Speaking of Analytics

[homer]

I’ve read Utah is big into using analytics. One use of analytics is to avoid being predictable offensively and defensively.

IMO, predictable play calling by Utah was a big factor in poor red zone performance against OSU and UofA.

If using QB Wilson limits red zone play calling options, Ludwig better make some changes.

One suggestion mentioned on this site is to use a tight end to run close to the goal line. We saw it work once this year.

That’s one idea, but unless Utah comes up with a Minnesota type high percentage short yardage play, Ludwig needs to get creative with different sets and personnel. The current RB group and O-Block schemes are not the solution.

[admiralute]

Utah uses the analytics basic or trial version. Need an upgrade to the premium version soon.

[Jim Vanderhoof]

I’m a little confused on analytics. Can someone explain. So if it’s fourth and 1 on the 10 yard line your chances are better to get the first down and possible touchdown than kick a field goal based on the results of thousands of similar situations. Not taking in to account personnel on either team. Is that correct?

[2008 National Champ]

In broad strokes, the studies say you should go for it when needing 3 yards or less on 4th down at any place on the field. Converting one 4th down that leads to a TD creates 7 points. You would need to kick 3 field goals instead of converting one 4th down for that to be the better option. And for every time you punt instead of going for it, you are accepting 0 points instead of the chance at 7.

It’s essentially the lotto effect where you never win a prize if you don’t buy a ticket but if you throw your dollar down, you at least have a chance. Or blackjack where you should play the same way the house does instead of sitting on 14 through 16 because you are afraid of busting.

[Mr Chainsaw]

So you analyze all your (and other teams) past data and determine what the likelihoods are statistically. Let say you traditionally score 50% of the time you at 4th and 2 or less. But you have a 90% chance of scoring a field goal in the same place. In the first case your expected outcome is 3.5 points (7 x 0.5 ignoring the extra point stats), in the second case your expected outcome is 2.7 (3 x 0.9). You should go for the first right? Of course there are situations or scenarios where those percentages are not what they have been when collecting the data. Also, just like with blackjack, you may have a 49% chance of winning by putting everything on black, but that doesn’t mean you can’t get red 10 times in a row and totally lose to Arizona, err I mean the house.

[RoboUte]

just like with blackjack, you may have a 49% chance of winning by putting everything on black

That’s roulette, how dare you!

[Mr Chainsaw]

Ooff, just adding to the confusion. What I thought and what I typed didn’t match up.

[RoboUte]

It doesn’t matta, nuna’ this matters

[Jim Vanderhoof]

Thanks for the explanation. I was more in line with data from past statistics. Odds and scoring percentages make more sense.

[2008 National Champ]

There is that component also but I was just referring to the utility in going for it on fourth down.

Ludwig has been an OC for over 20 years and his patterns are very well established. The other team still has to be able to stop his offense and having a good idea of what he is going to call in any situation is only half the battle. Penn State, Ohio State, Oregon in 2019 and last year, Washington last year.,, those were all teams with better talent that were able to take advantage of his known knowns.

What really makes Ludwig’s offense work is a QB that can bail him out with his legs. The number of times Huntley sidestepped a rush and completed big plays downfield on 3rd and long in 2019 was the key to that season because the play calls were getting blown up. 2021/2022 Rising kept a ton of drives moving that were initially stalled with timely scrambles.

Barnes last year – think of the last drive against SC – and to a limited extent Wilson this year have shown that they are capable of doing it but aren’t able to do it as consistently as Rising or Huntley so the offense bogs down. The play calls haven’t changed over the last 6 years. There’s just been different levels of execution.

And no amount of pleas by the fanbase is going to get Ludwig to change what he does. Every year we complain about poor red zone execution. Every year we complain about how easy it is to diagnose plays based on personnel and formation. These aren’t new issues. They can be overcome with top level QB play. And they can be exposed when only getting above average or worse QB play.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

We also don’t have a dependable short yardage back who is capable of shedding tackles near the goal line. I give Micah Bernard all of the props in the world, but he does not have the right body type and there is a considerable drop off after him in the current RB room. Combine that with a true freshman QB and that is a lot of pressure on IW shoulders in the red zone.

[Yergensen]

Does Boise St pulls Jeanty from short yardage downs due to his “body type”? Did we pull Ty because of his body type?

MB is averaging 6ypc. He runs between tackles, he runs physical, he gets tough yards. He also makes us less predictable. We need to actually use MB instead of Mitchell in short yardage situations. He’ll get it done.

The short yardage back is a dying breed, teams are trying to minimize use of roster spots for one trick ponies.

[2008 National Champ]

Jeanty goes around 215 and Jordan was in the 210 range so they weren’t really small backs, just on the shorter side.

To your point though, one of the toughest backs to bring down while Utah was in the PAC was Miles Gaskin. Played at 5’9 and around 195. Averaged 1300 yards a year and never needed to be taken out for a short yardage back. The ability to not let a defender get a clean shot on you while turning a negative play into a positive is, in my opinion, more valuable than trying to run over someone.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

I don’t disagree with what you are saying at all. MB is a stud and I wouldn’t have a problem giving him all the inside the 10 reps. I think the main issue is there is such a drop off in the RB room after him that they are probably trying to not get him beat up in multiple short yardage runs during the course of a game. The problem is that if we don’t score in the Red Zone then it doesn’t work pulling him out in those situations so I don’t think there is a choice going forward. MB needs to be the dude and we should just roll the dice on potential injury. We certainly aren’t going to win many more games only scoring 10 points.

I guess I didn’t articulate that I think that MB was being pulled in the red zone sometimes because I think the coaching staff is trying to protect him and/or restrict him to a certain number of carries a game. I just wish we had another big bodied back we could count on outside of MB. JJ leaving the program was a huge loss to our RB room. If we still had JJ and MB, we probably are 5 – 0 and have a much better functioning offense with IW running the show.

[Jim Vanderhoof]

Good post Charlie. Well said.

[Author]

Posts