:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/42401894/457456044.0.jpg)
UCLA 36, California 34
Confused? Visit the Advanced Stats glossary here.
| Basics | California | UCLA | Nat'l Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Plays | 73 | 92 | |
| Close Rate (non-garbage time) | 100.0% | ||
| Avg Starting FP | 39.3 | 24.7 | 29.8 |
| Possessions | 15 | 15 | |
| Scoring Opportunities* |
8 | 7 | |
| Points Per Opportunity | 4.38 | 5.29 | 4.69 |
| Leverage Rate** | 65.8% | 80.4% | 68.3% |
| Close S&P*** | 0.481 | 0.544 | 0.506 |
|
* A scoring opportunity occurs when an offense gets a first down inside the opponent's 40 (or scores from outside the 40). ** Leverage Rate = Standard Downs / (Standard Downs + Passing Downs) *** When using IsoPPP, the S&P formula is (0.8*Success Rate) + (0.2*IsoPPP) |
|||
| EqPts (what's this?) | California | UCLA | |
| Total | 25.5 | 33.2 | |
| Rushing | 6.1 | 15.5 | |
| Passing | 19.4 | 17.7 | |
| Success Rate (what's this?) | California | UCLA | Nat'l Avg |
| All (close) | 35.6% | 50.0% | 42.0% |
| Rushing (close) | 28.6% | 49.0% | 43.5% |
| Passing (close) | 40.0% | 51.2% | 40.4% |
| Standard Downs | 37.5% | 56.8% | 47.3% |
| Passing Downs | 32.0% | 22.2% | 30.5% |
| IsoPPP (what's this?) | California | UCLA | Nat'l Avg |
| All (close) | 0.98 | 0.72 | 0.85 |
| Rushing (close) | 0.77 | 0.64 | 0.73 |
| Passing (close) | 1.08 | 0.81 | 0.99 |
| Standard Downs | 0.94 | 0.57 | 0.77 |
| Passing Downs | 1.08 | 2.29 | 1.14 |
| Line Stats | California | UCLA | Nat'l Avg |
| Line Yards/Carry (what's this?) | 2.36 | 3.74 | 2.93 |
| Std. Downs Sack Rt. | 4.4% | 0.0% | 4.7% |
| Pass. Downs Sack Rt. | 9.1% | 10.0% | 7.4% |
| Turnovers | California | UCLA |
|---|---|---|
| Turnovers | 1 | 3 |
| Turnover Points (what's this?) | 1.9 | 17.4 |
| Turnover Margin | California +2 | |
| Exp. TO Margin | California +0.58 | |
| TO Luck (Margin vs. Exp. Margin) | California +1.42 | |
| TO Points Margin | California +15.4 points | |
| Situational | California | UCLA |
| Q1 S&P | 0.274 | 0.579 |
| Q2 S&P | 0.510 | 0.677 |
| Q3 S&P | 0.629 | 0.469 |
| Q4 S&P | 0.472 | 0.411 |
| 1st Down S&P | 0.442 | 0.580 |
| 2nd Down S&P | 0.587 | 0.579 |
| 3rd Down S&P | 0.371 | 0.468 |
| Projected Scoring Margin: California by 7.8 | ||
| Actual Scoring Margin: UCLA by 2 | ||
California won the field position battle by nearly 15 yards per possession, benefited from turnovers by more than two touchdowns, and, based on equivalent points and turnovers, should have won this game by almost eight points. So how did the Bears lose (aside from "they got screwed by an interception call at the end")?
UCLA nearly returned a kickoff for a touchdown and set up an easy score that way. So that was part of it. And the Bears were below average in terms of turning scoring opportunities into scores. Maybe that makes up the difference?
But yeah, terrible interception call at the end.
Loading comments...