t.o.p. - a statistical look at how our defense wore down

[RohanMotor]

I started a thread about 2/3rds of the way through the season about how our defense was getting worn down by being on the field so much every game. We were one of the worst teams in the country in time of possession. Early in the season tackling and run defense were very good. As the season wore on, they both deteriorated. Think about an individual football game. When a defense starts to tire what happens? Tackling starts to go and the other team can usually ram the ball down your throat running it. Now that the season is over, let's look at some stats....

First column is the opponents yards per carry (ypc) against us. Second column is their average ypc on the season. Third column is the difference. A negative number means we held them below their season average. A positive number means we didn't. A really big positive number means our anuses were sore after the game.


______ypc______
Team us avg diff
FAU 3.1 4.4 -1.3
UF.. 2.8 3.6 -0.8
USF 3.0 3.0 0.0
GT.. 5.4 5.6 -0.2
UNC 2.9 3.9 -1.0
WF. 2.4 2.9 -0.5
FSU 4.4 5.7 -1.3
VT.. 3.9 3.1 +0.8
Duke 6.9 4.4 +2.5
UVA 5.3 3.8 +1.5
Pitt. 6.7 3.6 +3.1

a month off to rest and then....

Louis 3.5 4.2 -0.7

Analysis: The trend is obvious. We held the first 7 d1 opponents to at or under their average ypc. That's good. In fact, that's real good in light of how bad our run defense was all of last year. Then a crack in the armor appears against VT, our 9th game of the season. For the first time we give up more ypc than the opponent averages. Then it just continues to worse from there on out. Remember our bye was early in the year and after essentially an extra 2 day rest after UNC, there was no more rest time.

The kicker here is the bowl game. After the clear trend of worsening run defense through the end of the year capped off with Pitt nearly doubling their avg ypc against us, all of a suddenly we completely reversed the trend and stuffed Louisville on the ground. Holding them to 3.5 ypc, .7 yards below their average. Obviously the rest time paid off.

I don't know. I think as the year went by, opponents figured out they could throw on us easily. Especially the drag routes, anything underneath. I would like to see the same analyst done for passing defense. Opponents were very successful with the TE and screens.

 

[Glacava75]

Out of the NCAA STATS page (national rankings)

Rushing Defense 77
Sacks-54
Total Defense-90 (FAU, USF, UCF were better ranked)

Our Defense sucked, no doubts about it!

 

[terdferguson]

Early in the season we played 4 god awful offenses. Literally the worst offenses on the planet.

Your point isn't valid in this argument.

The OP is comparing each opponent over the span of their respective season and his analysis is based on comparing apples to apples: how UM's defense compared to the average YPC for each opponent throughout the season.

IMO, great post and analysis.

Bull****.

Stats don't exist in a vacuum. AQ powers are supposed to hold ****ty teams to well below their respective averages. Oftentimes, bad teams play other bad teams. Simply because you hold a bunch of ****rag offenses below their norm does not mean you're achieving at a high clip relative to your peers. It means you'd kick a bunch of *** in the SunBelt or FCS.

Now, I still think OP has a valid point, but you can't discount **** opposition.

What matters is the competition that our opponent faced. So yes what you're saying is true but it only applies to Savannah State, who I didnt even include in the analysis, and USF since they play in a crappy conference. If you remove USF, the conclusion drawn from these stats remains unchanged.

 

[dk72]

I called it to the people I was watching the game with after the game was 9-2 and we held them to 3 FG's, I said 1-2 more 3 and outs and the defense will crumble...

Louisville isnt even a high tempo offense and they ran 76 plays without trying to

Our offense has a significant role in the D's issues.

Absolutely. As weak as our defense has been this year, the bowl loss falls squarely on the offense and the fact that Bridgewater had the best day of what had been an excellent college career. The offense was miserable, the defense had no time to rest or regroup, and Bridgewater made some amazing throws that were completed despite very good coverage.

 

[supacane]

This is crap, defenses suck because they suck. Why don't we turn around and say the offense is pressing because they know the D wont make any stops? Look at Texas A&M, do u think their offense sucks? Their defense sucks because it sucks. It has nothing to do with anything or anyone else. Point blank, period. Stop making excuses, Golden drilled that **** into your head last year and you still carried it into this season. There is no rule book that says you have to have a offense that holds on to the ball to field a good defense. We suck because our defensive staff is a big ******.

 

[CaneAlmighty]

Had the offense converted 3rd downs at a 45 % rate we would have held the ball 5 Minutes more a game Which would have Resulted in the defense giving up 360 yards per game on average.

 

[Ibis4life]

You have to love Canes fans. We love being miserable. For half the season, while we were going 7 & 0, fans were talking about playing for the national championship this year and complaining that Highsmith, Rodgers, Green, Gaines, Cornelius and Armbruster are not "Miami talent" and shouldn't even be playing D1 football. After a few losses it switched to "we have way too much talent to lose to Virginia Tech and Duke." The facts in this analysis are clear and he left out one glaring red flag. In the FSU game we lost 70% of our offense when Duke went down. Yes, Dallas did a nice job grinding out yards but we lost that home run hitter. Defenses didn't fear giving up the big play on the ground without Duke back there. And when we lost Dorsett, they were able to focus on Coley as a deep threat without worrying too much about the other receivers deep. We need more firepower on the offensive side of the ball as well as more talent and depth on the defensive side. It has started. Grace, Carter and Burns got a lot more playing time in the bowl game that should pay dividends next year. Having Yearby and Powell behind Duke next year will also be a huge plus. Everything I am reading from the UA practices it also sounds like we have a stud slot receiver coming in Barrios.

 

[nycane]

You have to love Canes fans. We love being miserable. For half the season, while we were going 7 & 0, fans were talking about playing for the national championship this year and complaining that Highsmith, Rodgers, Green, Gaines, Cornelius and Armbruster are not "Miami talent" and shouldn't even be playing D1 football. After a few losses it switched to "we have way too much talent to lose to Virginia Tech and Duke." The facts in this analysis are clear and he left out one glaring red flag. In the FSU game we lost 70% of our offense when Duke went down. Yes, Dallas did a nice job grinding out yards but we lost that home run hitter. Defenses didn't fear giving up the big play on the ground without Duke back there. And when we lost Dorsett, they were able to focus on Coley as a deep threat without worrying too much about the other receivers deep. We need more firepower on the offensive side of the ball as well as more talent and depth on the defensive side. It has started. Grace, Carter and Burns got a lot more playing time in the bowl game that should pay dividends next year. Having Yearby and Powell behind Duke next year will also be a huge plus. Everything I am reading from the UA practices it also sounds like we have a stud slot receiver coming in Barrios.

i never believed that we were playing for an nc. i agree with your last part. we saw the new blood, the future. grace, kamalu, burns,carter, figs, aqm, will all get better.

 

[SFbayCane]

Terd,
Good stuff. You data is solid, however I tend to agree with RohanMotor's conclusion. Its not that our D wore down its that our D never made any adjustments and teams eventually figured out how to attack our D and our coaching staff did not make changes. I've been saying for months now that as soon as teams saw our game against the gators they had all the film they needed to out scheme us. Our defense did nothing different between the UF and Va Tech games. The first time we something different from our defense was the UVa game.

 

[terdferguson]

Terd,
Good stuff. You data is solid, however I tend to agree with RohanMotor's conclusion. Its not that our D wore down its that our D never made any adjustments and teams eventually figured out how to attack our D and our coaching staff did not make changes. I've been saying for months now that as soon as teams saw our game against the gators they had all the film they needed to out scheme us. Our defense did nothing different between the UF and Va Tech games. The first time we something different from our defense was the UVa game.

I agree with you but that is related to the passing game and unrelated to the stats that I've shown involving the running game. I don't see any evidence that teams "figured out" how to run on us. And if so, did Louisville magically not figure out what everyone else did? And how come no one else before VT figured it out?

 

[supacane]

Terd,
Good stuff. You data is solid, however I tend to agree with RohanMotor's conclusion. Its not that our D wore down its that our D never made any adjustments and teams eventually figured out how to attack our D and our coaching staff did not make changes. I've been saying for months now that as soon as teams saw our game against the gators they had all the film they needed to out scheme us. Our defense did nothing different between the UF and Va Tech games. The first time we something different from our defense was the UVa game.

I agree with you but that is related to the passing game and unrelated to the stats that I've shown involving the running game. I don't see any evidence that teams "figured out" how to run on us. And if so, did Louisville magically not figure out what everyone else did? And how come no one else before VT figured it out?

huh Duke ran for 7000 yards against us. wtf were u watching? Teams do wat they want with our D, they just chose to throw for 500 yards

 

[poncho0091]

Terd,
Good stuff. You data is solid, however I tend to agree with RohanMotor's conclusion. Its not that our D wore down its that our D never made any adjustments and teams eventually figured out how to attack our D and our coaching staff did not make changes. I've been saying for months now that as soon as teams saw our game against the gators they had all the film they needed to out scheme us. Our defense did nothing different between the UF and Va Tech games. The first time we something different from our defense was the UVa game.

I agree with you but that is related to the passing game and unrelated to the stats that I've shown involving the running game. I don't see any evidence that teams "figured out" how to run on us. And if so, did Louisville magically not figure out what everyone else did? And how come no one else before VT figured it out?

I don't think it's as much about teams learned to run against us or our defense getting worn down. Every team wears down as the season goes on. I think its more about the fact that the first 5 teams we played were really bad teams/ offenses or run only offenses. When you know the only thing the other team can do is run the ball, you can just stack the box and play physical which we did. When its a crap team, they don't usually play BCS talent teams so their averages will be higher. What I feel is that Dnofrio and Golden don't know how to make adjustments for a team that can run AND pass.

Game 1 - FAU (crap)
Game 2 - UF (run only team. Horrible QB.)
Game 3 - Sav St (crap)
Game 4 - USF (crap)
Game 5 - GT (extremely run only)

Then you look at UNC, WF, and FSU. These teams were the first ones we played that could pass. we held them under their average ypc because we probably stayed close to play the run (maybe our coaches thought our defense was good with what we were doing after those first 5 games) and they realized they could just abuse us in the passing game and killed us there. They didnt even need more passing attempts because they were getting lots of yards. Nearly every team on our schedule after GT had a more balanced offense and we could not adjust.

North Carolina had their highest one of their highest passing % and yards against us. (avg of 62.5% us 74.4%)
Wake Forest had one of their only 2 games of the season where they passed for over 300 yards (the other was east carolina)
FSU had us beat so early in the 3rd that they could afford to start running the clock early and their average is going to go down when all they are doing is running out the clock and we are stacking the box to stop it.

After that the wheels fell off with VT and Duke.

 

[terdferguson]

Terd,
Good stuff. You data is solid, however I tend to agree with RohanMotor's conclusion. Its not that our D wore down its that our D never made any adjustments and teams eventually figured out how to attack our D and our coaching staff did not make changes. I've been saying for months now that as soon as teams saw our game against the gators they had all the film they needed to out scheme us. Our defense did nothing different between the UF and Va Tech games. The first time we something different from our defense was the UVa game.

I agree with you but that is related to the passing game and unrelated to the stats that I've shown involving the running game. I don't see any evidence that teams "figured out" how to run on us. And if so, did Louisville magically not figure out what everyone else did? And how come no one else before VT figured it out?

I don't think it's as much about teams learned to run against us or our defense getting worn down. Every team wears down as the season goes on. I think its more about the fact that the first 5 teams we played were really bad teams/ offenses or run only offenses. When you know the only thing the other team can do is run the ball, you can just stack the box and play physical which we did. When its a crap team, they don't usually play BCS talent teams so their averages will be higher. What I feel is that Dnofrio and Golden don't know how to make adjustments for a team that can run AND pass.

Game 1 - FAU (crap)
Game 2 - UF (run only team. Horrible QB.)
Game 3 - Sav St (crap)
Game 4 - USF (crap)
Game 5 - GT (extremely run only)

Then you look at UNC, WF, and FSU. These teams were the first ones we played that could pass. we held them under their average ypc because we probably stayed close to play the run (maybe our coaches thought our defense was good with what we were doing after those first 5 games) and they realized they could just abuse us in the passing game and killed us there. They didnt even need more passing attempts because they were getting lots of yards. Nearly every team on our schedule after GT had a more balanced offense and we could not adjust.

North Carolina had their highest one of their highest passing % and yards against us. (avg of 62.5% us 74.4%)
Wake Forest had one of their only 2 games of the season where they passed for over 300 yards (the other was east carolina)
FSU had us beat so early in the 3rd that they could afford to start running the clock early and their average is going to go down when all they are doing is running out the clock and we are stacking the box to stop it.

After that the wheels fell off with VT and Duke.

The dual threat offense thing is interesting but I don't see where it has a place in this debate. There's no correlation between facing dual threat teams and our run defense's performance. As you said, our run d held up against UNC, WF, and FSU. But then didn't against VT and Duke. Also UVA fits into the non dual threat category and they still ran all over us. Louisville, dual threat offense, we shut down their run game. No correlation, it's all over the map. You know what all that does prove though? That our pass defense sucks.

 

[poncho0091]

Fair enough, but ultimately what I'd like to point out is that once we play a team that can pass, our defense is lost. Also another possible explanation is that these passing teams create more first downs passing which keeps our defense on the field longer. After the GT game, passing first downs increased significantly per game. Also, after the GT game, avg. yards given up per play went up significantly. WF and uva is the only ones that stayed around the average and we still gave up 16 and 15 passing first downs against them (first 5 games 6,12,1,9,3 passing first downs).

I just honestly believe that once we played passing teams we got more exposed. Maybe our defense did get worn down, but I blame the defense themselves.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/miami-fl/2013/gamelog/

 

[Pennmed Canefan]

You are probably right here to an extent, but there are a couple of things that aren't accounted for. One is that we set out this year (and others) to stop the run, and we likely made some adjustments to protect us against the pass as those teams in the middle of the schedule lit us up. As that happens, it opens us up versus the run. The second is the demoralization of the defense. By the time FSU hit and we got beaten badly, we had to face the realization that the defense really wasn't much better than last year. We the fans could see that and I'm sure the players felt that as well. It's not that easy to recover from that and I think we were in the doldrums for awhile afterward. In fact I'm sure we still are to an extent.

UL is a standalone game with its own gameplan and a chance for the players to recharge physically but also emotionally.

 

[CaneHammer]

You are probably right here to an extent, but there are a couple of things that aren't accounted for. One is that we set out this year (and others) to stop the run, and we likely made some adjustments to protect us against the pass as those teams in the middle of the schedule lit us up. As that happens, it opens us up versus the run. The second is the demoralization of the defense. By the time FSU hit and we got beaten badly, we had to face the realization that the defense really wasn't much better than last year. We the fans could see that and I'm sure the players felt that as well. It's not that easy to recover from that and I think we were in the doldrums for awhile afterward. In fact I'm sure we still are to an extent.

UL is a standalone game with its own gameplan and a chance for the players to recharge physically but also emotionally.

I think you can add this on top of what Terd Ferg said.

 

[poncho0091]

You are probably right here to an extent, but there are a couple of things that aren't accounted for. One is that we set out this year (and others) to stop the run, and we likely made some adjustments to protect us against the pass as those teams in the middle of the schedule lit us up. As that happens, it opens us up versus the run. The second is the demoralization of the defense. By the time FSU hit and we got beaten badly, we had to face the realization that the defense really wasn't much better than last year. We the fans could see that and I'm sure the players felt that as well. It's not that easy to recover from that and I think we were in the doldrums for awhile afterward. In fact I'm sure we still are to an extent.

UL is a standalone game with its own gameplan and a chance for the players to recharge physically but also emotionally.

These are my thoughts exactly, but got caught up in looking for some numbers to provide some backup. Because of how badly our run defense got criticized last year, I'm sure the coaches put a huge focus on stopping the run this year.