Statistical anomalies

[NineOneSeven]

Here's one:

Leading the nation in total takeaways, with 1 win and 9 losses.

 

[Libero2]

I’m not interested enough to look it up, but I would wager our “points off turnovers” stat to be in the bottom 10% of the country.

If our defense doesn’t score off the turnover, we usually dont. even off Jones INT to the 5 today we only mustered 3 points

 

[HRE Otto IV]

There are so many. We are scoring 17.1 ppg in conference games. After ND it likely will be even worse. But using the current number if we scored 175% that next year we still would be scoring less than 30 ppg and be no better than 7th in conference (assuming ND does not join for good). Is scoring 175% our current number even realistic? If we can pull that off then we likely make a Bowl. If we cannot, we will have a losing season. BTW scoring 150% (still might be hard to achieve) puts us in a tie for 11th (minus ND).

If you compare our passing with Dungey, we avg'd 287.4 ypg over those 3 years and all 3 years were within 5 yard of that number so little variance. This year we are at 167.8 so we basically need 175% our current number to be at what we were with Dungey. How that happening? Even getting our numbers up to 2019 will not be good enough to make a Bowl game.

Rushing yards we are at 76.2 per game. Last year's O was not good enough yet it is nearly twice as many yards per game as this year. So we can achieve 150% of this year and still stink.

If ND takes mercy on us we could realistically end up 12th out of 15 in conference play in regards to sacks allowed per game. Crazy that our OL gets trashed by many here but there are others teams dealing with the same and not as bad as us.

For an O system that prides itself on going fast and getting in as many plays as possible, we likely will have the least amount of plays in conference games this year. The next lowest is nearly 8 plays ahead of us.

 

[orangenauburn]

There are so many. We are scoring 17.1 ppg in conference games. After ND it likely will be even worse. But using the current number if we scored 175% that next year we still would be scoring less than 30 ppg and be no better than 7th in conference (assuming ND does not join for good). Is scoring 175% our current number even realistic? If we can pull that off then we likely make a Bowl. If we cannot, we will have a losing season. BTW scoring 150% (still might be hard to achieve) puts us in a tie for 11th (minus ND).

If you compare our passing with Dungey, we avg'd 287.4 ypg over those 3 years and all 3 years were within 5 yard of that number so little variance. This year we are at 167.8 so we basically need 175% our current number to be at what we were with Dungey. How that happening? Even getting our numbers up to 2019 will not be good enough to make a Bowl game.

Rushing yards we are at 76.2 per game. Last year's O was not good enough yet it is nearly twice as many yards per game as this year. So we can achieve 150% of this year and still stink.

If ND takes mercy on us we could realistically end up 12th out of 15 in conference play in regards to sacks allowed per game. Crazy that our OL gets trashed by many here but there are others teams dealing with the same and not as bad as us.

For an O system that prides itself on going fast and getting in as many plays as possible, we likely will have the least amount of plays in conference games this year. The next lowest is nearly 8 plays ahead of us.

These are worse numbers than Greg.

Losing Sean Lewis killed the O
Losing a playmaker at QB made sure it was buried

 

[syrBossHogg]

There are so many. We are scoring 17.1 ppg in conference games. After ND it likely will be even worse. But using the current number if we scored 175% that next year we still would be scoring less than 30 ppg and be no better than 7th in conference (assuming ND does not join for good). Is scoring 175% our current number even realistic? If we can pull that off then we likely make a Bowl. If we cannot, we will have a losing season. BTW scoring 150% (still might be hard to achieve) puts us in a tie for 11th (minus ND).

If you compare our passing with Dungey, we avg'd 287.4 ypg over those 3 years and all 3 years were within 5 yard of that number so little variance. This year we are at 167.8 so we basically need 175% our current number to be at what we were with Dungey. How that happening? Even getting our numbers up to 2019 will not be good enough to make a Bowl game.

Rushing yards we are at 76.2 per game. Last year's O was not good enough yet it is nearly twice as many yards per game as this year. So we can achieve 150% of this year and still stink.

If ND takes mercy on us we could realistically end up 12th out of 15 in conference play in regards to sacks allowed per game. Crazy that our OL gets trashed by many here but there are others teams dealing with the same and not as bad as us.

For an O system that prides itself on going fast and getting in as many plays as possible, we likely will have the least amount of plays in conference games this year. The next lowest is nearly 8 plays ahead of us.

RE: the offensive stats, last year there were 10 ACC teams that were bowl eligible. I think about 9 of them averaged at least 25 pts/game, Pitt was the only one below that. That should be the goal, and I think when you factor in we'd be playing Liberty, Rutgers, Albany, and Ohio instead of teams like Notre Dame, UNC, etc. it doesn't look quite as daunting.

 

[Libero2]

There are so many. We are scoring 17.1 ppg in conference games. After ND it likely will be even worse. But using the current number if we scored 175% that next year we still would be scoring less than 30 ppg and be no better than 7th in conference (assuming ND does not join for good). Is scoring 175% our current number even realistic? If we can pull that off then we likely make a Bowl. If we cannot, we will have a losing season. BTW scoring 150% (still might be hard to achieve) puts us in a tie for 11th (minus ND).

If you compare our passing with Dungey, we avg'd 287.4 ypg over those 3 years and all 3 years were within 5 yard of that number so little variance. This year we are at 167.8 so we basically need 175% our current number to be at what we were with Dungey. How that happening? Even getting our numbers up to 2019 will not be good enough to make a Bowl game.

Rushing yards we are at 76.2 per game. Last year's O was not good enough yet it is nearly twice as many yards per game as this year. So we can achieve 150% of this year and still stink.

If ND takes mercy on us we could realistically end up 12th out of 15 in conference play in regards to sacks allowed per game. Crazy that our OL gets trashed by many here but there are others teams dealing with the same and not as bad as us.

For an O system that prides itself on going fast and getting in as many plays as possible, we likely will have the least amount of plays in conference games this year. The next lowest is nearly 8 plays ahead of us.

I will say it should have been an expectation of everyone that “season long averages” should have been down compared to previous years this year. Simply because we are only playing conferences games and don’t have the handful of what should be ‘cupcakes’ to allow us to rack up better offensive production than we should against an all conference schedule.

should it be this bad? Of course not. It’s not an excuse for this garbage production. But it does explain why the numbers should have come down a little bit per game.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

RE: the offensive stats, last year there were 10 ACC teams that were bowl eligible. I think about 9 of them averaged at least 25 pts/game, Pitt was the only one below that. That should be the first goal, and I think when you factor in we'd be playing Liberty, Rutgers, Albany, and Ohio instead of teams like Notre Dame, UNC, etc. it doesn't look quite as daunting.

I was looking only at conference games. So that will apply to 8 (9 if you want to include RU as they are P5) games next year. Even if we win our 3 non P5 games we need to win 3 of the other 9. Going to be hard to achieve that getting under 27 ppg. In 2019 P5 games we scored 24.7 ppg and it resulted in a 2-7 record. So if we get a TD more per game it likely won't be enough to make a Bowl. We are going to need a 10 point per game improvement and even then it may be close.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I will say it should have been an expectation of everyone that “season long averages” should have been down compared to previous years this year. Simply because we are only playing conferences games and don’t have the handful of what should be ‘cupcakes’ to allow us to rack up better offensive production than we should against an all conference schedule.

should it be this bad? Of course not. It’s not an excuse for this garbage production. But it does explain why the numbers should have come down a little bit per game.

I am comparing conference games to conference games. The averages shouldn't really be all that different playing 8 vs 10 games.

 

[syrBossHogg]

I was looking only at conference games. So that will apply to 8 (9 if you want to include RU as they are P5) games next year. Even if we win our 3 non P5 games we need to win 3 of the other 9. Going to be hard to achieve that getting under 27 ppg. In 2019 P5 games we scored 24.7 ppg and it resulted in a 2-7 record. So if we get a TD more per game it likely won't be enough to make a Bowl. We are going to need a 10 point per game improvement and even then it may be close.

Ah gotcha. Yeah it will be tight, but the defense also taking a step forward next year can help alleviate that.

 

[Libero2]

I am comparing conference games to conference games. The averages shouldn't really be all that different playing 8 vs 10 games.

Fair enough I need to read closer I was thinking you were just comparing seasons overall.

either Way the offense is complete unacceptable and needs to be completely overhauled in what we are doing

 

[Shrmdougluvr]

These are worse numbers than Greg.

Losing Sean Lewis killed the O
Losing a playmaker at QB made sure it was buried

No coach in SU history has seen his stock rise more by simply leaving than Sean Lewis. Not a part of the 10-3 team and when he was here, we got the same complaints about predictable play calling, running up the gut on first, etc.

I'm not hating on him. He was a good recruiter, a big personality, and has done a fine job at Kent St. But the way he's discussed (revered) here now is just odd.

 

[orangenauburn]

No coach in SU history has seen his stock rise more by simply leaving than Sean Lewis. Not a part of the 10-3 team and when he was here, we got the same complaints about predictable play calling, running up the gut on first, etc.

I'm not hating on him. He was a good recruiter, a big personality, and has done a fine job at Kent St. But the way he's discussed (revered) here now is just odd.

Look at Kent State under his lead

That's the pudding.

Man is a legit coach and program builder.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

There are so many. We are scoring 17.1 ppg in conference games. After ND it likely will be even worse. But using the current number if we scored 175% that next year we still would be scoring less than 30 ppg and be no better than 7th in conference (assuming ND does not join for good). Is scoring 175% our current number even realistic? If we can pull that off then we likely make a Bowl. If we cannot, we will have a losing season. BTW scoring 150% (still might be hard to achieve) puts us in a tie for 11th (minus ND).

If you compare our passing with Dungey, we avg'd 287.4 ypg over those 3 years and all 3 years were within 5 yard of that number so little variance. This year we are at 167.8 so we basically need 175% our current number to be at what we were with Dungey. How that happening? Even getting our numbers up to 2019 will not be good enough to make a Bowl game.

Rushing yards we are at 76.2 per game. Last year's O was not good enough yet it is nearly twice as many yards per game as this year. So we can achieve 150% of this year and still stink.

If ND takes mercy on us we could realistically end up 12th out of 15 in conference play in regards to sacks allowed per game. Crazy that our OL gets trashed by many here but there are others teams dealing with the same and not as bad as us.

For an O system that prides itself on going fast and getting in as many plays as possible, we likely will have the least amount of plays in conference games this year. The next lowest is nearly 8 plays ahead of us.

Nice post. Thanks for looking that all up and framing it that way.

Fact of the matter is in college football today it's really hard to compete if your offense isn't regularly scoring 30+. We have a warped sense of this because our teams over the last 20 years haven't scored at a similar pace to the rest of the college football world. It's not a coincidence that our two best seasons occurred when we had our two best offenses being led by two above average senior QBs.

 

[orangepassion]

These are worse numbers than Greg.

Losing Sean Lewis killed the O
Losing a playmaker at QB made sure it was buried

Losing Dungey killed the O more than anything. He made something out of nothing so many times.

 

[Scooch]

Here's one:

Leading the nation in total takeaways, with 1 win and 9 losses.

If we had even a merely below average offense we might have been able to win 3 or 4 more games given that turnover differential. Unfortunately we have a historically bad offense.

 

[CapitalO]

Here's one:

Leading the nation in total takeaways, with 1 win and 9 losses.

Even if you do not follow SU. football and you see this stat the first thing that would come to mind is man their offense must suck the second thought would be who the hell is their coach and the third would be maybe the defense gets the takeaways and still gives up a lot of points.