Stats Comparison for Alabama and Washington

I'm still compiling my data for the Washington game (it figures things like 1st and 2nd half). As a reminder, it showed a blowout of Notre Dame, a tossup with Ohio State, a 31-10 win over Michigan State (I fudged it to 31-17 because I didn't believe it), and a ten-point win over Clemson (although it was 27-17).

Here are a couple of points so far:

1) Alabama has played six of the top 50 offenses, Washington four.

2) Alabama has also played six of the top 50 DEFENSES, Washington four.

3) Washington is VERY good at avoiding turnovers, they average less than one per game. They've turned it over 12 times and forced 33 turnovers.

4) We're pretty good at the turnover thing, too, but we make teams pay far more immediately for their indiscretions (as in pick sixes and fumble returns for TDs). This last is certainly not surprising.

My point is that all of those factors - softer schedule, better defenses and offenses (admittedly a sort of subpoint of the SOS) - indicate that 'close' stats aren't quite as close as they look.

I'm going to reiterate what I've said here a hundred times: you win football games by running the ball, stopping the run, and winning the turnover battle. Maybe our Husky readers here can tell us a little about the following games (and guys, anyone here can tell you my inquiry is serious - I'd love to know from those of you who watch them more often than I do; I've seen three of your games and am watching USC through this week):

Arizona - they were terrible record-wise, but they're the best RUSHING team the Huskies played. They average 235 per game and lit up Washington for 308 yards. The game went into overtime where Washington prevailed. Of course, part of that is because Arizona's rushing defense is nothing short of awful (82nd, down near Arkansas and ATM). The Huskies actually rushed for more yards than Arizona did (352).

What went on in this game? It appears Washington won in part because they won the turnover battle, 3-1. Ok, the game was in Arizona, and it's also possible that Washington was looking ahead to the next two games with Stanford and Oregon. I'll grant that. What's up guys?

Oregon - the Ducks average 226 yards per game and exceeded it by four yards. Yes, they lost by seven touchdowns. Washington ran all over them, too.....but then again, Oregon ranks 121st out of 128 teams in rushing defense; even if you subtracted the Huskies nailing them for nearly 400 yards, they'd still rank 113th.

Washington's rushing offense ranks 36th at 210 yards per game.

Who did Alabama play with rushing offenses better than Washington this year?

Auburn (278.5) - held to 66; however, I'll spot them a little here because Pettway was nowhere close to 100% that day. But even healthy he would not have accounted for an additional 200 yards.

Kentucky (241.3) - held to 72

LSU (238.1) - held to 33

Mississippi St (233.2) - held to 94

Texas A/M (217.5) - held to 114


On the flip side - in favor of Washington fwiw - we've only played one passing offense better than yours, Ole Miss...and that was the one close game we had this year.

But here's one that might give Husky fans pause - you've played ONE PASSING DEFENSE rated higher than Alabama this year, Colorado....and they're 1/2 yard per game less than Alabama.

They held your QB to a season low 118 yards and only nine completions. And it's those COMBINED STATS that cause a lot of our better informed fans to basically say, "If we play our game, you have no chance." If you can't run and can't pass.....there's not much else left. Rutgers has a highly rated passing defense, but that's only because they're 126th against the run and teams are trying to not run the score up on them. (This is one of those little areas where statistics have some truth AND some fiction).

But there's more....the next highest rated passing defense you've faced was Oregon State (#44). Browning lit them up for 291 yards, about eighty more than they average surrendering.

=======

I think Washington does have a chance here, but it's a tiny window. You'll need to win the turnover battle AND cash those in for scores. We've lost the turnover battle in most recent games (not including Florida), but it hasn't mattered because teams either cannot cash in or are so far behind it doesn't matter if they do.



Now, a note about something you're going to hear that is mostly poppycock. ESPN is going to have all kinds of ignorant announcers channeling their 'inner Gary Danielson' and saying, "you can beat Alabama if you have a mobile quarterback" and then they'll cite the same examples we've heard ad nauseum. Let me kindly remove that notion from being a factor, because it isn't. Let me go over the ones they talk about real quick here:

1) 2008 Florida - Tim Tebow

This shouldn't even count. That was Saban's second year and MOSTLY still Mike Shula's recruits. They always forget we led that game going into the fourth quarter despite having a name out of the phone book at quarterback and almost no offensive stars outside of Julio Jones (Mark Ingram had his coming out the next year). The simple truth is that Florida was a MUCH better team than we were that year, and we arrived early. Note that when we had another year, they never mention us pounding them so badly that Urban Meyer quit after having a heart attack.

2) 2010 Cam Newton

Cam Newton might have been the greatest all-around player in the history of the SEC. But for those who didn't see that game, it was the most bizarre defeat I've ever experienced as a Tide fan. But they didn't win because Cam was some awesome dual threat in that game - Alabama's Greg McElroy actually threw for almost 200 yards more than Cam despite the fact McElroy left the game with an injury with about six minutes left. And Cam only rushed for 39 yards on 22 attempts, not exactly stellar numbers. (Forgotten is that Auburn had minus 8 yards offense in the first quarter).

We lost this game because:
a) the most insane fumble you will ever see cost us a touchdown (or at least three for sure) from Mark Ingram
b) Trent Richardson dropped a wide open touchdown and we settled for three
c) we fumbled the ball at the Auburn 8 right before halftime and lost at least three more

There were other reasons, and Cam deserves credit as does Auburn for fighting on. But stuff that would never happen in a million years all happened in one game. We lost PRIMARILY because of.....turnovers. And also because we failed to cash in opportunities.

3) 2012 Johnny Manziel

The part that gets forgotten here (by the ignorant press) is:
a) ATM rushed for 165 yards, and JM2 only had 92 of those - they had other backs
b) we had 3 turnovers and they had none
c) a play-calling sequence starting with first and goal at the end that defied common sense

4) 2013 Nick Marshall

Auburn rushed for nearly 300 yards against us. But what killed us mostly there was that Tre Mason got 164 by himself. Again, I'm not trying to take away from Marshall, and he played a good game against us that day - and Auburn wouldn't have won without his efforts. But...we lost because: a) Auburn had a GOOD running game; and b) we again failed to cash in opportunities in the red zone.

5) 2014 Cardale Jones

This example is going to be out there until the post-season is over. Unfortunately, even if we win, this same recited narrative will come up against next year. "Ohio State beat Alabama with a QB that was third string." True, but look at the box score a little closer:

a) Ohio State rushed for 281 yards against us, 230 from Zeke Elliott
b) Jones was just elusive enough to avoid a safety on a critical play in the game
c) we turned the ball over 3 times to their 2...and the last one was a pick six....we lost by 7
d) Ohio State averaged 6.7 yards per carry.

And that's the thing - if you can RUN on us, STOP our run, and beat us at turnovers.....you will win. (I hasten to add, however, that even Ohio State didn't exactly stop us rushing. We had twin guns in the backfield (TJ Yeldon and a not yet Heisman Derrick Henry) that.....well, I don't know what Kiffin was thinking. Henry only got 13 carries, and we threw the ball 36 times and ran 34...and Henry still had 95 yards in just those carries.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the first Washington-Alabama game since Christmas Day thirty years ago (and yes, I remember it well).

Stats lie...line em up and let's play.

rgw said:

I guess what I'm saying is I think the DB group is going to get challenged by the staff all during the lead up to this game. This is a money game for guys like Fitz, Averett, Hump, etc. They put on good tape here, they're gonna make money off it down the line. Ball security is going to be harped on by the offensive staff and head coach...because it is absolutely critical that the skill guys protect the ball and the QB doesn't throw bad balls into coverage.

Click to expand...

Appreciate that. I am just trying to get a good feel for this game. Washington is a good team and even though I expect us to win they aren't going to lay down at all. They'll need a few balls to bounce in their favor I believe to even have a chance.


Sent from my iPad Pro 12.9" using Tapatalk Roll Tide!

RTR91 said:

Selma, did you do stats including games against Bama and Washington or did you take those games out?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

You'll have to explain because I don't understand what you're asking. Maybe I do, let's see.

If you're asking me now if - for example - "did you take out the Auburn game when figuring Auburn's rushing stats for the year," that's what I USUALLY do that takes time. No, not here - that skews the numbers even more decisively Alabama's way in fact. I'm just participating here using the listing at the NCAA site. But that IS how I do it when coming up with the predictive model because you have to do so.

I also USUALLY cut out games that obviously skew the data. For example, Portland St for Washington. Normally, I would remove UTC for us, but it's not like Charleston Southern last year.

So no, I didn't do that here, but I WILL while working on this thing as I always do. That's when I took one look at the numbers and said, "We're absolutely going to kill Notre Dame" (the first time I used it).

I also use a 'mean monitor' that figures averages. For example, how many games was a team held below its average output and by how much. In 2012, we held all but one team DOUBLE DIGITS below their normal offensive point total. (I also have to go through and deduct things like defensive and special teams TDs that skew it as well).

Based on this year, there's a VERY high probability that Alabama gets at least ONE touchdown from the defense if we play two games - possibly two TDs (from defense and/or special teams).

If that's what you're asking then I didn't here, but I do there.

CoolBreeze said:

Stats lie...line em up and let's play.

Click to expand...

Actually, stats are a window - the problem is that people want to use them as a chain.

Another stat - Washington has not allowed a single NOT to be scored on them all season while Alabama has allowed only one (a fumble return for a TD). But each has had a great deal of success in this arena:

Washington has 7 NOTs: 2 KO, 2 Punt, 2 Int and 1 fumble return
Alabama has had 14 - 0 KO, 4 punt, 5 Int and 5 fumble returns

Looking at the turnover margins, Washington has the edge. They are plus 1.6 turnovers/game almost no matter how you slice the data. Even against their better competition they have done well in the turnover department. Alabama, even with your crazy NOT stats, is not as good at creating turnovers, with a plus .3 for the season.

So, the reality is that Washington is likely to win the turnover battle in this game. It is far from a lock - they were even with USC at 2 each, and Utah won the turnover battle 1-0. But Alabama should not expect a NOT in this game. You are going to have to score your TDs the old fashioned way - by running the ball down their throats.

B1GTide said:

Another stat - Washington has not allowed a single NOT to be scored on them all season while Alabama has allowed only one (a fumble return for a TD). But each has had a great deal of success in this arena:

Washington has 7 NOTs: 2 KO, 2 Punt, 2 Int and 1 fumble return
Alabama has had 14 - 0 KO, 4 punt, 5 Int and 5 fumble returns

Looking at the turnover margins, Washington has the edge. They are plus 1.6 turnovers/game almost no matter how you slice the data. Even against their better competition they have done well in the turnover department. Alabama, even with your crazy NOT stats, is not as good at creating turnovers, with a plus .3 for the season.

So, the reality is that Washington is likely to win the turnover battle in this game. It is far from a lock - they were even with USC at 2 each, and Utah won the turnover battle 1-0. But Alabama should not expect a NOT in this game. You are going to have to score your TDs the old fashioned way - by running the ball down their throats.

Click to expand...

Another stat that puts that into perspective:

Washington only trailed in four games this year.

They only trailed twice in the second half, and they lost one of them.


Only once did they ever trail by more than one score....and that's the game they lost.


And how many times have we seen the scenario in recent years: team slugs it out with Alabama and is hanging tough. They're really playing good. Tide drives long down the field and settles for a field goal. It's still a game. Tide D holds them to a three and out. Our offense is right back on the field - another drive right down the field, touchdown. Eats up five or six minutes.

All of a sudden they're down by ten and get desperate.


The Throw.
The Pick.
The Pick Six.
Game Over.


I think Washington would be ripe for that level of impatience given the fact they never trailed by much this year.

B1GTide said:

Another stat - Washington has not allowed a single NOT to be scored on them all season while Alabama has allowed only one (a fumble return for a TD). But each has had a great deal of success in this arena:

Washington has 7 NOTs: 2 KO, 2 Punt, 2 Int and 1 fumble return
Alabama has had 14 - 0 KO, 4 punt, 5 Int and 5 fumble returns

Looking at the turnover margins, Washington has the edge. They are plus 1.6 turnovers/game almost no matter how you slice the data. Even against their better competition they have done well in the turnover department. Alabama, even with your crazy NOT stats, is not as good at creating turnovers, with a plus .3 for the season.

So, the reality is that Washington is likely to win the turnover battle in this game. It is far from a lock - they were even with USC at 2 each, and Utah won the turnover battle 1-0. But Alabama should not expect a NOT in this game. You are going to have to score your TDs the old fashioned way - by running the ball down their throats.

Click to expand...

Btw, I agree with you that:
a) we will have to run and run and run (2012 UGA game everyone?)
b) they're more likely to have fewer TOs than we are.