Alright, started this thought process in an earlier thread the other day, and decided to expand upon it today. So, I decided to break down how our Defense does on any given year, and what are the minimum benchmarks the offense needs to hit to win games.
So what does this tell us? Well, for starters, every game shaded in maroon is an ACC game. Every number that is orange indicates a ranked opponent we faced. And all the numbers are total points allowed by the VT defense at the end of regulation. Now, completely understanding that there are other factors involved in getting to this point on a game by game basis, we can still get some information out of this.
First of all, when we're up against a ranked opponent, our offense needs to bring it, because 60% of the time, our defense is going to allow more than 20 points in those games (21 out of 35 since we joined the ACC), and in recent years (2012 onward), its even more critical with our defense allowing more than 20 in 8 of 9.
But this is where it gets interesting. Throw out averages, lets look at what teams actually do to us, and how often does an opposing offense break a given threshold against our defense...
So from this you can see how often we truly take it on the chin. I have shaded in maroon what would essentially guarantee us a trip to the ACC title game (1 ACC loss or fewer) or a 10 win season. From this you can pretty clearly see it, more times than not, a Bud Foster Defense, even in the current form, is going to limit our opponents to a maximum of between 31 and 35 points in all games, and somewhere between 26 and 31 points in ACC play.
So what can we deduce... If we have an offense that can score more than 31 points every game over the course of the season, history shows that team will win 10 or more games in that season. If we can score more than 36 points every game, in most years we'll finish the regular season undefeated. And those numbers really play out to be about the same in ACC play as well.
In 19 of 25 games Justin Fuente was head coach of Memphis, they scored more than 31 points. They scored more than 35 points in 17 of those 24 games. In only 3 games did his teams ever score less than 20 points, and one of those games was the week he interviewed for and accepted the position at Virginia Tech. If he continues the same trajectory here, we will be a 10 win team in most years, with a decent chance of finishing undefeated in any given season based on the numbers a Bud Foster defense will hold an opponent to.
Edit: Continuance
So, after stewing on it during the day, decided to look up how well our offense has performed over the years, and the numbers may or may not surprise you.
So essentially what I did is that I looked at the point totals our offense has had at the end of regulation in all of our games. While we do have games where we just absolutely pour numbers onto an opponent, most of our games that we play see our point totals taper off between a score of 21 to 25. But remember what we said earlier, to really have an offense that pairs well with a Bud Foster defense and gives us a legitimate chance to win the ACC, we need to be breaking 31 points more times than not. Look at the years that happened, 2009 and 2010 and look at how close we are to that line in 2005 to 2007. Its no surprise we were controlling the conference like we were during those years.
However, those numbers went away. From 2012 through this past season, our offense has been struggling. In those years, if our defense gave up more than 21 points in any given game, our chances of winning that game dropped to less than 50% based on the offensive help you could expect. And in ACC play, that line defensively needed to be 17 points or less. Is it any wonder we saw our win totals fall off?
But this is where things get exciting. If we prop our historical game by game scoring to be about 2 TDs more per game, we'll be right where we need to be. That'll put us breaking that 31 point barrier more times than not, and by doing so, significantly increase our odds of winning any given game, as that historically is the maximum amount of points you'll see our defense give up in a game in any given season. Considering the offense we've seen the last few years, and the playmakers we do have, who knows, 2 TDs per game might be attainable as early as this season.
Comments
wait a minute..LOLUVA was ranked for the 38-0 Bro game?
24th, per Hokiesports
They had just beaten FSU at FSU I believe, with EJ Manuel.
That was the game where FSU needed to drive to get in field goal range and the QB was throwing 4 yd passes in the middle of the field.
If they would have won they would have won the division. It was actually a pretty hyped game.
And it made it all the sweeter. There was a lot of internet and talk radio chatter about how London was closing the gap.
We have a big mixed Hokies and Hoos tailgate every time the game's in Charlottesville. The drunker everybody got the more they were talking shit. They were a lot quieter after the game.
38-0 bro haha.
I've been saying this since CJF day 1, we look like pure gold on paper. Let's just keep speeding up this train!!
Hey Alum, I'm too lazy to look it up, I'm assuming that the defensive point totals at the end of regulation are the final scores minus any pick-6s, fumble returns for 6, kick and punt returns, and safeties, correct? Since those points would not have been allowed by the defense?
Would imagine they include any scores against us as the offense has to offset those as well.
Yes this would include all scores for the opposing team, so it would include any direct points off of turnovers and the like, so there of course could be some leeway in those numbers. The above totals were pure raw numbers, as I really didn't have the time to do a deep dive like that (though, I would heavily caution doing that too much, because it would be a lot to ask to expect our team to not have any miscues over the course of a given season)
For comparison purposes to this statement:
In 9 of 26 games Frank Beamer was head coach of VT over the last two years, we scored more than 31 points. We scored more than 35 points in 5 of those 26 games. In 5 games his teams ever score less than 20 points,
It always comes down to a handful of plays or missed opportunities. At least that's what I've been told for 3 years straight.
Remember that Fosters D will not be as good as it has been, mostly because it Fuente gets his O up and running to his standards our D will be spending a lot more time on the field. I would estimate many a shootout in the future, with Bud's group hopefully getting one or two key stops each game to keep us ahead. Unless of course we develop a running game to go with a air raid attack...
Ehhh... This also assumes that the VT offense in the past was good at keeping the defense off the field, and with the rate we struggled to consistently pick up first downs, I'm not so sure that's truly the case.
Plus, while the Fuente offense is hurry up, its not Oregon levels of fast. He will slow it down to protect the defense when its necessary to do so, and will practice and train for doing that. I wouldn't expect to see the defense suffer directly because we develop a potent offense. If anything, we'll see similar to better TOP than we did in the past, just with more offensive drives ending in points.
No one said his offense was air raid. I'm pretty sure in other threads it's been documented that Fuentes offense runs the ball more than Tech's did, or the same. The other flip side to the argument about the D on the field more, is the number of 3 and outs the O has put up in the last several years. That's been documented in other threads as well that Fuente's O has less 3 and outs as well. That is a more accurate barometer of how much time the D is on the field.
Over the past two seasons, Memphis averaged only 1:27 less than VT in time of possession... and that was with a defense that wasn't as good as Bud's.
Wrong. As it has been pointed out, Memphis' TOP was less than 2 min different from VT's. VT went 3-and-out way more often than Memphis. Memphis scored way more often than VT. So, effectively, Bud's defense will have to play just about the same amount as they are used to. The only difference being that instead of trying to keep the game within reach, the defense will be defending an actual lead. Because this team will score more than previous versions.
Also, Fuente has said multiple times that he doesn't want to go fast just for the sake of going fast. He wants to control the tempo and not leave his defense high and dry.
I don't think this statement could be any more wrong. Fuente runs a run-first spread attack. Not the air raid. they are completely different.
Man, anytime someone's starts a comment with a quote and follows up with "wrong" I can't help but think of a Dwightesque/socially awkward kid looking for correct people's mistakes lol.
Expertly explained in one sentence. I don't think VPI meant it that way, but this is only too real and even people on these boards do it.
Yeah I wasn't trying to be mean or anything, that's why tried to word it in a certain way to avoid that. But it still makes me laugh when I see it I think of this
Personally, I'm a big fan of this one:
I only added Dwight because of the comments below my original comment...I thought it was funny
I'm a fan of Emma, personally.
I think this argument is balanced out by VT's opponents needing to score more, which makes them more one-dimensional, which helps Foster.
In theory this is correct. We can expect a little less time of possession and hopefully a little more aggressive defense (or one dimensional offense from the opposition). They should balance out. However, I'm still interested to see the real results on the field because there seems to be some sort of immeasurable ying and yang effect that makes it hard to be really good at both offense and defense.
If our O scores on every possession...no matter whether it takes 1 or 21 plays...I'm sure Bud will be fine.
I hope we get to a point where Bud has a 14 lead. When he does, they pin their ears back...and the flood of D points usually starts.
The thing that jumps out to me on the first graph is how dominating the 2006 defense was. Four shutouts. We've only had four shutouts since 2006.
Look at the points we gave up per game from 2004-2007. Its a goddamn crime those defenses never played for a National Title. Those years alone should have had the offensive staff fired. 1 TD per quarter (28 points a game) over that entire stretch would have had us at 46-2 combined. We couldn't even do that with some of the most talent we've ever had on the offensive side of the ball.
Just goes to prove what my line coach in high school preached: They can't win if they can't score.
I believe the correct response to this sort of criticism is "you're out of whack"
You have to feel bad for Coach Foster all those years.
As if the demands of his day job weren't enough - he had to maintain his alter-ego of "JasonfromArlington". Living a double-life has to be draining on a man.
Incredible. We truly did have legit defenses those years, which was exactly when I attended college. I know I didn't realize how good they were at the time, but maybe we (HCFB and the team) took those defenses for granted? Perhaps I realize how good they were now because I pay more attention to the team and game at this point versus getting hammered and chasing sorority girls. Would be nice to have Bud get his units back to those stalwarts, but I don't know if we will see that again.
This implies that you still do these things, but less frequently. I hope you're not married on the part of the latter half of the comment. Or married to a sorority girl.
life is more fun when you flip those verbs
Not really, we played in the ACC when it was done, not exactly world beaters on offense those seasons like we have now
We also seem to shutout UVA every 5 years. Wouldn't mind seeing 2016 continue that.
Just score more points than the other team.
That's...a lot of points to give up.
It's a maximum, not an average.
So? Giving up 35 points game even as a max is still incredibly high.
I'd be interested to know how many P5 teams didn't have a game last season where they allowed 35+ points. I would think almost every, if not every, gave up 35 at least once.
Alabama's defense gave up more than 35 points twice last season
Clemson's defense gave up more than 35 points thrice last season
Michigan (who had top rated [s&p+] defense last year) gave up more than 35 twice last season
BC's defense gave up more than 35 points 0 times last season
ND's defense gave up more than 35 points twice last season
Thanks for putting this together Alum!
It is my theory that over the past few years merely a few extra 1st downs per game would have netted us more wins. It was atrocious how many times the offense went 3&out, only to give the ball back to the opposing team after our D had just walked off the field.
It is my opinion that those defensive number totals will actually go down as our offense will be on the field longer, thus keeping the defense more fresh and keeping the other teams offense off the field. Even if we don't necessarily score a bunch more points (how can we not), I think that the simple feat of gaining a few more 1st downs per game will be monumental to Bud's D. And if we do happen to score quickly and the D has to go out on the field again, so what? We scored.
It is also my opinion that this is exactly the thing that allows this 2016 VT football team to be very successful this season. I don't think the offense needs to have it all together when the season begins (although, they do need to be growing). I'm not sure if Bud's D will be vintage this year, but they should be better than last year and that will allow this offense a little breathing room.
Oh cool, I don't remember getting a shut out in the 2014 season. Lemme check which game that was...DAMMIT
YAHTZEE!!!
I like the gif version of this more than I like the still image.
Its....so....painful
Hurt so good,
Come on baby make it hurt so good,
Sometimes love don't feel like it should,
you make it hurt so good...
That video is a fake. That really is a shot of Coach Beamer winning on the Price is Right. We all know what some kid can do with animation these days. The real score was 10 to 0. Just burn it.
Whatever helps you sleep at night is OK with us.
Jeeeaaahhhh!
It doesn't matter how bad the game was, Frank still got hyped about special teams.
1. Analysis is awesome.
Two looking at what could have been if our offense wasnt inept over the years : -this will either infuriate or bring hope for the future.
If our offense was a top 25 scoring offense over the years our record would be:
*using that current years 25th avg ppg- 2015 11-1
- 2014 12-0
- 2013 12-0
- 2012 9-3
- 2011 11-1
- 2010 11-1
- 2009 11-1
- 2008 12-0
- 2007 11-1
- 2006 11-1
If we had a top 50 scoring offense throughout the years:
The fact Frank Beamer could keep Bud Foster around all these years is a testament to how great of a man Frank Beamer was to work for.
Our actual records (regular season - doesnt include ACC champs or bowls):
2010 - the Tyrod effect
2011 to 2012: The weird effect the Danny Coale catch had on us.
The 2012 defense really took a statistically significant step back. In half our regular season games that year we gave up 26 or more points. In the 12 years we've been in the ACC, in only two other seasons have we allowed even 4 teams to do that in one year, and in half we only allowed it once or twice. Easily the worst defensive year we've had in ACC play.
Nope. I'm still blaming that PAC-12 official.
I'm sure throwing 13 interceptions in 8 ACC games didn't affect our defensive numbers at all that season...
2012 defense was awful first half of the season and somehow, incredibly smothering the second half. Over our last x (can't remember exactly) games of 2012 we averaged like 230 yds/game defensively and that carried over into our stout defense of 2013
If you just bump up our points per game, that doesn't necessarily translate into a clear win/loss correlation. If we are scoring more points, that means we are scoring faster/more often, which means the other team would have more opportunities to score as well.
High scoring teams in recent years (Baylor, TCU, Oregon, etc.) play a lot of games where it is 40 something to 30 something or 50 something to 40 something. There is a reason for that, and it isn't just bad defense.
Counterpoint....
I looked at the Ohio State game. The TOP on our first TD drive was 2:46. That had Sam's 51 yard TD catch and run (6 plays, 74 yards). Alternatively, the drive that knocked out Brewer was 2:30 (7 plays, 32 yards). Roughly the same amount of time, but clearly different outcomes.
Would you rather run 5 plays and punt, or run 5 plays and score? Both take similar amounts of time relatively speaking.
The teams you mentioned don't have Bud Foster, or his defense. FSU scores plenty and doesn't get in shootouts normally. Neither does Alabama. Neither did USC when they were great.
Both. It does both.
One reason TOP was what it was in Memphis is that the defense could not get off the field. If your defense gives up a long drive every time your offense makes a long drive TOP will be about the same. I am hopeful that will not be the case with our defense this year.
so I'm starting to do some data farming for a little project that I hope to publish for TKP before the season starts
the Miami game last year was weird. We only went 3-and-out once and punted twice. The 4 turnovers we committed (to their 0) really killed us in that game.
Edit: Small teaser
We punted on 37% of our offensive possessions*
We averaged 5.4 plays per drive*
I haven't crunched the numbers for Memphis but I have to imagine they are much better
*these are based on raw data including overtimes, kneel down victory formations, etc.
another disturbing trend I'm noticing is that we frequently went 3-and-out on the first possession of the second half. Our offense did not do well with halftime adjustments last year
Comparing to Memphis is good, but they faced very different defenses. An ACC cross check against aspirational offenses like Clem and UNC would also help with context.
Great point. If I have time I'll include some ACC offenses for reference
Second half scoring comparison was what was stuck in my head when I was reading this. Just remember too many times the third quarter was the major separator in our games.
Compare that to the season we played Tennessee, did not allow a 2nd half point for 5 straight games to end the season.
This is where our lack of depth is killing us... Teams were able to roll deeper talent later in games and pulled away from us
Number crunchers, is there an correlation to the defensive statistics to the number of underclassmen playing snaps.? Offense?
So let me make sure I'm football fanning correctly. If Pitt holds us to less than 3 TDs I need to immediately go to flight tracker and begin panicking right? Guys? Anyone?