And a Happy New Year to you all - what better way to start than with some stats for USC and Illinois as you're trying to clear your head for the Rose Bowl? Exactly.
I'm not convinced that there's much merit to a numbers-based preview of the Rose Bowl, since USC and Illinois had no opponents in common. However, I've been reading a fair bit about the Illinois offense and the challenges that running QBs like Isaiah "Juice" Williams pose, so I thought I'd set out the pictures of their respective seasons in summary.
I'm taking it as read that Mendenhall is a good running back and that Benn is a standout WR (the fuss here in DC when he committed to Illinois was significant for something not involving the Skins). What's included in the stats is Willams' performance. So, without further ado, Illinois' 2007 game results:
| Offense |
Defense |
||||||
| Opponent |
Result |
Passing |
Rushing |
Passing |
Rushing |
Other Notes |
QB |
| Missouri |
L, 40 - 34 |
316 |
119 |
359 |
70 |
ToP 30:37, TO -5 |
Williams 59 passing, 11 rushing |
| Western Illinois |
W, 21 - 0 |
123 |
277 |
71 |
81 |
ToP 30:33, TO -1 |
Williams 123 passing, 16 rushing |
| Syracuse |
W, 41 - 20 |
130 |
378 |
223 |
63 |
ToP 29:46, TO push |
Williams 97 passing, 90 rushing |
| Indiana |
W, 27 - 14 |
98 |
288 |
263 |
134 |
ToP 31:48, TO +1 |
Williams 98 passing, 32 rushing |
| Penn State |
W, 27 - 20 |
120 |
216 |
298 |
129 |
ToP 33:27, TO +2 |
Williams 120 passing, 37 rushing |
| Wisconsin |
W, 31 - 26 |
121 |
289 |
392 |
127 |
ToP 25:58, TO +2 |
Williams 121 passing, 92 rushing |
| Iowa |
L, 10 - 6 |
150 |
137 |
182 |
141 |
ToP 25:34, TO -1 |
Williams 98 passing, 41 rushing |
| Michigan |
L, 27 - 17 |
116 |
137 |
228 |
115 |
ToP 25:11, TO +1 |
Williams 70 passing, 17 rushing |
| Ball State |
W, 28 - 17 |
145 |
324 |
167 |
170 |
ToP 31:01, TO -3 |
Williams 145 passing, 99 rushing |
| Minnesota |
W, 44 - 17 |
207 |
448 |
242 |
95 |
Top 30:22, TO -1 |
Williams 207 passing, 133 rushing |
| Ohio State |
W, 28 - 21 |
140 |
260 |
156 |
180 |
ToP 33:00, TO +3 |
Williams 140 passing, 70 rushing |
| Northwestern |
W, 41 - 22 |
220 |
321 |
310 |
69 |
ToP 38:30, TO push |
Williams 220 passing, 136 rushing |
| Total |
1886 |
3194 |
2891 |
1374 |
|||
| Average |
157.17 |
266.17 |
240.92 |
114.5 |
And then, USC:
| Offense |
Defense |
||||||
| Opponent |
Result |
Passing |
Rushing |
Passing |
Rushing |
Other Notes |
|
| Idaho |
W, 38 - 10 |
206 |
214 |
155 |
98 |
ToP 32:34, TO -2 |
Booty |
| Nebraska |
W, 49 - 31 |
144 |
313 |
389 |
31 |
ToP 29:02, TO +1 |
Booty |
| Washington State |
W, 47 - 14 |
302 |
207 |
183 |
64 |
ToP 33.02, T.O. - 1 |
Booty |
| Washington |
W, 27 - 24 |
236 |
224 |
90 |
100 |
ToP 34.51, T.O. -1 |
Booty |
| Stanford |
L, 23 - 24 |
364 |
95 |
149 |
86 |
ToP 32.08, T.O. -4 |
Booty |
| Arizona |
W, 20 - 13 |
130 |
146 |
233 |
22 |
ToP 33.06, T.O. +1 |
Sanchez |
| Notre Dame |
W, 38 - 0 |
235 |
227 |
117 |
48 |
ToP 30.15, T.O. +2 |
Sanchez |
| Oregon |
L, 17 - 24 |
277 |
101 |
157 |
182 |
ToP 30.59, T.O. -1 |
Sanchez |
| Oregon State |
W, 24 - 3 |
187 |
100 |
85 |
91 |
ToP 29.34, Push |
Booty |
| Cal |
W, 24 - 17 |
129 |
239 |
199 |
200 |
ToP 30.19, T.O. +1 |
Booty |
| Arizona State |
W, 44 - 24 |
375 |
133 |
243 |
16 |
ToP 30.46, T.O. +1 |
Booty |
| UCLA |
W, 24 - 7 |
206 |
231 |
156 |
12 |
ToP 37:50, +2 |
Booty |
| Total |
2791 |
2230 |
2156 |
950 |
|||
| Average |
232.58 |
185.83 |
179.67 |
79.17 |
Thusly, numbers.
What stands out about all of this is the Illinois player I didn't mention: Rashard Mendenhall. His yards per game are verging on the ridiculous - multiple 200 yard games, for realz? Williams doesn't have crazy yardage but he doesn't seem to need it.
The other interesting things about Illinois? They aren't necessarily hampered by shorter time of possession or turnovers - which suggests a certain resilience. And perhaps more importantly, they don't seem to win games where Williams picks up fewer than 100 yards in passing and 50 yards of rushing, even if Mendenhall is running wild.
As for USC, the key distinction I think is in average rushing yards allowed per game - just shy of 80 - against the Illinois average of 266 per game. Something's got to give there.
I took a look at the Scouts preview, and the crux of their thinking was that while Illinois has a lot of talent on offense, they haven't tried to play against a defense that is as highly ranked as USC. The speed of the defensive line against the run and in passing routes could match well against Mendenhall - who is more of an up-the-center runner - while flushing Williams to the perimeter (his strength in running) for Maualuga et the other linebackers to tackle. Otherwise, they suggest that Arrelious Benn will be up against a zone-coverage secondary because left to single coverage / his own devices he could wreak havoc.
As for Illinois' defense, they are strong against the run but really only have one standout in the secondary, CB Vontae Davis. Even though Turner is possibly out, Hazelton and Ausberry were showing enough improvement towards the end of the season that Illinois will have to do more than tee off on Fred Davis.
So, with all that... I'm loath to predict scores, and I think the Scouts prediction of a 38 - 17 win for USC is selling Illinois short. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see SC win it by 7 to 10 points. Illinois is being compared to Oregon and other teams with running QBs, but the numbers don't tell the story of them being Dennis-Dixon-in-October-Ducks. Still, USC has to pay attention from the first play of the game because complacence / arrogance will put them in a hole - not for the first time this season.