Mizzou-ATM: Beyond the Box Score PREVIEW

You know the rules by now.

Glossary.
Last week's preview.

Being that I had meetings all day and just got back from the MU b-ball game, this will be short on analysis.  That'll come in the preview tomorrow.  For now it's pretty much just the numbers.

Let's get to it!

Click 'Full Story' for all the stat goodness you can handle...

Success Rate by Quarter

ALL PLAYS

Mizzou
Q1: Mizzou 51.9%, Opponents 42.0%
Q2: Mizzou 47.5%, Opponents 43.1%
Q3: Mizzou 55.7%, Opponents 43.4%
Q4: Mizzou 52.4%, Opponents 45.6%
TOTAL: Mizzou 51.9%, Opponents 43.6%

Texas A&M
Q1: ATM 49.4%, Opponents 40.6%
Q2: Opponents 44.6%, ATM 36.9%
Q3: Opponents 50.3%, ATM 45.1%
Q4: ATM 55.1%, Opponents 48.8%
TOTAL: ATM 46.8%, Opponents 45.9%

CLOSE GAMES ONLY

Mizzou
Q1: Mizzou 51.9%, Opponents 42.0%
Q2: Mizzou 48.8%, Opponents 40.1%
Q3: Mizzou 61.6%, Opponents 40.7%
Q4: Opponents 44.4%, Mizzou 38.0%
TOTAL: Mizzou 50.9%, Opponents 41.6%

Texas A&M
Q1: ATM 49.4%, Opponents 40.6%
Q2: Opponents 45.6%, ATM 37.8%
Q3: Opponents 56.0%, ATM 46.9%
Q4: ATM 59.8%, Opponents 48.6%
TOTAL: ATM 47.0%, Opponents 46.1%

CONFERENCE GAMES

Mizzou
Q1: Mizzou 54.5%, Opponents 45.0%
Q2: Mizzou 45.8%, Opponents 40.0%
Q3: Mizzou 58.3%, Opponents 35.2%
Q4: Mizzou 55.8%, Opponents 43.5%
TOTAL: Mizzou 53.6%, Opponents 40.8%

Texas A&M
Q1: ATM 49.5%, Opponents 40.6%
Q2: Opponents 46.1%, ATM 38.3%
Q3: Opponents 50.0%, ATM 46.2%
Q4: ATM 54.0%, Opponents 49.4%
TOTAL: ATM 47.5%, Opponents 46.5%

CLOSE & CONFERENCE

Mizzou
Q1: Mizzou 54.5%, Opponents 45.0%
Q2: Mizzou 46.3%, Opponents 41.2%
Q3: Mizzou 61.2%, Opponents 36.7%
Q4: Opponents 51.2%, Mizzou 37.0%
TOTAL: Mizzou 51.7%, Opponents 42.8%

Texas A&M
Q1: ATM 49.5%, Opponents 40.6%
Q2: Opponents 46.1%, ATM 39.6%
Q3: Opponents 52.5%, ATM 46.2%
Q4: ATM 58.2%, Opponents 47.9%
TOTAL: ATM 47.6%, Opponents 46.2%

Once again, the third quarter seems to have Mizzou written all over it.  But it would behoove Mizzou to have this game wrapped up going into Q4.  That's when ATM begins to successfully wear down opponents' defenses.

Success Rates by Down

Mizzou
1st: Mizzou 49.5%, Opponents 46.2%
2nd: Mizzou 51.4%, Opponents 41.2%
3rd: Mizzou 57.1%, Opponents 41.4%
4th: Mizzou 100.0%, Opponents 50.0%
TOTAL: Mizzou 51.9%, Opponents 43.6%

Texas A&M
1st: ATM 47.0%, Opponents 46.7%
2nd: ATM 46.7%, Opponents 43.7%
3rd: Opponents 46.3%, ATM 44.7%
4th: Opponents 66.7%, ATM 64.7%
TOTAL: ATM 46.8%, Opponents 45.9%

QB Success Rates

Mizzou

CHASE DANIEL
-- Total: 51.7%
-- Run: 49.8%
-- Pass: 53.1%

CHASE PATTON
-- Total: 63.0%
-- Run: 69.7%
-- Pass: 46.2%

Texas A&M

STEPHEN McGEE
-- Total: 46.6%
-- Run: 54.1%
-- Pass: 35.9%

JARROD JOHNSON
-- Total: 53.5%
-- Run: 58.3%
-- Pass: 28.6%

Run Success Rates and Points Per Play

(For players with 5.00 points or more)

Mizzou
Tony Temple: 89 carries, 29.55 points, 0.33 PPP, 39.3% success rate
Chase Daniel: 57 carries, 25.39 points 0.45 PPP, 57.9%
Jeremy Maclin: 32 carries, 20.32 points, 0.64 PPP, 56.3%
Jimmy Jackson: 41 carries, 17.61 points, 0.43 PPP, 53.7%
Derrick Washington: 28 carries, 11.24 points, 0.40 PPP, 60.7%
Martin Rucker: 13 carries, 5.24 points, 0.40 PPP, 61.5%
TOTAL: 306 carries, 121.13 points, 0.40 PPP, 52.0%

Texas A&M
Jorvorskie Lane: 129 carries, 56.50 points, 0.44 PPP, 62.8%
Stephen McGee: 136 carries, 51.64 points, 0.38 PPP, 59.6%
Michael Goodson: 112 carries, 29.90 points, 0.27 PPP, 41.1%
Jarrod Johnson: 13 carries, 12.05 points, 0.93 PPP, 69.2%
Keondra Smith: 23 carries, 5.95 points, 0.26 PPP, 34.8%
TOTAL: 439 carries, 167.90 points, 0.38 PPP, 54.4%

Lane is still a weapon.  Here's to hoping Franchione continues to ignore him.

Receiver Success Rates

Mizzou
Martin Rucker: 60 catches, 40.81 points, 0.68 PPP, 81.7%
Jeremy Maclin: 46 catches, 38.83 points, 0.84 PPP, 84.8%
Will Franklin: 32 catches, 34.18 points, 1.07 PPP, 87.5%
Chase Coffman: 44 catches, 32.68 points, 0.74 PPP, 88.6%
Danario Alexander: 25 catches, 15.03 points, 0.60 PPP, 60.0%
Tommy Saunders: 20 catches, 10.25 points, 0.51 PPP, 85.0%
Jared Perry: 11 catches, 7.98 points, 0.73 PPP, 81.8%
TOTAL: 264 catches, 194.50 points, 0.74 PPP, 80.3%
TOTAL, WR: 142 catches, 112.71 points, 0.79 PPP, 79.6%
TOTAL, TE: 104 catches, 73.49 points, 0.71 PPP, 84.6%
TOTAL, RB: 18 catches, 8.30 points, 0.46 PPP, 61.1%

Texas A&M
Martellus Bennett: 36 catches, 27.78 points, 0.77 PPP, 72.2%
Kerry Franks: 22 catches, 21.56 points, 0.98 PPP, 90.9%
Michael Goodson: 18 catches, 13.22 points, 0.73 PPP, 50.0%
Earvin Taylor: 16 catches, 9.37 points, 0.59 PPP, 56.3%
Pierre Brown: 13 catches, 5.83 points, 0.45 PPP, 84.6%
TOTAL: 152 catches, 102.25 points, 0.67 PPP, 67.8%
TOTAL, WR: 53 catches, 47.28 points, 0.89 PPP, 90.6%
TOTAL, TE: 44 catches, 31.52 points, 0.72 PPP, 77.3%
TOTAL, RB: 45 catches, 23.45 points, 0.52 PPP, 48.9%

ATM's receptions are pretty equally split between RBs, WRs, and TEs.  That's probably not a good thing for them...and an overall 67.8% success rate for receptions is really poor.

Line Yards and Sack Rates (Offense)

Mizzou
Line Yards: 313 carries, 997.5 line yards, 3.19 LY/carry
1st-2nd Down Sack Rate: 298 pass attempts, 10 sacks, 3.4% sack rate
3rd-4th Down Sack Rate: 104 pass attempts, 3 sacks, 2.9% sack rate

Texas A&M
Line Yards: 441 carries, 1513.5 line yards, 3.43 LY/carry
1st-2nd Down Sack Rate: 198 pass attempts, 4 sacks, 2.0% sack rate
3rd-4th Down Sack Rate: 91 pass attempts, 6 sacks, 6.6% sack rate

Line Yards and Sack Rates (Defense)

Mizzou
Line Yards: 273 carries, 768.5 line yards, 2.82 LY/carry
1st-2nd Down Sack Rate: 269 pass attempts, 10 sacks, 3.7% sack rate
3rd-4th Down Sack Rate: 132 pass attempts, 9 sacks, 6.8% sack rate

Texas A&M
Line Yards: 357 carries, 1054.6 line yards, 2.95 LY/carry
1st-2nd Down Sack Rate: 248 pass attempts, 10 sacks, 4.0% sack rate
3rd-4th Down Sack Rate: 105 pass attempts, 4 sacks, 3.8% sack rate

Defensive Success Rates

(For players with 5.0 successful tackles or more, or 15.0 tackles or more.)

MIZZOU

Defensive Line
Ziggy Hood: 22.5 tackles, 16.5 successful, 73.3%
Stryker Sulak: 23.5 tackles, 16.0 successful, 68.1%
Tommy Chavis: 22.0 tackles, 14.5 successful, 65.9%
Lorenzo Williams: 14.5 tackles, 13.0 successful, 89.7%
Charles Gaines, 8.0 tackles, 6.0 successful, 75.0%
TOTAL: 104.5 tackles, 74.0 successful, 70.8%

Linebackers
Sean Weatherspoon: 59.0 tackles, 31.0 successful, 52.5%
Brock Christopher, 55.5 tackles, 30.5 successful, 55.0%
Van Alexander: 22.0 tackles, 14.0 successful, 63.6%
TOTAL: 144.5 tackles, 79.0 successful, 54.7%

Defensive Backs
William Moore: 50.0 tackles, 21.0 successful (42.0%)
Pig Brown: 56.0 tackles, 19.5 successful (34.8%)
Castine Bridges: 23.0 tackles, 8.0 successful (34.8%)
Carl Gettis: 24.5 tackles, 7.0 successful (28.6%)
Hardy Ricks: 16.0 tackles, 4.5 successful (28.1%)
Darnell Terrell: 23.0 tackles, 3.5 successful (15.2%)
TOTAL: 225.5 tackles, 73.0 successful, 32.4%

% of plays made by...
Defensive Line: 22.0%
Linebackers: 30.5%
Defensive Backs: 47.5%

TEXAS A&M

Defensive Line
Red Bryant: 25.5 tackles, 23.5 successful (92.2%)
Chris Harrington: 29.0 tackles, 22.0 successful (75.9%)
Cyril Obiozor: 24.0 tackles, 19.5 successful (81.3%)
Michael Bennett: 23.5 tackles, 19.5 successful (83.0%)
Henry Smith: 16.5 tackles, 14.0 successful (84.8%)
Kellen Heard: 16.0 tackles, 11.5 successful (71.9%)
Lucas Patterson: 11.5 tackles, 6.5 successful (56.5%)
Von Miller: 8.0 tackles, 5.0 successful (62.5%)
TOTAL: 165.0 tackles, 127.5 successful (77.3%)

Linebackers
Mark Dodge: 59.5 tackles, 28.0 successful (47.1%)
Misi Tupe: 52.5 tackles, 25.5 successful (48.6%)
Matt Featherston: 14.5 tackles, 7.0 successful (48.3%)
Anthony Lewis: 11.0 tackles, 5.0 successful (45.55)
TOTAL: 140.5 tackles, 67.5 successful (48.0%)

Defensive Backs
Alton Dixon: 43.0 tackles, 14.0 successful (32.6%)
Jordan Pugh: 41.5 tackles, 7.0 successful (16.9%)
Arkeith Brown: 26.5 tackles, 7.0 successful (26.4%)
Danny Gorrer: 22.0 tackles, 7.0 successful (31.8%)
Devin Gregg: 44.0 tackles, 4.5 successful (10.2%)
Marquis Carpenter: 19.5 tackles, 4.5 successful (23.1%)
TOTAL: 223.5 tackles, 49.0 successful (21.9%)

% of plays made by...
Defensive Line: 31.2%
Linebackers: 26.6%
Defensive Backs: 42.2%

ATM has an underrated D-line, and it does its best to mask a poor LB corps and a really poor secondary.

Turnover Costliness

Mizzou Offense
TOTAL: 14 turnovers, 52.10 'costliness points', 3.72 avg
Fumbles: 3 fumbles, 12.27 points, 4.09 avg
INTs: 11 INTs, 39.83 points, 3.62 avg

Mizzou Defense
TOTAL: 21 turnovers, 74.60 'costliness points', 3.55 avg
Fumbles: 10 fumbles, 35.51 points, 3.55 avg
INTs: 11 INTs, 39.09 points, 3.55 avg

Texas A&M Offense
TOTAL: 10 turnovers, 29.51 'costliness points', 2.97 avg
Fumbles: 7 fumbles, 20.77 points, 2.97 avg
INTs: 3 INTs, 8.74 points, 2.91 avg

Texas A&M Defense
TOTAL: 15 turnovers, 46.03 'costliness points', 3.07 avg
Fumbles: 10 fumbles, 27.54 points, 2.75 avg
INTs: 5 INTs, 18.49 points, 3.70 avg

ATM is conservative, conservative, conservative.  The downside of this is that, if they fall behind, they are cooked.  But if they keep it close, especially early, the fact that they just try to move the chains and don't turn the ball over becomes an asset.

Statistical MIPs

Mizzou Offense: Will Franklin.  He's Mizzou's biggest receiving homerun threat, and an early uppercut could open things up big.

Mizzou Defense: Ziggy Hood.  Tommy Chavis and Stryker Sulak have gotten the most credit for the Mizzou D's resurgence, and deservedly so.  But at this point, Ziggy is the best playmaker on the line, and if he can blow up the interior of the ATM O-line, Jorvorskie Lane ain't running anywhere, even if he does actually get to touch the ball.

ATM Offense: Gotta be the J-Train.

ATM Defense: Red Bryant.  He's the D-line's best playmaker, and the line's the key, just like with Mizzou's defense...only for a very different reason.  D-line is ATM's strength, and the only way they're slowing Mizzou down is if they get after Chase Daniel.  Bryant is the most likely candidate.

In This Article

Topics
X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Rock M Nation

You must be a member of Rock M Nation to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Rock M Nation. You should read them.

Join Rock M Nation

You must be a member of Rock M Nation to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Rock M Nation. You should read them.

Spinner.vc97ec6e

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9347_tracker