[TreeFitty]

With 10 of those scores being TDs.

Granted, this is against not-so-good competition, but we're not beating ourselves in the Red Zone.

The true area for concern on offense is our dismal 3rd down conversion rate of 41% (9/22). Last we converted at a 58% clip. THIS MUST IMPROVE.

Also, time of possession is only at 30:03 per game. Last year we hit 34:34. This also must change. It would mean our running game is working and we're converting on 3rd.

We've also shifted from a first half team into a second half team. Not sure if this is good or bad.

So far this year:

Score by quarters 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total
Stanford 17 27 29 28 101
Opponents 0 10 0 7 17


Last Year:

Score by quarters 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total
Stanford 152 149 114 109 524
Opponents 36 54 55 81 226

[TreeFitty]

With 10 of those scores being TDs.

Granted, this is against not-so-good competition, but we're not beating ourselves in the Red Zone.

The true area for concern on offense is our dismal 3rd down conversion rate of 41% (9/22). Last we converted at a 58% clip. THIS MUST IMPROVE.

Also, time of possession is only at 30:03 per game. Last year we hit 34:34. This also must change. It would mean our running game is working and we're converting on 3rd.

We've also shifted from a first half team into a second half team. Not sure if this is good or bad.

So far this year:

Score by quarters 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total
Stanford 17 27 29 28 101
Opponents 0 10 0 7 17


Last Year:

Score by quarters 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total
Stanford 152 149 114 109 524
Opponents 36 54 55 81 226

[fullmetal]

Time of possession is a little tricky to use.  The big plays, like Jeremy Stewart's 30-yard TD run or Fleener's 60-yard reception TD, reduce the the time of possession a whole lot while increasing the only real metric that matters, which is the one on the scoreboard.

[fullmetal]

Time of possession is a little tricky to use.  The big plays, like Jeremy Stewart's 30-yard TD run or Fleener's 60-yard reception TD, reduce the the time of possession a whole lot while increasing the only real metric that matters, which is the one on the scoreboard.

[TreeFitty]

this is true, but i think our lowered time of poss. numbers are a result of faltering on 3rd down, not a result of more big quick strike plays.

[TreeFitty]

this is true, but i think our lowered time of poss. numbers are a result of faltering on 3rd down, not a result of more big quick strike plays.

[Leftcoast]

44 - 14 !  Time of Possession wasn't that big of a deal. 

This is the year to dream big - I'm expecting the Oregon game to be for the Rose Bowl. 

Yeah, I know that's big talk for a team that hasn't played a conference game yet and has Arizona, USC, Oregon, Notre Dame, Washington and Cal on their schedule.

[Leftcoast]

44 - 14 !  Time of Possession wasn't that big of a deal. 

This is the year to dream big - I'm expecting the Oregon game to be for the Rose Bowl. 

Yeah, I know that's big talk for a team that hasn't played a conference game yet and has Arizona, USC, Oregon, Notre Dame, Washington and Cal on their schedule.

[TreeFitty]

good point garvin. i guess my stance is that time of poss will look like last years if we fix our 3rd down troubles.

[TreeFitty]

good point garvin. i guess my stance is that time of poss will look like last years if we fix our 3rd down troubles.

[terry]

The true area for concern on offense is our dismal 3rd down conversion rate of 41% (9/22). Last we converted at a 58% clip. THIS MUST IMPROVE.

Also, time of possession is only at 30:03 per game. Last year we hit 34:34. This also must change. It would mean our running game is working and we're converting on 3rd.

A 41% conversion rate on 3rd down is not dismal. It's a bit above average. The national median last year was about 39.8%. Stanford's 58% last year was ridiculously good. It led the nation by a wide margin. In fact, I heard somewhere that it was the highest conversion rate since the NCAA began tracking this as an official statistic, although I didn't try to verify that. Yes, we want to improve our 3rd down conversion rate, but realistically, we probably shouldn't expect to reach 58% again, and we don't need to reach 58% to have a very good offense. Oregon converted at a 45% rate last year, and their offense was pretty darned good.

Stanford's time of possession of 34:34 last year also led the nation by a substantial margin. I generally don't care much about time of possession, because it doesn't have a strong correlation to winning. Oregon ranked 106th in time of possession last year; Auburn ranked 73rd. There's more than one way to win. I liked our time of possession last year because it was a reflection of the fact that our running game was working well. If we can run well, the time of possession will be fine.

Our sample size is too small to draw many conclusions so far. And both games were blowouts, so the stats are distorted by the fact that these games were not competitive. Who cares whether we convert on 3rd down in the 4th quarter when we're leading by 35 points? Duke dominated time of possession in the 4th quarter last Saturday, but that is a totally irrelevant stat. Once we get deeper into the season, these numbers will be more interesting.

[terry]

The true area for concern on offense is our dismal 3rd down conversion rate of 41% (9/22). Last we converted at a 58% clip. THIS MUST IMPROVE.

Also, time of possession is only at 30:03 per game. Last year we hit 34:34. This also must change. It would mean our running game is working and we're converting on 3rd.

A 41% conversion rate on 3rd down is not dismal. It's a bit above average. The national median last year was about 39.8%. Stanford's 58% last year was ridiculously good. It led the nation by a wide margin. In fact, I heard somewhere that it was the highest conversion rate since the NCAA began tracking this as an official statistic, although I didn't try to verify that. Yes, we want to improve our 3rd down conversion rate, but realistically, we probably shouldn't expect to reach 58% again, and we don't need to reach 58% to have a very good offense. Oregon converted at a 45% rate last year, and their offense was pretty darned good.

Stanford's time of possession of 34:34 last year also led the nation by a substantial margin. I generally don't care much about time of possession, because it doesn't have a strong correlation to winning. Oregon ranked 106th in time of possession last year; Auburn ranked 73rd. There's more than one way to win. I liked our time of possession last year because it was a reflection of the fact that our running game was working well. If we can run well, the time of possession will be fine.

Our sample size is too small to draw many conclusions so far. And both games were blowouts, so the stats are distorted by the fact that these games were not competitive. Who cares whether we convert on 3rd down in the 4th quarter when we're leading by 35 points? Duke dominated time of possession in the 4th quarter last Saturday, but that is a totally irrelevant stat. Once we get deeper into the season, these numbers will be more interesting.