Alright, we're combining the "MU-__ Beyond the Box Score" piece with the "Big 12 BTBS Box Scores" piece...I've bolded the super-duper interesting parts of each box score...
Mizzou
|
Baylor
|
|
% Close = 100.0% | ||
51.4% | Field Position % |
48.6% |
80.8% | Leverage % |
75.9% |
TOTAL | ||
73 | Plays | 79 |
31.56 | EqPts | 29.73 |
63.0% | Success Rate | 53.2% |
0.43 | Points Per Play (PPP) | 0.38 |
1.062 | S&P (Success + PPP) | 0.908 |
CLOSE GAME ONLY | ||
same | Plays | same |
same | EqPts | same |
same | Success Rate | same |
same | PPP | same |
same | S&P | same |
RUSHING | ||
9.45 | EqPts | 11.85 |
57.6% | Success Rate | 57.5% |
0.29 | PPP | 0.30 |
0.862 | S&P | 0.871 |
3.43 | Line Yards/carry |
3.20 |
PASSING | ||
22.10 | EqPts | 17.88 |
67.5% | Success Rate | 48.7% |
0.55 | PPP | 0.46 |
1.228 | S&P | 0.946 |
NON-PASSING DOWNS | ||
69.5% | Success Rate | 56.7% |
0.43 | PPP | 0.29 |
1.120 | S&P | 0.856 |
PASSING DOWNS | ||
35.7% | Success Rate | 42.1% |
0.46 | PPP | 0.65 |
0.820 | S&P | 1.073 |
TURNOVERS | ||
3 | Number | 2 |
9.39 | Points Lost | 5.50 |
4.93 | Points Given | 4.27 |
14.32 | Total T/O Pts | 9.77 |
-4.55 | Turnover Pts Margin | +4.55 |
1.315 | Q1 S&P | 0.842 |
1.183 | Q2 S&P | 0.953 |
0.790 | Q3 S&P | 1.041 |
0.807 | Q4 S&P | 0.702 |
0.970 | 1st Down S&P | 0.739 |
1.158 | 2nd Down S&P | 1.066 |
1.156 | 3rd Down S&P | 0.741 |
- How was Baylor able to see more offensive success than expected on Saturday? Success on 2nd downs. They were okay on 1st downs, but their 2nd down success (which has been a strength of theirs all year, for some reason) kept them out of tough 3rd downs.
- How was Baylor able to run so effectively on Saturday? It appears the answer is in the trenches. Baylor's 3.40 Line Yards per carry was higher than their 2.83 season average, and MUCH higher than Missouri's 2.18 season average allowed. This is something to watch as pass rush specialists Brian "God" Coulter and Jacquies Smith start to see more playing time over run stuffer Tommy Chavis (it's also something to keep in mind next year, when God and Jacq become two of our defensive staples). While the pass rush is improved by the addition of Coulter and Smith, they might not be as good at holding the line as Chavis is.
- It goes without saying that the first two quarters went more or less as expected. Turnovers prevented Missouri from probably having a 17- or 21-point lead, but they were dominating in S&P. And then came the third quarter, where Baylor turned the game on its ear. Remember last year, when Missouri humiliated team after team in Q3 (sans the Big 12 title game)? While the offense is still more-or-less holding up its end of the bargain (#2 in Q3 S&P+ in Big 12 play), the defense hasn't been as dominant (only #7 in Q3 S&P+ in Big 12 play). Mizzou has been fine in Q3 in a lot of games--Texas, Colorado, Nebraska--but Q3 efforts against OSU and Baylor turned the game around against Mizzou. Is that coaching? Execution? Luck? No idea.
- Taking turnovers into account, the scoring margin actually favors Baylor. OUCH. Not at all what we expected to see here, but...survive and advance! The North title still runs right through Columbia, and if NU beats KU on Saturday, the North title could actually be clinched before the trip to Arrowhead.
Alright, a bit more BU-MU analysis after the jump, then it's on to the other Big 12 games...
Here's a review of who I named the "Key Players" last week...
Key Players: Baylor
QB Hot Tub Griffin III
Griffin had 17.88 EqPts passing and 5.40 EqPts rushing (at a 0.954-S&P clip). His first career INT was obviously costly, and it's not like they have him throwing too many risky passes, but still...he passed this test with flying colors. Pass.
RB Jay Finley
Finley had 14 of the BU RBs' 27 carries. His S&P was only 0.786 (with a rather impressive 58% success rate), and he managed only 3.01 EqPts, but his game-tying Q4 TD reception was huge. Stil, though, Baylor needed a hair more from him, I guess. Pass.
LB Joe Pawelek
Pawelek was in on 13 tackles (7 solos) and a TD-saving INT. I mentioned last week that I wasn't sure if he was actually a good LB or if he was making plays in a "Somebody has to make tackles, even on a bad defense" way. He impressed me. Jordan Lake also passed this test, though if his hands were a little better, he wouldn't have dropped what could have been a game-winning INT. Thank goodness his hands aren't a little better, huh? PASS.
KR Mikail Baker
Baker had a 33-yard kickoff return, and two others totalling 44 yards, but he was not a difference-maker. Fail.
Key Players: Mizzou
TE Chase Coffman
How about 10 catches, 7.54 EqPts, a 1.454 S&P, and two more ridiculous TDs that apparently the refs reviewed on replay simply so they could watch it again? Does that sound like a difference-maker to you? PASS.
OL Colin Brown (i.e. the offensive line)
I don't believe Brown had any false starts this week, which is a good sign. As a whole, the O-Line gave up 1 sack and 2 QB hurries in 41 pass attempts--that's certainly not bad. It sounded like Daniel was having to run around quite a bit in the second half, and that Baylor's line was playing well, but without visual proof I'll go to the numbers and suggest that Mizzou's line was average to above average, and nothing more. Neither.
LB Brock Christopher, LB Sean Weatherspoon, FS William Moore, or whoever ends up shadowing Hot Tub Griffin III the most
Griffin's rushing totals were not a difference maker, though it sounded like Mizzou's determination not to let Griffin's legs beat them opened up the short passing game in a major way. Oh, and do you remember William Moore's name being called by Mike Kelly more than once? Because I don't. Fail.
P Jake Harry
Harry stepped onto the field only once, Mizzou won. Ahh, science. PASS.
--
BIG 12 BTBS BOX SCORES
Texas
|
Tech
|
|
% Close = 87.4% | ||
31.4% | Field Position % |
68.6% |
69.4% | Leverage % |
75.3% |
TOTAL | ||
62 | Plays | 81 |
22.90 | EqPts | 31.66 |
38.7% | Success Rate | 59.3% |
0.37 | Points Per Play (PPP) | 0.39 |
0.756 | S&P (Success + PPP) | 0.983 |
CLOSE GAME ONLY | ||
45 | Plays | 80 |
18.63 | EqPts | 31.19 |
44.4% | Success Rate | 58.8% |
0.41 | PPP | 0.39 |
0.858 | S&P | 0.978 |
RUSHING | ||
6.32 | EqPts | 7.65 |
41.7% | Success Rate | 61.5% |
0.26 | PPP | 0.29 |
0.680 | S&P | 0.910 |
2.19 | Line Yards/carry |
3.81 |
PASSING | ||
16.57 | EqPts | 24.01 |
36.8% | Success Rate | 58.2% |
0.44 | PPP | 0.44 |
0.805 | S&P | 1.018 |
NON-PASSING DOWNS | ||
44.2% | Success Rate | 63.9% |
0.41 | PPP |
0.37 |
0.852 | S&P | 1.012 |
PASSING DOWNS | ||
26.3% | Success Rate | 45.0% |
0.28 | PPP | 0.45 |
0.540 | S&P | 0.895 |
TURNOVERS | ||
2 |
Number | 1 |
0.87 | Points Lost | 0.94 |
7.00 | Points Given | 3.41 |
7.87 | Total T/O Pts | 4.35 |
-3.52 | Turnover Pts Margin | +3.52 |
0.283 | Q1 S&P | 0.873 |
0.469 | Q2 S&P | 1.246 |
0.651 | Q3 S&P | 0.625 |
1.744 | Q4 S&P | 1.121 |
0.924 | 1st Down S&P | 1.135 |
0.578 | 2nd Down S&P | 0.904 |
0.657 | 3rd Down S&P | 0.716 |
- What I said last week: "Meanwhile, if Colt McCoy wins the Heisman this year, you can thank the constantly successful tightrope act of thriving on Passing Downs. Yet again, UT was better on Passing Downs than Non-Passing Downs, and while you have to worry that the magic could suddenly, violently disappear (it did for Chase Daniel for about 6 quarters, long enough to kill his Heisman chances and his team's title chances), it might not."
- What I say this week: BAM. Passing Downs KILLED Texas. Murdered them.
- What also murdered Texas: playing like ass in the first half. You can ask Missouri--playing like ass for an entire first half against a Top 10 team on the road? Not a good idea. Just sayin'.
- An underrated facet of Tech's victory was the way they dominated the field position battle. Even when they didn't put together a scoring drive, they usually moved the ball well enough to keep Texas deep inside their own field position. It led directly to the safety that kicked off the scoring, and despite Malcolm Williams' star-turning 91-yard TD, field position benefited Tech greatly.
- In all, Tech's defense isn't dominant, and it doesn't rank tremendously well among other Big 12 teams, but they tackle really well, and they're much better than previous Tech defenses at stopping the big play. This was evident here, as aside from Williams' aforementioned TD, Texas was not eating up large chunks of yardage at a time.
Nebraska
|
Oklahoma
|
|
% Close = 9.8% | ||
32.1% | Field Position % |
67.9% |
68.3% | Leverage % |
74.3% |
TOTAL | ||
63 | Plays | 70 |
26.68 | EqPts | 41.17 |
38.1% | Success Rate | 47.1% |
0.42 | Points Per Play (PPP) | 0.59 |
0.805 | S&P (Success + PPP) | 1.060 |
CLOSE GAME ONLY | ||
3 | Plays | 10 |
0.53 | EqPts | 10.61 |
33.3% | Success Rate | 60.0% |
0.18 | PPP | 1.06 |
0.508 | S&P | 1.661 |
RUSHING | ||
14.21 | EqPts | 15.25 |
38.2% | Success Rate | 42.5% |
0.42 | PPP | 0.38 |
0.800 | S&P | 0.806 |
2.37 | Line Yards/carry |
3.02 |
PASSING | ||
12.47 | EqPts | 25.93 |
37.9% | Success Rate | 53.3% |
0.43 | PPP | 0.86 |
0.809 | S&P | 1.398 |
NON-PASSING DOWNS | ||
44.2% | Success Rate | 48.1% |
0.38 | PPP | 0.54 |
0.824 | S&P | 1.020 |
PASSING DOWNS | ||
25.0% | Success Rate | 44.4% |
0.51 | PPP | 0.73 |
0.763 | S&P | 1.173 |
TURNOVERS | ||
4 | Number | 1 |
5.37 | Points Lost | 4.41 |
17.50 | Points Given | 1.18 |
22.87 | Total T/O Pts | 5.59 |
-17.28 | Turnover Pts Margin | +17.28 |
0.223 | Q1 S&P | 1.472 |
1.168 | Q2 S&P | 1.103 |
0.850 | Q3 S&P | 1.081 |
0.757 | Q4 S&P | 0.150 |
0.456 | 1st Down S&P | 0.844 |
0.955 | 2nd Down S&P | 1.122 |
1.329 | 3rd Down S&P | 1.335 |
- 9.8%! We have a new record for "fastest time between when a game started and when it was officially over". Nebraska ran 3 plays when the game was within 17 points or less! THREE!
- Needless to say, when you're playing in Norman, it's a bad idea to give up a 17-point Turnover Points Margin.
K-State
|
Kansas
|
|
% Close = 20.1% | ||
42.2% | Field Position % |
57.8% |
61.6% | Leverage % |
71.2% |
TOTAL | ||
73 | Plays | 66 |
22.34 | EqPts | 37.64 |
34.3% | Success Rate | 53.0% |
0.31 | Points Per Play (PPP) | 0.57 |
0.649 | S&P (Success + PPP) | 1.101 |
CLOSE GAME ONLY | ||
10 | Plays | 18 |
1.49 | EqPts | 15.98 |
30.0% | Success Rate | 55.6% |
0.15 | PPP | 0.89 |
0.449 | S&P | 1.443 |
RUSHING | ||
10.76 | EqPts | 25.39 |
37.9% | Success Rate | 60.0% |
0.37 | PPP | 0.635 |
0.750 | S&P | 1.235 |
2.36 | Line Yards/carry |
4.27 |
PASSING | ||
11.58 | EqPts | 12.25 |
31.8% | Success Rate | 42.3% |
0.26 | PPP | 0.47 |
0.581 | S&P | 0.894 |
NON-PASSING DOWNS | ||
40.0% | Success Rate | 61.7% |
0.33 | PPP | 0.66 |
0.727 | S&P | 1.273 |
PASSING DOWNS | ||
25.0% | Success Rate | 31.6% |
0.27 | PPP | 0.36 |
0.523 | S&P | 0.674 |
TURNOVERS | ||
5 | Number | 1 |
13.11 | Points Lost | 4.34 |
16.50 | Points Given | 0.90 |
29.61 | Total T/O Pts | 5.24 |
-24.37 | Turnover Pts Margin | +24.37 |
0.351 | Q1 S&P | 1.418 |
0.601 | Q2 S&P | 0.946 |
0.554 | Q3 S&P | 1.150 |
0.970 | Q4 S&P | 0.755 |
0.486 | 1st Down S&P | 1.131 |
0.525 | 2nd Down S&P | 0.829 |
0.932 | 3rd Down S&P | 1.586 |
- Most weeks, a game that was only close 20% of the time would be the big 'blowout' winner, but not this week. KSU did win the "suicide by turnovers" award for the week, though, so congrats for that!
- Jake Sharp has been running roughshod over opponents for the last few games, and I'm wondering if it's actually him, of if the O-line has finally clicked. A 4.28 Line Yards per carry suggests the latter.
- For K-State, a confusing per-down line. They were atrocious on 1st and 2nd downs, but downright decent on 3rd downs.
- I'm thinking Josh Freeman should go ahead and go pro. It's pretty clear that another year in this system isn't going to do anything for his "Man, does he look great in a uniform!" draft stock--really, it can only hurt it...unless K-State fires Ron Prince and hires Norm Chow or something. Which isn't going to happen. A 0.581 Passing S&P is pretty awful considering how iffy KU has been against the pass. I don't care if his receivers really are awful...a big-time pro prospect should be able to do better than that.
Iowa St
|
OSU
|
|
% Close = 37.0% |
||
51.4% | Field Position % |
48.6% |
68.5% | Leverage % |
83.1% |
TOTAL | ||
73 | Plays | 65 |
20.29 | EqPts | 49.87 |
43.8% | Success Rate | 56.9% |
0.28 | Points Per Play (PPP) | 0.77 |
0.716 | S&P (Success + PPP) | 1.336 |
CLOSE GAME ONLY | ||
24 | Plays | 27 |
6.67 | EqPts | 22.83 |
45.8% | Success Rate | 59.3% |
0.28 | PPP | 0.85 |
0.736 | S&P | 1.438 |
RUSHING | ||
9.35 | EqPts | 19.26 |
47.2% | Success Rate | 52.8% |
0.26 | PPP | 0.53 |
0.732 | S&P | 1.063 |
2.32 | Line Yards/carry |
3.58 |
PASSING | ||
10.94 | EqPts | 30.61 |
40.5% | Success Rate | 62.1% |
0.30 | PPP | 1.056 |
0.701 | S&P | 1.676 |
NON-PASSING DOWNS | ||
54.0% | Success Rate | 57.4% |
0.35 | PPP | 0.70 |
0.889 | S&P | 1.274 |
PASSING DOWNS | ||
21.7% | Success Rate | 54.6% |
0.12 | PPP | 1.10 |
0.342 | S&P | 1.643 |
TURNOVERS | ||
3 | Number | 2 |
8.85 | Points Lost | 5.22 |
5.57 | Points Given | 3.31 |
14.42 | Total T/O Pts | 8.53 |
-5.89 | Turnover Pts Margin | +5.89 |
0.703 | Q1 S&P | 1.041 |
0.684 | Q2 S&P | 1.599 |
0.627 | Q3 S&P | 2.085 |
0.877 | Q4 S&P | 0.930 |
0.896 | 1st Down S&P | 1.387 |
0.638 | 2nd Down S&P | 1.457 |
0.551 | 3rd Down S&P | 0.760 |
- Hey, Gene Chizik: you were a defensive coordinator, right? Just checking. Because your defense just gave up over 1 Point Per Play for every pass OSU threw on Saturday. That's amazingly bad.
- That's really all I've got. Every stat on the page is some variation of "ISU offense = okay. ISU defense = amazingly bad."
Colorado
|
A&M
|
|
% Close = 100.0% | ||
60.4% | Field Position % |
39.6% |
71.4% | Leverage % |
59.4% |
TOTAL | ||
77 | Plays | 64 |
21.91 | EqPts | 20.82 |
44.2% | Success Rate | 34.4% |
0.28 | Points Per Play (PPP) | 0.33 |
0.726 | S&P (Success + PPP) | 0.669 |
CLOSE GAME ONLY | ||
same | Plays | same |
same | EqPts | same |
same | Success Rate | same |
same | PPP | same |
same | S&P | same |
RUSHING | ||
14.75 | EqPts | 6.26 |
50.0% | Success Rate | 35.7% |
0.35 | PPP | 0.22 |
0.851 | S&P | 0.581 |
3.05 | Line Yards/carry |
2.62 |
PASSING | ||
7.15 | EqPts | 14.56 |
37.1% | Success Rate | 33.3% |
0.20 | PPP | 0.40 |
0.576 | S&P | 0.738 |
NON-PASSING DOWNS | ||
50.9% | Success Rate | 36.8% |
0.31 | PPP | 0.32 |
0.815 | S&P | 0.693 |
PASSING DOWNS | ||
27.3% | Success Rate | 30.8% |
0.23 | PPP | 0.33 |
0.504 | S&P | 0.634 |
TURNOVERS | ||
3 | Number | 1 |
8.58 | Points Lost | 2.48 |
4.77 | Points Given | 2.41 |
13.35 | Total T/O Pts | 4.89 |
-8.46 | Turnover Pts Margin | +8.46 |
0.764 | Q1 S&P | 0.333 |
0.707 | Q2 S&P | 0.468 |
0.377 | Q3 S&P | 1.455 |
0.951 | Q4 S&P | 0.211 |
0.850 | 1st Down S&P | 0.646 |
0.687 | 2nd Down S&P | 0.847 |
0.486 | 3rd Down S&P | 0.436 |
- Turnovers = difference in this game.
- That, and the 3rd quarter.
- And the Colorado offense's complete lack of explosiveness. 0.28 PPP is pretty damn bad.
- Long-term, Rodney Stewart's gruesome broken leg might be a good thing for Colorado. He should recover just fine, and now Darrell Scott will have some more opportunities to prove if he's going to be worth a damn anytime soon.