According to this blog, we were #2 in DL to OL performance disparity this past season. Says a lot about how far our O has to go.
http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2014/2/24/5438972/college-football-line...
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
I think we all knew this: our offensive line needed some work, despite improvements we saw this year, and our defensive line is beast, because lunchpail.
If you look though, Michigan State came in at #5 because their defense carried the team. On the opposite end, Oregon, Auburn, and Texas A&M all had far superior offensive lines because that was their strength. Just because there is disparity between our OL and DL, it doesn't mean our OL was poor. It just means our DL was superb and performed better than our OL. We all knew this though.
I would question how superior the Oregon offensive line was. I think their skill position players cover a lot of issues so the numbers that offense creates look fantastic, but when they played a team with a solid D (Stanford/Arizona), they got punched in the mouth.
The decision of how good the offensive line was determined by using the adjusted line yards (defined here http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/glossary and explained here http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods#aly). So yes, there is a certain amount that is determined by the back, but the adjusted line yard factors in what the OL was responsible for. Due to the effectiveness of Oregon's system and execution, their offensive line statistically looked strong despite whatever level of skill or technique they had.
We all know our offense didn't have a stellar year. The best way I can put it is... We showed glimpses of excellence and we might have woken up 1 or 2 days and peed excellence (Miami and GT) but then there were the other days (Maryland, Duke) where we couldn't figure out Orange from White.
I'm pretty sure this list is extremely similar to any "rush offense vs. rush defense" list we could compile, and honestly doesn't tell us a whole heck of a lot. But hey, it's the offseason, so rankings and lists 'n stuff. Woo.
Turkey leg good sir. Because, as you so sagely put it, "Woo."
If I had more time today I'd try to do that comparison. Sometimes these advanced analytics don't end up telling you much more than what the basic stats would.
If you feel the need, more power to you. Also, my comment wasn't meant to belittle your finding/posting this, and of course it's interesting to see MOAR NUMBERS on everything. I just don't see why their particular method is so special (again, knocking them, not you).
To some degree that's true, but adjusted line yards/sack rate adjusts for opponent and tries to separate the running back from the offensive line in determining who is responsible for rushing yards.
We gotta keep our sanity. Double Woo!! Woo!!
There are statistics and damn statistics. When I saw ODU had the 2nd best OL, I thought of Chapel Hill and downgraded the study just a wee bit
They didn't have the 2nd best OL. They had the 2nd biggest disparity between their O-line and D-line where the O-line was superior. That says more about their defense which was the equivalent of a bag of flaming dog poop.
Looking at the linked spreadsheet, ODU actually ranks as the #8 OL and #123 DL. These sort of stats make me skeptical. The only real way to tell the ability of the line is to sit down and do a season's worth of film analysis. Were they the reason for the play or did someone else make an exceptional play? These sort of stats are something I have trouble trusting. If you did sit down and dissected each play for how many yards the OL pushed for while maintaining a running hole, then I'd pay more attention. That's when you start comparing yards gained by the runner and the line's push. Same can be said for the DL and lost yards.
When I looked at the rankings just for D-Lines, what stood out to me was how we got to no. 5 in adj sack rate. On passing downs we were above average ranking no. 41 with a rate of 7.8%, but on standard downs our defense was ranked no. 1 with a rate 11.9%, 3.2% higher than the no. 2 school.
http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2014/2/18/5421806/college-football-2013...