The Season in Statistics

by The Bengal on Nov 30, 2009 5:16 PM CST Comment 16 comments

LSU finished 3rd in the SEC this year and concluded a 9-3 season and an upcoming trip to the Capital One Bowl. A very successful season on the face of it and a definite improvement over last years results, but many of us have still felt uneasy about how the team looked getting to the end result. I was curious where we ended up in offensive and defensive statistics this year. The stats were pulled from here and the rankings from here if you want to double check my numbers.

Overall Special Teams were great, with the curious exception of kickoff returns. We have the unusual distinction of ranking 110th in kickoff returns, but our kickoff coverage ranked 3rd in the country. The Defense was improved but not by as much as I thought, Scoring D was much better, 12th vs 56th last year, but Total D only improved to 29th from 32nd last year. The offense we all know about. No major offensive category ranked in the top half of Division 1 and the offense was ranked 108th ranked total offense (out of 120 teams). We were outgained by opponents on the season in rushing, passing, first downs and total offense.

I also looked at scoring by quarters. The announcers in the Arkansas game mentioned that we had outscored our opponents in the third quarter this year. This surprised me, because in the game threads and post-game comments many of us complained about how the team would go into long funks in the 3rd quarter. I expected to see us outscored in the third quarter and then coming back and outscoring the opponents in the 4th for some of our comeback wins. We dominated the 1st quarters and outscored all opponents by a pretty big margin in the 3rd quarter, but were tied in 4th quarter scoring. It's worse if you look at SEC opponents. While we still maintain a 3rd quarter edge, it's only 6 points, less than a point a game. Even worse, our SEC opponents owned the 4th quarter, outscoring us 62-40.

So how did we end up with a better record than last year? 22nd ranked turnover margin vs. 67th last year, 12th ranked scoring defense vs. 56th, spectacular special teams (except KO returns), and relatively efficient and effective Red Zone Offense and Defense. The good news is that the team found ways to win with those formulas. The concern is that turnover margin, scoring defense, and special teams tend to be somewhat more variable year to year than total offense and total defense.

There are opportunities for improvement in specific areas to get back to the types of dominant Tiger teams we've gotten spoiled with earlier in this decade. The offense has to get better at both scoring and ball control while still protecting the ball. The D needs to hold their edge in scoring D but needs to get off the field quicker. Third and Chavis wasn't as bad as we've heard from our Tennessee brethren, but it's worrisome that our opponents had an almost equal 3rd down conversion to ours. To win the West next year these areas will have to improve.

TEAM STATISTICS	LS	OPP	LSU Rank
SCORING	306	192	75 Offense/12 Defense
Points Per Game	25.5	16.0
FIRST DOWNS	217	231	85
RUSHING YARDAGE	1555	1610	84 Offense/44 Defense
Average Per Game	129.6	134.2
PASSING YARDAGE	2161	2309	100 Offense/28 Defense
Comp-Att-Int	185-312-7	204-381-13
Average Per Pass	6.9	6.1
Average Per Game	180.1	192.4
TOTAL OFFENSE	3716	3919	108 Offense/ 29 Defense
Total Plays	722	835
Average Per Play	5.1	4.7
Average Per Game	309.7	326.6
KICK RETURN AVERAGE	18.7	17.4	110 for/3 against
PUNT RETURN AVERAGE	18.6	4.0	1
PENALTIES-Yards	76-569	73-565	67 # penalties/35 yardage
Net punt average	38.2	31.1	14
TIME OF POSSESSION/Game	28:21	31:38	103
3RD-DOWN Conversions	58/148	68/185
3rd-Down Pct	39%	37%	61 Converted/45 Allowed
4TH-DOWN Conversions	3/12	10/19
4th-Down Pct	25%	53%	110 Converted/73 Allowed
SACKS BY-Yards39%	37%	61 Converted/45 Allowed
4TH-DOWN Conversions	3/12	10/19
4th-Down Pct	25%	53%	110 Converted/73 Allowed
SACKS BY-Yards	20-134	35-238	76 Sacks for/108 Sacks allowed
TOUCHDOWNS SCORED	37	18
FIELD GOALS-ATTEMPTS	16-19	21-27
RED-ZONE SCORES	33-38 87%	28-36 78%	27 Red Zone TDs/33 Red Zone D
RED-ZONE TOUCHDOWNS	23-38 61%	13-36 36%

RED-ZONE SCORES	33-38 87%	28-36 78%	27 Red Zone TDs/33 Red Zone D
RED-ZONE TOUCHDOWNS	23-38 61%	13-36 36%

Score by quarters	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	OT	Total
LSU vs All	102	59	67	75	3	306
All Opponents	36	48	33	75	0	192

Score by quarters	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	OT	Total
LSU vs SEC	61	35	39	40	3	178
SEC Opponents	26	29	33	62	0	150

0 recs | Comment 16 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

3rd and Chavis

I read this blog all the time but don’t post too often. Because the offense was so bad, I don’t think Chavis is getting as much scrutiny as he might deserve by commenters here. I really disliked the bend but don’t break style of defense we played this year. If LSU has the athletes, why isn’t the defense designed to shut down opposing offenses more emphatically?

The offense could have helped the defense out a bit by having fewer three and outs. But the defense did very little to help the offense find a rhythm by allowing the other team’s offense to stay on the field so long. It seemed like Chavis’ defense had very few three and outs this year. I think that needs to change next year if we want to be successful next season. And, of course, Crowton needs to go (I hope this is a foregone conclusion).

by no brainer on Nov 30, 2009 4:58 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

About not shutting down opposing offenses more emphatically

My guess is that it was due to our anemic pass rush. Even a good back seven gets tired after a while. Only a guess.

by artiger on Nov 30, 2009 6:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Where did the

3rd and Chavis moniker come from?

I have several family members that live in Knoxville and my best friend here is a huge UT fan, I have asked them all about this and they don’t have a clue what I’m talking about or where it came from??

GEAUX TIGERS!!!

by SouthernMan on Nov 30, 2009 5:12 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

They must've not been in the sports talk circles then

3rd and Chavis has been in the SEC vernacular since before the ’98 championship.

by PodKATT on Nov 30, 2009 6:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So what does it mean?

Explain, please.

by artiger on Nov 30, 2009 7:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

3rd and chavis

is basically saying that the defense will hold up great on 1st and 2nd downs and create a 3rd and long that they will then allow to be converted.

by ORtigerfan on Nov 30, 2009 7:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks.

Sounds logical, which is probably why I didn’t know that.

by artiger on Nov 30, 2009 7:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Spurrier

It’s probably an urban legend but I heard that during the Fun’n’Gun days a reporter asked Spurrier what his favorite down and distance was and he replied, “Third and Chavis.”

CHAD JONES! WOOOO!!!!

by The Bengal on Nov 30, 2009 10:03 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs

BTW PodKATT

If you know how to fix the formatting in those tables, please feel free to edit the post. I couldn’t figure out how to do it.

CHAD JONES! WOOOO!!!!

by The Bengal on Nov 30, 2009 10:08 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs

It wasn't that bad.

I found it pretty readable.

by artiger on Nov 30, 2009 10:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i agree

it’s fine, i just cleared out the nonsense in the middle

by PodKATT on Dec 1, 2009 9:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

To improve the defense

We just need improved D-line play. Now, I’m not sure we’re going to get it. But that will help us on third down and get opponents off the field earlier. These statistics are very indicative of a team with a talented back seven that is being let down by it’s D-line. The back seven will hold up well in the red zone when they have a shorter field to defend, but until then the D-Line will let opponents grind out yards and convert seemingly improbable third and longs.

by Nearl on Dec 1, 2009 12:59 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Has anybody heard anything

about what Chad Jones is planning to do?

I wouldn’t blame him for going pro but boy it would be nice to have one more year with him and Peterson opposite each other!

GEAUX TIGERS!!!

by SouthernMan on Dec 1, 2009 1:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Bengal

Weigh in on this please. You made this statement.

The Defense was improved but not by as much as I thought, Scoring D was much better, 12th vs 56th last year, but Total D only improved to 29th from 32nd last year.

Specifically about that scoring D comment.

Last year we gave up 314 pts or 24.2 PPG.
This year we have given up 192 pts or 16 PPG.

I’m 99% sure that the 2008 stats include the 7 INTs for touchdowns that we threw. As in, the stats don’t discriminate between pts the defense actually gave up or pick sixes or even Special Teams TDs. Usually, this is probably a moot point because those things even out, but we had such an outlier last year with our 7 INTs returned for touchdowns that I think we should take those numbers out of the 2008 numbers to really comapre the two defenses.

So the adjusted 2008 numbers minus 49 pts from Jarrett Lee: 265 pts or 20.4 PPG. I think this is a fair, analysis to make when comparing the 2008 defense to the 2009 defense.

So at the end of the day our defense improved from giving up 20.4 PPG to 16 with one game to go in the 2009 season, and stayed about the same from giving up 325 YPG in 2008 to 326 YPG in 2009 with one game to go.

So reading these numbers, we really didn’t STOP teams from driving on us this year, any more so than we did last year. What we DID do better was create turnovers which stopped scoring drives at rate that made us improve about a field goal per game. Since we didn’t put much pressure on opposing offenses, and I’ll point to the fact that our sack numbers and QB hurry numbers were abysmal, I think it is safe to say that our scheme let us take better advantage of our opponents mistakes in 2009 over 2008. That would be counter to creating mistakes by being a pressure defense.

All of this to say, I’m not sure Chavis was a great hire. He is, however, a good hire. I do think we should hold off judgement on Chavis until our Offense can start to help us outgain our opponents and win the TOP battle. I think the fact that we were outscored in the 4th quarter has a lot to do with our defense being tired because of our anemic offense.

by LSU Jonno on Dec 2, 2009 9:36 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

You're right

I didn’t exclude the pick 6s from scoring D. But even excluding those, we did a much better job keeping opponents out of the end zone than we did last year.

2009 Opponent TDs – 18
2008 Opponent TDs – 39 less 7 pick 6s = 32

This doesn’t account for situations where the interception left the opponent with a short field to punch in a TD (I think Bama had a very short TD after interception, for instance). But it does show that even with the pick 6s factored in, the D did a good job of bend, don’t break.

This supports your proposition that:

…we really didn’t STOP teams from driving on us this year, any more so than we did last year. What we DID do better was create turnovers which stopped scoring drives at rate that made us improve about a field goal per game.

But I do think there was a difference as the field shortened in addition to the ability to force turnovers. We did force teams to attempt a lot more field goals this year vs. 2008. 27 field goal attempts in 2009 vs. 19 in 2008. That tells me that we were stopping more drives once the opponent got inside the 30.

The most discouraging thing to me was 4th quarter scoring. We allowed a LOT of fourth quarter scoring, especially by SEC opponents. I don’t know if that was the D getting tired from being on the field, or the offense leaving them in poor field position, but opponent scoring was almost twice as high in the 4th quarter as in any other quarter. SEC opponents scored 41% of their points in the 4th quarter. That’s why the total D number is so critical. You have to get the D off the field and maintain good field position to finish the games.

CHAD JONES! WOOOO!!!!

by The Bengal on Dec 2, 2009 10:42 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If what you say about the 4th quarter is true...

That opponent scoring was almost twice as high in the 4th quar as it was in any other quarter, then I think we can expect our defense to improve with a better offense.

Now that is always the case anyway, but a better offense would seem to provide our defense with 20% better statistics assuming our 4th quarter numbers would be in line with the rest of our stats.

In addition to the D benefiting from a better O, I think we’ll see better defensive numbers due to an improving defense. Year two under Chavis should benefit us as well.

I’m still not sold that Chavis will return our defense to the “feared/nasty/dominating” catagory, but it will probably be decent or good by SEC standards.

by LSU Jonno on Dec 2, 2009 10:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs