My Take

[SWC75]

I've been saying it for two seasons because so many people here have trouble grasping the obvious

But it's an explanation why the scoring went down from 2015-2016, not an explanation why the large increase in yards didn't produce the number of points you'd expect from such an increase. I'll put it another way:

In 2015 we scored 34 offensive touchdowns in 12 games on 320 yards per game total offense
In 2016 we scored 39 offensive touchdowns in 12 games on 441 yards per game total offense
In 2017 we have scored 29 offensive touchdowns in 9 games, (which projects to 38 over 12 games) on 456 yards per game total offense.

It's not enough. If we score 9 touchdowns in the next three games, will we win two of them and get to a bowl?

 

[CuseCactus]

Assuming ED plays - we'll break 40 against both Wake and Louisville.

 

[Millhouse]

But it's an explanation why the scoring went down from 2015-2016, not an explanation why the large increase in yards didn't produce the number of points you'd expect from such an increase. I'll put it another way:

In 2015 we scored 34 offensive touchdowns in 12 games on 320 yards per game total offense
In 2016 we scored 39 offensive touchdowns in 12 games on 441 yards per game total offense
In 2017 we have scored 29 offensive touchdowns in 9 games, (which projects to 38 over 12 games) on 456 yards per game total offense.

It's not enough. If we score 9 touchdowns in the next three games, will we win two of them and get to a bowl?

2015 you're lumping in easier overtime tds. if i remember correctly, there were 4 of them

that is a pretty good increase in offensive touchdowns

 

[Crusty]

2015: We averaged 320 yards per game and scored 27 points a game

2016: We averaged 441 yards a game and 26 points a game.

2017: We are averaging 456 yards a game and 29 points a game.

Where's the beef?

Tubas

 

[JrodCuse]

You've been saying that for two seasons. That may account for why scoring went down from Shafer's last year to Dino's first but it hardly accounts for the discrepancy between yards and points. In 2015 we were 118th in the country in yards and 77th in points. Last year we were 42nd in yards and 90th in pints. This year we are 28th in yards and 61st in points.

Here is SU with the five teams ranked above them in yard and the five teams ranked below, along with the points per game they are scoring:

Arkansas State 465 yards 40 points
Mississippi 462 yards 32 points
U of Miami 461 yards 31.5 points
New Mexico State 461 yards 31 points
Navy 457 yards 32.5 points
Syracuse 456 yards 29 points
UCLA 450 yards 34 points
North Carolina State 447 yards 33 points
Gerogia 446 yards 37 points
Wake Forest 445 yards 32 points
Penn State 444 yards 38 points

The other ten teams in the group are averaging 454 yards and 34 points per game.

I think how aggressive our coach is on 4th downs plays into that a touch. Once we start converting those plays more...look out

 

[SWC75]

I think how aggressive our coach is on 4th downs plays into that a touch. Once we start converting those plays more...look out

We are converting 61% now- 38th in the country. That's pretty good.

4th Down Conversion Pct | FBS Football Statistics - NCAA.com

 

[SWC75]

2015 you're lumping in easier overtime tds. if i remember correctly, there were 4 of them

that is a pretty good increase in offensive touchdowns

If our rank in scoring correlated to our rank in yards, we'd be going pretty good. The 28th rated scoring team, USC, is averaging 35.2ppg.

 

[Millhouse]

If our rank in scoring correlated to our rank in yards, we'd be going pretty good. The 28th rated scoring team, USC, is averaging 35.2ppg.

USC has 4 tds by returned punts/fumbles/interceptions and scored 17 points in one overtime.

so their offense is scoring 30.7 per game in regulation

without those scores they'd be 50th in the country (i haven't subtracted every other teams non regulation offensive scores)

they're 14th in the country in yards

I'm the wrong messenger for this obvious fact because I know it stinks to admit I'm right. But your stubbornness about this is goofy.

maybe all this is evidence supporting taking a lot more chances on defense and in the return game.

if those scores are what's keeping a great USC offense from being 50th in the country, it might be something that's quite overlooked. i think it's mostly luck and not very predictive but luck is important

 

[SWC75]

USC has 4 tds by returned punts/fumbles/interceptions and scored 17 points in one overtime.

so their offense is scoring 30.7 per game in regulation

without those scores they'd be 50th in the country (i haven't subtracted every other teams non regulation offensive scores)

they're 14th in the country in yards

I'm the wrong messenger for this obvious fact because I know it stinks to admit I'm right. But your stubbornness about this is goofy.

It's goofy to think that our ranking in scoring should be close to our rank in gaining yards?

 

[Millhouse]

It's goofy to think that our ranking in scoring should be close to our rank in gaining yards?

it's not going to be as close as you want it to be because of defensive scores and much easier overtime scores.

45 points in defense and overtime is significant, it's just math

 

[orangepassion]

But it's an explanation why the scoring went down from 2015-2016, not an explanation why the large increase in yards didn't produce the number of points you'd expect from such an increase. I'll put it another way:

In 2015 we scored 34 offensive touchdowns in 12 games on 320 yards per game total offense
In 2016 we scored 39 offensive touchdowns in 12 games on 441 yards per game total offense
In 2017 we have scored 29 offensive touchdowns in 9 games, (which projects to 38 over 12 games) on 456 yards per game total offense.

It's not enough. If we score 9 touchdowns in the next three games, will we win two of them and get to a bowl?

A different question. Is our Offense better than last year?

 

[RF2044]

But it's an explanation why the scoring went down from 2015-2016, not an explanation why the large increase in yards didn't produce the number of points you'd expect from such an increase. I'll put it another way:

In 2015 we scored 34 offensive touchdowns in 12 games on 320 yards per game total offense
In 2016 we scored 39 offensive touchdowns in 12 games on 441 yards per game total offense
In 2017 we have scored 29 offensive touchdowns in 9 games, (which projects to 38 over 12 games) on 456 yards per game total offense.

It's not enough. If we score 9 touchdowns in the next three games, will we win two of them and get to a bowl?

I'm not sure what's so difficult about this to understand contextually. In addition to the defensive score differential, our running game / OL -- while both improving -- aren't where they need to be yet. We also currently aren't getting explosive home run kind of plays, which means that we string together lots of first downs and work our way down field systematically, but aren't always getting scores.

We get lots of yards between the 20s, but bog down in the red zone. That will change eventually, but until it does our scoring will lag a bit behind the yardage / total offense. The important thing is that we're amassing those yards, because it shows that the offensive system is working. When scoring catches up, watch out.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

At the pace this team plays at they need to average close to 35 points (top 30ish in the country) to be consistently successful while running this offensive scheme. Everything I see statistically on a national basis this year and last suggest the same very strongly.

Why people argue that the efficiency and scoring issue with the offense isn't still a big problem baffles me. You can love the scheme and love Coach Babers and still realize that when it comes to efficiency and scoring (last year and this year) the offense has not put the necessary points on the scoreboard required to win when they have 85 plays/game or 14-15 possessions per game. Imo, why that is not happening is the useful discussion.

To boil it down to a few glaring statistics that show the issue of yards gained vs. points scored look at yards per play and the Red Zone TD%. Syracuse is 102nd in yards per play. The additional total yardage (total offense) is a direct effect of the additional plays run not the success of those individual plays. Its pretty undisputable based upon this years data to date. The Red Zone TD% ranks us at 119th nationally meaning once we get it inside the 20 we are as bad as it gets getting it pass the goal line for 6.

These numbers don't have bias. They just exist.

I like the scheme and have confidence in Coach Babers to right the ship yet I can still clearly see that the offense is not performing as intended by the coach and I suggest he would agree with that assessment. In fact, he has called his own team below average at this point. I believe he knows that the offense needs to get much better/efficient if he is going to achieve his vision of being consistently good at Syracuse.

 

[SWC75]

I'm not sure what's so difficult about this to understand contextually. In addition to the defensive score differential, our running game / OL -- while both improving -- aren't where they need to be yet. We also currently aren't getting explosive home run kind of plays, which means that we string together lots of first downs and work our way down field systematically, but aren't always getting scores.

We get lots of yards between the 20s, but bog down in the red zone. That will change eventually, but until it does our scoring will lag a bit behind the yardage / total offense. The important thing is that we're amassing those yards, because it shows that the offensive system is working. When scoring catches up, watch out.

And that's what we need - for the scoring to catch up. I takes more than 26-25-27-27-19-24 points to win major college football games these days, (the 65th ranked of 130 teams is averaging 29 points per game) and we have to win 2 of 3.

All the reasons given are part of the problem: we aren't getting defensive or special teams score. We lack offensive explosiveness. We can't run the ball well enough to punch it in. We throw the ball to the sideline too much and not enough to the middle, (look at that Custis play- it was his only catch of the game). The offensive line needs an upgrade, either through maturity or new personnel. Some of this will take another year or two. But we've got to find a way to put more points on the board in these next three games.

 

[SWC75]

A different question. Is our Offense better than last year?

Slightly. We are averaging 456 yards per game and 29 points vs. 441 yards and 26 points last year.

 

[SWC75]

it's not going to be as close as you want it to be because of defensive scores and much easier overtime scores.

45 points in defense and overtime is significant, it's just math

Are the 33 teams that rank lower than us in yards but higher than us in scoring all doing on defense/special teams and overtime? it can't be all an illusion.

 

[RMH44]

I'm not sure what's so difficult about this to understand contextually. In addition to the defensive score differential, our running game / OL -- while both improving -- aren't where they need to be yet. We also currently aren't getting explosive home run kind of plays, which means that we string together lots of first downs and work our way down field systematically, but aren't always getting scores.

We get lots of yards between the 20s, but bog down in the red zone. That will change eventually, but until it does our scoring will lag a bit behind the yardage / total offense. The important thing is that we're amassing those yards, because it shows that the offensive system is working. When scoring catches up, watch out.

As well as Irv and Steve are playing, they're not getting a bunch of YAC. That's where AET excelled and his home run threat is greatly missed.

Our long TD passes (Irv and Custis come to mind) were the result of broken coverage...not because the WR out ran the DB's. I'm really looking forward to watching some of the new WR's who (reportedly) have break away speed.

Additionally. wouldn't it be great to have a RB or two that is a threat to take it to the house on every touch?

 

[RF2044]

And that's what we need - for the scoring to catch up. I takes more than 26-25-27-27-19-24 points to win major college football games these days, (the 65th ranked of 130 teams is averaging 29 points per game) and we have to win 2 of 3.

All the reasons given are part of the problem: we aren't getting defensive or special teams score. We lack offensive explosiveness. We can't run the ball well enough to punch it in. We throw the ball to the sideline too much and not enough to the middle, (look at that Custis play- it was his only catch of the game). The offensive line needs an upgrade, either through maturity or new personnel. Some of this will take another year or two. But we've got to find a way to put more points on the board in these next three games.

...and I think that we will. Keep in mind that we've played a defensive gauntlet, against a bunch of teams with 5 star recruits.

I'm not saying that the games we have remaining won't be tough, but hopefully 465 yards becomes 500 yards or more against a non-Clemson / FSU / Miami.

 

[RF2044]

At the pace this team plays at they need to average close to 35 points (top 30ish in the country) to be consistently successful while running this offensive scheme. Everything I see statistically on a national basis this year and last suggest the same very strongly.

Why people argue that the efficiency and scoring issue with the offense isn't still a big problem baffles me. You can love the scheme and love Coach Babers and still realize that when it comes to efficiency and scoring (last year and this year) the offense has not put the necessary points on the scoreboard required to win when they have 85 plays/game or 14-15 possessions per game. Imo, why that is not happening is the useful discussion.

To boil it down to a few glaring statistics that show the issue of yards gained vs. points scored look at yards per play and the Red Zone TD%. Syracuse is 102nd in yards per play. The additional total yardage (total offense) is a direct effect of the additional plays run not the success of those individual plays. Its pretty undisputable based upon this years data to date. The Red Zone TD% ranks us at 119th nationally meaning once we get it inside the 20 we are as bad as it gets getting it pass the goal line for 6.

These numbers don't have bias. They just exist.

I like the scheme and have confidence in Coach Babers to right the ship yet I can still clearly see that the offense is not performing as intended by the coach and I suggest he would agree with that assessment. In fact, he has called his own team below average at this point. I believe he knows that the offense needs to get much better/efficient if he is going to achieve his vision of being consistently good at Syracuse.

Honest question -- WHO is arguing that?

I've seen a lot of commentary in this thread and others on the topic about the points being a lagging indicator. Reasons aren't excuses.

 

[orangepassion]

Slightly. We are averaging 456 yards per game and 29 points vs. 441 yards and 26 points last year.

With basically a healthy Dungey all year

 

[Louie and Bouie]

Honest question -- WHO is arguing that?

I've seen a lot of commentary in this thread and others on the topic about the points being a lagging indicator. Reasons aren't excuses.

Imo, in this thread and others (I've read and posted in) any questioning of the continuing inability of the offense to score enough points to consistently win is met with resistance as if you're directly challenging Babers and then devolves into a coaching change thread and how much better we're doing now. The metric used to show how much better we're doing is usually total offense which completely discounts pace of play/number of plays/possessions per game. Very few want to discuss yards per play or points per possession which is a great way to compare efficiency between different years and teams with different styles of play.

In this thread, our lack of offensive production in points per game(adjusted for the number of plays we run) is now being explained as a failure of defensive/special teams point production.

My overriding point was/is that this team needs to average 35-37 points per game at this pace to be consistently good. If not, it is my belief we will remain a .500 or worse team. So while I wholeheartedly agree that things are moving in the right direction I also see that, statistically speaking, the offense has not done enough to this point in the season.

I greatly value the team getting to 6 wins this year and a bowl game and I believe in order to do so the offense needs to have some of it's best games in the last 3. Here's hoping it all comes together.

 

[RF2044]

Imo, in this thread and others (I've read and posted in) any questioning of the continuing inability of the offense to score enough points to consistently win is met with resistance as if you're directly challenging Babers and then devolves into a coaching change thread and how much better we're doing now. The metric used to show how much better we're doing is usually total offense which completely discounts pace of play/number of plays/possessions per game. Very few want to discuss yards per play or points per possession which is a great way to compare efficiency between different years and teams with different styles of play.

In this thread, our lack of offensive production in points per game(adjusted for the number of plays we run) is now being explained as a failure of defensive/special teams point production.

My overriding point was/is that this team needs to average 35-37 points per game at this pace to be consistently good. If not, it is my belief we will remain a .500 or worse team. So while I wholeheartedly agree that things are moving in the right direction I also see that, statistically speaking, the offense has not done enough to this point in the season.

I greatly value the team getting to 6 wins this year and a bowl game and I believe in order to do so the offense needs to have some of it's best games in the last 3. Here's hoping it all comes together.

No, it was being used to explain the artificially inflated scoring of 2015 compared to under Babers where we haven't been getting defensive scores, special teams big plays, or having our scoring numbers padded by tacking on points in OT that weren't "earned" during the four quarters of play.

Agree with your premise about it needing to improve, but there are reasons why scoring isn't on par with yards [yet], and what I've seen in this thread is an explanation of those contextual factors. I haven't seen one poster express that they are hoping we don't score more.

 

[Millhouse]

Are the 33 teams that rank lower than us in yards but higher than us in scoring all doing on defense/special teams and overtime? it can't be all an illusion.

I didn't say that it was.

I'm saying the correlation is not what you want it to be because there are other types of scores that muck it up

we get free yards by being smarter on fourth down but we still have a low passer rating and bad rushing number from running backs so it doesn't pay off as much as we'd like.

 

[Millhouse]

Imo, in this thread and others (I've read and posted in) any questioning of the continuing inability of the offense to score enough points to consistently win is met with resistance as if you're directly challenging Babers and then devolves into a coaching change thread and how much better we're doing now. The metric used to show how much better we're doing is usually total offense which completely discounts pace of play/number of plays/possessions per game. Very few want to discuss yards per play or points per possession which is a great way to compare efficiency between different years and teams with different styles of play.

In this thread, our lack of offensive production in points per game(adjusted for the number of plays we run) is now being explained as a failure of defensive/special teams point production.

My overriding point was/is that this team needs to average 35-37 points per game at this pace to be consistently good. If not, it is my belief we will remain a .500 or worse team. So while I wholeheartedly agree that things are moving in the right direction I also see that, statistically speaking, the offense has not done enough to this point in the season.

I greatly value the team getting to 6 wins this year and a bowl game and I believe in order to do so the offense needs to have some of it's best games in the last 3. Here's hoping it all comes together.

a lot of the yards come from going for it more. it's low hanging fruit. the offense isn't really all that good. i'm encouraged by this - imagine what can be when the offense is better and we maintain the same smart approach (most of the time) on fourth down?

 

[upperdeck]

we give up so many pts with no running game so we cant score when the field compresses. its pretty easy to find 1 more td a game just with a running game that was below avg and not awful. we cant even run a QB sneak with power or get a push for 1-2 yds when we need it..