CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: medinabuckeye1 on January 03, 2023, 02:38:39 PM
-
(https://i.imgur.com/5tNHE2e.png)
I looked at something similar wrt tOSU and Michigan and it was shocking how much scores have increased in that game over the decades.
Here I wanted to analyze that with regard to the best teams in the game rather than just two specific teams. The lines:
- Blue dots: From 1998-2013 this is simply the score of the winning team in the BCSNCG. From 2014-present this is the average winning score of the two CFP semi-finals and the CFPNCG.
- Red dots: Same as blue except for losers rather than winners.
- Green dots: This is a rolling four-year average of winning scores in BCSNCG's and CFP games (both semi-finals and CG's) so the far left green dot is the four year average from 1998-2001 and the far right green dot is the four year average from 2019-2022.
- Purple dots: Same as green except for losers rather than winners.
The average score from 1998-2001 was roughly 30-15. The last four years it is roughly ten points higher at 41-25. While it has bounced around a bit, the general trend is clearly up.
I have my own opinions but my question to you is this: Is this a random thing or a structural change?
Thoughts?
-
(https://i.imgur.com/5tNHE2e.png)
I looked at something similar wrt tOSU and Michigan and it was shocking how much scores have increased in that game over the decades.
Here I wanted to analyze that with regard to the best teams in the game rather than just two specific teams. The lines:
- Blue dots: From 1998-2013 this is simply the score of the winning team in the BCSNCG. From 2014-present this is the average winning score of the two CFP semi-finals and the CFPNCG.
- Red dots: Same as blue except for losers rather than winners.
- Green dots: This is a rolling four-year average of winning scores in BCSNCG's and CFP games (both semi-finals and CG's) so the far left green dot is the four year average from 1998-2001 and the far right green dot is the four year average from 2019-2022.
- Purple dots: Same as green except for losers rather than winners.
The average score from 1998-2001 was roughly 30-15. The last four years it is roughly ten points higher at 41-25. While it has bounced around a bit, the general trend is clearly up.
I have my own opinions but my question to you is this: Is this a random thing or a structural change?
Thoughts?
I mean, just to start, the sport overall got faster. So teams are overall driving up total possessions per game.
-
The year-to-year is pretty noisy so the four-year MA is more discernible, but at a glance they paint the same picture. I think it's a structural change on two fronts. Aggressiveness/style of offenses, and quality of QBs. The style of play is fairly self-evident, I think. IMO the game has more QBs now who are more capable on average than the QBs on average from when your chart starts. Start with the QB running. This was more of a novelty 20 years ago even though there have always been guys who could run (this doesn't apply to option offenses, obviously). Today it's not only common, it's probably prevalent for a QB to be a good runner with designed runs factored in, which makes it a lot harder for defenses to stop the chains from moving. It also used to be the case that in many teams' offensive schemes, the QB was only responsible for reading half the field on a given play. Whether or not they were capable of more is moot, what matters is what they were doing. I can't be sure about this, but today's game regularly has QBs who appear to be reading the whole field routinely. Or they're supposed to be. The ones who can do it effectively become your best guys. If I'm right about that, that's a stress on defenses that didn't used to be there.
But your question was does defense still win championships. I'd posit that yes it does, as it arguably matters now more than ever because teams can score so much. You need to be a team that can get a couple stops against a great offense. Maybe not shut it down, but not allow the opponent to score every drive.
-
I downloaded a dataset that covers 2013 through 2021. I want to practice some school stuff with it, but tell you what....help me come up with some more specific questions and I'll let you know if I find anything interesting. "Does defense win championships?" is a specific question but it's not a very definable one.
Maybe something like are the defenses that win NCs and/or achieve a certain metric(s) getting better on average, or worse, or staying the same. Or maybe, does the defensive performance over time correlate with achieving certain benchmarks more or less than does offensive performance.
I really don't know. Gotta ask the right questions.
If I have enough time I could try to run some regression analysis and see what percentage of outcome certain factors account for.
-
It’s a good question. Even with data- hard to answer.
Ohio State put up 41 on a really good Georgia defense- and they scored the least of the 4 semi playoff teams. And they did that without their best 3 RBs, best 2 WRs and best 2 TEs.
Both teams had stops.
Does a team with an amazing defense but not great offense ever beat a team with an amazing offense but not much defense? In our playoff system- it hasn’t happened yet that I can recall.
Seems like to MDT’s point- the game today- the rules, RPOs, the athletes- it’s all favoring the offense.
-
Seems like to MDT’s point- the game today- the rules, RPOs, the athletes- it’s all favoring the offense.
yup. 2021 Georgia was the exception, that defense had 5 NFL 1st round starters and it's best player was Nakobe Dean who went in the 3rd rd, and there were a bunch of other starters/two deep guys that weren't draft eligible that will probably be 1st and 2nd rd picks in this draft (Jalen Carter, Ringo). So yeah, unless you're fielding a defense loaded with high level NFL talent like that- the answer is no, it doesn't.
You better score points. In bunches. And you need just enough defense to get a few critical stops a game.
-
I don't think a 1-game sample from each season is meaningful at all. Why limit yourself to that? Take the average points allowed per game for their seasons....it multiplies the validity by 10+, right off the bat.
.
Defenses are gradually allowing more points overall, due to teams passing more. The average pass attempt yields more yardage than the average rush attempt. That's a basic universal, regardless of era.
.
Aside from some flashes, no one was passing much as recently as the 1980s. Only BYU and Miami were approaching a 50/50 run-pass ratio then. And as we all know, coaches copy each other's successful strategies and old coaches influence young coaches over time. Florida, FSU, Houston, and more began passing a lot in the 90s and won big. As teams drifted away from the option, some holdouts used it as a 'great equalizer'....but people wised up and realized passing an inordinate % of the time was a better equalizer (think: air raid).
.
There are other reasons, but that would be #1.
-
The 10th-most season pass attempts over time (to avoid outliers):
1982: 378
1992: 376
2002: 472
2012: 499
2022: 480
.
So taking a long view of things, it's more passing.
To focus on the last decade or so, I'd say it's the copy-cat reaction to the read-option/back-shoulder throws.
.
Call it a combination of both "great equalizer" offenses (option + air raid), but the longer it takes a defense to determine whether the play is a run or a pass, the more time the offense has to advance downfield before the ball is distributed. What was once a limiting factor of a 5-step route vs a 7-step route being a sack risk is now just part of the normal offense.
.
Add to that the purposeful, back-shoulder throw - which sort of just ignores tight coverage - and you have a very difficult offense to defend AND an offense that can both gain more yardage per attempt and complete passes that wouldn't have even been attempted in the past.
.
Note: most people don't realize how horrifically god-awful QB play was as recently as the early-90s. Alabama won a NC in 1992 with a QB that had a 112 passer rating w/ 7 TDs and 9 INTs. And the Heisman winner that year had under 20 TDs and only a 138 rating (that would get him benched by midseason nowadays).
-
Time for some stats. Here's where the title-winning teams finished in yards per play, going back:
26th/63rd
2nd
18th
28th
3rd
1st
5th
2nd
26th
2nd
2nd
1st
56th
3rd
13th
5th
8th
10th
7th
1st
28th
4th
7th
We run out before FSU and Tennessee. YPP has a couple flaws, but it does show a few things. Basically, it's usually top-10, give or take some blips. We're seeing some slightly noticeable blips of late.
-
One thing I see routinely now is a freshman QB stepping in pretty much ready to play. By his 2nd year, he's a veteran. This happened rarely back in the day and only if the senior was injured or was playing very badly. The young QBs now are WAY ahead of where they were 25 years ago, I think. It could be said of the rest of the offense as well, perhaps save RBs.
-
Time for some stats. Here's where the title-winning teams finished in yards per play, going back:
offense or defense?
-
I don't think a 1-game sample from each season is meaningful at all. Why limit yourself to that? Take the average points allowed per game for their seasons....it multiplies the validity by 10+, right off the bat.
This is why I want to set some reasonable benchmark of achievement other than just NC winners. That also seems to limit the sample size beyond what may be meaningful. Obviously it's technically correct as far as answering "does defense win championships?", but maybe there's more insight to be gained by looking at "very good" teams rather than only the NC winners.
Maybe broaden it to playoff participants. I dunno.
If I get the time I wanted to feed the 2014-2021 data to some machine-learning algorithms and see what comes up as a predicted winner for this year's playoff games, and if it could predict who the participants even are. But I'm not sure how much time I'm gonna spend on this atm. What I really wanted was some practice cleaning some real-world datasets, but these that I downloaded are pristine. (I mean, yeah, that's what you hope for in a real world setting, but currently not what I'm interested in.)
-
This year's semis really showed that winning the NC often hinges on one play. One play in a playoff game or even one in September.
Take the '83 Huskers. They were one of the most dominant teams ever. But they don't make anyone's top 5 because of a 2-point play failing.
There is nothing special about a NC that sets them apart from other great teams. They get a trophy. They're the best in the history books. But in reality, they had a play go their way, had a call go their way, lost at the right time, had other teams lose at the right time, etc.
I look at it like no team is LIKELY to win a CCG, semifinal, and NCG. No team has a 51% chance at winning those 3 in a row.
.
So yeah, I'd expand the pool of teams to put in your Orange Julius potato chip machine. ;)
-
Take the '83 Huskers. They were one of the most dominant teams ever. But they don't make anyone's top 5 because of a 2-point play failing.
yup, greatest offense to that point in history - not a great defense
84 Huskers had a great defense - didn't make the Orange bowl
offense was stuffed on the goal line vs the Sooners
-
yup, greatest offense to that point in history - not a great defense
They're basically 2019 LSU, but for a failed 2-point attempt.
So they're viewed as less-than.
-
yup, but Doc Tom nor I would change the decision to go for the win
gained a lot of respect that night
as we say, injuries are part of the game, but it's a shame Rozier was knocked out of the game.
might have been a different play call for the two
-
Everyone seems to think Nebraska still wins the NC with a tie there. Voters back then were idiots and cared more about WHEN you lost or tied as who it was against.
Auburn finished their season with consecutive wins over teams ranked 5th, 7th, 4th, 19th, and 8th. Their only loss was to top-5 Texas back in September.
I think Auburn wins the NC (or at least a split) if Nebraska tied in the bowl game.
-
I think a team needs a better than average D to prevail even today. We see some high scoring games now, but nothing like 63-55 (yet). You need to try and limit the opponent to 35 (or less) and then score in the 40s. I figure an elite offense today will score mid30s on even a very good defense.
-
I think a team needs a better than average D to prevail even today. We see some high scoring games now, but nothing like 63-55 (yet). You need to try and limit the opponent to 35 (or less) and then score in the 40s. I figure an elite offense today will score mid30s on even a very good defense.
This.
People keep pointing to 2019 as not great, but that's only true in stretches, even though the offense was able to carry a unit at times that was only okay. I don't think they run through their final 3 games vs. UGA, OU, and Clemson had the defense not come round to championship caliber. Clemson in particular, they got the better of us early on on both sides of the ball. If not for the defense clamping down, tigers would've found themselves playing from behind in a shootout even when the offense got rolling.
-
I would certainly say clutch defense.
Just like an underrated skill in basketball is the ability to run 30 seconds off the clock when you absolutely have to run 30 seconds off the clock, defense when you absolutely have to get a stop definitely wins championships.
-
But the early season happened, counts, and matters. LSU was good enough to come through Sept + Oct unscathed.
-
Everyone seems to think Nebraska still wins the NC with a tie there. Voters back then were idiots and cared more about WHEN you lost or tied as who it was against.
Auburn finished their season with consecutive wins over teams ranked 5th, 7th, 4th, 19th, and 8th. Their only loss was to top-5 Texas back in September.
I think Auburn wins the NC (or at least a split) if Nebraska tied in the bowl game.
back in the early 80's........ before you were too old.
an undefeated team trumped a one loss team
see 1984 BYU
-
But the early season happened, counts, and matters. LSU was good enough to come through Sept + Oct unscathed.
This matters if we're talking about some greatest season of all time comparison.
It's mostly immaterial to "does defense win championships." A good case can be made that LSU doesn't win a championship, even with their offense, if their defense didn't sharpen way up.
-
So championships are only won at the end of the seson?
If so, I don't understand football.
-
Literally, a championship is won at the very end of a season.
-
So championships are only won at the end of the seson?
If so, I don't understand football.
Yeah, I think the upcoming TCU-UGA games is the "end of the season" ...
-
Yeah, I think the upcoming TCU-UGA games is the "end of the season" ...
I get OAM's point. If TCU and Georgia hadn't played well enough to defeat all of their opponents in September and October, they very well might not be playing for the championship in January.
But comparing a team's defense over all games in a season, is even more difficult than comparing them for single games late in the season, and we're already struggling just with that data alone.
-
A team can well be fairly unimpressive early and then improve obviously to the point of winning an NC. Another can go the other direction, we all know this.
This happens in baseball fairly often.
And sure, you can't lose two early and expect to be well positioned for a CFP invite though it's possible.
-
I get OAM's point. If TCU and Georgia hadn't played well enough to defeat all of their opponents in September and October, they very well might not be playing for the championship in January.
But comparing a team's defense over all games in a season, is even more difficult than comparing them for single games late in the season, and we're already struggling just with that data alone.
I get his point too, I was just being a dick. But I said also has a point--winning a championship and getting to a championship are two different things, if we want to pick nits.
He and a couple others keep referencing 2019 LSU, and my main point is that either way, they needed a stout defense. No secret the defense had problems for several games, but even prior to rounding into championship form down the stretch, the D was crucial. Notably, LSU was in a back-and-forth with Florida, and may well not win if not for a key stop or two at the end (which made the score appear further apart than the actual game). Then there was Auburn, who held LSU's offense in check all day, but the defense would not let AU get much going either. They win by 3 because of the defense that day, more than the offense, imo. Then there's Alabama, where I've already noted I think the second half of that game was total BS, but it was what it was. And LSU clamping down on Bama for a half was absolutely vital to winning that game that wound up a 5 point margin.
Then, obviously the playoffs. Already mentioned the Clemson game, and prior to that the defense did a great job against OU, even though it's probably valid to argue LSU's offense wins that game even if the defense hadn't shown up. But OU kind of proves the point....they were explosive as was LSU, I think those were the 1 and 2 offenses that year. Why does LSU win comfortably? Because LSU had a defense, OU did not.
I think you still need a good-to-great defense to both be in position to win a NC, and then to actually win it. Is there a team we can point to that did it with a mediocre or poor defense? I can't think of one, off the top of my head.
-
offense or defense?
That’s defense
-
haven't gone through whole thread, so forgive me if this has been said. but, imo, yes. defenses might be giving up more scores, but it's relative to their peers. and relative to their peers, you still need to be one of the best defenses.
went a little different route, and looked at conference champs for since 2011. compared their conf and national rank for scoring d. here is data:
(https://i.imgur.com/BlAEqwC.png)
few notes...
- interestingly, the b1g is the least responsive to this. not much, just 1 ranking spot on average, but they have the highest rank among their peers (conf mates).
- every conf had at least 1 anomaly. yes, i realize i spelled it wrong in excel.
- on average, basically need to be one of the top 3 d in conf to win it. top 4 for b1g.
-
also, should note that looking at average national rank, and then thinking who competes and wins titles recently, there is pretty strong correlation.
-
Teams with good Os and Ds should frequent the CFP. I can't think of a team with a superb either and lousy other than made the CFP.
-
Teams with good Os and Ds should frequent the CFP. I can't think of a team with a superb either and lousy other than made the CFP.
2018 OU had the #1 offense and a pretty bad defense I believe.
-
2018 OU had the #1 offense and a pretty bad defense I believe.
Oh, I agree with that, they of course were eliminated, but they had a lot of O and not much D.
-
All I know is that your chart confirms "twelving" as a valid term. :57:
-
All I know is that your chart confirms "twelving" as a valid term. :57:
This year's CFP confirms it is now just "college footballing" that is the valid term.
-
took the other conferences a few seasons to catch up to the trend
SLOWWW
-
took the other conferences a few seasons to catch up to the trend
SLOWWW
Exactly. The WAC started it, the PAC continued it, the B12 perfected it... and now comes along the SEC and the plodding, slow B1G, bringing up the rear.
-
UGA gave up a thousand yards in the past two games. That's something like 500 per.
They did better against SEC East teams, and Oregon.
-
I don't think a 1-game sample from each season is meaningful at all. Why limit yourself to that? Take the average points allowed per game for their seasons....it multiplies the validity by 10+, right off the bat.
I limited it because my focus is on teams that win the NC or at least get close.
-
Then we should have a thread entitled "Random chance wins championships" and it'll have 897,000 posts of examples.
-
If "random chance" were a significant factor, we should see years where Kansas wins, or Vandy wins, or Boston College wins. It's really a rather limited universe of teams with more than a 0.1% chance preseason, and we have one of them this year.
-
I think maybe I phrased the thread title wrong. Perhaps it should have been "Can a team with a great defense and a mediocre-to-lousy offense still win a Championship?"
What I was thinking of was teams like 1992 Bama and 2002 Ohio State that had great defenses and mediocre offenses and managed to win it all.
In 1992 Bama had 5 games where they didn't score more than 27 points:
- 13 against LaTech but shut them out, won by 13.
- 17 against Auburn but shut them out, won by 17.
- 17 against USM but held them to 10, won by 7.
- 17 against Tennessee but held them to 10, won by 7.
- 25 against Vandy but held them to 8, won by 17,
In 2002 Ohio State had 9 games where they didn't score more than 27 points:
- 10 against Purdue but held them to 6, won by 4.
- 13 against Penn State but held them to 7, won by 6.
- 14 against Michigan but held them to 9, won by 5.
- 17 against Miami (in regulation) but held them to 17, won in 2OT.
- 19 against Wisconsin but held them to 14, won by 5.
- 23 against Cincy but held them to 19, won by 4.
- 23 against Illinois but held them to 16, won by 7.
- 25 against WSU (PacChamps) but held them to 7, won by 18.
- 27 against Northwestern but held them to 16, won by 11.
'92 Bama and '02 tOSU didn't need great (or even very good) offenses because their defenses were able to hold their opponents to ~13PPG. Even against VERY good opponents:
- 02 tOSU held 10-3 Pac Champion WSU to 7
- 02 tOSU held 9-4 PSU to 7
- 02 tOSU held 10-3 M to 9
- 92 Bama held 9-3 Ole Miss to 10
- 92 Bama held 9-3 Tennessee to 10 in Knoxville
- 92 Bama held Miami to 13 in the Sugar Bowl
- 02 tOSU held Miami to 17 (regulation) in the FiestaBowl
- 92 Bama held 9-4 UF to 21 in the SECCG
- 02 tOSU held 9-5 TxTech to 21
Even against their very best opponents those Tide and Buckeye squads only needed to score in the low 20's (max) to win. That doesn't take much from the offense. Also consider that defenses this good typically generate a defensive sore or at least a short field or two for the offense so basically those offenses only needed about two TD's per game. I just don't think it is possible to win an NC this way anymore because it seems to me that even the best defenses simply can't reliably keep today's offenses under ~27 points.
Look at it this way:
- Ohio State scored 41 in a CFP Semi-Final, and
- They lost anyway, and
- That was the fewest points scored by any of the four CFP teams (51-TCU, 45-M, 42-UGA, 41-tOSU).
Here are Ohio State's defensive stats for the eight years from 1968-1975:
(https://i.imgur.com/wrcgsqM.png)
To put that in perspective, the best defense in the game this year (Illinois) allowed 12.3 PPG. Six of Ohio State's eight defenses from 1968-1975 did better than that. Ohio State's worst defenses in that stretch were the 1968 defense which allowed 15 PPG and the 1972 defense which allowed 15.5. Those both fall between this year's #6 (Iowa at 14.4) and this year's #7 (Marshall at 16.2).
-
In that case I lean toward "no."
As in, it would be improbable in today's game to win a NC with an elite defense and a mediocre-to-poor offense.
-
Ha, UGA allowed the fewest points in the CFP this year at 41. Fewest.
That may be the most allowed in the CFP not counting OT, or close to it. I know UGA - OU ran up and down the field in 2017. That was a 45-45 tie.
-
Saban was doing it before relenting and joining in with Tua at QB.
.
I'm reminded of 2012 Florida, which fits the bill you described. Under Will Muschamp, defensive guru, the offense's job was literally to just not turn the ball over. They went 11-1 and with a little different luck, could have been 12-0. Notre Dame was that type of team that year. Here's some of their outcomes:
20-17
20-3
13-6
20-13
17-14
21-6
They relied on their defense, only scored 30+ three times all year.
It got them to the NCG where they lost. I don't think it was due to the type of team they were, just a massive talent disparity with Bama.
.
But that's 10 years ago now. Good teams, even ones with seemingly unremarkable offenses, tend to average at least 30-35 points per game nowadays. It seems like a program that has a fluke defensive peak season is hot garbage on offense and goes 7-5 (Iowa, Illinois, et al).
-
If "random chance" were a significant factor, we should see years where Kansas wins, or Vandy wins, or Boston College wins. It's really a rather limited universe of teams with more than a 0.1% chance preseason, and we have one of them this year.
Random chance when it comes to individual game outcomes. We'd have a half dozen different NCs in the past 20 years if replay wasn't a thing.
People don't want to believe random chance (aka LUCK) wields such influence on these outcomes, but they do.
-
back in the early 80's........ before you were too old.
an undefeated team trumped a one loss team
see 1984 BYU
see 1982 Penn State/SMU
-
I think folks here fully realize the randomness factor in competitive games.
-
Ha, UGA allowed the fewest points in the CFP this year at 41. Fewest.
That may be the most allowed in the CFP not counting OT, or close to it. I know UGA - OU ran up and down the field in 2017. That was a 45-45 tie.
if we're getting technical, Michigan's defense only allowed 37. JJ was responsible for 14 of TCU's 51 points.
-
see 1982 Penn State/SMU
well yeah, but...........
-
if we're getting technical, Michigan's defense only allowed 37. JJ was responsible for 14 of TCU's 51 points.
True but 37 is still a LOT of points by the standards of 20 or more years ago and Michigan's defense was one of the best in the country this year.
I know you know this but for some perspective, from the hiring of Bo at Michigan through the end of Earle Bruce's tenure at Ohio State neither the Buckeyes nor the Wolverines ever scored more than 27 in THE GAME. That is the point. Back then (1969-1987 in this example) good-to-great defenses could reliably hold their opponents in the mid 20's or less so if you had a great defense then all you needed was for your own offense to not turn the ball over.
My argument here is that teams can no longer succeed in that fashion. Georgia and Michigan had great defenses this year. TCU scored 37 on Michigan's defense (not counting defensive scores) and Ohio State scored 41 on Georgia’s defense. Michigan needed more offense to beat TCU and Georgia only beat Ohio State because they were able to put up 42 points.
-
I think maybe I phrased the thread title wrong. Perhaps it should have been "Can a team with a great defense and a mediocre-to-lousy offense still win a Championship?"
What I was thinking of was teams like 1992 Bama and 2002 Ohio State that had great defenses and mediocre offenses and managed to win it all.
not sure about 02 osu, but bama's 92 offense wasn't all that bad. was 27th nationally in scoring (3rd in sec), and 53rd in total offense (4th in sec). obviously the d both helped and "hurt" those stats. they helped by scoring some on their own, but also by providing shorter fields to drive. conversely, they "hurt" the o stats by... providing shorter fields to drive (fewer potential yards to gain).
that offense wasn't a world beater to be sure. but i don't remember it being terrible, and the stats seem to bear that out as well. in the same way i wouldn't say the 2011 offense was bad, i wouldn't say the 92 was either. stats to their peers are quite similar, actually. 11 was 20th nationally in scoring (2nd sec), and 31st in total o (4th sec). was a run based offense helped by a stout d, but was fairly efficient.
-
In that case I lean toward "no."
As in, it would be improbable in today's game to win a NC with an elite defense and a mediocre-to-poor offense.
i think we just need to reevaluate what those are. imo, if you're top 10-ish for that year, you're elite. so relative to your peers, you are at or among the best. that's what i consider elite.
and generally, within that definition, you still need to be elite on d. most cfp participants are inside the top 10 (or just outside it) in scoring d nationally for their respective years. there are a couple outliers, tbf. but generally, that's where they are.
offenses generally follow this as well, though not quite to the extent defenses do. however, they are more closely following it in recent years.
-
not sure about 02 osu, but bama's 92 offense wasn't all that bad. was 27th nationally in scoring (3rd in sec), and 53rd in total offense (4th in sec). obviously the d both helped and "hurt" those stats. they helped by scoring some on their own, but also by providing shorter fields to drive. conversely, they "hurt" the o stats by... providing shorter fields to drive (fewer potential yards to gain).
that offense wasn't a world beater to be sure. but i don't remember it being terrible, and the stats seem to bear that out as well. in the same way i wouldn't say the 2011 offense was bad, i wouldn't say the 92 was either. stats to their peers are quite similar, actually. 11 was 20th nationally in scoring (2nd sec), and 31st in total o (4th sec). was a run based offense helped by a stout d, but was fairly efficient.
1992 Bama offense was Derrick Lassic and 11 other guys who got to be on a team with Derrick Lassic.
-
you're not wrong, but there were 70-80 teams who's offense was worse than that, scoring wise.
-
1992 Bama offense was Derrick Lassic and 11 other guys who got to be on a team with Derrick Lassic.
See, I think their offense was more Antonio Langham pick-6s and opponents punting it to David Palmer.
.
That Bama team was amazing. It beat Southern Miss 17-10, while allowing only 54 total yards. They had to get the punter to throw a TD pass, because Barker stunk and threw a pick-6. Southern Miss took the lead on a 3-yard drive they were gifted, already in FG range.
.
Vandy ran for 138 yards on them....but it took 61 carries, lol.
.
The Tide's defense WAS their offense. They fumbled 6 times vs So.Miss! Just utter ineptitude! Even in an impressive performance vs Arkansas, they fumbled 5 times. Then there's the LA Tech game....167 total yards, didn't cross LT's 18 yard line all game long. How did they win? By holding Tech to -8 yards rushing, kicking 2 FGs, and a Palmer punt return TD.
Bama ran 44 times for 67 yards. 2.5 yards per play (running+passing).
Hot garbage.
.
But they went 13-0. I'd have to say that even today, if you have '92 Bama's defense, you could win a NC.
-
you could, until you ran into Joe Burrow ;)
-
you could, until you ran into Joe Burrow ;)
If 2019 Auburn could hold him to 23 points, I have no doubt about what '92 Bama would be perfectly able.
-
True but 37 is still a LOT of points by the standards of 20 or more years ago and Michigan's defense was one of the best in the country this year.
....
My argument here is that teams can no longer succeed in that fashion. Georgia and Michigan had great defenses this year. TCU scored 37 on Michigan's defense (not counting defensive scores) and Ohio State scored 41 on Georgia’s defense. Michigan needed more offense to beat TCU and Georgia only beat Ohio State because they were able to put up 42 points.
You got me thinking about the bcs game between LSU and Oklahoma in 2003. Both sides of the ball were great for each team. OU had the #1 defense while LSU had the #1 scoring defense. Both teams had soul-crushing defensive lines. OU had a boa-constrictor type scheme reminiscent of many of Alabama's recent teams, while LSU had an encyclopedia of insane blitzes.
But OU had as much buzz for their offense. They hung half a hundred like 6 times, which we probably wouldn't blink at today, but that was hot stuff for 2003. They just ran over people and/or took their top off. LSU wasn't thought of as explosive even by 2003 standards, but they were extremely efficient, averaging 35 ppg prior to the title game against OU, and they routinely piled up those points in the first half as a matter of gameplan. Saban liked to blitzkrieg teams early on and then let his defense and special teams account for boring second halves to kill the clock. There were a couple of teams--notably Florida and Ole Miss--that gave LSU's offense problems, but overall they did well. OU just trucked everybody they played, until K-State in the B12CG.
Obviously the defenses prevailed in their match, each offense scoring only 14 points.
I don't mean to diminish either of those defenses--they really were great--but it's my belief that today's best offenses would easily put 30 on them, probably at a minimum. As good as those offenses were, they didn't offer enough conflict or confusion for a defense and were much easier for the defenses to diagnose pre-snap. And....caveat: I don't know this for a fact....like I previously mentioned, I believe QBs White and Mauck were only reading half the field at a given time, and QBs today aren't nearly so confined to that and will more often find and exploit busts or a winning matchup on the play.
Where I think things have changed the most is in how defenses cause the most havoc and what QBs can do to mitigate it. Both of those defenses caused havoc on the line and made life miserable for QBs. And that's partly because White, Mauck and their contemporaries wilted when guys came free or whipped the lineman in front of them. QBs today look way more comfortable facing enormous pressure consistently and still keep the chains moving.
The 2018 (?) title game between Clemson and Alabama was really something. Clemson couldn't run well, and Alabama teed off on Trevor Lawrence and they knocked him off his spot or put him on the run a lot of the day. In days gone by, that's a landslide victory for Alabama. But Lawrence burned them over, and over and over, a little at a time. Add in a few turnovers by Bama, and Clemson wins big without even being able to run much or protect the QB like you'd want. Stetson Bennett just did it to us in the SECCG....LSU harassed him well enough in the early goings and did a good job stuffing their run....Bennett just kept hitting plays under duress and c'est la vie.
-
If 2019 Auburn could hold him to 23 points, I have no doubt about what '92 Bama would be perfectly able.
Incorrect, for several reasons.
2019 LSU would drop 40 on '92 Bama, and that's if they got tired of scoring.
-
Saban was doing it before relenting and joining in with Tua at QB.
.
I'm reminded of 2012 Florida, which fits the bill you described. Under Will Muschamp, defensive guru, the offense's job was literally to just not turn the ball over. They went 11-1 and with a little different luck, could have been 12-0. Notre Dame was that type of team that year. Here's some of their outcomes:
20-17
20-3
13-6
20-13
17-14
21-6
They relied on their defense, only scored 30+ three times all year.
It got them to the NCG where they lost. I don't think it was due to the type of team they were, just a massive talent disparity with Bama.
.
But that's 10 years ago now. Good teams, even ones with seemingly unremarkable offenses, tend to average at least 30-35 points per game nowadays. It seems like a program that has a fluke defensive peak season is hot garbage on offense and goes 7-5 (Iowa, Illinois, et al).
That bit about Bama is, kind wrong on several fronts. They went spread well before Tua. They also put up some bit numbers with those pro-style attacks. (I’d have to dig deeper into the numbers, but I think the 2015 team might have been the worst offensive title team, which was still on the spread side of things, albeit with a so-so QB)
That UF team was something. 73rd in points per drive, 87th in yards per play. Maybe a bit lucky to be where they were, though the advanced stats like em a good bit.
-
That bit about Bama is, kind wrong on several fronts. They went spread well before Tua. They also put up some bit numbers with those pro-style attacks. (I’d have to dig deeper into the numbers, but I think the 2015 team might have been the worst offensive title team, which was still on the spread side of things, albeit with a so-so QB)
That UF team was something. 73rd in points per drive, 87th in yards per play. Maybe a bit lucky to be where they were, though the advanced stats like em a good bit.
I feel like Saban was doing a trial run pre-Tua. You're completely right about what you said, but I don't feel like he thought "fuck it, let's go all in" on the offensive trend until Tua.
-
Incorrect, for several reasons.
2019 LSU would drop 40 on '92 Bama, and that's if they got tired of scoring.
Oh, okay. My mistake. Because you say so.
-
Here's how good that defense was:
They blew out the #1 team and won the NC with their QB going 5-14, 0 TD, 2 INT and only 63 yards passing.
-
Largest margin of victory in National Championships (1998-2021) & #1 vs. #2 Bowls (pre-1998)
+38 Nebraska ‘95
+36 USC ‘04
+32 Nebraska ‘71
+28 Clemson ‘18
+28 Alabama ‘20
+28 Alabama ‘12
+27 Florida ‘06
+23 Miami ‘01
+22 Ohio St ‘14
+22 Texas ‘63
+21 Alabama ‘11
+21 Alabama ‘92
-
See, I think their offense was more Antonio Langham pick-6s and opponents punting it to David Palmer.
.
That Bama team was amazing. It beat Southern Miss 17-10, while allowing only 54 total yards. They had to get the punter to throw a TD pass, because Barker stunk and threw a pick-6. Southern Miss took the lead on a 3-yard drive they were gifted, already in FG range.
.
Vandy ran for 138 yards on them....but it took 61 carries, lol.
.
The Tide's defense WAS their offense. They fumbled 6 times vs So.Miss! Just utter ineptitude! Even in an impressive performance vs Arkansas, they fumbled 5 times. Then there's the LA Tech game....167 total yards, didn't cross LT's 18 yard line all game long. How did they win? By holding Tech to -8 yards rushing, kicking 2 FGs, and a Palmer punt return TD.
Bama ran 44 times for 67 yards. 2.5 yards per play (running+passing).
Hot garbage.
.
But they went 13-0. I'd have to say that even today, if you have '92 Bama's defense, you could win a NC.
When I think of all time great college defenses ‘92 Bama is still the first one that pops in my mind.
-
When I think of all time great college defenses ‘92 Bama is still the first one that pops in my mind.
I think of the unbeaten, unscored-upon 1895 Texas Longhorns.
-
I feel like Saban was doing a trial run pre-Tua. You're completely right about what you said, but I don't feel like he thought "fuck it, let's go all in" on the offensive trend until Tua.
So, here's your batch of national title teams, by points per drive and yards per play:
2009: 25th/30th
2011: 19th/12th
2012: 3rd/6th
2015: 45th/47th
2017: 15th/14th
2020: 1st/2nd
2014 was when they went spread, albeit a a power spread with a decent dual-threat passer and bell-cow type pass game. The next year, they didn't have the dynamic QB, so it was kind of a pro-style, distributor QB spread, with one powerhouse back, one good backup and a trio of really good pass catchers. Then they went more power spread with an underclassman for two years.
I think what changed more than anything was they finally got a really, really good QB. They had some really nice pro-style offenses, and honestly the worst title winning offense was a spread, just one without a first-round QB.
-
Very good, thank you for that.
-
I think this RPO, pass-a-lot offense is like the wishbone....it diverts the defenders' eyes and will take some time to really defend, schematically.
.
-
See, I think their offense was more Antonio Langham pick-6s and opponents punting it to David Palmer.
.
bama had 5 non-offensive td's that season. about 3 ppg. 1 was in seccg, and another in the national title. langham had 2 pick-6, palmer had 1 return td.
having said that, the d (and returns) absolutely set the offense up for easier scores.
-
Incorrect, for several reasons.
2019 LSU would drop 40 on '92 Bama, and that's if they got tired of scoring.
that's just cause those '92 players are in their 50s now.
-
Oh, okay. My mistake. Because you say so.
I mean.....that's exactly your logic.....because you said so.
I have as much proof as you do.
Both units dominated their seasons, but the game is so radically different that it depends on how you view the changes that have come. My thoughts on offenses, qbs, and physical level of the players are public record by this point, ymmv.
All we know for sure is Bama did things like slow down Miami to a virtual crawl, and LSU stuck 42 on that year's #1 defense...with a QB with a broken rib for half the game. The truth lies in some hypothetical alternate reality.
....but they'd still totally drop 40 on them.
-
I think of the unbeaten, unscored-upon 1895 Texas Longhorns.
Oh yeah, them too.😉
-
I think this RPO, pass-a-lot offense is like the wishbone....it diverts the defenders' eyes and will take some time to really defend, schematically.
.
My biggest problem with RPO isn’t how it’s defended, it’s how it’s officiated. Until officials start consistently flagging linemen being downfield that will continue to be hard to stop. The NCAA should adopt the NFL rule of only allowing linemen one yard past the LOS, imo. It’s a pet peeve of mine.
-
Oh yeah, them too.😉
1895 Texas Longhorns
Texas compiled a record of 5–0.
Schedule
at Dallas A.C. Dallas, TX W 10–0
Austin YMCA W 24–0
Tulane W 16–0
San Antonio W 38–0
at Galveston Galveston, TX W 8–0
-
I'd take the legendary 1899 Sewanee team over that:
12-0, 11 by shutout. Won 5 road games in six days.
Oct 21 - Georgia (12-0)
Oct 23 - @ Ga Tech (32-0)
Oct 28 - Tennessee (46-0)
Nov 3 - SW Presbyterian (54-0)
Nov 9 - @ Texas (12-0)
Nov 10 - @ Texas A&M (10-0)
Nov 11 - @ Tulane (23-0)
Nov 13 - @ LSU (34-0)
Nov 14 - Ole Miss (12-0)
Nov 20 - Cumberland (71-0)
Nov 30 - Auburn (11-10)
Dec 2 - North Carolina (5-0)
.
-
now that's just mean
stickin it to Dawgs, Horns, Vols, Aggies, and Tiggers
-
Nope. They let Auburn score 10 on 'em. Crappy defense.
-
'19 LSU would hang 50 on 'em.
-
that's just cause those '92 players are in their 50s now.
Ha that's along the lines of what the press asked Ty Cobb in the 1950s how he would hit against today's pitchers, Cobb told them "probably 270-280".The scribe asked why so low,Cobb shot back " because I'm 73 F****** years old" (supposedly)
-
as far as we know
-
48.4 pts per game: 2019 LSU
48.5 pts per game: 2020 Alabama
.
LSU probably had one of the toughest traditional schedules of all time in 2019. At least the top half of it.
But they also played Ga Southern, Northwestern State, and Utah State.
.
2020 wasn't a traditional year for anyone, but for Alabama, it was a 10-game conference schedule with no cupcakes. Alabama missed the bottom 2 SEC teams, while LSU played both of the bottom 2 in their season.
.
So if you want to compare the schedules, and ranked every opponent by both teams, LSU played the bottom 5 on that combined list