[Husker] Comparing 2007 vs 2008 (Very long)

[Skylar Dodds]

I had read an interesting post on a message board (I got the poster's
permission before resending it here) and I thought it very much worth the
read.  It's a statistical analysis of this year vs last.

I would keep in mind 2 things.  

First, and in my opinion the best sign that this year's coaches know how to
play with the talent they have, is you can't ignore our Time of Possession
this year.  We held the ball on average 36:27 on average this year vs last
year's 27:18.  That's an AMAZING difference and a credit to Watson and Bo
for realizing what gives them the best chance of winning a football game.

Second, not included below, is the 3-and-out stats.  In 2007 we had 30 on
offense and only forced 10 on defense and had a combined 3 (THREE) between
MU, OSU, UT, KU, and CU.  Yikes.  In 2008, with more plays on offense we had
just 18 and with less plays on defense we forced 20.  Those are pretty
incredible stats and one of the best signs on defense (IMO) is the ability
to get off the field.

Anyhow...without further ado...

============================================================================
=====

FROM CALLAHAN TO PELINI: BY THE NUMBERS

Intuitively we all have surely recognized improvement on the field from the
trainwreck that was last year to now. Most notably are the immeasurables:
heart, desire, fortitude. These were the kinds of things that the Callahan
regime seemed to devalue. They are also the kinds of things that Pelini
appears to be the incarnation of. With great relief it appears that these
intangibles are once again a part of us. 

But what about the measurables? It's the end of the regular season and as we
did not go to a bowl game last year, it is a good time to compare 2007 and
2008 to evaluate where the improvements have appeared in measurable ways; by
the numbers, so to speak. For those who want their own look, there are more
details available in the two sources for these statistics, the NCAA CFB
stats website, and the B12 Conference website. 

ON OFFENSE

RUSHING OFFENSE. Callahan famously was said he wanted to "pound the rock." I
will take him at his word on this. But whatever he intended, it didn't
happen. In 2007 we ended up 66th in the nation in Rushing Offense. 

Accordingly, one of the things I thought would be interesting to watch would
be whether the transition from Callahan to Watson would show any difference
here. As it turns out, it certainly did. The Watson Rushing Offense ended
the regular 2008 season 37th nationally, and went from 9th in the B12 (144.4
ypg) in 2007 to 5th in the Big 12 in '08 (173.5 ypg). 

SCORING OFFENSE. The biggest payout of the move to more balance was in
scoring. Husker's Scoring Offense improved from 28th nationally to 18th
nationally, and from 8th in the B12 (32 ppg) to 6th in 2008 (36.2 ppg).

There isn't much more in the terms of measurables that are significant with
the Offense. Last year's team was pretty solid, and this years team has been
so as well. Looking forward, it will be interesting to see the impact of
moving from Joe Ganz to the next QB, whoever wins the job. 

ON DEFENSE

DEFENSIVE LINE PLAY. As we all no doubt observed, the biggest improvement on
the Defense was the play of the defensive line. The DL coaches -- Carl
Pelini and John Papuchis -- deserve enormous credit here. The available
personnel was considerably less than the year before with the losses of
Turner and Dixon from the Senior group. 

Despite these losses the Rushing Defense improved from 116th nationally to
33rd, and the Blackshirts went from 12th in the B12 (with 232.2 ypg) in
Rushing Defense to 5th (with 125.8 ypg). That is a fully 100+ yard
improvement in defense. 

DL push/penetration also dramatically improved. Sacks improved from 112th
nationally to 27th nationally, from 12th in the B12 to 3rd. This year's team
had 30 sacks for 226 yards in losses in conference play. If sacks are the
most definitive drive killer in football -- and certainly they are --
consider the difference from 2007, when we had all of 13 sacks in B12 play,
for a total loss of 94 yards. 

Tackles for Loss follow the same pattern. The Blackshirts improved from 93rd
nationally to 46th nationally and from 10th in the B12 to 5th.

With acknowledgements to the contributions of the also-improved LB group to
these numbers, there may not be a more improved position group on any team
in major conference college football than our DL. 

Three other defensive categories are worth noting. 

TOTAL DEFENSE. First, total defense improved from the embarrassing 112th
nationally in 2007 to a middling 67th nationally in 2008. Importantly,
however, our total defense went from 12th in the B12 to 3rd. We improved
from giving up an inconceivable 476 ypg in B12 play to 361 ypg, in the
context of a conference that may have produced the most yards per game for a
BCS conference in college football history. 

SCORING DEFENSE. The Blackshirt's Scoring Defense improved from 114th
nationally to 82nd nationally, from 12th in the B12 to 6th. I suppose we
don't like being 6th in the B12 in scoring defense; as Bo often says: "We
have a long ways to go." But it is encouraging that we only gave up 29.2 ppg
in 2008 B12 play, after giving up a staggering 37.9 points per B12 game in
2007.

THIRD DOWN DEFENSE. Finally, I want to close out the defensive discussion
with what I see as the most encouraging measurable of all, 3rd down defense.
The Blackshirts improved from 117th nationally to 33rd, from 12th in the B12
to 2nd. In 2007, we gave up 3rd down conversions 50.3% of the time against
B12 opponents; in 2008? 35.3%. This represents a stunning 30% improvement in
what many believe is the most important statistic on defense. 

The impact of this improvement can be seen most readily in opponent's first
downs. If you are not sitting down, I recommend it at this time. We went
from 299 opponent's first downs in 2007, to 214 in 2008. Let me say that
again: From 299 first downs for B12 opponents, to 214. I do not think it is
an overstatement to say that our improvement in this statistic alone
accounts for the 3 additional wins that the Pelini-led Huskers have achieved
moving from 2007 to 2008. 

SOME AREAS THAT NEED REAL ATTENTION

There are six statistical categories where we had noteworthy stagnation or
even decline. The primary areas of decline were in Special Teams. One
wonders if this is due to coaching performance or if it has to do with
change in philosophy with regard to using position players on ST. I don't
really know, and will leave that for further discussion. In any event, the
declines here were real, and need attention. 

NET PUNTING. We all sensed that something wasn't right with Titch. Well,
that was certainly the case. In net punting. we went from 40th in the nation
to 96th, and fourth to 10th in the B12. The net yards per punt declined from
36.3 net/yp in 2007 B12 play to a dismal 33 net/yp in 2008. Is a 3 yard
decline significant? Perhaps not. But we certainly are not getting the field
position benefits that we have enjoyed with a long line of Husker punters.
And the future of that position is very cloudy at this point. 

KICKOFF COVERAGE. In 2007, we finished 61st in the country in KO coverage,
giving up 20.7 yard per return. In 2008 play, we dropped to 101st in the
nation, giving up 23 yards per return. This is certainly not as big a drop
off as I had guessed there would be. But here is where we have seen the
biggest difference: Adi only had 26 touchbacks in 81 attempts in 2008 (32%),
while he had a remarkable 28 touchbacks in 69 attempts in 2007 (40.6%). It
is difficult to tell if this has been due to coaching decisions to use
shorter kicks for some tactical reason, or if Adi has lost his groove. In
either case, we need some tweaking here. 

PASS EFFICIENCY DEFENSE. Our pass efficiency defense also got worse. The DBs
went from 75th in the nation to 90th, and from 7th to 9th in the B12. Our
pass efficiency rating went from 130.2 in 2007 to 137.5 in 2008. Frankly, I
don't understand this statistical category well enough to know if this is a
significant decline. I will leave that to others. Suffice it to say that OU,
who is the leader in this category, had a rating of 115.6. Whether it be 130
or 137, we have a ways to go here to get to championship level football. 

TURNOVER MARGIN. There has been a good deal of ink spilled on this already,
and the numbers bear out the concern. We improved a hair on this statistic
between 2007 and 2008, but we remain dismally underproductive here. We were
once again tied for the bottom spot in the Big 12, with a margin of -.83
turnovers per game. 

IN SUM, all in all I think we have gotten what we wanted, and as Bo says,
there is still large room for improvement. The offense is stable, and as the
OL has developed, the Big Red has become more diversified and flexible than
it ever was under Callahan. The Defense has dramatically improved, most
notably in the DL, and this is the primary source of payout we have seen in
the wins and losses. 

There remain question marks in the DBs and on Special Teams. Time will tell
whether a combination of maturity in the new system and the depth that will
be added at corner and safety with the return of some from injury and others
from redshirts, will lead to the improvement we have seen in other areas. In
view of the Staff's performance thus far, my bet is on Bo.

============================================================================
==================

--
Skylar