Virginia Tech Offensive Efficiency in 2008
Thursday I looked at the efficiency stats for the defense and saw the Hokies did better than what was expected of them against their opponents in 2008. Today I'll look at the offense.
The numbers aren't very good. Tech did not live up to expectations in either the running or passing games and fell miles short of where it should have been when it came to putting points on the board.
As expected, the worst numbers came from the debacle that was the Miami game. That game inspired me to write a post that was tagged under "really drunk posts" when in fact should have been given its own tag of "incredibly drunk posts".
Get the bourbon ready. The numbers are after the jump.
First up are the rushing stats. Remember that these numbers are bereft of sacks, which I view as passing plays and the NCAA erroneously views as running plays. Although maybe I should have left them in because when you include sacks, our rushing efficiency actually goes up to 1.000. How?
Because in ACC play last year, the average sack resulted in a 6.5-yard loss. Our sacks resulted in an average loss of 5.8 yards. So multiply that 0.7-yard difference over 26 sacks and the Hokies actually GAIN 18.2 yards against expectations. So we have that going for us. Which is nice.
Abbreviations: YPC - opponent's yards per carry allowed without sacks; Rush - VT carries minus sacks; ExYds - expected yards for VT; Yards - VT yards with sacks taken out; Eff - VT efficiency.
| Opponent | YPC | Rush | ExYds | Yards | Eff |
| Georgia Tech | 4.5 | 45 | 203.8 | 212 | 1.040 |
| North Carolina | 4.2 | 40 | 169.3 | 133 | 0.786 |
| Boston College | 3.6 | 37 | 134.2 | 153 | 1.140 |
| Florida State | 4.9 | 28 | 136.4 | 117 | 0.858 |
| Maryland | 4.8 | 48 | 228.8 | 281 | 1.228 |
| Miami | 5.0 | 32 | 160.6 | 117 | 0.729 |
| Duke | 4.3 | 43 | 185.7 | 214 | 1.153 |
| Virginia | 3.9 | 51 | 200.4 | 224 | 1.118 |
| Boston College | 3.6 | 51 | 184.9 | 162 | 0.876 |
| Season | 4.3 | 375 | 1623.0 | 1613 | 0.994 |
The Miami number becomes even more frustrating since it came one week after our most impressive rushing game against Maryland. For reasons I'll never understand (and don't want to) Miami's front four dominated our offensive line.
These numbers tell me our biggest problem was with the consistency of our offensive line both in passing (which we knew about because of the high sack number) and in the rushing game. One week we couldn't be stopped, the next week we had our worst game.
The offensive line is the biggest road block between the Hokies and being a national title contender, not Bryan Stinespring.
On to the passing numbers. Drink up.
Abbreviations: YPA - opponent's yards per attempt allowed; Pass - VT pass attempts; ExYds - expected yards for VT; Yards - VT actual yards; Eff - VT efficiency.
| Opponent | YPA | Pass | ExYds | Yards | Eff |
| Georgia Tech | 5.7 | 15 | 85.7 | 48 | 0.560 |
| North Carolina | 5.7 | 22 | 126.1 | 141 | 1.118 |
| Boston College | 6.1 | 27 | 164.1 | 90 | 0.548 |
| Florida State | 6.2 | 22 | 135.5 | 161 | 1.188 |
| Maryland | 6.3 | 21 | 132.5 | 127 | 0.959 |
| Miami | 7.1 | 20 | 142.9 | 173 | 1.138 |
| Duke | 7.8 | 25 | 196.0 | 147 | 0.750 |
| Virginia | 6.2 | 28 | 174.6 | 176 | 1.008 |
| Boston College | 6.1 | 19 | 115.5 | 84 | 0.727 |
| Season | 6.3 | 199 | 1259.1 | 1147 | 0.911 |
I have to admit, I thought the final number would be a lot uglier. Especially when you consider the nightmare start the passing offense had against Georgia Tech and the first Boston College game.
These number can't help but improve in 2009. Tyrod Taylor enters his third year as a starter and has receivers he actually knows and trusts. The difference in trust Taylor had in his receivers to actually run the correct route and then catch the ball went up dramatically in the last four ACC games last year.
And finally, the total yards and points efficiency numbers. Tech's points efficiency was ... spectacular. Simply spectacular.
Abbreviations: YPP - opponent yards per play allowed; Plays - VT plays; ExYds - expected yards for VT; Yards - VT actual yards; Eff - VT efficiency; PPP - opponent points per play allowed adjusted for non-offensive points; Plays - VT plays; ExPts - expected points for VT; Points - VT points minus non-offensive points; Eff - VT efficiency.
| Opponent | YPP | Plays | ExYds | Yards | Eff |
| Georgia Tech | 4.7 | 61 | 285.4 | 247 | 0.865 |
| North Carolina | 4.7 | 64 | 303.1 | 268 | 0.884 |
| Boston College | 4.4 | 65 | 283.1 | 240 | 0.848 |
| Florida State | 4.9 | 56 | 272.1 | 243 | 0.893 |
| Maryland | 5.1 | 72 | 365.4 | 400 | 1.095 |
| Miami | 5.3 | 58 | 309.8 | 250 | 0.807 |
| Duke | 5.4 | 72 | 392.4 | 334 | 0.851 |
| Virginia | 4.5 | 80 | 360.5 | 392 | 1.087 |
| Boston College | 4.4 | 72 | 313.6 | 234 | 0.746 |
| Season | 4.8 | 600 | 2888.1 | 2608 | 0.903 |
| Opponent | PPP | Plays | ExPts | Points | Eff |
| Georgia Tech | .308 | 61 | 18.8 | 20 | 1.066 |
| North Carolina | .275 | 64 | 17.6 | 20 | 1.137 |
| Boston College | .321 | 65 | 20.9 | 9 | 0.431 |
| Florida State | .327 | 56 | 18.3 | 20 | 1.094 |
| Maryland | .299 | 72 | 21.6 | 23 | 1.067 |
| Miami | .400 | 58 | 23.2 | 14 | 0.604 |
| Duke | .348 | 72 | 25.1 | 7 | 0.279 |
| Virginia | .237 | 80 | 18.9 | 17 | 0.898 |
| Boston College | .321 | 72 | 23.1 | 23 | 0.995 |
| Season | .315 | 600 | 188.9 | 153 | 0.810 |
How was it that bad? The No. 1 culprit has to be the offense's efficiency in the red zone. Tech scored points on 74 percent of its red zone possessions in ACC play, good enough for 11th in the conference. And 47 percent of its 34 red zone possessions resulted in touchdowns, also good enough for 11th in the ACC.
Only Wake Forest, which was a special kind of awful in the red zone last year, was worse than the Hokies. But the Deacs aren't a power run team by any stretch of the imagination. So for the Hokies to only be better in the red zone than Wake Forest is unacceptable.
This was one year after the Hokies had the best red zone offense in the ACC. Improvement in this area comes down to play-calling from Bryan Stinespring (which obviously worked in 2007 and failed miserably in 2008) and execution of those plays by the offense (ditto).
So we have our two things to watch for on the Hokies offense next season: Offensive line consistency and red zone production. If both of those improve, the Hokies might actually live up to the high expectations that are being set for them. If they don't, well, you can expect more posts on this blog like the one you saw after the Miami game.
0 recs |
4 comments
|
Comments
New Guy here
Look, I can’t claim to be a Hokie “fan”, but I will be watching all of the teams games for the next couple years I hope. I am from Indianapolis and am a graduate of Warren Central High School. After watching your for-now starter at RB, Darren Evans, put up ridiculous numbers on the way to my alma mater winning four consecutive state 5A championships, I became determined to watch and monitor his progress throughout college. It is my hope that he somehow has good productivity for the Hokies but finds his way back home to the Colts whenever he enters the draft.
What do Hokie fans think of Evans, and his possibility of maintaining his starting role entering next season, His performance in the Maryland game and in the Orange Bowl showed me that he is a true gamer, but I hope VTs O-line can step it up and allow DE to pound it between the tackles or seal off the edge so that he can have effective cutback lanes on the outside. Could someone give me a little more info on VTs offensive system/rushing philosophy?
I also wish I had time and motivation to blog at Speed Blue Nation
Evans is no doubt the starter, and one of, if not the, best running backs in the ACC. He would have had an even bigger year last year if our line and overall offense had any sort of consistency. But the O-Line has been getting gradually better every season, and this season’s is thought to be the best since ‘04 with Grove and the rest. I’m still waiting to see but I can see that it’s possible.
Williams will push for time, and that’s no doubt great for the team as a whole, but Evans is the go to guy no doubt. He’s gonna have a big year and is a big key to the Hokies’ offense.
Offense
f4H,
I agree that the offensive line play was substandard but the play-calling and game management by the offensive coordinator were atrocious. You highlight the ineptitude in the redzone and attribute that to Stinespring, but don’t leave him out of the picture the rest of the game either. His terrible use of personnel his tendency to run double reverses before we’ve successfully run a single reverse, his piss poor use of the tight end most of the season (barring the Orange Bowl), these are not the signs of a good coordinator.
I think the players in ‘09 are going to have to perform despite their coordinator because there’s just too much talent on the field, but it sure is nice to wish for a guy running the offense who had a clue what was going on and understood football.
MadJay
P.S. @ Bullard47 – my thoughts on Evans are that he is a very solid back who needs another half-step in speed if he wants to make it in the NFL. He has good vision, runs with power and has a great feel for where the hole is in the line. Most importantly he has good ball security. I’m glad he’s a Hokie and I expect him to have a strong season.
my beef with stiney
i like him a lot as a coordinator of the offensive scheme and as a recruiter. my problem with him as a play caller is that he seems unwilling to make adjustments when his original game plan isn’t working against the opposing defense. it’s why i can usually tell if were going to win or lose in the first quarter. because i know we’re going to run the same stuff in the second half as we did in the first regardless of whether or not it worked.
i think this, not our run-first attitude, is why we don’t have many come-from-behind wins.
by furrer4heisman on May 23, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions

by 

















