Explosive Plays

Submitted by HarleyMarlboro on October 11th, 2023 at 7:28 AM

In his $Mailbag this week, Stewart Mandel talks about Penn State's lack of explosive plays.  They actually rank dead last in FBS.  This is going to cause a major problem for them going forward.  

He also notes that all four CFP teams last year ranked in the top 20, although Michigan was last out of the four at #17.  This year, according to CFBstats, we are #39 currently in long scrimmage plays (20+ yards).  I'm hoping this is a result of choking out lesser competition, and saving some of those big plays for "real" competition, but it will be interesting to keep an eye on it going forward.

MGoCJ

October 11th, 2023 at 7:42 AM ^

I think people underestimate how dominating everybody has hurt us in some of these types of stats.  Our starters sitting 25-30% of the football games have greatly limited their opportunities to have big plays.  We also have had minimal incentive to use our best plays that would have a higher probability of hitting for 20+.  I don’t have any stats to back it up, but it seems a lot of our big plays last year occurred in the 2nd half after wearing teams down.

enlightenedbum

October 11th, 2023 at 9:13 AM ^

Yeah the only record in danger this year I think is not cumulative.  JJ's 10.4 yards per attempt would break 1986 Harbaugh's record of 10.1.  JJ would be 24th all time.

Also kind of crazy that Lincoln Riley coached 5 of the top 12 on that metric (counting this year which has Caleb Williams at 12th and Penix at 5th), including 2016-2019 Oklahoma being 2, 3, 4, and 9.

But even more crazy is that Grayson McCall averaged 11.9 yards per attempt (!!!) in 2021.

chrisball96

October 11th, 2023 at 8:13 AM ^

As always I think we keep the playbook pretty vanilla until the big games, so these stats make sense for the moment. With the talent we have I fully expect to see some explosive plays against Ohio State and Penn State.

Booted Blue in PA

October 11th, 2023 at 8:40 AM ^

Our running game was not hitting its stride in the first several games this season.  I would be curious to see how many runs over 20 yards we had in the first 6 games last year vs this year.  Now that Blake and The Don are back in form we should see them pop more of those 'explosive play' carries.

Yeoman

October 11th, 2023 at 10:12 AM ^

cfbstats conveniently has monthly splits (but not, unfortunately, run/pass splits so it doesn't quite answer your question).

Through five games this year we had 25 plays of 20+. Through five games last year we had 26. Season started a bit later two years ago but through four games we had 21. 2020 we didn't have a September. 2019 it was 21 in four games. 2018 it was 27 in five games.

The lack of variance is weird but otherwise this is at least two patties short of a nothingburger.

NeverPunt

October 11th, 2023 at 9:12 AM ^

For a serious reply on this topic:

Thru 6 games this year:  Michigan has 31 plays of 20+ yards. 5.1 per game

For all  14 games of 2022: Michigan had 78 plays of 20+ yards, so 5.6 per game.

I couldn't find a specific RB ranking by year to compare, but I did find an article from last Sept. which pointed out Blake led the country in 20+ runs at the time with 8 at that stage in the season. 

My guess is that given the above, our RBs have been a little less explosive than last year, we've been mercying teams by the 3rd quarter this year, and the rest of college football may be a little more designed for big play, fast hitting offense than we are.

The Mad Hatter

October 11th, 2023 at 10:40 AM ^

I've been rewatching some games from last season and I had forgotten just how close some of them were.  We were playing starters all the way until the end more than a few times.

Last year we were a second half team.  This year we're a beat the snot out of you early then take a nap team.

I'll be interested to see what it looks like when we don't lift off the gas. 

Vasav

October 11th, 2023 at 2:30 PM ^

offensively we're going to lose like, 10 starters tho right? the entire OL, QB, 2 RBs, top 2 WRs - our 3rd RB looks good, we bring back 3 TE/FB types, and I dont expect a major dropoff from receivers but do expect a major dropoff at QB - and while the 2nd OL is good, I think replacing all 5 at once would portend a step back. Trente, Raheem, Crippen, and Hinton does sound like a 4/5 of a pretty good OL though

QB is the x factor and it will be a lot of new faces. D can def hold it down though - we'll lose mikey, wallace, rod moore, barret and likely colson and Jenkins and Harrel? 5 returning starters, experienced backups stepping up at all of those positions except nickel/2nd corner, and either Walker/Hill should hit at one of those. Yea i'm feeling pretty good about the D.

treetown

October 11th, 2023 at 9:12 AM ^

These sorts of stats are so biased by the opposition that the early season rankings are not useful.

Consider the Denard Robinson era teams. During the first month (3 non-conference games usually), he would rip off many 20+ yard runs and passes but at the end of the year against the better Big Ten teams, it was a different matter.

As a metric for professional teams, which are more consistent in the rosters and skill level, this may make more sense.

Let's see how this looks for teams as they enter conference play.

Vasav

October 11th, 2023 at 2:38 PM ^

One thing though is, how you play against crappy teams is instructive of how you will do. In 2019 we beat MTSU comfortably but right off the bat you could see this O hadn't figure itself out. We struggled against Army and got toasted by Wiscy, and it wasn't until halftime against Penn State that we looked good. In 2021 watching us blowout WMU and NIU (in addition to a bad Washington) let us know that it was going to be a good year - although how good may not be clear, taking care of bad teams gives you some idea. Being threatened by Rutgers did portend that we had a ceiling, and 2022 we weren't really threatened by anybody in the 4th quarter except Illinois. So far we've not really been threatened by anyone in the 2nd half.

Those early games do show just how well-oiled of a machine you are - it was clear right away how much better in '22 JJ was at the helm of the offense against CSU than Cade was. There's something to that, and to those who're trying to quantify it.