Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="SWC75, post: 4458683, member: 289"] I took a deep dive into the stats to see how we compared to big, bad Boston College. So here is everything on this page: [URL="https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/702/p2"]NCAA College Football FBS current team Stats | NCAA.com[/URL] I also use the stat page on the college’s athletic websites. SCORING OFFENSE SU- 28 BC- 17 TOTAL OFFENSIVE YARDS SU- 360 BC - 308 OFFENSIVE FIRST DOWNS SU- 213 BC - 180 OFFENSIVE RUSHING YARDS SU- 141 BC - 61 OFFENSIVE PASSING YARDS SU- 218 BC - 247 OFFENSIVE PASSING YARDS PER COMPLETION SU- 14 BC - 12 OFFENSIVE PASSING YARDS PER ATTEMPT SU- 8 BC - 7 OFFENSIVE PASSING EFFICIENCY SU- 143 BC - 123 OFFENSIVE COMPLETION PERCENTAGE SU- 60 BC - 58 OFFENSIVE 3RD AND 4TH DOWN PERCENTAGE SU- 37 BC 33 OFFENSIVE RED ZONE POINTS SU- 183in45 = 4 BC - 111in28 = 4 SACKS ALLOWED SU- 34 BC - 43 TACKLES FOR A LOSS ALLOWED SU- 68 BC - 91 BLOCKED KICKS ALLOWED SU- 2 BC - 2 (I’m assuming blocked kicks are placekicks and added them to blocked punts) SCORING DEFENSE SU- 23 BC- 30 TOTAL DEFENSIVE YARDS SU- 338 BC - 373 DEFENSIVE FIRST DOWNS SU- 215 BC - 217 DEFENSIVE RUSHING YARDS SU- 155 BC - 168 DEFENSIVE PASSING YARDS SU- 183 BC – 204 DEFENSIVE PASSING YARDS PER COMPLETION SU- 12 BC- 12 DEFFENSIVE PASSING YARDS PER ATTEMPT SU- 6 BC- 7 DEFENSIVE PASSING EFFICIENCY SU- 127 BC - 129 DEFENSIVE COMPLETION PERCENTAGE SU- 65 BC - 57 DEFENSIVE THIRD AND FOURTH DOWN PERCENTAGE SU- 40 BC - 38 DEFENSIVE RED ZONE POINTS SU- 159in37 = 4 BC - 207in44 = 5 SACKS SU- 27 BC - 20 TACKLES FOR A LOSS SU- 67 BC - 71 BLOCKED KICKS SU -2 BC - 1 DEFENSIVE TOUCHDOWNS SU- 3 BC - 0 KICKOFF RETURNS SU- 26 BC - 22 OPPONENT KICKOFF RETURNS SU- 21 BC - 29 KICKOFFS THAT WERE RETURNED SU- 15/52 = 29% BC - 28/68 = 41% OPPONENT KICKOFFS THAT WERE RETURNED SU- 21/62 = 34% BC – 20/41 = 49% PUNT RETURNS SU- 7 BC - 5 OPPONENT PUNT RETURNS SU- 8 BC - 6 PUNTS RETURNED SU- 23/50 = 46% BC- 14/56 = 25% OPPONENT PUNTS RETURNED SU- 14/48 = 40% BC- 12/70 = 17.1% NET PUNTING SU- 36 BC - 39 FIELD GOAL PERCENTAGE SU- 16/21 = 76 BC – 8/14 = 57% LONGEST FG SU- 54 BC - 46 40 YARDS + SU- 5/9 BC - 1/3 EXTRA POINTS MISSED SU- 0 BC - 1 TURNOVER MARGIN SU- +5 BC- -10 PENALTIES SU- 91/686yds BC - 67/537yds TIME OF POSSESSION SU- 28 BC- 29 STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE SU- #32 BC #72 (Everybody has their own system for this: I averaged the sources on this page: [URL="https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other"]NCAA College Football Strength of Schedule Rankings & Ratings[/URL] COMMON OPPONENTS: We beat Louisville 31-7: BC them 34-33 = SU +23 We beat Connecticut 48-14: BC lost to them 3-13 = SU +44 We beat NC State 24-9; BC beat them 21-20 = SU +14 We lost to Clemson 21-27; BCF lost to them 3-31 = SU +22 We lost to Notre Dame 24-41; BC lost to them 0-44 = SU +27 We lost to Florida State 3-36; BC lost to them 14-44 = BC +3 We lost to Wake Forest 35-45; BC lost to them 15-43 = SU +18 Total: SU + 145 / 7 games = SU +21 I looked at that and there is what it tells me that seems to be in Boston College’s favor: - We continue to be one of the most penalized teams in the nation with 91 in 11 games. BC is more moderate with 67. - BC returned 49% of their opponent’s kickoffs. We returned 34%. - Despite the absence of Phil Jurkovec, BC has out-passed us by 29 yards per game. - Our punts are returned more often than theirs. - BC has 71 TFLs to our 67. That’s not a big difference but, since we had more sacks, 27-20, that means that we had 40 TFLs on running plays and they had 51. The fact that they give up more rushing yards, 155-168) and for a higher average (3.9-4.4), means that they are taking chances to get those TFLs and get gashed sometimes, too. - We’ve allowed opponents to complete 65% of their passes. BC’s held them to 57%. The yards per completion are about the same. Our advantages: - We have 33 more first downs than BC. They aren’t one of those grind-it-out teams that hogs the clock. (At least until they play us.) - We are third in the country in average kickoff returns. BC is 129th in kickoff return defense. - 41% of BC’s kickoffs were returned to 29% of ours. And we have some guys who can burn them. - We are averaging 13.71 yards per completion to BC’s 11.64 and 8.2 yards/attempt to 6.7. - We return punts at a higher rate for more yardage. - We’ve been to the red zone 17 more times and scored 72 more points there. - We’ve given up 48 fewer red zone points. - BC literally has no rushing attack. They are #131 – last in BCS with 60.9 yards rushing per game. (The next worse is 77.2) They are averaging 2.0 yards per carry. Of course, that includes sacks: They’ve given up 43 for 341 yards. They’ve been thrown for 489 yards in losses, so they’ve lost 148 yards on designed running plays. Overall, without the sacks, They’ve gained 3.6 yards per carry. We are averaging 5.2 yards per designed run. - We haven’t been great defending the QB but we’ve given up only 34 sacks for 209 yards. - We’ve been tackled for a loss 68 times but it’s happened to BC 91 times. - BC is giving up more rushing yards per game than we are 168-154. Maybe Sean Tucker can finally have that break-out game we’ve been waiting for. He needs 65 yards to reach 1,000. - BC has passed for more yards because they’ve thrown the ball 402 times, (despite having to do it with their second string QB much of the time), Our passing efficiency is 20 points higher than theirs. - We don’t have a lot of sacks, despite playing aggressive defense. BC doesn’t even have that many, (20). Shrader should have time to throw. - Turnover margin: We’re +5. They are -10. - We’ve out-gained them by 52 yards and given up 35 fewer yards. - Even with the bad game at Wake Forest, Andre Szmyt (76%) is still a lot better than their guy (57%). - In the end, it’s about points and BC doesn’t score them: 17.3ppg, #125 in BCS. We are #71 with 28.0. Their defense is also worse, 22.6-30.2. - We are 6-5 against the 32nd toughest schedule. They are 3-8 against the 72nd toughest schedule. Of course, our statistics are mostly from a time when we were reasonably healthy. Now we have problems at quarterback, in both lines, the secondary and a lot of guys who will play but will play hurt. But BC’s probably just as badly beaten up, if not worse. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?