GATA 2009 WAC Stats

[FishingBack]

These stats may surprise you. They are conference only stats.

Tech was:

3rd in scoring D behind Boise and Nevada
2nd in total D behind Boise
2nd in rushing D behind Nevada
6th in pass D ahead of Idaho, Nevada, and Utah State
2nd in pass efficiency D behind Boise
2nd in interceptions behind Boise
2nd in sacks by, behind Nevada
3rd in turnovers gained and turnover margin, behind Boise and Nevada
T-2nd in redzone defense with Fresno, behind NMSU

I think that is good, despite the perception of our pass D being terrible.

[FishingBack]

And our offensive scoring was better in 2009 than 2008 by about 5 points a game.

We did not lose games because of offense and defense for the most part.

SPECIAL TEAMS was the culprit. We hit rock bottom there.

[SixWings]

Special teams were the reason the D looked bad. When you give the opposing team 50 yards to score, instead of 70-80, the D looks better in stats, but not where it counts.

Our kick-offs and punts were bad, and our coverage was worse. We won games in 08 because of ST (MSU, NIU, etc), and we lost a lot of games in 09 because of them.

[champion110]

Doesn't surprise me a bit. I think the stats would be high if you counted non-conference as well. We barely lost games last year - no huge blow outs. We have never played lsu that close (almost beat them) and we beat MState. Our defense was not the problem. Yes, Special Teams was a problem, but our offense was not good. We couldn't put enough points on the board. We could move the ball okay, but the points were not there. I am not looking at any stats, though, so that is just my perception.

[FishingBack]

Special teams were the reason the D looked bad. When you give the opposing team 50 yards to score, instead of 70-80, the D looks better in stats, but not where it counts.

Our kick-offs and punts were bad, and our coverage was worse. We won games in 08 because of ST (MSU, NIU, etc), and we lost a lot of games in 09 because of them.

Idaho returned the opening kickoff for a TD. We fumbled a kickoff vs USU.

We failed to block kicks like we had in the past. We failed to cover returns.

[Cactus Rob]

These stats may surprise you. They are conference only stats.

Tech was:

3rd in scoring D behind Boise and Nevada
2nd in total D behind Boise
2nd in rushing D behind Nevada
6th in pass D ahead of Idaho, Nevada, and Utah State
2nd in pass efficiency D behind Boise
2nd in interceptions behind Boise
2nd in sacks by, behind Nevada
3rd in turnovers gained and turnover margin, behind Boise and Nevada
T-2nd in redzone defense with Fresno, behind NMSU

Wow, and all of that with a losing record!

[techman05]

I said this in December and I will say it again. Our stats look decent and our team was DECENT. However, every other team, without exception, in our conference improved in some phase of the game if not every phase. We didn't improve enough in any phase to keep up.

[FishingBack]

I said this in December and I will say it again. Our stats look decent and our team was DECENT. However, every other team, without exception, in our conference improved in some phase of the game if not every phase. We didn't improve enough in any phase to keep up.

It's not that we didn't improve, it's that special teams tanked.

Our offense and defense were better in conference play. It's the special teams almost exclusively - combined with injuries of course. However even with the injuries we had decent offensive and defensive stats.

We also had a huge disparity on the road. Our huge blowout wins at home boosted our stats.

[SixWings]

Interesting numbers...

Tech's Total/scoring offense
372 ypg(77th in the country) / 29 ppg (46th in the country)

Tech's total/scoring defense
368 ypg(60th in the country) / 25.75 ppg (61st in the country)

on average we scored more points and had more yards than our opponents- not something you typically see in a losing-record team.

Why? Nicholls, Hawaii, NMSU, SJSU. We blew them out.

another interesting note is the disparity between our offensive ypg and ppg numbers. We were very efficient on offense, or somehow managed to play with a short field quite a bit (which I don't remember us doing). I imagine that our 20th ranked TO differential had something to do with it, but it's still nice to be efficient.

edit:

We also had a huge disparity on the road. Our huge blowout wins at home boosted our stats.

beat me to it.

[SixWings]

(I love stats)

More interesting numbers.

Tech was 105th in the country and last in conference in net punting. (killed us slowly)
Tech was 111th in the country and 7th in conference in TFL. (this is very bad considering the special player we had on the DL)
Tech was 79th in the country and 6th in conference in Sacks Allowed. (Boise was 1st in the country)
Tech was 79th in the country and 6th in conference in Kickoff Returns. (Not sure why these are so bad, when our punt returns are so good.)
Tech was 81st in the country and 4th in conference in Run Defense. (A large fall off from the previous year)
Tech was 91st in the country and 7th in conference in Pass Offense (no surprise there)

[FishingBack]

With the recent news about Spangler staying, the conference game stats seemed very pertinent to me. 2nd in most categories beind Boise on defense is a good job.

If we get our offense rolling but keep a 2nd or 3rd place defense, we should have great results.

[Brian96]

With the recent news about Spangler staying, the conference game stats seemed very pertinent to me. 2nd in most categories beind Boise on defense is a good job.

If we get our offense rolling but keep a 2nd or 3rd place defense, we should have great results.

Plus ANY improvement in special teams, particularly kickoffs and punts.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

It's not that we didn't improve, it's that special teams tanked.

Our offense and defense were better in conference play. It's the special teams almost exclusively - combined with injuries of course. However even with the injuries we had decent offensive and defensive stats.

We also had a huge disparity on the road. Our huge blowout wins at home boosted our stats.

Wasn't Special Teams DD's baby?

[Bill Brasky]

So we kept the special teams coach right?

[qng001]

So we kept the special teams coach right?

Yes, Mark Tommerdahl