Week 5 Stat Roll

[skyman]

Cool, thanks. To be clear, I am not saying explosiveness isn't important to winning, just that if you have a consistently, highly efficient offense (high YPP/success rate) and you are elite at maximizing your scoring opportunities in the red Zone (or just in plus territory), offensive explosiveness becomes less important to your teams success. Thus far we have been elite at YPP/success rate and red zone scoring.

Oh I agree but I really just ant to find my post on it because repulling all the studies is a pain, lol.. This has been like a 5 year thing and include spread revolution taking over to NFL, to texas air raid raised Mahomes running it with Reid stealing cfb concepts to Fangio being in denver playing mahomes twice a season and saying **** this Im sitting in two deep all game and that actually taking off and Macdonald/Minter remixing it to point of winning CFB championship AND super bowl in a couple years time, Fangio two deep crashing offensive football and the air raid/spread era closing to more efficiency, TE, etc.

There is ALOT on this stuff and playing the dink and dunk is VERYYYY hard and plays into the hand of DCs, plus opens you up to be backdoored when you play good offenses.. IE the week of Ole Miss playoff game and it was talked about and almost happened.. God bless "CARSON BECK WITH HIS LEGS!!!!!!"

Let me settle in and try to pull up some stuff.

 

[skyman]

@flips Speaking on some of what you mentioned, and aurthor of some of the older stuff lean more towards efficiency (I want to touch on later)

"But over time, I've come to realize that the sport comes down to five basic things, four of which you can mostly control. You make more big plays than your opponent, you stay on schedule, you tilt the field, you finish drives, and you fall on the ball. Explosiveness, efficiency, field position, finishing drives, and turnovers are the five factors to winning football games.

• If you win the explosiveness battle (using PPP), you win 86 percent of the time. (Big Plays)
• If you win the efficency battle (using Success Rate), you win 83 percent of the time. (Stay on schedule-No third down and longs)
• If you win the drive-finishing battle (using points per trip inside the 40), you win 75 percent of the time. (Score TD's in the Red Zone)
• If you win the field position battle (using average starting field position), you win 72 percent of the time. (Iowa's punter)
• If you win the turnover battle (using turnover margin), you win 73 percent of the time. (Gang tackle strip the ball out- the ball is the program)

This is from 2013 college football game data. It's very, very similar from year to year.""

You want to eat up chunks of yardage with big plays, because big plays mean both points and fewer opportunities to make mistakes."

Explaining explosive plays, the NFL’s most nebulous important stat

Obviously explosive plays are important in the NFL, but can anyone define what they actually are?

www.sbnation.com

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7010925/2026/01/30/explosive-plays-nfl-seahawks-patriots-scoop-city/

Still, these big plays are as important as ever. While turnovers and field position still matter, big gains are increasingly realized as the key differentiator, both in college football and in the NFL.

A 2022 data study by PFF found that having one explosive play tripled the expected points value of a drive. Unlike when a team needs three downs at a time to methodically move downfield, a chunk play reduces the number of times an offense has to avoid a mistake.



And thanks to 2024’s NFL kickoff rule changes, a single explosive puts an offense even closer to field goal range than it did at the time of that study.

The most effective way to measure this is explosive-play margin, the difference between the number of chunk plays each offense gains per game and the number its defense allows. It’s no coincidence that the final four teams led the league in that stat’s regular-season margin:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5774192/2024/09/18/sec-football-explosive-plays/

In the old days, they were known as big plays. Or maybe long plays. It’s not clear when, or why, football people started to refer to them as “explosive plays” or just “explosives.” It was probably around the time football people started referring to position groups as “rooms.”

The football people also can’t quite agree on what defines an explosive play, because there is no official definition: Some use 15-yard runs and 20-yard passes. Others use less.

“People tend to slant those to whichever one is favorable to them,” Georgia coach Kirby Smart said last year.

There has been a growing consensus, however, that a stat is very important: Explosive play margin, as in who has more in a game, is heavily indicative of who wins the game. Maybe it was always that way, maybe it means more in this era of higher scoring and more passing, meaning bend-but-don’t-break defenses have the upper hand, and ground-and-pound offenses don’t.

The Pulse Newsletter
Free, daily sports updates direct to your inbox.
Georgia’s survival at Kentucky is a prime example: Kentucky outgained Georgia in yards, 284-262, and had a good running game in the second half. But in that decisive second half — using the definition of explosives as rushes of 12-plus yards and passes of 16-plus — Georgia had five explosive plays (three passes, two runs), Kentucky only had one, as Georgia’s defense gave ground but firmed up when it needed to.

Georgia coach Kirby Smart, Carson Beck (15) survived against Kentucky on Saturday with a 13-12 win.Carter Skaggs / Imagn Images

That’s just one example from this season, when the data continues to show, along with previous seasons, that explosive play margin is a key factor:

2024 (so far)​

In SEC play — conference or nonconference — the team that wins explosive play margin has a 32-2 record.

The biggest exception is Arkansas, which was plus-15 in its overtime loss at Oklahoma State, with the Razorbacks blowing a huge lead and killing themselves with penalties (seven for 70 yards) and turnovers (minus-two). The other one was Vanderbilt (nine explosives) in its five-point loss to Georgia State (eight explosives).

When the explosive play margin is even or close, teams give themselves a chance. But the worse it gets, the harder it gets. Here’s a breakdown by margin, via TruMedia:

• +10 or better: 10-1
• +5 to +9: 13-0
• +1 to +4: 9-1
• Even: 1-2
• -1 to -4: 3-4
• -5 to -9: 0-3
• -10 or worse: 0-1

On a cumulative basis, the data is similar. There are three SEC teams with losing records, and those three rank in the bottom four in overall explosive play margin. The only SEC team with a negative differential and a winning record is LSU, which was minus-10 in its season-opening loss to USC, but plus-five in its win at South Carolina.

SEC explosive plays per game

Team	Explosives	Opponent explosives	Differential
	16.00	2.67	13.33
	18.00	6.00	12.00
	17.00	5.33	11.67
	10.33	2.67	7.67
	11.67	4.33	7.33
	10.67	4.00	6.67
	7.67	3.00	4.67
	11.00	7.00	4.00
	8.00	5.33	2.67
	8.00	6.67	1.33
	6.00	5.67	0.33
	7.67	7.33	0.33
	5.00	5.00	0.00
	9.00	9.67	-0.67
	8.33	9.33	-1.00
	7.67	9.00	-1.33

Source: TruMedia

Recent season history​

Between 2019-23, SEC teams that had more explosive plays than their opponent had an overall record of 397-72. And the higher the margin in that game, the more likely they were to win, per TruMedia:

• +10 or better: 52-2 (.963)
• +5 to +9: 153-9 (.944)
• +1 to +4: 193-61 (.760)
• Even: 42-38 (.525)
• -1 to -4: 62-145 (.300)
• -5 to -9: 10-87 (.103)
• -10 or worse: 2-16 (.111)

(For what it’s worth, four of the 12 losses by teams with five-plus margins were during the 2020 COVID 19 season.)

On a cumulative basis, the five SEC champions — and six College Football Playoff participants, meaning Georgia in 2021 — each averaged 3.5 more explosive plays than their opponents. The four SEC teams that won the national title during that time each averaged at least four more explosive plays than their opponents.

Does defense win championships? No, explosive play margin does.

The reason for the data​

Three-and-outs are great, but not necessary and also much harder to get than they used to be: Per TruMedia, the rate of three-and-outs forced by SEC defenses has gone down, from 35.5 percent of drives in 2004 to 31.5 percent in 2014 to 27.8 percent so far this year.

But the defenses that force the offense to stay on the field for longer, thus increasing the chance for mistakes, give themselves a better shot.

Georgia’s defense hasn’t given up a touchdown during the past four games, and in the season opener, Clemson was held to three or fewer plays on six of its 11 possessions. But on Saturday night, Kentucky only had one three-and-out among its 10 drives. The bigger deal was preventing the Wildcats from getting into the red zone on all but one of their possessions.

On the other side of the ball, the offenses that get bigger chunk plays decrease their chances for mistakes. Time of possession, as a result, has become much less meaningful: Ole Miss (28 minutes, 55 seconds), Alabama (29:10) and Georgia (29:42) are all averaging less time of possession than their opponents so far. Tennessee (30:48) and Texas (30:21) are barely above the mark.

It’s a higher-scoring era, and coaches would rather have points than long drives that only get three points. Turnover margin still matters, as do field position and some other traditional factors. But explosive play margin is the one that may tell the story as much as any.

 

[Cajuncane]

Not bad figuring we’ve played 2nd and 3rd string players for the equivalent of one whole game.Just think how crazy these numbers would be , especially on offense,if we had stayed with the starters for that time.

 

[flips]

@skyman Thank so much for the links. Using the 10+ rush/20+ pass explosive play definition from the SBnation link, this season so far our explosive differential is:

10+ runs	20+ passes
Miami	17	20
FBS Opponents	5	10

We are +22 in ExplosiveDifferential thus far this year, +5.5/game. Our offense is averaging 9.25 explosive plays/game. Our defense is giving up 3.75 explosive plays/game

Last year:

	10+ runs	20+ passes
Miami	64	51
FBS Opponents	46	37

We were +32 in ExplosiveDifferential, +2.13/game. Our offense averaged 7.67 explosive plays/game. Our defense gave up 5.53 explosive plays/game.

So, while we have struggled to produce many very long runs this year and very long passes, using this definition of explosive plays, our offense to date this year has been 20% more explosive (caveat that I am comparing 4 games this year against 15 last year which included 3 playoff games). Our defense has limited explosive plays 32% better than last year.

Considering how well our defense is playing, I still conclude it's not hugely important that we make a massive leap on offense in terms of explosiveness (using the 10+ rush/20+ pass definition), as long as we continue to be a highly efficient offense, in terms of YPP, Success Rate, PPD (or drive TD% which you posted in the analytics thread today), and Red Zone efficiency/TD%.

On that last metric, I charted all the current AP Top 10 teams in the red zone, on both offense and defense:

This is FBS games only through last weekend's games.

• RZO/G - Offensive Red Zone Opportunities per Game
• P/RZO - Points per offensive red zone opportunity (I assumed all XPs are made)
• P/RZO/G - Average offensive red zone points per game
• oRZO/G - Opponent's red zone opportunities per game
• oP/RZO - Opponent's points per red zone opportunity
• oP/RZO/G - Opponent's average red zone points per game
• NET/G - Average red zone scoring differential per game

We are second-best in the AP Top-10 (OSU is #1) in red zone scoring differential per game at +19.23 points. Last year we were only +9.94. We are simply owning the red zone thus far this year.

Our efficiency in getting to the red zone and scoring TDs on offense, paired with our efficiency in keeping opponents out of the red zone and limiting their TDs when they do get there on defense have both seen marked improvement since last year. Whether this holds up over the course of the entire season is unknown, obviously.

We are handily winning 4 of Connelly's 5 factors. The only one we aren't is Net Field Position. We are 56th in the country at +0.8 yards. We haven't committed a non-garbage time turnover on offense yet this year either, which while obviously unsustainable, is awesome.

 

[E1k]

Baby doll, we are 113th in the country. Whatever “secret weapon” you think it is, Dawson doesn’t know about it.

You all are responding to me like I said we need to run Huepel’s fastest iteration of offense. We take nearly 29 seconds to snap the ball, which limits the amount of plays we run on offense, and gives the D every possible chance to recognize and adjust.

For example, Clemson had time to recognize Mali was on an LB and for Dabo to call a timeout. Advantage neutralized. When you create that mismatch and combine it with speed, you win the play. It’s not a call to run go-go, it’s a call to stress the defense more and get an extra possession a game. You can save players from injuries just as easily by having Nickel come in by the start of the 4th as you can by limiting possessions. You can also keep your opponent in the game longer by giving yourself fewer opportunities to score.

Dawson has run tempo in spurts before. He did with cam in 2024, tvd in 2023 and his years in Houston. Last year there was an obvious clear big shift away from that, i mentioned the natty because it was the first time we ran it last year, its obviously just something he keeps in his back pocket instead of running it more frequently like he did previously

And I didn’t respond in anyway implying that we should be like the veer and shoot offenses lol just relax baby doll. We are lowering the amount of plays on purpose and betting on our efficiency to he better than our opponents. Thats why i posted that article, there has been an intentional shift across the country

The 29 seconds they have to adjust we also have that time to adjust, see the mali td that got called back that was checked into by mensah. So the advantage doesn’t just go to the defense because you’re using up the play clock lol. And if we had a matchup that forced clemson to use a timeout thats also a win for us, timeout usage is also mentioned in that article.

You don’t need to combine you creating a matchup with speed, thats not what we’re trying to do. We’re trying to sustain long drives, you don’t need tempo to stress the defense, or to create extra possessions or to limit injuries lol. What you think is keeping your opponent in the game isn’t correlated to tempo, its actually the opposite.

 

[mosthated305]

Mensah almost turned it over in the end zone at the bottom of the field in the 2nd half

I believe Barkate ran the wrong route and it took his defender into the throwing lane. After the play you see Mali and Barkate talking.

 

[Pearson704]

Baby doll, we are 113th in the country. Whatever “secret weapon” you think it is, Dawson doesn’t know about it.

You all are responding to me like I said we need to run Huepel’s fastest iteration of offense. We take nearly 29 seconds to snap the ball, which limits the amount of plays we run on offense, and gives the D every possible chance to recognize and adjust.

For example, Clemson had time to recognize Mali was on an LB and for Dabo to call a timeout. Advantage neutralized. When you create that mismatch and combine it with speed, you win the play. It’s not a call to run go-go, it’s a call to stress the defense more and get an extra possession a game. You can save players from injuries just as easily by having Nickel come in by the start of the 4th as you can by limiting possessions. You can also keep your opponent in the game longer by giving yourself fewer opportunities to score.

we play fast in spurts.

It may be a matter of walking really well before we run.

I could hear Dawson saying: 'you lose that element of surprise if you run tempo all the time'.

 

[skyman]

@skyman Thank so much for the links. Using the 10+ rush/20+ pass explosive play definition from the SBnation link, this season so far our explosive differential is:

10+ runs	20+ passes
Miami	17	20
FBS Opponents	5	10

We are +22 in ExplosiveDifferential thus far this year, +5.5/game. Our offense is averaging 9.25 explosive plays/game. Our defense is giving up 3.75 explosive plays/game

Last year:

	10+ runs	20+ passes
Miami	64	51
FBS Opponents	46	37

We were +32 in ExplosiveDifferential, +2.13/game. Our offense averaged 7.67 explosive plays/game. Our defense gave up 5.53 explosive plays/game.

So, while we have struggled to produce many very long runs this year and very long passes, using this definition of explosive plays, our offense to date this year has been 20% more explosive (caveat that I am comparing 4 games this year against 15 last year which included 3 playoff games). Our defense has limited explosive plays 32% better than last year.

Considering how well our defense is playing, I still conclude it's not hugely important that we make a massive leap on offense in terms of explosiveness (using the 10+ rush/20+ pass definition), as long as we continue to be a highly efficient offense, in terms of YPP, Success Rate, PPD (or drive TD% which you posted in the analytics thread today), and Red Zone efficiency/TD%.

On that last metric, I charted all the current AP Top 10 teams in the red zone, on both offense and defense:

View attachment 375228

This is FBS games only through last weekend's games.

• RZO/G - Offensive Red Zone Opportunities per Game
• P/RZO - Points per offensive red zone opportunity (I assumed all XPs are made)
• P/RZO/G - Average offensive red zone points per game
• oRZO/G - Opponent's red zone opportunities per game
• oP/RZO - Opponent's points per red zone opportunity
• oP/RZO/G - Opponent's average red zone points per game
• NET/G - Average red zone scoring differential per game

We are second-best in the AP Top-10 (OSU is #1) in red zone scoring differential per game at +19.23 points. Last year we were only +9.94. We are simply owning the red zone thus far this year.

Our efficiency in getting to the red zone and scoring TDs on offense, paired with our efficiency in keeping opponents out of the red zone and limiting their TDs when they do get there on defense have both seen marked improvement since last year. Whether this holds up over the course of the entire season is unknown, obviously.

We are handily winning 4 of Connelly's 5 factors. The only one we aren't is Net Field Position. We are 56th in the country at +0.8 yards. We haven't committed a non-garbage time turnover on offense yet this year either, which while obviously unsustainable, is awesome.

Yea its alot of good stuff here. Mario has talked about it and he is aware of most of this, mind you I have been screaming this stuff while we were stuck in malaise for decade plus (if not scheming for explosive plays, get explosive players!) so its music to my ears and I think it surprises people how up on analytics Mario is.. (Like how we ran draw with fletcher in 3rd to set up going for 4th down at their 38 yard line, we didnt get it but Mario didnt hesitate) Some times we get in trouble (GT '24 game we went OD on 4th down)

I think the defense is doing alot of heavy lifting, I want to see more from offense lol.. We can be better.. Its too mali centric and I think that makes it easier for the better defenses later in year.. If a defense doubles Mali how do we make them pay? I havent seen that answered. We need to have multiple answers to the test.. That happens this month so when the test comes in indiana, we know what to do.