Some Interesting Offensive number

[Jarid in Cedar]

As I rewatched the game, I had a general bias that we do not convert short distances well for first downs. The same could be said for our struggles inside the 10. So I decided to check my impression with reality:

I threw out the WSU game as a potential outlier. I also excluded 1st downs converted via penalty as well. There may be some errors as it is easy to lose lines when you are flipping screens on the play by play.


3rd and short(1-3 yards)- 15 out of 26 for 58%
3rd and medium(4-9 yards)- 14 out of 47 for 30%
3rd and long( 10+ yards)- 6 out of 29 for 21%

Here is our breakdown on our 1st down conversions on 1st and 2nd downs:

1st and 10 or more- 50 first downs
2nd and short(1-3 yards)- 6 first downs
2nd and medium(4-9 yards)-29 first downs
2nd and long(10+ yards)-14 first downs

Lastly, our number of 1st downs based on distance

0-3 yards-21 first downs
4-9 yards-43 first downs
10+ yards-70 first downs

In the amazing stat dept, a whopping 52% of our first downs are converted at a distance of 10 yards or greater.

My take home from all of this is that our offense operates best when ripping off large chunks of yards, and we don't move the chains very well. I think that this is a primary cause of our relatively poor 3rd down conversion rates. Simply put, we don't grind drives very well. In fact, I can only think of three times that we methodically drove the field( last drive vs USU for the FG, 90_+yard drive vs BYU and the 99 yard drive vs Stanford).

My initial issue was that I don't like that we don't have a series of plays that we can go under center when we need 2 yards or less for a first down/score. It drives me crazy to have to wait for the snap to the QB before the RB can move(from 6 yards back) when we only need 2 feet.

I am curious to what the rest of you see with these numbers.

[wuapinmon]

Just curious....given the weak short stats, have yall gone for it on 4th much? Any two point conversions?

[SoCalPat]

In the amazing stat dept, a whopping 52% of our first downs are converted at a distance of 10 yards or greater.



Is it really that amazing of a stat? I honestly don't know. How does that match up with Oregon? Or against the worst offensive team in FBS? So 10 of our first downs per game (on average) cover 10 yards or more. Sounds about right to me. Do our long touchdown plays also give credit for making a first down? They should, but if they don't, that number/percentage is going to be even higher.

I'm more concerned about 3rd and short. That appears to be an abysmal number.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Is it really that amazing of a stat? I honestly don't know. How does that match up with Oregon? Or against the worst offensive team in FBS? So 10 of our first downs per game (on average) cover 10 yards or more. Sounds about right to me. Do our long touchdown plays also give credit for making a first down? They should, but if they don't, that number/percentage is going to be even higher.

I'm more concerned about 3rd and short. That appears to be an abysmal number.

Yes, i counted a touchdown as a converted first down for its respective down/distance.

As far as comparison, I have no idea. At a glance, that seems like a high number to me. I might check against a typical Oregon game, or maybe a UCLA game.


And I agree, the 3rd and short is way too low to me (and that was the reason i did all of this)

[UBlender]

It seems the more interesting number would be to look at number of "chunk plays" on a game-by-game basis. You can define it however you want (30+, 25+, 20+, 10+). In any case, I am almost certain that that number dramatically dives the last two games.

Without looking, I am thinking Utah's 3rd down conversions were better against USC than in a couple of games where Utah's offense produced much better.