After reading this article ranking teams Pace of Play. http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/5/15/8586169/hurry-up-offe...
I decided to look into how the teams ended up at the end of the year. I ran the stats on the last 5 games of the season to see what these teams looked like when they were full on, end of season ready.
| Game Summary | Avg Plays/Drive | Pts/Drive | Avg Plays/G | Avg Pts/G | Time of Poss | Pace of Play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baylor | 6.2 | 2.2 | 86.2 | 29.6 | 28.33 | 00.19.55 |
| Memphis | 6.47 | 2.4 | 75 | 25.4 | 28.02 | 00.22.3 |
| TCU | 5.7 | 1.6 | 86.8 | 30.2 | 32.33 | 00.22.37 |
| Oregon | 5.5 | 2.7 | 72.2 | 48.6 | 27.17 | 00.22.38 |
| Clemson | 6.2 | 2.72 | 84.6 | 35 | 32.58 | 00.23.34 |
| Houston | 6.13 | 2.6 | 73.6 | 27.2 | 29.45 | 00.24.14 |
| Virginia Tech | 5.6 | 1.8 | 75.6 | 28.4 | 32.06 | 00.25.5 |
| UVA | 6.3 | 2.4 | 73.4 | 28.2 | 34.22 | 00.28.09 |
| Alabama | 6.5 | 2.2 | 72.6 | 27.6 | 36.03 | 00.29.45 |
| Stanford | 6.4 | 3.6 | 69.6 | 37.4 | 36.25 | 00.32.3 |
First off, Baylor is fast. I've never watched a game, but Im thinking I might this year just to see how much faster they are than other teams, a play every 19 seconds...thats pretty crazy. Thats not even taking into consideration how long the actual plays themselves last. And look who on this list landed at number two. The pace of play talk all spring, is not just hype, this offense is definitely faster than any offense that has been in Blacksburg. Now to the second question that Ive heard a lot lately. Will having an up-tempo offense hamper our defense and leave them out to dry?
| Drive Summary | FG | Punt | TD | Turnover | Total Drives | % of Drives Ending W/Punts | % of Drives Ending w/Pts | % Drives 3 & Out |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Virginia Tech | 11 | 29 | 12 | 13 | 65 | 45% | 35% | 34% |
| TCU | 8 | 33 | 14 | 19 | 74 | 45% | 30% | 36% |
| UVA | 9 | 24 | 16 | 10 | 59 | 41% | 42% | 25% |
| Houston | 4 | 23 | 20 | 12 | 59 | 39% | 41% | 29% |
| Alabama | 13 | 20 | 12 | 11 | 56 | 36% | 45% | 27% |
| Baylor | 3 | 22 | 20 | 22 | 67 | 33% | 34% | 31% |
| Clemson | 9 | 19 | 21 | 15 | 64 | 30% | 47% | 23% |
| Stanford | 8 | 15 | 21 | 7 | 51 | 29% | 57% | 16% |
| Memphis | 10 | 16 | 15 | 16 | 57 | 28% | 44% | 25% |
| Oregon | 9 | 16 | 29 | 9 | 63 | 25% | 60% | 16% |
Based on last years numbers, I think we can be comfortable in this offense going forward. Even though Memphis was an up-tempo offense, and they play quick between snaps, they were able to sustain long offensive drives. Memphis actually was one of the lowest teams with percent of drives ending in 3 and outs. Unfortunately, our beloved Hokies happen to have been one of the WORST teams in sustaining drives. I think this right here speaks volumes about our offensive perception over the years. We punted the ball A LOT, and we went 3 and out A LOT. No wonder fans used to be disappointed most games, even with the W about our offense. Going through the drive summaries for Virginia Tech paints a boring picture and one, honestly that makes things a little clearer. Going 3 and out on almost 50% of your drives is going to kill any defense. It could also be the reason we lost so many late games the past two years, our defense was probably beat from the lack of rest. Our new offense even though up-tempo, once settled in, will actually be better for our defense.
All in all, maybe this year isnt the year we explode on the scene, maybe we do. But I am certainly happy to see that we are in the hands of someone who has ran an offense successfully in the past. This is no blast on past administration and Loeffler, however, his offensive statistics do not bode well for him, and thats putting it lightly. Needless to say, even if our offense wasnt, or maybe it was, what we expected (hoped) to see in the spring game, sooner than later, we will have an offense that we can have confidence in. The future is bright for the Hokies.
EDIT: Ive attached the drive summaries of both Virginia Tech and Memphis Seasons, if we can have half of this productivity, added with Bud Fosters Defense I think well be in contention. The 3 & Out average doesnt look too different, but if you look game by game, theres a stark difference. Memphis had over 5 games where they had 1 or less 3 and outs, Virginia Tech didnt have a single game less than 2, and those two games were Furman and Tulsa, not the best representations of Virginia Techs game management.
Also to note - 3 & outs included turnovers that happened with 3 or less plays on a drive, I felt it was weird to not count those, because they would be just as detrimental to defenses rest times.
| Team | Opponent | FG | Punt | TD | Turnover | 3 & Outs | Grand Total | % Scoring Drives | % Punted Drives | % 3&Out |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Memphis | Total | 23 | 56 | 58 | 28 | 37 | 165 | 49% | 23% | 22% |
| Auburn | 1 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 11 | 9% | 30% | 45% | ||
| Bowling Gr | 3 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 12 | 67% | 23% | 0% | ||
| Cincy | 1 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 15 | 47% | 25% | 47% | |
| Houston | 2 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 13 | 46% | 17% | 38% | |
| Kansas | 2 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 14 | 64% | 8% | 29% | |
| Missouri St | 3 | 8 | 0 | 11 | 73% | 21% | 0% | |||
| Navy | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 11 | 36% | 16% | 27% | |
| Ole Miss | 3 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 54% | 28% | 7% | |
| SFU | 1 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 13 | 31% | 51% | 31% | |
| SMU | 3 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 13 | 46% | 23% | 8% | ||
| Temple | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 11 | 36% | 16% | 36% | ||
| Tulane | 3 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 11 | 64% | 19% | 0% | |
| Tulsa | 1 | 6 | 9 | 1 | 3 | 17 | 59% | 25% | 18% | |
| VT | Total | 21 | 66 | 41 | 36 | 49 | 164 | 38% | 31% | 30% |
| BC | 4 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 14 | 36% | 54% | 36% | |
| Duke | 1 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 12 | 33% | 39% | 25% | |
| ECU | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 13 | 31% | 27% | 23% | ||
| Furman | 4 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 45% | 23% | 18% | ||
| GT | 2 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 12 | 42% | 22% | 42% | |
| Miami | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 11 | 36% | 19% | 27% | |
| NCSt | 6 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 11 | 36% | 4% | 27% | ||
| Ohio St | 1 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 14 | 29% | 37% | 21% | |
| Pitt | 2 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 11 | 27% | 35% | 45% | |
| Purdue | 3 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 15 | 47% | 21% | 27% | |
| Tulsa | 2 | 3 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 62% | 18% | 15% | |
| UNC | 1 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 13 | 31% | 24% | 38% | |
| UVA | 3 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 14 | 36% | 45% | 43% | |
| Grand Total | Total | 44 | 122 | 99 | 64 | 86 | 329 | 43% | 27% | 26% |
Anyone else catch any interesting insights from this, that I missed?
Comments
How did you select the teams you included on this list?
Just pulled some I thought had a pretty good makeup of up-tempo and traditional pro style to get a range, leaning more towards up-tempo to see how Memphis compared.
Part of the reason they had so few three and outs is that Memphis generally "stayed on schedule" by avoiding negative plays on first downs. I don't have the statistical acumen or the time to collect the data, but from an observational perspective (watching 8 Memphis games), it sure seemed like they very rarely got a 3 and out unless there was some form of first down penalty. Quick screens and runs garnering 3-5 yards set up good situations on 2nd and 3rd down.
Something I keep meaning to ask you, but where have you gotten said 8 games' worth of film?
I've watched the Ole Miss and Houston games on Youtube. They take just over an hour, and that's with much of the between-play banter still included. You can probably find all of their games fairly easily there.
I think this right here speaks volumes about our offensive perception over the years. We punted the ball A LOT, and we went 3 and out A LOT.
I wish I could say we didn't notice, but I'm pretty sure we all noticed.
3 and out isn't a strategy? /s
How else were we going to get a pick 6?
And let us not forget that we were an offense who was not trying to score every drive
It's called "ball control offense".
Punting is better than points, because a touchdown can get you 6 points, but a punt can get you 40 yards. Yards are worth 3 feet, BTW. If you convert feet to players, you end up with 60 players against 11 for the other team.
Because of this, our defense is now magical. You're welcome.
-B.S.
I think I just got cancer from reading that.
I think the only thing that sticks out to me is TCU and having their number so close to ours, but they were amazing last year though and won a lot of games even while still punting at nearly 50% of their drives.
I was pretty shocked too. But I do remember their defense was pretty solid last year, without really being a fan, I bet it's pretty safe to say the defense won a few games for them.
I think also trevone boykin didn't play in 2 of those 5 games.
Tcu usually has an elite defense, but last year they were decimated by injuries. Something like 7 starters went down, and that after a year where they lost something like 6-8 starters to graduation.
Keep in mind these numbers are only from the last 5 games, and TCU's stats will be pretty heavily skewed by their punt-fest against Baylor in the rain. There were a combined 22 punts that game (TCU had 12), and I remember when it went to overtime, I was pretty confident we would get to see the elusive college overtime punt.
Edit: It's worth mentioning that TCU and Baylor were both hit particularly hard by injuries late in the season (Baylor literally abandoned the concept of a QB), and despite capping off their respective seasons with bowl wins, neither team was close to full strength down the stretch. So the last 5 games may not be the most representative sample.
The thing is, as bad as those games were for them, the play by play summaries are eerily similar to our VT UVA game. There was something like 6 straight 3 and outs back and forth.
3 quick thoughts:
1) 3 seconds difference in pace of play seems fairly minor to me.
2) I would think the extra 5 min of TOP for the opponent could put appreciable strain on a defense over time
3) I'm not sure how you draw your conclusions based on the 2nd set of data from that 2nd set of data. Even within the 2nd set of data there is little correlation I can see between pace of play and the last 3 columns. 3 and outs are a function of a lot of things - most of which have little to do with speed of an offense.
It's not the pace of play that makes them better at sustaining drives its the fact that they were sustaining drives that was the point I was trying to make.
There was some fear that if they moved at a quicker pace they could be more of a burden on the defense, 3 & outs become much more detrimental. The good news is, our old offense went three and out a lot. Memphis offense sustained longer drives making them less of a burden.
Think of it as playing 10% faster, or having 10% more plays to work with. If you get 60 offensive snaps per game, now you get 66.
wait, so are you saying that Fuente is going to give us
*puts on shades*
110%?
YYYYEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Think of it as giving the defense three fewer seconds to adjust before every snap. That last second adjustment that the LB makes? It doesn't happen now. Neither does that part where the d-lineman tries to pull the o-line to jump the gun.
The TOP disparity doesn't look like it can be attributed to the higher tempo offense.
Memphis averaged 6.47 plays per drive with 22.3 seconds between plays, meaning an average drive lasted 2 minutes 24 seconds.
VT averaged 5.6 plays per drive with 25.5 seconds between plays, meaning an average drive lasted 2 minutes 23 seconds.
In terms of contribution to TOP, they were almost identical.
Up tempo is about dictating terms to the defense.
It reduces the defense' ability to substitute, either situationally or to keep players fresh. At times it also allows plays to be run with the defense occasionally out of position or without everyone on the same page...what Tulsa did to VT in the bowl game.
I think the averages are deceiving. While they let you look at the game as a whole, i.e., numbers of plays, the value of up tempo comes when there are substantially less than 22 seconds between plays, with the defense scrambling just to get in position, much less make a special call or engage in pre-snap antics.
All I know is this: the team with the most points wins the game. The speed of scoring those points is merely a preference. I'm more excited for the rhythm of a Fuente offense than I am the speed. I do agree with a statement he made though; it's easier to say whoa than go. I felt like that was one of Lefty's weaknesses.
These numbers are really hard to wrap my head around.
VT outscored Memphis over the last 5 games, yet had significantly fewer points per drive. We had the same number of plays per game but Memphis had more plays per drive. Obviously it makes sense when I look at the drive statistics and see that Memphis got 8 fewer drives than we did, but why did they have so many fewer drives than us? Was it the defense failing to make stops?
Our defense making stops. Memphis opposing offense slowing the game down the rest their defense? Not sure how those overtimes were counted either.
We had more 3-and-outs. Our defense was better than theirs. We got teams off the field and then promptly failed to move the ball. Memphis moved the ball but then their defense couldn't stop anyone
In my opinion TOP is not an important statistic in an Up-tempo style offense. Most coaches would rather have "more shots on goal" than the other team rather than winning TOP. I am excited to see VT using more RPO's this year and forcing the defense to defend the entire field. RPO's also puts the offense in the right play if read right by the QB so there are no wasted plays.
I think the important stat is points/play or points/drive. I have not crunched any numbers, but my thought is that these stats should be able to show how "effective" or "efficient" an offense is, regardless of its tempo.
I'm not sure I want to rely heavily on RPOs with a first year starting QB especially since everyone is playing in a brand new system. I don't think this offense needs them to function. There is enough variation in play selection for any given formation that any call can be made before getting set and still be effective.
How about when we're up 14 in the 4th, just letting the clock simmer? Guaranteed to burn at least 2 minutes a pop?
Points For > Points Against = Happy NitWhitt
98% percent of the time, the team that scores the most points wins.
If you count vacated wins as losses, this statement might actually be true.
actually, you don't even need to count them as losses for it to be true. He didn't say "2% of the time the team with the most points loses."
Is that TOP correct? Memphis was on the field longer defensively?
I believe it. Memphis had a pretty average defense last year. Watching a lot of their One Hour videos on youtube it looks like their defense just can't get anyone off the field. The USF game, in particular, stood out to me as one where USF put together really long methodical drives that ate up lots of clock and then Memphis would drive down the field and score pretty quickly. Memphis played fairly well offensively in that game but I think they really only had 4 offensive possessions in the first half because USF had the ball mostly. Watching some games last year my big take-away was that teams who limited Memphis offensively did so by keeping them off the field. Temple was the same way. Only a handful of offensive drives in the first half for the Tigers.
You know, if you could get an offense mind like Justin Fuente teamed up with a defensive mind like Bud Foster, you'd be doing a pretty good job as an Athletic Director.
yeah, I'm hoping...
How fast is the offense?
30
Heh! I was thinking more...
Is it faster than green grass through a goose?
This fast: