this should put images of LMJ’s amazing success against USC in 2009 or Stanford in 2010 in your mind.
I would also like a better understanding of what a passing/rushing down is, for Oregon.
We seem to flip these often.
Oregon loves you, Chip Kelly!
Sure
For anyone, a passing down is defined as 2nd and 8 or more or 3rd and 6 or more. Anything else – first down, shorter gains on second down and above – are rushing downs.
To put it in perspective, think about all those times we don’t convert 3rd and 9. Or even our atrocious 3rd down conversion rate in general. That’s because of two things – we aren’t that great when we’re forced to abandon the run on a play and we often get more than enough yards on first and second down to not worry about a 3rd down.
To further what you're saying...
Oregon is 50th in the country in S&P+ in passing downs. That speaks to just how good their offense, that they are able to overcame how mediocre they are in those situations.
Last year Oregon was 24th in passing downs. It’s important to note, however, that overall S&P+ hated Oregon last season. According to that, they had teh 24th ranked offense. This year, despite the significant drop in passing downs, Oregon has the 4th offense in S&P+.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Is 2nd and 8 universally a passing down nowadays?
I know Chip will call a run play on almost any yardage on almost any down, but how about the rest of ’em?
Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.
by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Dec 6, 2011 8:27 PM PST up reply actions
It's simply how we perform
While we’ll run on it, it’s mostly a way to distinguish between plays where a team would normally pass vs plays where they could realistically run. Whether a team actually runs or passes on those downs is somewhat immaterial; in this specific case it mostly speaks to Oregon’s problems when we have to get a lot of yards and are forced to pass.
Right, I meant Oregon seems to have rushed on 3rd and 15, for example, which most teams would pass
(although thanks for the specifics, because I used to think 2nd and 6 or more was also a passing down). In the last game I distinctly remember feeling I didn’t know whether it was a passing down or a rushing down because Oregon didn’t pass on a passing down and didn’t rush on a rushing down.
Some of this might be a response to the defense and our option attack — we have some plays that could end up in a pass or a rush depending, so I end up getting very confused about what exactly to expect from Chip Kelly.
Oregon loves you, Chip Kelly!
We are usually very mercurial in our intentions
We’ll often go after things we think are available weaknesses on first down – both to probe what we think is going on and to test stuff out. Especially early on. We don’t have a ton of tendencies in that regard.
As an example, think about the first half vs. WSU. We did IZR and OZR runs early and they responded by a blitzing lineback on the weakside (away from the RB’s running lane) which blew up the play a few times. We responded by throwing to the weakside and creating a bubble screen to keep them honest; the first one went for 40 yards and a TD by DAT. that’s the sort of thing you’ll see with us – we’ll try something, see what their reaction is, and then beat them on that adjustment.
This is also why we often do better in that third quarter; that’s often when we do more adjustments.
Fascinating, and well done.
I love your writeup, but isn’t the idea that Oregon needs to run the ball to win fundamental to the offense?
Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.
by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Dec 6, 2011 8:26 PM PST reply actions
Not exactly
In theory we could pass really well too and it wouldn’t matter (we tried this quite a bit against UCLA on first downs with bubble screens). the important thing is to make sure we stay in rushing down yardages – less than 2nd and 7, less than 3rd and 5 – and are not getting a lot of negative plays. Wisconsin’s D is opportunistic and is happy to trade big plays for the chance at getting big losses. We can win by simply not taking huge chances and getting good gains but not insane gains every play.
And that is very unlike Oregon’s MO for most of the season. We’re used to relying on explosive plays to get drives going and occasionally stalling. Now, I think we also are going to do well because our running game is so strong and their running defense is fairly weak, but runnning the ball isn’t necessary; getting yards on first down is.
OK, that makes sense.
I’d like to see a statistical breakdown of our average 3rd-down yardage in the first and second halves. We all know the Ducks usually perform better in the second, and I’m just guessing that we see fewer third and long scenarios in the second, fewer 4th downs, and fewer reasons to “rely” on the pass. This is outside of the games where we couldn’t establish the run overall, like LSU and Auburn. Wisconsin doesn’t have defenses like those. With Stanford ‘09 being the exception, all of our losses (and Cal ’10) in the Kelly era have come to teams against whom we couldn’t establish the run (’SC holds true, until the 4th when we finally started gashing their D with the run and came up just short).
Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.
by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Dec 6, 2011 10:54 PM PST up reply actions
They are opportunistic in terms of turnovers
In terms of sacks, not so much. They don’t rank highly in that regard. From what I’ve seen, they are content to rush 4 most of the time, play medium to soft coverage, and let you make the mistakes. They aren’t terribly explosive up front, but they do have a big front seven, including the linebackers. They are the biggest front seven we’ve faced this year, nobody in the Pac-12 compares in terms of their size in the front 4 and in the LB corps. Best comp in terms of size is Cal, though they are a true 4-3 D. They don’t give up many big gains, but that’s a result of the philosophy, not team speed. Their defense is built to win against teams that have power running games.
I like the matchup in terms of the fact that the teams that have slowed Oregon down have been the ones with a lot of speed at LB and explosive DTs. This Wisconsin defense reminds me a lot of the USC defense that came to Oregon in ‘09 and got shredded on the power play; a 4-3 D with NFL size but not a lot of quickness in the LB group. We’ve struggled at times against quicker Ds that can shoot gaps and keep us from getting to the edge.
The thing is though, I don’t know how good their defense really is because of their schedule strength. They rank decently in the stat sheet as a solid defense, but there are some anemic offenses in the Big 10 this year. They also skipped the best one in Michigan. We are by far the best and most explosive offensive team they’ve faced.
Prince: This bores me. Is anyone up for a game of basketball?
I don't think this is right
“They don’t give up many big gains, but that’s a result of the philosophy, not team speed. Their defense is built to win against teams that have power running games.”
they give up quite a bit of big gains according to the S&P and FEI stats; both rated them fairly meh against explosive-style plays and gains. Significantly worse than Oregon, truth be told. what they do appear to be good at is stopping people if they get into long yardage situations. If you see 3rd and 8, 3rd and 10 they appear to get a fairly good amount of stops at that point. But they don’t get there that often because they give up a lot of yards on first and second downs.
Which is great, because Oregon does really well when doing well on first and second downs.
I was looking at long plays from scrimmage
They are fairly good at limiting the big play from that perspective, ranking in the top 20 consistently for least number of 10+ yd plays, 20+ yd plays, 30+ yd plays, etc. Granted, they played a heavy slate of non-explosive offenses, so those numbers aren’t adjusted for SOS. FEI and S&P do a better job of that.
Prince: This bores me. Is anyone up for a game of basketball?

by 























