NDSU vs Ducks

[gavin2126]

I keep seeing Oregon's 2019 defense being called 22nd, so decided to look it up.

It turns out the 22nd ranking comes from total yards allowed. Not exactly the most useful stat for comparing defenses, especially considering how many times Oregon boat raced opponents and put in the back-ups. It also doesn't allow for yards per play - Oregon had to defend 973 plays which is more than any team ranked above them in YPG, and only two of those even faced more than 900 plays.

Here are some defensive stats that are more relevant:

Yards/Play: 4.73. Rank: 11th.

Offensive TDs allowed: 23 TDs. Rank: 4th.

Opponent RZ rush TD: 5. Rank: 2nd.

Opponent RZ pass TD: 9. Rank: 20th.

Interceptions: 20. Rank: 2nd.

YDS/Rush: 3.27. Rank: 13th.

Defensive pass efficiency: 14th.

Not purely a defensive stat, but turnover margin: +16. Rank: 5th.

Teams held to 7 points or fewer: 6, including 5 without allowing a TD. In comparison NDSU had 5 games allowing 7 or fewer, and 3 not allowing a TD. In two more games, and you can decide who had the tougher schedule.

Now, I'm not saying that Oregon's 2020 defense will be as good or better than 2019. But we're very optimistic when we bring back 9/11 starters and something like 18/22 out of the two deep. Feel free to make snide remarks about how y'all should try to kneel it out, and so forth. I just wanted to explain why Oregon fans, and the national media, are so excited for this defense.

I don't think anyone is really saying you didn't have a good defense, or that you won't have a good defense again next season. And you should be excited for it. We just think our offense is really good, and multi-dimensional, and will pose some problems for your defense.

Are we going to march up and down the field at will against you? Not likely. But many posts from Duck fans make it seem like you are going to completely smother us, rendering us inept, and that we will end up being thrilled on the rare occasion we pick up a first down. That is just as unlikely.

Personally I think we'll score somewhere in the mid 20's. The question for me will be if our defense will be able to hold you guys to less than that.

[GreenfieldBison]

I keep seeing Oregon's 2019 defense being called 22nd, so decided to look it up.

It turns out the 22nd ranking comes from total yards allowed. Not exactly the most useful stat for comparing defenses, especially considering how many times Oregon boat raced opponents and put in the back-ups. It also doesn't allow for yards per play - Oregon had to defend 973 plays which is more than any team ranked above them in YPG, and only two of those even faced more than 900 plays.

Here are some defensive stats that are more relevant:

Yards/Play: 4.73. Rank: 11th.

Offensive TDs allowed: 23 TDs. Rank: 4th.

Opponent RZ rush TD: 5. Rank: 2nd.

Opponent RZ pass TD: 9. Rank: 20th.

Interceptions: 20. Rank: 2nd.

YDS/Rush: 3.27. Rank: 13th.

Defensive pass efficiency: 14th.

Not purely a defensive stat, but turnover margin: +16. Rank: 5th.

Teams held to 7 points or fewer: 6, including 5 without allowing a TD. In comparison NDSU had 5 games allowing 7 or fewer, and 3 not allowing a TD. In two more games, and you can decide who had the tougher schedule.

Now, I'm not saying that Oregon's 2020 defense will be as good or better than 2019. But we're very optimistic when we bring back 9/11 starters and something like 18/22 out of the two deep. Feel free to make snide remarks about how y'all should try to kneel it out, and so forth. I just wanted to explain why Oregon fans, and the national media, are so excited for this defense.

I stopped reading when you said your defense “had to defend 973 plays...”

Why couldn’t your projected “top n” defense get off the field?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[BisonNeil]

Sure am hoping Kobe is back at full speed, he'll be a nightmare in the A gap.

A lot of talk here about the OL and the Bison running attack. The A gap blocking wasn’t particularly good in the run game in my opinion, outside of Lance, during the natty against JMU. The Bison OL struggled with JMUs DL on straight up run blocking for the RBs so I’m a bit skeptical of some of the bravado being discussed here. If the A gap run game is working the game plan and the OL will have to play better than they did in January.

[ndsubison1]

A lot of talk here about the OL and the Bison running attack. The A gap blocking wasn’t particularly good in the run game in my opinion, outside of Lance, during the natty against JMU. The Bison OL struggled with JMUs DL on straight up run blocking for the RBs so I’m a bit skeptical of some of the bravado being discussed here. If the A gap run game is working the game plan and the OL will have to play better than they did in January.

I agree. Any chance Volson moves inside to make way for Sundell or Mauch?

[RatherBeYachting]

I stopped reading when you said your defense “had to defend 973 plays...”

Why couldn’t your projected “top n” defense get off the field?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The number of plays your defense faces is largely dependent on the pace of the game.

Oregon doesn't huddle and snaps with a lot of time. A similarly paced offense was Clemson. They faced three fewer plays (970 vs 973), while giving up more TDs against a much weaker schedule. Of course teams that run hurry up offenses are going to see more defensive possessions than slow it down teams like Pitt or Wisconsin.

For the sake of comparison:

NDSU had 970 defensive plays, giving up 21 TDs. Oregon had 973 defensive plays, giving up 23 TDs. Oregon's TD/Play rate was tops in FBS.

As far as getting off the field and 3rd down percentage defense: NDSU was at .336 and Oregon was a teensy bit better at .332.

NDSU forced 23 turnovers, Oregon had 27. So, that combined with the worse third down percentage, begs the question; why couldn't your defense get off the field?

[ndsubison1]

The number of plays your defense faces is largely dependent on the pace of the game.

Oregon doesn't huddle and snaps with a lot of time. A similarly paced offense was Clemson. They faced three fewer plays (970 vs 973), while giving up more TDs against a much weaker schedule. Of course teams that run hurry up offenses are going to see more defensive possessions than slow it down teams like Pitt or Wisconsin.

For the sake of comparison:

NDSU had 970 defensive plays, giving up 21 TDs. Oregon had 973 defensive plays, giving up 23 TDs. Oregon's TD/Play rate was tops in FBS.

As far as getting off the field and 3rd down percentage defense: NDSU was at .336 and Oregon was a teensy bit better at .332.

NDSU forced 23 turnovers, Oregon had 27. So, that combined with the worse third down percentage, begs the question; why couldn't your defense get off the field?

33% is really good. Even for FCS.

[gavin2126]

The number of plays your defense faces is largely dependent on the pace of the game.

Oregon doesn't huddle and snaps with a lot of time. A similarly paced offense was Clemson. They faced three fewer plays (970 vs 973), while giving up more TDs against a much weaker schedule. Of course teams that run hurry up offenses are going to see more defensive possessions than slow it down teams like Pitt or Wisconsin.

For the sake of comparison:

NDSU had 970 defensive plays, giving up 21 TDs. Oregon had 973 defensive plays, giving up 23 TDs. Oregon's TD/Play rate was tops in FBS.

As far as getting off the field and 3rd down percentage defense: NDSU was at .336 and Oregon was a teensy bit better at .332.

NDSU forced 23 turnovers, Oregon had 27. So, that combined with the worse third down percentage, begs the question; why couldn't your defense get off the field?

First time I've ever seen the TD/play stat.

[RatherBeYachting]

33% is really good. Even for FCS.

I wholeheartedly agree. Especially after a few years at the end of the Helfrich era where I knew a 3rd and 17 would be converted. I was trying to drive home the point that calling Oregon's defense the 22nd best in FBS is a bit deceiving when it only references total yards instead of more relevant statistics like yards per play, red zone defense, 3rd down conversions, turnovers, etc.

That will be one of the keys to the game. On offense NDSU converts at an FCS best 50% clip, while Oregon's defense is very aggressive on early downs to set up their third down defense.

I've been trying to look at some NDSU videos and stats when I get bored at work. It's been interesting.

[gavin2126]

I wholeheartedly agree. Especially after a few years at the end of the Helfrich era where I knew a 3rd and 17 would be converted. I was trying to drive home the point that calling Oregon's defense the 22nd best in FBS is a bit deceiving when it only references total yards instead of more relevant statistics like yards per play, red zone defense, 3rd down conversions, turnovers, etc.

That will be one of the keys to the game. On offense NDSU converts at an FCS best 50% clip, while Oregon's defense is very aggressive on early downs to set up their third down defense.

I've been trying to look at some NDSU videos and stats when I get bored at work. It's been interesting.

You get to watch videos at work. You hiring?

[GreenfieldBison]

The number of plays your defense faces is largely dependent on the pace of the game.

Oregon doesn't huddle and snaps with a lot of time. A similarly paced offense was Clemson. They faced three fewer plays (970 vs 973), while giving up more TDs against a much weaker schedule. Of course teams that run hurry up offenses are going to see more defensive possessions than slow it down teams like Pitt or Wisconsin.

For the sake of comparison:

NDSU had 970 defensive plays, giving up 21 TDs. Oregon had 973 defensive plays, giving up 23 TDs. Oregon's TD/Play rate was tops in FBS.

As far as getting off the field and 3rd down percentage defense: NDSU was at .336 and Oregon was a teensy bit better at .332.

NDSU forced 23 turnovers, Oregon had 27. So, that combined with the worse third down percentage, begs the question; why couldn't your defense get off the field?

NDSU played sixteen games. That’s 16. SIXTEEN.