UCLA Offense vs Stanford Defense
Rankings reflect ranking percentile for Offense or Defense vs NCAA
Smoothed D3.js Radar Chart
Chart reflect ranking percentile for Offense or Defense vs NCAA
0 is worst unit in NCAA 100 is best
Until Weeks 5-6 the model outputs are directional, but useful
The UCLA offense (#36), did OK against Texas A&M on the road. A&M has a very good defense, but if you are going to be a really good team, you are going to have to perform against really good competition. 24 points isn't going to win you many games on the road unless you have a lights out defense. Even worse for UCLA is their performance against BYU which has a very good defense as well. 17 points on the road is not good at all. It's fair to ask whether I am judging too harshly, UCLA lost a ton of experince off last years team, but for a team with as many highly touted recruits as UCLA, they are not what you would expect.
Which is not to say they are not good, UCLA is pretty good at Drive Efficiency, and they are very good at avoiding Negative Drives and D-plus plays. UCLA seems to be one of those offenses that makes your bend, but not break, strategy look bad. Some of this can be expected given the new cast of receivers and Paul Perkins not being there, but this UCLA offense should be far more Explosive.
So UCLA isn't explosive. Their new offense is supposed to be more of a pro-style attack, which should set up Rosen to pick apart defenses for big gains on play action, but it hasn't been. Something isn't clicking yet for this unit and you can see it on their Play Efficiency and Explosiveness scores.
Stanford's defense (#10) has been so good this year, in a very small sample, that I have to throw some brakes on it. Stanford had a pretty average defense last year #48 and I would be shocked to see the kind of year to year improvement like that. I still think they are good and that they probably finish higher than last year, which is good because Stanford's offense might not be other worldly good like last year either.
So far Stanford has been really good at most everything, but particularly in 3 phases: they limit Drive Efficiency, they don't allow Explosive Drives, and they cause D-plus plays. The last two are really interesting because they suggest Stanford is getting pressure without blitzing or that their man coverage is so good that it doesn't matter if they send extra guys. Usually teams generate a lot of D-plus plays by blitzing and over a season they also give up a lot of Explosive Drives.
Stanford has only been OK at generating Negative Drives for the offense and on 3rd down. They really need to clean this up in this game. UCLA has been methodical and Stanford needs to cash in when they get UCLA into 3rd downs, since it doesn't look like UCLA is going to burn Stanford on the big play.
Chart reflect ranking percentile for Offense or Defense vs NCAA
0 is worst unit in NCAA 100 is best
Stanford has only been OK at generating Negative Drives for the offense and on 3rd down. They really need to clean this up in this game. UCLA has been methodical and Stanford needs to cash in when they get UCLA into 3rd downs, since it doesn't look like UCLA is going to burn Stanford on the big play.
0 is worst unit in NCAA 100 is best
Until Weeks 5-6 the model outputs are directional, but useful
The UCLA offense (#36), did OK against Texas A&M on the road. A&M has a very good defense, but if you are going to be a really good team, you are going to have to perform against really good competition. 24 points isn't going to win you many games on the road unless you have a lights out defense. Even worse for UCLA is their performance against BYU which has a very good defense as well. 17 points on the road is not good at all. It's fair to ask whether I am judging too harshly, UCLA lost a ton of experince off last years team, but for a team with as many highly touted recruits as UCLA, they are not what you would expect.
Which is not to say they are not good, UCLA is pretty good at Drive Efficiency, and they are very good at avoiding Negative Drives and D-plus plays. UCLA seems to be one of those offenses that makes your bend, but not break, strategy look bad. Some of this can be expected given the new cast of receivers and Paul Perkins not being there, but this UCLA offense should be far more Explosive.
So UCLA isn't explosive. Their new offense is supposed to be more of a pro-style attack, which should set up Rosen to pick apart defenses for big gains on play action, but it hasn't been. Something isn't clicking yet for this unit and you can see it on their Play Efficiency and Explosiveness scores.
Which is not to say they are not good, UCLA is pretty good at Drive Efficiency, and they are very good at avoiding Negative Drives and D-plus plays. UCLA seems to be one of those offenses that makes your bend, but not break, strategy look bad. Some of this can be expected given the new cast of receivers and Paul Perkins not being there, but this UCLA offense should be far more Explosive.
So UCLA isn't explosive. Their new offense is supposed to be more of a pro-style attack, which should set up Rosen to pick apart defenses for big gains on play action, but it hasn't been. Something isn't clicking yet for this unit and you can see it on their Play Efficiency and Explosiveness scores.
Stanford's defense (#10) has been so good this year, in a very small sample, that I have to throw some brakes on it. Stanford had a pretty average defense last year #48 and I would be shocked to see the kind of year to year improvement like that. I still think they are good and that they probably finish higher than last year, which is good because Stanford's offense might not be other worldly good like last year either.
So far Stanford has been really good at most everything, but particularly in 3 phases: they limit Drive Efficiency, they don't allow Explosive Drives, and they cause D-plus plays. The last two are really interesting because they suggest Stanford is getting pressure without blitzing or that their man coverage is so good that it doesn't matter if they send extra guys. Usually teams generate a lot of D-plus plays by blitzing and over a season they also give up a lot of Explosive Drives.
So far Stanford has been really good at most everything, but particularly in 3 phases: they limit Drive Efficiency, they don't allow Explosive Drives, and they cause D-plus plays. The last two are really interesting because they suggest Stanford is getting pressure without blitzing or that their man coverage is so good that it doesn't matter if they send extra guys. Usually teams generate a lot of D-plus plays by blitzing and over a season they also give up a lot of Explosive Drives.
Stanford has only been OK at generating Negative Drives for the offense and on 3rd down. They really need to clean this up in this game. UCLA has been methodical and Stanford needs to cash in when they get UCLA into 3rd downs, since it doesn't look like UCLA is going to burn Stanford on the big play.
Comments
Post a Comment