clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Study Hall: Georgia Tech 28, Miami 17

Scott Cunningham

Georgia Tech 28, Miami 17

Confused? Visit the Advanced Stats glossary here.

Basics Georgia Tech Miami Nat'l Avg
Total Plays 72 44
Close Rate (non-garbage time) 100.0%
Avg Starting FP 26.1 21.5 29.7
Possessions 8 8
Scoring Opportunities*
4 5
Points Per Opportunity 7.00 3.40 4.69
Leverage Rate** 79.2% 77.3% 68.4%
Close S&P*** 0.541 0.599 0.508
* 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?) Georgia Tech Miami
Total 25.4 20.8
Rushing 23.4 7.7
Passing 2.0 13.2
Success Rate (what's this?) Georgia Tech Miami Nat'l Avg
All (close) 50.0% 52.3% 42.2%
Rushing (close) 51.6% 52.9% 43.6%
Passing (close) 37.5% 51.9% 40.7%
Standard Downs 52.6% 58.8% 47.5%
Passing Downs 40.0% 30.0% 30.7%
IsoPPP (what's this?) Georgia Tech Miami Nat'l Avg
All (close) 0.71 0.91 0.85
Rushing (close) 0.71 0.85 0.73
Passing (close) 0.67 0.94 0.99
Standard Downs 0.73 0.96 0.77
Passing Downs 0.56 0.56 1.14
Line Stats Georgia Tech Miami Nat'l Avg
Line Yards/Carry (what's this?) 3.80 4.19 2.93
Std. Downs Sack Rt. 0.0% 5.3% 4.7%
Pass. Downs Sack Rt. 16.7% 12.5% 7.3%
Turnovers Georgia Tech Miami
Turnovers 0 2
Turnover Points (what's this?) 0.0 10.3
Turnover Margin Georgia Tech +2
Exp. TO Margin Georgia Tech +1.32
TO Luck (Margin vs. Exp. Margin) Georgia Tech +0.68
TO Points Margin Georgia Tech +10.3 points
Situational Georgia Tech Miami
Q1 S&P 0.620 0.789
Q2 S&P 0.528 0.472
Q3 S&P 0.550 0.574
Q4 S&P 0.490 0.514
1st Down S&P 0.448 0.686
2nd Down S&P 0.515 0.539
3rd Down S&P 0.686 0.263
Projected Scoring Margin: Georgia Tech by 14.9
Actual Scoring Margin: Georgia Tech by 11

Teams had eight possessions in this game, and one for each team was an end-of-half kneeldown. So basically seven each. How crazy is that? Washington State had five possessions in the third quarter against California. And when you only get seven chances to score, blowing two scoring opportunities on interceptions (as Miami did) feels more like blowing four opportunities.