clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Study Hall: UCLA 36, California 34

New, 3 comments
Thearon W. Henderson

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.