Big 12: Beyond the Box Score (Week 3)

As the season progresses, I figure it might be a good idea to take a look at the Big 12 games of the previous week in my "BTBS Box Score" format...see if we can learn a bit about the games that the box scores and recaps don't tell us...I can't say "this will be on Tuesdays" or Wednesdays or any other day--I'll just try to update it at some point throughout the week.

And if you missed yesterday's Mizzou BTBS piece, here it is.

First up...Kansas, of course.


S. Florida

% Close = 97.3%
72 Plays 74
28.65 EqPts 29.99
41.7% Success Rate 40.5%
0.40 Points Per Play (PPP) 0.41
0.815 S&P (Success + PPP) 0.811
same Plays 70
same EqPts 24.82
same Success Rate 38.6%
same PPP 0.35
same S&P 0.740
4.64 EqPts 11.77
36.8% Success Rate 25.9%
0.24 PPP 0.44
0.613 S&P 0.695
24.00 EqPts 18.22
43.4% Success Rate 48.9%
0.45 PPP 0.39
0.887 S&P 0.877
43.2% Success Rate 42.9%
0.42 PPP 0.35
0.855 S&P 0.775
39.3% Success Rate 36.0%
0.36 PPP 0.52
0.750 S&P 0.880
1 Number 0
1.75 Points Lost 0.00
3.57 Points Given 0.00
5.32 Total T/O Pts 0.00
-5.32 Turnover Pts Margin +5.32

Taking EqPts into account, the margin for this one was USF +6.66.  The game was really decided by two things: Todd Reesing's Favre-esque INT at the end of the game, and KU's complete ineffectiveness running the ball.  Jake Sharp and Jocques Crawford combined for just 26 yards on 9 carries, and for some reason Angus "The Answer" Quigley only got 3 carries (for 22 yards).  They abandoned the run (the Run-Pass ratio was 21-51), and while they were able to produce a couple good plays on passing downs, KU was just outleveraged by USF as the game wore on. 

Nice resiliency by the Jayhawks to come back and tie the game after giving up 31 straight points, but USF deserved the win in this one, and honestly KU just didn't have what I thought they had.  The pass defense was suspect (something I certainly like to see as a Mizzou fan), and the running game was nonexistant.



% Close = 35.7%
71 Plays 72
44.11 EqPts 19.02
66.2% Success Rate 38.9%
0.62 Points Per Play (PPP) 0.26
1.283 S&P (Success + PPP) 0.653
30 Plays 21
16.67 EqPts 2.91
70.0% Success Rate 19.0%
0.56 PPP 0.14
1.256 S&P 0.329
18.38 EqPts 6.46
61.7% Success Rate 43.3%
0.39 PPP 0.22
1.008 S&P 0.649
25.73 EqPts 12.56
75.0% Success Rate 35.7%
1.07 PPP 0.30
1.822 S&P 0.656
71.4% Success Rate 45.1%
0.57 PPP 0.32
1.280 S&P 0.766
46.7% Success Rate 23.8%
0.83 PPP 0.14
1.297 S&P 0.378
0 Number 3
0.00 Points Lost 5.03
0.00 Points Given 7.24
0.00 Total T/O Pts 12.27
+12.27 Turnover Pts Margin -12.27

Final EqPts margin in this one: Oklahoma by 37.36.  Not pretty.  The OU offense stalled for a short while early, allowing the "% close" number to creep over 30%, but this one was never in doubt.  Ironically, because OU runs the ball so well, they ended up with a higher Passing S&P than Mizzou did this week because, well, Mizzou kept throwing the ball (short) during junk time, and that hurt the numbers put up by Chase Daniel.  OU just ran and ran and ran and kept Sam Bradford's pristine passing numbers intact.

Really, the only nitpicking I can do on OU is that Washington had over a 40% success rate running the ball.  They had absolutely no big-play potential, and the S&P (0.649) was still quite low, but a better running team might be able to move the chains if they have enough of a passing game to keep OU from loading up.  But one thing's for certain: you do not want to fall into passing downs against OU.  It's suicide.



% Close = 100.0%
67 Plays 52
15.69 EqPts 12.44
35.8% Success Rate 30.8
0.23 Points Per Play (PPP) 0.24
0.592 S&P (Success + PPP) 0.547
same Plays same
same EqPts same
same Success Rate same
same PPP same
same S&P same
3.87 EqPts 7.74
15.4% Success Rate 31.3%
0.15 PPP 0.24
0.303 S&P 0.554
11.82 EqPts 4.71
48.8% Success Rate 30.0%
0.29 PPP 0.24
0.776 S&P 0.536
42.0% Success Rate 34.4%
0.24 PPP 0.28
0.659 S&P 0.619
17.6% Success Rate 25.0%
0.22 PPP 0.18
0.395 S&P 0.432
3 Number 2
7.09 Points Lost 2.81
5.30 Points Given 5.59
12.39 Total T/O Pts 8.40
-3.99 Turnover Pts Margin +3.99

So after winning two blowouts despite the stats being pretty close, Iowa State lost a game in which the stats were more-or-less on their side.  They "outgained" Iowa by 3.25 EqPts, though the Turnover Points Margin (Iowa +3.99) swung the overall margin slightly in Iowa's favor.

One thing I know for certain: I'm glad I didn't watch this game on TV.  Ggh.  Neither team could run the ball at all, and Iowa complemented that with a lovely inability to throw.  Jake Christensen subbed in for Ricky Stanzi and was a significant improvement (which tells you all you need to know about Ricky Stanzi), but this was still an offensive nightmare.  This game had the biggest difference of the week between the score and the EqPts score--it swung on a punt return TD by Iowa's Andy Brodell, but otherwise the Excitement Quotient* was deep in the negative.

* No, there's really not an excitement quotient.  But there should be.



% Close = 35.9%
82 Plays 60
46.43 EqPts 14.62
56.1% Success Rate 40.0%
0.57 Points Per Play (PPP) 0.24
1.127 S&P (Success + PPP) 0.644
28 Plays 23
16.78 EqPts 5.17
53.6% Success Rate 34.8%
0.60 PPP 0.22
1.135 S&P 0.573
11.06 EqPts 3.21
65.4% Success Rate 55.0%
0.43 PPP 0.16
1.079 S&P 0.711
35.38 EqPts 11.41
51.8% Success Rate 32.5%
0.63 PPP 0.29
1.150 S&P 0.610
60.7% Success Rate 43.5%
0.56 PPP 0.24
1.165 S&P 0.678
42.9% Success Rate 28.6%
0.59 PPP 0.25
1.018 S&P 0.532
1 Number 5
1.57 Points Lost 11.77
3.83 Points Given 9.46
5.40 Total T/O Pts 21.23
+15.83 Turnover Pts Margin -15.83

I'll be watching Tech closely over the next couple weeks--either SMU's offense really is horrific and careless with the ball, or Tech really might have a decent defense on their hands.  Granted, if anybody knows how to defend a run & shoot style of offense, it's Tech, but they gave up under 15 EqPts and forced 5 turnovers.  Now, SMU really might be that bad (needless to say, June Jones is finding himself in a Rich Rodriguez-esque "the personnel doesn't match the system" quandary), but it was a nice performance by Tech.

As for the offense, all I can say is this: I've been completely baffled over the last couple of years why Tech hasn't run the ball more.  Opponents have to respect (and fear) the pass, and with those line splits and little Shannon Woods (and a bigger Baron Batch) darting in and out, it's a guaranteed 7 yards every time, at least until they find themselves in a 3rd-and-2 or redzone situation.  The field conditions may have played a part in this, but Tech actually ran the ball 27 times on Saturday!  And they were pretty successful at it to boot.



% Close = 63.7%
58 Plays 77
38.27 EqPts 18.81
46.6% Success Rate 36.4%
0.66 Points Per Play (PPP) 0.24
1.125 S&P (Success + PPP) 0.608


Plays 49
29.92 EqPts 12.38
48.6% Success Rate 36.7%
0.81 PPP 0.25
1.295 S&P 0.620
30.03 EqPts 9.25
53.7% Success Rate 37.5%
0.73 PPP 0.29
1.269 S&P 0.664
8.24 EqPts 9.56
29.4% Success Rate 35.6%
0.48 PPP 0.21
0.779 S&P 0.568
51.3% Success Rate 41.3%
0.60 PPP 0.29
1.115 S&P 0.703
36.8% Success Rate 29.0%
0.78 PPP 0.18
1.147 S&P 0.467
0 Number 5
0.00 Points Lost 12.24
0.00 Points Given 11.13
0.00 Total T/O Pts 23.37
+23.37 Turnover Pts Margin -23.37

A word about Baylor's Passing Downs success: they were 7-for-19 with a 1.147 S&P on Passing Downs against Wazzu.  Sounds great, right?  Well, 6 of those 7 successes were runs.  They were 1-for-9 on PD's throwing the ball.  In other words, Robert Griffin is very much a one-trick pony right now.  He's an exciting one-trick pony, but...yeah.  Defenses will adjust (hell, the North teams can just dust off the "stopping Brad Smith" papers), and I don't expect Baylor to do much of anything in conference play, but I do think they're closer to being a real, honest-to-god football team.  Kudos to Art Briles for that. 



% Close = 38.1%
68 Plays 71
39.34 EqPts 15.48
57.4% Success Rate 36.6%
0.58 Points Per Play (PPP) 0.22
1.152 S&P (Success + PPP) 0.584
25 Plays 28
17.62 EqPts 5.97
72.0% Success Rate 42.9%
0.70 PPP 0.21
1.425 S&P 0.642
21.95 EqPts 6.30
54.5% Success Rate 41.4%
0.50 PPP 0.22
1.044 S&P 0.631
17.38 EqPts 9.18
62.5% Success Rate 33.3%
0.72 PPP 0.22
1.349 S&P 0.552
63.0% Success Rate 47.9%
0.54 PPP 0.28
1.165 S&P 0.756
35.7% Success Rate 13.0%
0.75 PPP 0.09
1.103 S&P 0.225
1 Number 2
2.10 Points Lost 5.73
5.39 Points Given 5.14
7.49 Total T/O Pts 10.87
+3.38 Turnover Pts Margin -3.38

I'm figuring that one staple of a Bo Pelini defense in Lincoln is going to be wrecking shop on Passing Downs.  NMSU is a pass-first team, which suggests that they should have at least competent Passing Downs numbers, but...oy.  A 0.225 S&P on PD's is about as low as you can get.  They did alright in moving the ball on Non-Passing Downs, but they weren't good enough at staying out of awkward situations, and that was their downfall.

Meanwhile, NU's offense clicked right along smoothly.  Granted, they were supposed to--this was New Mexico Friggin State--but I'm sure the NU fanbase has begun the chest-pounding-and-overhyping process; I do think they're rounding into the shape it's going to take to make it to the 7-9 win territory I predicted after an iffy-for-three-quarters showing against what appears to be at least a decent San Jose State team.



% Close = 18.9%
66 Plays 66
46.52 EqPts 9.76
57.6% Success Rate 24.2%
0.70 Points Per Play (PPP) 0.15
1.281 S&P (Success + PPP) 0.390
15 Plays 10
14.22 EqPts 1.5
60.0% Success Rate 20.0%
0.95 PPP 0.15
1.548 S&P 0.350
37.99 EqPts 6.53
62.5% Success Rate 31.3%
0.68 PPP 0.14
1.303 S&P 0.449
8.53 EqPts 3.22
30.0% Success Rate 5.6%
0.85 PPP 0.18
1.153 S&P 0.234
64.0% Success Rate 35.7%
0.72 PPP 0.13
1.361 S&P 0.488
37.5% Success Rate 4.2%
0.65 PPP 0.18
1.029 S&P 0.220
1 Number 1
1.31 Points Lost 0.95
2.41 Points Given 4.03
3.72 Total T/O Pts 4.98
+1.26 Turnover Pts Margin -1.26


Kudos to OSU for TCB'ing the fastest this week.  This thing was over in about 35 seconds.  SMS (yes, SMS) fumbled on its opening play, and needless to say, OSU's putting up points anytime you hand them the ball at your 18.  SMS drove down for a missed FG, Zac Robinson threw a 66-yard TD pass, and this one was academic.

I'd go into analyzing OSU's dominance on Passing Downs, etc., but...well, they dominated in everything.  This was SMS, so I won't think too hard here.

Log In Sign Up

Log In Sign Up

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

I already have a Vox Media account!

Verify Vox Media account

Please login to your Vox Media account. This account will be linked to your previously existing Eater account.

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

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.




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.