[UPDATED] An interesting read: Doc Saturday runs the numbers on SC

by DC Trojan on Sep 30, 2009 12:02 PM PDT Comment 12 comments

Bumped...This should be fun! - P

Doc Saturday aka Matt Hinton looked at the stats for this year's team so far versus the 2004 through 2008 teams, and the results are interesting: this year's team looks really good on running yards and receiving yards.

However, as you might guess, the 3rd and 4th down conversion ratios, along with the turnovers, look like shit. Blown trips into the red zone don't help either.

Net result: the team is playing well at the play-by-play fundamentals. If they hang onto the ball better and increase their 3rd and 4th down conversions, they can get back to winning. After all, it only requires that you score more points than the opposition, right?

UPDATE...HP Fires Back. - P

You have to wonder if ‘Dr. Saturday’ is even watching the games, as he makes the case here that USC’s current offensive problems are basically about turnovers and penalties.

No mention that the numbers put up so far have been against the weakest part of the Trojan schedule. USC is averaging 19.3 ppg the last three games and if you take away that last drive against Ohio State in the final minutes, it falls to 16.6 for a unit that returned nine starters from 2008 (also, two of USC’s scores against WSU came off of an onside kick and a turnover inside the Cougar 30). The Trojans are one of the worst teams in the country at third down conversions. But why get into that? Much easier to slap some selective numbers together to ‘prove’ that the latest edition of the USC offense compares to recent ones.

Mmmmkay...let the fire works begin...

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Conquest Chronicles' writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Conquest Chronicles' writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 12 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Great read

The Doc’s table reveals a huge loss in offensive production after Leinart’s record-setting 2005 season. In 2006 the numbers dropped sharply (with Booty running the offense) and improved a bit in 2007. Production returned to Leinart-like (2004) levels under Mark Sanchez in 2008
This year’s numbers are skewed by the UDub debacle. If you look a Barkley’s three starts things don’t look nearly as bad. When compared to Booty’s first year starting (junior), Barkley (true freshman) looks very promising:
2006 – Booty starting (season): Offensive scoring: 30 pts/gm. Total offense: 392 yds/gm
2009 – Barkley starting (3 gm.): Offensive scoring: 34 pts/gm. Total offense: 429 yds/gm
Clean up the blown blocking assignments, stop dropping (so many) passes, and above all stop fumbling, then things will start turning around in a hurry.

by Locoweed 1.1 on Sep 29, 2009 7:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

That’s what I’m thinking. I’ve been getting all riled up about coaching decisions and this and that – and there’s still probably something to it – and yet the execution variables are the ones making the most difference.

Not sure that this next stretch lends itself to cleaning up as the team goes, but you never know.

by DC Trojan on Sep 29, 2009 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Each year the team has its strengths and weaknesses

These guys fumble! How many times and how many ways have they been told to hold it high and tight?

by Locoweed 1.1 on Sep 29, 2009 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good look

Barkley to JDB 2006. Still have to remind myself that JDB, Mark, etc. had 3 full years in the system. Still think the playcalling and overall philosophy is too conservative and uncreative.

by DFWTrojan on Sep 29, 2009 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

But the play calling is just that someone who isn't in the trenches trying to call the game.

The reason we have had some bigger years is that we had QBs that could call audibles, yes and that does include the god some call Chow. Matt Barkley has already made the calls in the last drive of the OSU game, which shows me that he is going to be a great one at USC.

These kids will come together to become a cohesive team, that they have been in the past. I feel it would help that the staff decides the direction of running attack, so the backs can become consistent. Because right now they remind me of a tennis student that tries to many approaches to his game, not settling on curtain sequence. In sport it is important to use the theory of condition response, in during the most important times switch up here and there.

Paul D. Kelley

It's not about doing your job, But can you do it with a TENNIS BALL in your throat!

by so.cal.native1952 on Sep 30, 2009 6:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I tend to side with HP

I would love to see an analysis of our turnovers relative to the point in the game. I believe most of our TOs in the glory years came later in the game after the offense had established a lead and the opposing offense was “opening it up” to catch up.

I think the TOs argument is backwards. Our TOs are down because our offense no longer scores like it use to. I don’t buy the fact that USC still has a good offense, yet can only put up a top 10 offense, or close to it, when we have a top 10 draft QB running the show. That is ridiculous. Corp, Mustain, JDB were all 5 star QBs. Look at OU scoring with their backup. Look at Auburn scoring. SC has the talent to score with any QB running the show.

It’s our offensive system and philosophy that have become antinquated and predictable.

by DFWTrojan on Sep 30, 2009 12:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Hyperbole

“Two of USC’s scores against WSU came off of an onside kick and a turnover inside the Cougar 30”

USC did not score on a onside kick tthey scored on the play after the onisde kick. The play was a 57 yd pass to Williams that would have scored anywhere deeper. The drive did not benefit from a short field.

Also I do not think Ohio State considered this the weakest part of the schedule. Sure SJ st and WA St are the two weakest teams, but the stats for those games are not doulbed that of normal so the comparison makes sense.

There is no one reason that 3rd down conversion is so bad right now, but a couple of things have contributed to this: poor field position and conservative play calling. Play calling has opened up as Barkley has shown he is capable. It seemed readily apparent to me in the Washington game that Corp was not ready for a more sophisticate set of plays.

by 22blast on Sep 30, 2009 6:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Field position affects 3rd down conversions?

Really? I didn’t realize the chain changed lengths.

by DFWTrojan on Sep 30, 2009 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Perhaps he meant that it’s less worth risking a longer passing play when you’re deep in your own territory?

by DC Trojan on Oct 1, 2009 7:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's RN's Punting is Winning Philosphy

Yeah, OCR had a great analysis, which you guys have probably read:

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/third-usc-trojans-2588355-down-percent

What gets me is the high % propensity to run on 3rd down. It appears that the issue is not field position, but poor execution on 1st and 2nd down leading to more 3rd and long situations.

I still say the penalties and TOs explanation for the underperforming offense is a cop-out. From the running on 3rd down, it appears obvious that “Big Balls Pete” has turned into “No Balls Pete”.

Maybe this is warranted for the young QBs. But, when you see what Landry Jones is doing at OU, or what Chris Todd (although a sr) is doing at Auburn, I simply don’t buy that we have to play so conservatively trying to not let our offense (and inexperienced, 5 star QBs) lose the game. Playing that tight must filter down to the players, who in turn are playing tight.

Let Bates open it up, Pete. Let your balls drop.

by DFWTrojan on Oct 1, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

3rd down conversions increase when you play grudge matches against Charleston Southern and Troy. Play calling tends to open up just a bit!

by Locoweed 1.1 on Sep 30, 2009 11:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Points, points and more points. Polls polls and peoples ideals

People who play the game understand the score really only matters at the end of the game. Regaurdless of margin whoever has more wins period, end of story we won we were better that day. PC really doesn’t care about NC, but does care about Conference race and the Rose bowl. He has to care about being better than 2 teams ucla and tranditional Notre Dame, it’s in his contract.

If there is not a playoff than there really isn’t a NC in D-1 college basketball, it’s basically a voting contest. Now here is the funniest thing about all this, the voting is 60-70% dumb ass sport column writers that have never played a down of D-1 FB So again Pete laughs at their ideals and moves of to just getting the job done, trying to pull out a victory in a game played.

I’m with Pete about winning and losing as long as I got more points it’s a win, the margin doesn’t matter. If the season is 12-0, 11-1, 10-2, 9-3, 8-4, 7-5 it is a winning season thats it. To me Doc Saturday is just another non-athlete writer what the _uck does he know about FB anyway.

Paul D. Kelley

It's not about doing your job, But can you do it with a TENNIS BALL in your throat!

by so.cal.native1952 on Oct 1, 2009 4:02 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs