[BostonCard]

Offense	Start	Rush%	Plays/10	Yds/play	Yds/Dr	%available	3&Out%	eTO%	Pts/Dr
Stanford	64.4	63.3%	61.9	7.1	43.7	67.8%	6.8%	6.8%	4.20
Washington St.	69.1	22.9%	63.1	6.5	40.7	59.0%	16.2%	14.9%	3.11
UCLA	72.7	42.2%	54.0	6.9	37.4	51.5%	25.9%	6.9%	3.02
Oregon	67.3	58.3%	53.9	7.0	37.8	56.1%	21.1%	10.5%	2.88
USC	73.3	49.3%	60.5	6.2	37.5	51.2%	23.7%	11.9%	2.56
Arizona	72.1	44.9%	60.9	6.0	36.8	51.1%	14.1%	18.8%	2.45
Utah	66.3	54.5%	52.6	5.6	29.6	44.7%	14.5%	14.5%	2.45
Arizona St.	67.3	45.8%	59.3	5.6	33.4	49.6%	13.3%	16.0%	2.17
Cal	71.0	39.0%	57.5	5.9	34.1	48.0%	14.9%	31.3%	1.99
Washington	68.8	44.5%	49.8	5.5	27.4	39.8%	28.1%	18.8%	1.75
Colorado	73.3	47.6%	61.8	5.0	31.1	42.4%	26.9%	14.9%	1.72
Oregon St.	75.3	50.7%	60.0	4.7	28.2	37.4%	28.3%	19.6%	1.15
Average	69.9	46.4%	57.9	6.0	34.9	50.0%	19.2%	15.4%	2.47

Defense	Start	Plays/10	Yds/play	Yds/Dr	%available	3&Out%	eTO%	Pts/Dr
Utah	71.5	54.3	4.8	26.1	36.5%	20.9%	22.4%	1.55
Washington	70.7	60.7	5.3	32.3	45.8%	17.9%	22.4%	1.96
USC	70.4	58.4	5.5	32.3	45.9%	19.4%	19.4%	2.03
UCLA	70.2	61.1	5.3	32.1	45.8%	17.5%	19.3%	2.04
Stanford	74.9	56.3	5.8	32.4	43.3%	33.9%	10.7%	2.04
Washington St.	67.7	57.0	6.1	34.7	51.2%	15.2%	21.2%	2.39
Arizona St.	70.5	47.8	6.3	30.3	42.9%	29.2%	9.7%	2.43
Cal	69.0	62.1	6.4	39.8	57.7%	16.2%	22.1%	2.63
Oregon	68.8	59.1	6.2	36.6	53.2%	15.6%	13.0%	2.66
Colorado	69.3	59.0	6.7	39.7	57.4%	10.4%	11.9%	2.93
Arizona	68.4	59.3	6.6	39.4	57.6%	21.7%	5.8%	3.36
Oregon St.	67.3	61.4	7.3	44.7	66.3%	12.0%	6.0%	3.78
Average	69.9	57.9	6.0	34.9	50.0%	19.2%	15.4%	2.47

Net	Net Field Pos	Plays/10	Yds/play	Yds/Dr	3&Out%	eTO%	Pts/Dr
Stanford	-10.5	5.6	1.3	11.3	-27.1%	-3.9%	2.17
UCLA	2.5	-7.1	1.7	5.3	8.3%	-12.4%	0.98
Utah	-5.2	-1.7	0.8	3.5	-6.4%	-7.9%	0.90
Washington St.	1.4	6.1	0.4	6.1	1.1%	-6.3%	0.71
USC	2.9	2.1	0.7	5.2	4.4%	-7.5%	0.53
Oregon	-1.5	-5.1	0.8	1.2	5.5%	-2.5%	0.22
Washington	-1.9	-10.9	0.2	-4.9	10.2%	-3.6%	-0.21
Arizona St.	-3.2	11.6	-0.7	3.1	-15.8%	6.3%	-0.26
Cal	2.0	-4.6	-0.5	-5.7	-1.3%	9.3%	-0.65
Arizona	3.7	1.7	-0.6	-2.5	-7.7%	13.0%	-0.91
Colorado	4.1	2.8	-1.7	-8.7	16.4%	3.0%	-1.21
Oregon St.	8.0	-1.4	-2.6	-16.5	16.3%	13.6%	-2.63

[BostonCard]

Offense	Start	Rush%	Plays/10	Yds/play	Yds/Dr	%available	3&Out%	eTO%	Pts/Dr
Stanford	64.4	63.3%	61.9	7.1	43.7	67.8%	6.8%	6.8%	4.20
Washington St.	69.1	22.9%	63.1	6.5	40.7	59.0%	16.2%	14.9%	3.11
UCLA	72.7	42.2%	54.0	6.9	37.4	51.5%	25.9%	6.9%	3.02
Oregon	67.3	58.3%	53.9	7.0	37.8	56.1%	21.1%	10.5%	2.88
USC	73.3	49.3%	60.5	6.2	37.5	51.2%	23.7%	11.9%	2.56
Arizona	72.1	44.9%	60.9	6.0	36.8	51.1%	14.1%	18.8%	2.45
Utah	66.3	54.5%	52.6	5.6	29.6	44.7%	14.5%	14.5%	2.45
Arizona St.	67.3	45.8%	59.3	5.6	33.4	49.6%	13.3%	16.0%	2.17
Cal	71.0	39.0%	57.5	5.9	34.1	48.0%	14.9%	31.3%	1.99
Washington	68.8	44.5%	49.8	5.5	27.4	39.8%	28.1%	18.8%	1.75
Colorado	73.3	47.6%	61.8	5.0	31.1	42.4%	26.9%	14.9%	1.72
Oregon St.	75.3	50.7%	60.0	4.7	28.2	37.4%	28.3%	19.6%	1.15
Average	69.9	46.4%	57.9	6.0	34.9	50.0%	19.2%	15.4%	2.47

Defense	Start	Plays/10	Yds/play	Yds/Dr	%available	3&Out%	eTO%	Pts/Dr
Utah	71.5	54.3	4.8	26.1	36.5%	20.9%	22.4%	1.55
Washington	70.7	60.7	5.3	32.3	45.8%	17.9%	22.4%	1.96
USC	70.4	58.4	5.5	32.3	45.9%	19.4%	19.4%	2.03
UCLA	70.2	61.1	5.3	32.1	45.8%	17.5%	19.3%	2.04
Stanford	74.9	56.3	5.8	32.4	43.3%	33.9%	10.7%	2.04
Washington St.	67.7	57.0	6.1	34.7	51.2%	15.2%	21.2%	2.39
Arizona St.	70.5	47.8	6.3	30.3	42.9%	29.2%	9.7%	2.43
Cal	69.0	62.1	6.4	39.8	57.7%	16.2%	22.1%	2.63
Oregon	68.8	59.1	6.2	36.6	53.2%	15.6%	13.0%	2.66
Colorado	69.3	59.0	6.7	39.7	57.4%	10.4%	11.9%	2.93
Arizona	68.4	59.3	6.6	39.4	57.6%	21.7%	5.8%	3.36
Oregon St.	67.3	61.4	7.3	44.7	66.3%	12.0%	6.0%	3.78
Average	69.9	57.9	6.0	34.9	50.0%	19.2%	15.4%	2.47

Net	Net Field Pos	Plays/10	Yds/play	Yds/Dr	3&Out%	eTO%	Pts/Dr
Stanford	-10.5	5.6	1.3	11.3	-27.1%	-3.9%	2.17
UCLA	2.5	-7.1	1.7	5.3	8.3%	-12.4%	0.98
Utah	-5.2	-1.7	0.8	3.5	-6.4%	-7.9%	0.90
Washington St.	1.4	6.1	0.4	6.1	1.1%	-6.3%	0.71
USC	2.9	2.1	0.7	5.2	4.4%	-7.5%	0.53
Oregon	-1.5	-5.1	0.8	1.2	5.5%	-2.5%	0.22
Washington	-1.9	-10.9	0.2	-4.9	10.2%	-3.6%	-0.21
Arizona St.	-3.2	11.6	-0.7	3.1	-15.8%	6.3%	-0.26
Cal	2.0	-4.6	-0.5	-5.7	-1.3%	9.3%	-0.65
Arizona	3.7	1.7	-0.6	-2.5	-7.7%	13.0%	-0.91
Colorado	4.1	2.8	-1.7	-8.7	16.4%	3.0%	-1.21
Oregon St.	8.0	-1.4	-2.6	-16.5	16.3%	13.6%	-2.63

[BostonCard]

As before, here are the Pac-12 conference per-drive stats, available here (http://fbsdrivestats.com/pac-12-2015/).

Start is the distance from the end zone that drives start at.
Rush% is the percentage of plays that are rushes.
Plays/10 is the number of plays per 10 drives.
Yds/play is average yards per play.
Yds/Dr is average yards per drive
%available is the percentage of available yards (based on starting position) that are attained. (for example, a drive starting at the team's own 20, which gains 60 yards has attained 60/80 = 75% of available yards.
3&Out% is the percentage of drives that go three and out.
Pts/Dr is the number of points per drive.

Observations:
We continue to dominate on offense, and it's not even close; we gain a whole point more than our opponents do per drive.  We also lead the league in starting position, percent of our plays that are rushes, yards per play (just barely over our upcoming opponent), yards per drive, and we gain the largest fraction of our available yardage.  We have the lowest three and out percentage (less than half the next team) and the lowest effective turnover percentage.

Our upcoming opponent is in the upper tertile of teams on offense, and, specifically, has the second best yards per play on offense.

This accounting continues to like Washington State, and continues to find USC to be in the middle tertile of teams, hampered a lot by near bottom field position.  Cal's offense is below average in pretty much every offensive measure.  Of particular concern to the Bears ought to be that they have a league worst effective turnover percentage (failures to convert fourth down are considered turnovers, as are safeties).  In fact, almost half of Cal possessions end in a three-and-out, a turnover, a turnover on downs, or a safety.

On defense, Utah continues to lead the league, and Washington continues to be second.  There is an effective three-way tie for third between the LA teams and Stanford.  We benefit from pinning our opponents in the worst field position of the conference, but tend to give up a fair number of yards per play.  That being said, we do well in forcing trhee-and-outs, but despite our recent improvements, not in forcing turnovers.

Those who have said Oregon has a below average defense are right.  We've already played the three worst defenses in the league, but Oregon and Cal are fourth and fifth worst (and very similar, though Cal excells in forcing turnovers).

We again dominate the net stats, repeatedly getting over two points more than our opponent in each drive.  No other team is within a point.

That being said, the stats like UCLA and their freshman QB; second best in the league.  And UCLA controls its own destiny.

The numbers continue to consider USC a good but not great team, certainly not as good as some of the other computer systems.  They consider ORegon a slightly better than average team, but not by much.  Cal is in the bottom tertile of teams, and though they should beat Oregon State easily (because OSU is by far the worst team),  that may be the only game left they win (though playing ASU might be tight).

Lastly, some time ago I mused how a team made up of WSU's offense and UW's defense might fare against Stanford.  The answer is that while such a team would easily be the second best team in net points/drive (at +1.15), that's still a full point per drive worse than Stanford.  Even combining WSU's offense with Utah's defense doesn't get you a net points per drive equal to Stanford*.  Hell, our net points per drive are better than the vaunted Andrew Luck teams of 2010 (2.01) and 2011 (1.43).

BC

[BostonCard]

As before, here are the Pac-12 conference per-drive stats, available here (http://fbsdrivestats.com/pac-12-2015/).

Start is the distance from the end zone that drives start at.
Rush% is the percentage of plays that are rushes.
Plays/10 is the number of plays per 10 drives.
Yds/play is average yards per play.
Yds/Dr is average yards per drive
%available is the percentage of available yards (based on starting position) that are attained. (for example, a drive starting at the team's own 20, which gains 60 yards has attained 60/80 = 75% of available yards.
3&Out% is the percentage of drives that go three and out.
Pts/Dr is the number of points per drive.

Observations:
We continue to dominate on offense, and it's not even close; we gain a whole point more than our opponents do per drive.  We also lead the league in starting position, percent of our plays that are rushes, yards per play (just barely over our upcoming opponent), yards per drive, and we gain the largest fraction of our available yardage.  We have the lowest three and out percentage (less than half the next team) and the lowest effective turnover percentage.

Our upcoming opponent is in the upper tertile of teams on offense, and, specifically, has the second best yards per play on offense.

This accounting continues to like Washington State, and continues to find USC to be in the middle tertile of teams, hampered a lot by near bottom field position.  Cal's offense is below average in pretty much every offensive measure.  Of particular concern to the Bears ought to be that they have a league worst effective turnover percentage (failures to convert fourth down are considered turnovers, as are safeties).  In fact, almost half of Cal possessions end in a three-and-out, a turnover, a turnover on downs, or a safety.

On defense, Utah continues to lead the league, and Washington continues to be second.  There is an effective three-way tie for third between the LA teams and Stanford.  We benefit from pinning our opponents in the worst field position of the conference, but tend to give up a fair number of yards per play.  That being said, we do well in forcing trhee-and-outs, but despite our recent improvements, not in forcing turnovers.

Those who have said Oregon has a below average defense are right.  We've already played the three worst defenses in the league, but Oregon and Cal are fourth and fifth worst (and very similar, though Cal excells in forcing turnovers).

We again dominate the net stats, repeatedly getting over two points more than our opponent in each drive.  No other team is within a point.

That being said, the stats like UCLA and their freshman QB; second best in the league.  And UCLA controls its own destiny.

The numbers continue to consider USC a good but not great team, certainly not as good as some of the other computer systems.  They consider ORegon a slightly better than average team, but not by much.  Cal is in the bottom tertile of teams, and though they should beat Oregon State easily (because OSU is by far the worst team),  that may be the only game left they win (though playing ASU might be tight).

Lastly, some time ago I mused how a team made up of WSU's offense and UW's defense might fare against Stanford.  The answer is that while such a team would easily be the second best team in net points/drive (at +1.15), that's still a full point per drive worse than Stanford.  Even combining WSU's offense with Utah's defense doesn't get you a net points per drive equal to Stanford*.  Hell, our net points per drive are better than the vaunted Andrew Luck teams of 2010 (2.01) and 2011 (1.43).

BC

[indiancardinal]

Thanks BC.... I now look forward to your weekly update of the Per Drive Stats. Maybe we can come up with a snazzier title :)

I know this is most meaningful among common opposition like conference opponents but have  you looked at what the per drive stats are for the Top 10 in the CFP rankings? Would be cool to see how we stack up against Alabama, Clemson, UDFG and the like.

[indiancardinal]

Thanks BC.... I now look forward to your weekly update of the Per Drive Stats. Maybe we can come up with a snazzier title :)

I know this is most meaningful among common opposition like conference opponents but have  you looked at what the per drive stats are for the Top 10 in the CFP rankings? Would be cool to see how we stack up against Alabama, Clemson, UDFG and the like.

[BostonCard]

Net	Conf.	Plays/10	Yds/Play	Yds/Dr	Pts/Dr
Baylor	Big 12	1.6	4.2	24.0	3.31
Clemson	ACC	9.2	2.1	15.9	1.89
Oklahoma	Big 12	2.0	2.8	15.9	1.73
Louisiana St.	SEC	1.4	2.6	15.3	1.67
Ohio St.	Big Ten	1.4	2.3	12.5	1.56
Stanford	Pac-12	2.6	1.3	9.4	1.52
Michigan	Big Ten	1.8	1.3	8.0	1.51
Florida St.	ACC	2.1	1.9	12.3	1.48
Michigan St.	Big Ten	7.4	0.7	8.4	1.35
TCU	Big 12	3.4	2.3	15.2	1.29
Iowa	Big Ten	3.1	1.4	9.0	1.28
Alabama	SEC	8.0	1.7	12.5	1.20
Oklahoma St.	Big 12	4.0	1.2	9.0	1.17
North Carolina	ACC	-12.0	2.2	5.9	1.14
UDFG	Ind.	5.2	1.7	12.4	1.11

This is not entirely apples to apples (you'll note the Stanford numbers changed) because it includes all games, not just conference games.  Still, Stanford acquits itself pretty well compared to other Power-5 teams, especially given that our play has improved since the second half of the second game.

Results are not adjusted for opponents, so the Big 12 looks good, while UDFG, who has played a pretty brutal schedule, doesn't look so good.

BC

[BostonCard]

Net	Conf.	Plays/10	Yds/Play	Yds/Dr	Pts/Dr
Baylor	Big 12	1.6	4.2	24.0	3.31
Clemson	ACC	9.2	2.1	15.9	1.89
Oklahoma	Big 12	2.0	2.8	15.9	1.73
Louisiana St.	SEC	1.4	2.6	15.3	1.67
Ohio St.	Big Ten	1.4	2.3	12.5	1.56
Stanford	Pac-12	2.6	1.3	9.4	1.52
Michigan	Big Ten	1.8	1.3	8.0	1.51
Florida St.	ACC	2.1	1.9	12.3	1.48
Michigan St.	Big Ten	7.4	0.7	8.4	1.35
TCU	Big 12	3.4	2.3	15.2	1.29
Iowa	Big Ten	3.1	1.4	9.0	1.28
Alabama	SEC	8.0	1.7	12.5	1.20
Oklahoma St.	Big 12	4.0	1.2	9.0	1.17
North Carolina	ACC	-12.0	2.2	5.9	1.14
UDFG	Ind.	5.2	1.7	12.4	1.11

This is not entirely apples to apples (you'll note the Stanford numbers changed) because it includes all games, not just conference games.  Still, Stanford acquits itself pretty well compared to other Power-5 teams, especially given that our play has improved since the second half of the second game.

Results are not adjusted for opponents, so the Big 12 looks good, while UDFG, who has played a pretty brutal schedule, doesn't look so good.

BC

[BostonCard]

Thanks BC.... I now look forward to your weekly update of the Per Drive Stats. Maybe we can come up with a snazzier title :)

Maybe I'll call them drive-by stats.

BC

[BostonCard]

Thanks BC.... I now look forward to your weekly update of the Per Drive Stats. Maybe we can come up with a snazzier title :)

Maybe I'll call them drive-by stats.

BC

[indiancardinal]

BC... Is there something amiss in the first column - plays per 10 drives.
Is it the avg no of plays per drive or the total plays per 10 drives?

[indiancardinal]

BC... Is there something amiss in the first column - plays per 10 drives.
Is it the avg no of plays per drive or the total plays per 10 drives?

[Hulk01]

These always interest me.

A number that leaps out is third and outs.  We suffer them only about one in 16 possessions, against one time in three for our opponents.  It's so brobdingnagian it begs for explanation.

[Hulk01]

These always interest me.

A number that leaps out is third and outs.  We suffer them only about one in 16 possessions, against one time in three for our opponents.  It's so brobdingnagian it begs for explanation.

[stupac2]

These always interest me.

A number that leaps out is third and outs.  We suffer them only about one in 16 possessions, against one time in three for our opponents.  It's so of exceedingly large proportions it begs for explanation.

That occurred to me too. I was floored by it. It's especially surprising given that our defense ypp isn't all that great. But getting 3-and-outs while not doing them is a great way to win field position (which we do) and that's pretty helpful for winning games. I wonder what's driving it.

[stupac2]

These always interest me.

A number that leaps out is third and outs.  We suffer them only about one in 16 possessions, against one time in three for our opponents.  It's so of exceedingly large proportions it begs for explanation.

That occurred to me too. I was floored by it. It's especially surprising given that our defense ypp isn't all that great. But getting 3-and-outs while not doing them is a great way to win field position (which we do) and that's pretty helpful for winning games. I wonder what's driving it.

[FarmBoy]

It must be a brobdingnagian advantage for our defense. You regularly hear about defenses getting gassed because of how quickly the offense puts them back on the field. Our guys have been protected.

[FarmBoy]

It must be a brobdingnagian advantage for our defense. You regularly hear about defenses getting gassed because of how quickly the offense puts them back on the field. Our guys have been protected.

[fullmetal]

The best defense is sometimes a good (ball-control) offense.

[fullmetal]

The best defense is sometimes a good (ball-control) offense.