:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/20493339/182221208.0.jpg)
Confused? Visit the Advanced Stats glossary here. Or just skip to the words. I won't be offended. (Okay, I'll only be a little offended.)
Clemson 56, Wake Forest 7 |
||||||
| WF | Clemson | WF | Clemson | |||
| Close % | 52.8% | STANDARD DOWNS | ||||
| Field Position % | 29.5% | 55.4% | Success Rate | 45.5% | 54.8% | |
| Leverage % | 61.1% | 75.5% | PPP | 0.50 | 0.75 | |
| S&P | 0.959 | 1.297 | ||||
| TOTAL | ||||||
| EqPts | 18.5 | 56.4 | PASSING DOWNS | |||
| Close Success Rate | 33.3% | 52.5% | Success Rate | 14.3% | 44.4% | |
| Close PPP | 0.35 | 0.89 | PPP | 0.10 | 1.36 | |
| Close S&P | 0.680 | 1.411 | S&P | 0.241 | 1.805 | |
| RUSHING | TURNOVERS | |||||
| EqPts | 5.7 | 17.5 | Number | 2 | 0 | |
| Close Success Rate | 15.4% | 55.0% | Turnover Pts | 7.5 | 0.0 | |
| Close PPP | 0.19 | 0.44 | Turnover Pts Margin | -7.5 | +7.5 | |
| Close S&P | 0.349 | 0.989 | ||||
| Line Yards/carry | 1.66 | 3.41 | Q1 S&P | 0.813 | 1.553 | |
| Q2 S&P | 0.475 | 1.238 | ||||
| PASSING | Q3 S&P | 0.875 | 1.084 | |||
| EqPts | 12.7 | 38.9 | Q4 S&P | 0.281 | 0.784 | |
| Close Success Rate | 43.5% | 50.0% | ||||
| Close PPP | 0.43 | 1.33 | 1st Down S&P | 0.903 | 1.106 | |
| Close S&P | 0.867 | 1.833 | 2nd Down S&P | 0.333 | 1.135 | |
| SD/PD Sack Rate | 14.3% / 0.0% | 7.7% / 10.0% | 3rd Down S&P | 0.352 | 1.381 | |
| Projected Pt. Margin: Clemson +45.4 | Actual Pt. Margin: Clemson +49 | ||||||
In Wake Forest's last four games versus ranked teams, the Deacs have been outscored 52-0 (at No. 5 Florida State last year), 42-13 (to No. 14 Clemson), 38-0 (at No. 3 Notre Dame), and 56-7 (Saturday at No. 3 Clemson). Average score: 47-5. Ouch.
In the offseason, Jim Grobe and Wake talked a lot about moving back toward the run a bit. But the run was an outright disaster on Saturday, and a potentially solid secondary got lit up repeatedly but big pass plays, especially on passing downs. This game was over quickly.