goemaw.com
TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: DQ12 on December 08, 2013, 01:52:19 AM
-
Alright so I think we can all agree that the 2013 offense wasn't as good as 2012's. We lost K-State EMAW legend Chris Harper and Heisman finalist Quarterback Collin Klein. On the other hand: Tyler Lockett. So let's break down these numbers together, goEMAW.com members!
First, let's start with the raw numbers. 2013 Cats had 408.6 yards per game, which put us at 64th in the country. 2012 Cats had 392.9.
But yards per game is kids stuff. Let's check out our pace just so we have some context. In short, our offense went really slow. Again. We ran 66.5 plays per game, 114th highest, in 2013. The 2012 cats ran 65.5 plays per game, which ranked 118th last year. A slight increase, but nothing earth shattering.
If we combine the two categories above, we can see our yards per play and get at our efficiency. 2013 Cats earned 6.1 yards per play. Wow. That's actually really good. That puts us at 26th in the country and 2nd in the Big 12 (behind Baylor and their uber crazy 7.5 yards per play). It's also higher than the 2012 Cats, who had 6.0 yards per play.
OK, so 2013 Cats ran more plays and earned more yards per play than 2012 Cats. So far so good.
But let's talk points:
- 2013 Cats offense scored 31.5 points per game, which is good (31st in the country; 4th in the Big 12 behind Baylor, OSU and Tech). When you factor in our pace, it's even more impressive: 0.52 points per play (13th in the country, 3rd in the Big 12 behind Baylor and OSU).
- Compare this with the 2012 offense, which ran at a similar pace and had fewer yards per game than 2013 offense 37.8 13th in the country. That's crazy, especially since earlier I said only 7 offenses in the country ran fewer plays than us last year. Factoring in our 2012's offense slow pace translates to a super high .519 points per play (3rd in the country).
DATA NOTE: 2013 Florida State's points per play is 0.764. :sdeek: x1000. They're good.
OK so our offense had more yards per play, but fewer points per play. What accounts for this? Probably either 3rd down percentage or turnovers. Let's get into the third down stuff first:
- 2013 Cats had 12.8 third downs per game (111th most). That's very few, which is to be expected given our pace. Last year's was 12.2. (120th).
- 2013 Cats converted third downs at a rate of 49.65%. WOW! Really good! That ranks 13th in the country and 1st in the Big 12! Kiss our butts, Baylor (47.1%; 19th)! 2012 Cats were really good at this too, 51.02% (6th).
Alright, so if 3rd down percentage doesn't really explain the difference, it must be turnovers.
Oh my. It's definitely turnovers. 2013 Cats turned it over 2 times per game. That's 95th in the country and 8th in the Big 12. This number is made even worse by our really slow pace. I couldn't find any pace-related turnover stats, but let me put it this way, if only 10 teams in the country run fewer plays than us, but have the 30th most turnovers, that means we have a crazy high number of turnovers per play. Yeesh.
By comparison, the 2012 Cats averaged only 1 turnover per game. Only 3 teams had fewer turnovers last year.
So what was the deal? Has to be Waters' interceptions, right?
2013 Cats threw 1 int per game (tied with 11 teams at 78th fewest). That's pretty bad. It's magnified by our slow pace. K-State's INT% was 4.28%. Compared that to the 2012 Cats who threw 0.8 INTs (3.14%) per game. For every 4 interceptions the 2012 offense threw, the 2013 offense threw 5.
Hmm. So the 2012 Cats actually threw a lot of interceptions given its pace too. 2013 is worse, for sure, but it still doesn't really explain the difference. After all, K-State double its turnovers this year compared to last. Must be fumbles.
Fumbles: The 2013 Cats had 1.5 fumbles per game (80th fewest) Uh oh. I see where this is going. We cannot fumble it that much given our pace. The 2012 Cats had 0.8 per game (8th fewest).
-Of those 1.5 fumbles per game, the 2013 Cats only recovered 35.3% of them (99th FR%), which translated to about 1 fumble lost per game. The 2012 Cats recovered 70% (4th) and given that they had so few fumbles per game anyways, it means that the Cats only lost 0.2 fumbles per game (:sdeek: :sdeek: :sdeek:). For every fumble the 2012 offense lost, the 2013 offense lost 5.
The biggest difference between the 2012 offense and the 2013 offense is fumbles lost. Had we held onto the ball more, or recovered it more when we did drop it, the 2013 offense would've been really good. INTs were a problem, but only slightly moreso than 2012. But even so, the 2013 offense was pretty good. It ran at a snail's pace, but gobbled up a pretty good amount of yards per play and moved the chains at a good rate on third down.
"Data"Lew 12, signing out!
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages1.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20110402122521%2Fgoonies%2Fimages%2F5%2F54%2FData.jpg&hash=c3785ccfac8863a19b6feced29ea7808a0bf3ec9)
-
Are you going to compare the 2013 Cats' points per game to 2012's or no?
-
2012 was higher. But they were +20 on turnovers on the year, and we ended at 0.
Almost every stat site I've looked at says that the offense was better this year than last. The exception being the massive TO difference, which was really the biggest problem of the season by far.
-
Are you going to compare the 2013 Cats' points per game to 2012's or no?
i goofed. i must have hit the post button too soon without noticing.
(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQoHQtoFxxaiNTfFpJrvA6QTIGj7087qKXmretKdy_BL7zGDOSQ_A)
-
the d stands for data
-
Great research, dlew
Our best shot at upsetting an opponent early in the season was OSU. Obviously you can solely base TO's on that loss. Would explain the 95th in the country in that particular statistic
-
Interesting if true.
-
Can we just label this the butt fumble.
-
Don't special teams and defensive scores count to the total point production you cited? That would be a big difference from last year, too.
-
Not just TOs, but three and outs as well.
-
Not just TOs, but three and outs as well.
three and outs artificially boost the offensive yards data
-
if only bill would do this kind of research in his spare time instead of hanging out at the lake listening to eddie murphy raw.
fantastic post, dlew.
-
:nerd:
-
on the year, we lost 11 fumbles. of those, 4 were lost by waters and 3 were lost by sams.
-
Don't special teams and defensive scores count to the total point production you cited? That would be a big difference from last year, too.
:nono:
those don't count for offensive scores, Rusterbuster. IIRC, i think the 2013/2012 non-offensive scores were about the same. Roughly 3 points a game for both.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft3.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcSNsm28NXXM6oka8t-eG09Mw51RXPSjaOvALtkHHHMvB7K346CjzA&hash=748d435ef01b1b079ca2d673d6317c688e4c5441)
-
This may not be right, but I remember in a lot of games last year we let off the gas because we were so far ahead. This year we were pretty much going all out the entire game to get those points. I really think the offense regressed this year and not just because of turnovers.
-
Don't special teams and defensive scores count to the total point production you cited? That would be a big difference from last year, too.
:nono:
those don't count for offensive scores, Rusterbuster. IIRC, i think the 2013/2012 non-offensive scores were about the same. Roughly 3 points a game for both.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft3.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcSNsm28NXXM6oka8t-eG09Mw51RXPSjaOvALtkHHHMvB7K346CjzA&hash=748d435ef01b1b079ca2d673d6317c688e4c5441)
This surprises me. For some reason, I thought we scored several ST TD's last season where we didn't get many this year. :dunno:
-
Yes, it surprises me, too.
-
I wonder how our average starting field position compares.
-
that was the best statistical analysis i've seen in a long time. good job, datalew12.
-
I wonder how our average starting field position compares.
2013: 31.8
2012: 36.3
We went from #1 in college football last year (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fpa2012) in Field Position advantage to #40 this year (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fpa).
I am amused by the lengths many of our fans will go to discredit this year's offensive stats because they don't like the QB who got more snaps. The main reason I became #teamfence as this season went along was because of the production this team on offense with both QBs.
I won't try to say this offense was better than last year's because it wasn't, mainly because of turnovers. datalew point out the fumble/TO issue well in his thread, so he deserves all the credit.
I get the 3 and out talk, but when you compare 3rd down conversions and a slight drop in TOP (32 min to 31.5, from 1st to 2nd in the Big 12) it doesn't seem like its nearly as big of a deal.
Great job datalew.
-
I wonder how our average starting field position compares.
2013: 31.8
2012: 36.3
We went from #1 in college football last year (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fpa2012) in Field Position advantage to #40 this year (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fpa).
I am amused by the lengths many of our fans will go to discredit this year's offensive stats because they don't like the QB who got more snaps. The main reason I became #teamfence as this season went along was because of the production this team on offense with both QBs.
I won't try to say this offense was better than last year's because it wasn't, mainly because of turnovers. datalew point out the fumble/TO issue well in his thread, so he deserves all the credit.
I get the 3 and out talk, but when you compare 3rd down conversions and a slight drop in TOP (32 min to 31.5, from 1st to 2nd in the Big 12) it doesn't seem like its nearly as big of a deal.
Great job datalew.
thanks! how does the defensive field position compare?
-
I wonder how our average starting field position compares.
2013: 31.8
2012: 36.3
We went from #1 in college football last year (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fpa2012) in Field Position advantage to #40 this year (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fpa).
I am amused by the lengths many of our fans will go to discredit this year's offensive stats because they don't like the QB who got more snaps. The main reason I became #teamfence as this season went along was because of the production this team on offense with both QBs.
I won't try to say this offense was better than last year's because it wasn't, mainly because of turnovers. datalew point out the fumble/TO issue well in his thread, so he deserves all the credit.
I get the 3 and out talk, but when you compare 3rd down conversions and a slight drop in TOP (32 min to 31.5, from 1st to 2nd in the Big 12) it doesn't seem like its nearly as big of a deal.
Great job datalew.
thanks! how does the defensive field position compare?
25.6 last year, 30.6 this year.
-
I am amused by the lengths many of our fans will go to discredit this year's offensive stats because they don't like the QB who got more snaps. The main reason I became #teamfence as this season went along was because of the production this team on offense with both.
The problem with this position is you don't seem to acknowledge that the offense could have been any better. I can acknowledge the offense was pretty good, but I think it could have been much better than last years' if the QB situation was handled differently.
-
our offense was not good (and it wasn't good last year either so WGAF how it compared to last year)
-
our offense was not good (and it wasn't good last year either so WGAF how it compared to last year)
What is your measure of good offense?
-
our offense was not good (and it wasn't good last year either so WGAF how it compared to last year)
What is your measure of good offense?
:dubious:
-
our offense was not good (and it wasn't good last year either so WGAF how it compared to last year)
What is your measure of good offense?
:dubious:
I'm just curious.
-
our offense was ridiculous last year. No way we should have expected it to get any better.
-
Well, we've got 20 days to get it right.
-
our offense was not good (and it wasn't good last year either so WGAF how it compared to last year)
What is your measure of good offense?
Well, for starters an offense should be dominant in at least one phase of the game (running or passing), I wouldn't consider us dominant at either (not this year or last). Our offense is inept anytime face a defense with a pulse. I know everyone wants to pretend like we were an amazing team last year but we got physically dominated by the two best teams that we played. Anyone who wouldn't argue differently is delusional. We were great against mediocre teams and awful against good teams.
-
our offense was not good (and it wasn't good last year either so WGAF how it compared to last year)
What is your measure of good offense?
Well, for starters an offense should be dominant in at least one phase of the game (running or passing), I wouldn't consider us dominant at either (not this year or last). Our offense is inept anytime face a defense with a pulse. I know everyone wants to pretend like we were an amazing team last year but we got physically dominated by the two best teams that we played. Anyone who wouldn't argue differently is delusional. We were great against mediocre teams and awful against good teams.
The 2012 co-champions of the Big XII was a mediocre team??? :sdeek:
-
Using the site fan posted,
Defense:
2012 - 10th
2013 - 50th
Offense:
2012 - 21st
2013 - 23rd
Special Teams:
2012 - 1st
2013 - 23rd
-
our offense was not good (and it wasn't good last year either so WGAF how it compared to last year)
What is your measure of good offense?
Well, for starters an offense should be dominant in at least one phase of the game (running or passing), I wouldn't consider us dominant at either (not this year or last). Our offense is inept anytime face a defense with a pulse. I know everyone wants to pretend like we were an amazing team last year but we got physically dominated by the two best teams that we played. Anyone who wouldn't argue differently is delusional. We were great against mediocre teams and awful against good teams.
The 2012 co-champions of the Big XII was a mediocre team??? :sdeek:
did you watch the cotton bowl?
-
They played in the fiesta bowl. :confused:
-
we've got plenty of time to work on the hubes wildcat
-
They played in the fiesta bowl. :confused:
OU played in the cotton bowl dumbass
-
They played in the fiesta bowl. :confused:
OU played in the cotton bowl dumbass
Yeah I know, dumbass. They lost to the heirs man winner who took down bama. :flush:
-
I can tell you right now I loved these nuggets datalew. And what's even better is that they were #noboner nuggets. Not those filthy one or 2 boner.
-
our offense was not good (and it wasn't good last year either so WGAF how it compared to last year)
What is your measure of good offense?
Well, for starters an offense should be dominant in at least one phase of the game (running or passing), I wouldn't consider us dominant at either (not this year or last). Our offense is inept anytime face a defense with a pulse. I know everyone wants to pretend like we were an amazing team last year but we got physically dominated by the two best teams that we played. Anyone who wouldn't argue differently is delusional. We were great against mediocre teams and awful against good teams.
kind of have to agree with this. except the best we faced was Oregon. Then probably OU, then...Baylor? So we were 1-2 in those games (all road/neutral). I think of KSU as the Oakland A's. Their strength is that they are consistently good throughout a season which lends itself to a good/above good record, but when we have to face top level teams/talent (i.e. the MLB playoffs) , we will lose. This is because bill gets his ass completely destroyed in recruiting.
-
I am amused by the lengths many of our fans will go to discredit this year's offensive stats because they don't like the QB who got more snaps. The main reason I became #teamfence as this season went along was because of the production this team on offense with both.
The problem with this position is you don't seem to acknowledge that the offense could have been any better. I can acknowledge the offense was pretty good, but I think it could have been much better than last years' if the QB situation was handled differently.
It certainly could have been better. I think there is good chance it could have been about the same or worse.
-
our offense was not good (and it wasn't good last year either so WGAF how it compared to last year)
What is your measure of good offense?
Well, for starters an offense should be dominant in at least one phase of the game (running or passing), I wouldn't consider us dominant at either (not this year or last). Our offense is inept anytime face a defense with a pulse. I know everyone wants to pretend like we were an amazing team last year but we got physically dominated by the two best teams that we played. Anyone who wouldn't argue differently is delusional. We were great against mediocre teams and awful against good teams.
kind of have to agree with this. except the best we faced was Oregon. Then probably OU, then...Baylor? So we were 1-2 in those games (all road/neutral). I think of KSU as the Oakland A's. Their strength is that they are consistently good throughout a season which lends itself to a good/above good record, but when we have to face top level teams/talent (i.e. the MLB playoffs) , we will lose. This is because bill gets his ass completely destroyed in recruiting.
Everyone has shitty records against top level teams. I mean, even Oregon and Oklahoma that you cited did last year.