Offensive Realities

besserheimerphat · 10-13-2006, 11:12 AM

I posted this on Cyclone Report a few days ago as a reply to an o-line thread, and thought I'd post it here too. . .

"Look at this years stats thru Nebraska vs. last years stats, and I think it's apparent that this years o-line is BETTER than last years. Offensively we are on pace to equal our rushing yardage from last year, on 100 fewer carries. Our passing game is on pace to equal last years. We are on pace to give up 30 sacks for 180 yds as opposed to 39 sacks for 243 yds in 2005.

We're also averaging fewer penalty yards per game. We're converting 45% of our 3rd downs (38% last year). We're averaging only 0.6 total ypg fewer than last year even with fewer plays due to clock rules changes (we're averaging 0.6 more yards per play). Our red zone scoring is up (85% vs. 81%), and so are red zone TD's (70% vs. 58%).

We are calling a run/pass ratio of 193/191 this year vs. 491/368 last year. Our three leading recievers are all averaging 50+ ypg as opposed to last year where it was Blythe and those other guys.

The telling stats for me are turnovers (on pace for 8 int's vs. 22 last year, on pace for 6 fumble recoveries vs. 13 last year) and kick return average (averaging 17.2 vs. 23.4). We aren't getting any field position advantages on anyone - we have to go the length of the field everytime we get the ball. And with the combination of clock rule changes and a defense that can't get the ball back on turnovers or downs, we have less time to move the ball a greater distance. Despite all this we are still putting up offensive numbers equal to or greater than last year. We just need to find a way to get that extra push into the endzone.

Statisticly, the Cyclones have only regressed on the defensive side of the ball.

To see the official ISU stats, go to Cyclones.com, click on Football and then Statistics. For both the 2005 and 2006 seasons, right click and select "Open in New Window" and you can view them side by side."

cycloneworld · 10-13-2006, 11:21 AM

You forgot to mention one little thing: POINTS.

We have scored a helluva lot less points, that's the key.

5549 · 10-13-2006, 11:24 AM

Don't forget last year the offense was "set up" often by a very strong positive turnover ration!

besserheimerphat · 10-13-2006, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by besserheimerphat

we have to go the length of the field everytime we get the ball. And with the combination of clock rule changes and a defense that can't get the ball back on turnovers or downs, we have less time to move the ball a greater distance. Despite all this we are still putting up offensive numbers equal to or greater than last year. We just need to find a way to get that extra push into the endzone.

I did say something about it, just not much as it's pretty obvious. Another thing I noticed, last year we averaged 28.2 ppg. This year our defense is giving up an average of 28.7 ppg. So last years higher scoring offense with this years defense would still loose a bunch of games. The good thing is that our schedule is easier from here on out (once we get past OU that is).

besserheimerphat · 10-13-2006, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by cycloneworld

You forgot to mention one little thing: POINTS.

We have scored a helluva lot less points, that's the key.

Actually we're only averaging 6 fewer ppg so far this season - 22.X vs. 28.2. Where would that number be if we hadn't attempted 13 4th down conversions so far this season? We've only converted 4 by the way. I don't know how many failed attempts were within Shaggy's field goal range, but I'm guessing we've lost some points here too.

ISUFan22 · 10-13-2006, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by besserheimerphat

Actually we're only averaging 6 fewer ppg so far this season - 22.X vs. 28.2. Where would that number be if we hadn't attempted 13 4th down conversions so far this season? We've only converted 4 by the way. I don't know how many failed attempts were within Shaggy's field goal range, but I'm guessing we've lost some points here too.

I'm still trying to figure out the rationale behind that...

No matter how you want to massage the stats...we're scoring less points than last year. And to any coach...6 points per game is a lot...especially with the close games we've had this year.

And...considering we have a completely veteran offense...there is no excuse for scoring less than we did last year. I know the defense helped us get some of those points in '05...yet we should at least be doing what we did last year...if not better.

Keep in mind, that 22 points per game is with only 2 Big 12 games under our belt. Me thinks, unless the offense wakes up, that number could easily slide downward.

bstegs · 10-13-2006, 12:06 PM

Not saying that I support this argument one way or the other but two key statistics would be:
1. Average starting field position (2005 vs. 2006)
2. Actual points scored per game by the offense last year
- We had a couple of defensive touchdowns last year that impacted scoring (interception vs. Iowa, and "Big Play's" fumble rumble against Colorado)
- This is not to say the offense is completely off the hook, the fumble recovery at Nebraska's 12 should have resulted in at least 3 points

NU Follower · 10-13-2006, 12:30 PM

Guys,
Go and look at least year. You averaged 23.3 points per game in the first 6 games of last year. It was games against Okla State: 37 pts, Texas A&M: 42 pts, and KSU: 45 pts which really improved your scoring average.
I said at the beginning of the year that your offense wouldn't be as good as last year b/c of your schedule.
Good luck the rest of the year. Help make the Big XII North look better.

tazgolfv · 10-13-2006, 12:33 PM

Fann22 it is easy to figure out.
1) our offense wasn't as GREAT as everyone thinks it was last year. take out aTm, OSU and KSU and our ppg goes way down. And our defense helped a couple of times. We haven't played as many BAD defenses this year as we did the whole season last year. And before you bring up UNI, Toledo and UNLV, I would say remind you we hardly scored at will against Illinos St, and Army
2)Less turnovers from our defense means less offensive posessions and less scoring opportunities.
3) Rule changes mean less opportunities for everyone.

I'm not letting the offense off the hook though. They had planty of chances against Nebraska and failed to succeed. They new our defense would have tolearn on the job. Whether it was penalties, bad passes or what they failed. It was good to see the defense step up.

Personally I feel penalites have killed us! Not the quantities but timing.

besserheimerphat · 10-13-2006, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by ISUFan22

I'm still trying to figure out the rationale behind that...

No matter how you want to massage the stats...we're scoring less points than last year. And to any coach...6 points per game is a lot...especially with the close games we've had this year.

And...considering we have a completely veteran offense...there is no excuse for scoring less than we did last year. I know the defense helped us get some of those points in '05...yet we should at least be doing what we did last year...if not better.

Keep in mind, that 22 points per game is with only 2 Big 12 games under our belt. Me thinks, unless the offense wakes up, that number could easily slide downward.

But we ARE doing at least what we did last year. The offensive statistics support that. The things we are missing from last year are score and starting field position, both of which I think are directly attributable to the defense. They don't get turnovers or 3-and-outs, so we are starting nearly all of our drives from the 20. How many times did we start with the ball outside our own 40 last year? This is a critical stat that I haven't been able to find. Also keep in mind that our two conference games thusfar have been against Texas and Nebraska. Oklahoma is probably the best defensive team we have to face the rest of the year, and their defense appears to be down this year.

Subtract 3 defensive touchdowns from last year, and the scoring average becomes 26.5 ppg.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not happy with the offense. There is certainly something missing. However, I don't think that our teams woes are due entirely to the play of the offense or the offensive line.

Wesley · 10-13-2006, 01:59 PM

Front four rush now sticks in my mind. The pressure push up the middle is not there after Nick Leaders left.

The offense is not doing enough to compensate for the waaker defense.

We were 7-5 last and expect similar.

cycloneworld · 10-13-2006, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by NU Follower

Guys,
Go and look at least year. You averaged 23.3 points per game in the first 6 games of last year. It was games against Okla State: 37 pts, Texas A&M: 42 pts, and KSU: 45 pts which really improved your scoring average.
I said at the beginning of the year that your offense wouldn't be as good as last year b/c of your schedule.
Good luck the rest of the year. Help make the Big XII North look better.

Well you can't really take our scoring output from almost 30% of our games (and conference games at that) to figure scoring average. You can't just pick and choose which games to use in determining out PPG, that's just not fair. What we didn't do was beat the Western Montana State Tech's 57-0 to skew our overall scoring average.

Remember we also score 22 points in overtime against Toledo so that significantly helps our scoring average for this year.

Rhino Jones · 10-13-2006, 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by besserheimerphat

Actually we're only averaging 6 fewer ppg so far this season - 22.X vs. 28.2. Where would that number be if we hadn't attempted 13 4th down conversions so far this season? We've only converted 4 by the way. I don't know how many failed attempts were within Shaggy's field goal range, but I'm guessing we've lost some points here too.

I really don't understand what we're doing on 4th down. We punted it twice against Nebraska with a yard or less to go when we were still in the game and had a chance to keep momentum, and then late in the game we went for it on 4th and 7 with a ridiculous fake kick and another time on 4th and 15.

Against Iowa we went for it on 4th and 10 after passing up chances on 4th and short earlier. Why not reverse that and go for it early in the game on a yard to go, so that we don't get ourselves so far behind that we get desperate? Is it really that hard to understand that 1 is a small number while 7,10 and 15 are big numbers? Our aggressiveness in the 2nd quarter of games this year has been pathetic. We sat on the ball against Iowa with almost 2 minutes left and went into halftime on a weak note with 3 timeouts still in the bank. We punted it to Nebraska on 4th and 1 with 5 minutes to go in the half and then gave up trying for a first down with 2 minutes to go when we got the ball back. Our timidity gave up 7 points right before half to a Nebraska offense that doesn't think there's a wrong time in the game to try to score.

I honestly don't mind losing when we get outplayed. I understand that other schools have bigger budgets and better athletes. It's getting outcoached on game day every week that upsets me.

Wesley · 10-13-2006, 09:15 PM

What I read into this is we were 7-5 last year when we scored more points due to turnover help and had a better defense. At the same time, we were just getting by except for Colorado game. Now we do not score quite as much and our defense gives up more so our record is dead even at 3-3. Looks like either the defense has to get better or the offense has to improve or both. Stats tell the story. Now ESPN is quoting the offensive 378 yards, worst in Big 12, for the Oklahoma game tomorrow. They can prove a lot of people wrong if they play a good game. It will really be how the front four play.