Stanford 41, USC 22
Confused? Visit the Advanced Stats glossary here.
|Close Rate (non-garbage time)||97.0%|
|Avg Starting FP||37.0||23.5||29.8|
|Points Per Opportunity||4.86||4.80||4.73|
* 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?)||Stanford||USC|
|Success Rate (what's this?)||Stanford||USC||Nat'l Avg|
|IsoPPP (what's this?)||Stanford||USC||Nat'l Avg|
|Line Stats||Stanford||USC||Nat'l Avg|
|Line Yards/Carry (what's this?)||3.20||3.79||2.88|
|Std. Downs Sack Rt.||12.5%||0.0%||4.9%|
|Pass. Downs Sack Rt.||0.0%||20.0%||7.5%|
|Turnover Points (what's this?)||0.0||8.0|
|Turnover Margin||Stanford +1|
|Exp. TO Margin||Stanford +1.61|
|TO Luck (Margin vs. Exp. Margin)||USC +0.61|
|TO Points Margin||Stanford +8.0 points|
|1st Down S&P||0.730||0.521|
|2nd Down S&P||0.627||0.653|
|3rd Down S&P||0.634||0.573|
|Projected Scoring Margin: Stanford by 16.5|
|Actual Scoring Margin: Stanford by 19|
It was like a flashback for a while. Stanford was up 13-3 at halftime, but only poor finishing had prevented the Cardinal from already putting the game away. Four trips inside the USC 15 should have produced a lot more than a TD, two field goals, and a turnover on downs. USC found some offense early in the third quarter and surged into the lead ... and then Stanford put an end to the proceedings.
Previous Stanford teams didn't have this version of Christian McCaffrey and a senior Kevin Hogan. So any struggle with finding the end zone was merely temporary. USC acquitted itself relatively well -- 51% success rate, awesome run numbers despite a slow start -- but Stanford's just better.