Running Back Success Rates: Alabama vs. North Texas
by Nico2.0 on Sep 22, 2009 8:00 AM CDT
in Football
13 comments
Much like the Florida International game, our success rates against a defense like North Texas aren't going to tell us a ton about our running game, but still, we want to provide the information for your perusal. I've been delayed on processing the VT numbers and will have those ready on Wednesday or Thursday. Anyway, four backs carried in our game against UNT and, as always, they'll be listed in the order they got their first carry. For those of you that need a refresher on RB success rate, it goes a little something like this: a carry is successful if on...
- 1st down: the RB gains 40% of the yardage needed
- 2nd down: the RB gains 60% of the yardage needed
- 3rd & 4th down: the RB gains 100% of the yardage needed
Ingram had another solid day with 129 all-purpose yards (91 rushing, 38 receiving) and he had both a rushing and receiving TD. Actually, I guess you can't get much more perfect than having every carry you take be deemed a success.
Richardson turned in another solid performance as well. Nothing you can really complain about when 73% of his carries were successful. Two of his three unsuccessful carries were only a yard short of being deemed successful so he was two yards shy of being 10 of 11. His carry for (-1) yards in the first half was the only negative play we had all day as far as designed runs were concerned.
Grant got more carries than any other back in the game. He had as many as Ingram and Richardson combined. Considering the fact that the lion's share of his carries came in the 2nd half behind non-starters, I'd say his overall 63% is quite good.
With only one carry, there's no need to construct a chart for Goode. His 14 yard carry was on a first & 10, putting his success rate at 100% for the day.
Needless to say, we pretty much ran the ball at will against North Texas. Our overall team success rate was 74%. We had eight carries of 10 yards or more and 21 carries of five yards or better. Move the ball like that and it's nearly impossible not to win. This analyses will get more interesting once we delve into conference play.
0 recs |
13 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
at this point...
…how much of this can we credit to the awesome of the running back corps and how much is it due to the offensive line developing as a unit?
by kleph on Sep 22, 2009 8:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Well
having three to four SEC caliber running backs means that there is fresh legs constantly on the field and it’s easier for an offensive line
Plus the balance of our play calling, with the threat of Gmac’s arm forces teams to respect us in that regard
basically I believe a balanced attack and involving your runninbacks and tightends in the passing game takes a lot of pressure off our O line and helps them tremendously
Terrence Cody drinks your milkshake!
by Wallacewade04 on Sep 22, 2009 11:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed...
…but it seems a little bit “chicken and the egg” to me. are gmac and co doing well because of solid OL play or is the line reaping the benefits of a better-than-expected QB and RB performance? i’d expect it’s a little of both but was hoping someone better versed in the numbers might weigh in on the subject.
by kleph on Sep 22, 2009 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's a damn fine example of reciprocity at work
such a fine example, that it’s damned near impossible to determine which is the host organism, chicken, egg, BR corps, or o-line/balanced O attack.
welcome to the SEC kiffykins...
by tempebamafan on Sep 22, 2009 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
like samples in a good Daft Punk track
each stands out on their own, for their own merits, yet coalesces into a sublime greater being when laced together by the mad scientists at the switchboard.
welcome to the SEC kiffykins...
by tempebamafan on Sep 22, 2009 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know if you noticed but the SEC site was wrong
about Ch. 3 picking up the local SEC games. I called the station about it and they had no idea what I was talking about. Fortunately I had Gameplan anyway but still that is the kind of thing you think they would confirm before putting out there for the world to see.
by UAinPHOENIX on Sep 22, 2009 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha
yeah i wound up calling channel 3 myself after reading that a month ago or so… they put me right through to the program director (i was blown away… thinkin at best i’d get some jr schmoe) and he told me they are going to pick up the games on the SEC Network, after daylight savings time makes the switch over in mid october. they have Good Morning Arizona Saturday on til 10 am and it’s basicaly the only show they can sell ads for on a saturday… so anyway, once we go back to mountain time, we’ll have the games on 3 tv… already bought gameplan as well. already worth it.
welcome to the SEC kiffykins...
by tempebamafan on Sep 22, 2009 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great, so they are showing half a season's worth of games
The SEC should try to find a different station next year if this is the best Ch 3 can do. I guess it is nice to have some of those games out here but if you have to buy Gameplan to get the first month and a half of the season it doesn’t really help much.
by UAinPHOENIX on Sep 22, 2009 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
plus
you gotta take this staffs willingness to change into consideration
The wild tide formation, the pistol formation, the willingness to take shots downfield – all of that on top of our bread and butter under center and good ole shotgun
when you line up in all these different formations and get the ball in so many different peoples hands, the defense is going to get confused
Terrence Cody drinks your milkshake!
by Wallacewade04 on Sep 22, 2009 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll be posting the VT...
…numbers later this evening or early tomorrow. As I’m sure you can imagine, they aren’t as stellar as they were against FIU and UNT. Now, the question is, how much of that can we attribute it to being a better opponent and how much of it is that it was the first game?
by Nico2.0 on Sep 22, 2009 11:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It is hard to judge
Clearly McElroy was nervous early and his play reflected that. It likely effected some of the other aspects of the offense since Va Tech wasn’t forced to move away from their “Stop Julo, stop the run” gameplan. We did wear them down, but I also thought we were starting to move the ball on them when McElroy finally calmed down, went through his progressions, and got the ball to the open man.
by UAinPHOENIX on Sep 22, 2009 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pull stats from the 3rd quarter of VT game foward...
that should remove the butterfly effect.
Got that winning feelin'
by skycaster on Sep 22, 2009 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's simple . . .
When you have 4 good/great RB"s, there is never a tired one in. This occasionally puts 8 in the box, which keeps them on their toes. While their trying to spotlight Mark Ingram we bomb it to Julio, and vise versa.
by cashvilletitans12 on Sep 22, 2009 5:56 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
