:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47249132/usa-today-8812571.0.jpg)
Nebraska @ Miami
Miami, why you do dis?
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4085340/Screen_Shot_2015-09-22_at_11.06.38_AM.0.png)
Top Plays
|
|
Play.Number |
Offense |
Down-Distance-Spot |
Quarter |
Play Description |
Home Team Win Probability Before Play |
Home Team Win Probability Added |
|
|
215 |
Nebraska |
1-10-25 |
5 |
Tommy Armstrong Jr. Pass INTERCEPTED |
0.524 |
0.345 |
|
|
222 |
Miami (Florida) |
4-9-11 |
5 |
FIELD_GOAL |
0.697 |
0.303 |
|
|
211 |
Nebraska |
2-4-8 |
4 |
Tommy Armstrong Jr. Pass to Stanley Morgan Jr. for 8, TOUCHDOWN |
0.821 |
-0.280 |
|
|
220 |
Miami (Florida) |
3-6-8 |
5 |
Team Rush for -3 |
0.857 |
-0.160 |
|
|
214 |
Miami (Florida) |
1-10-75 |
4 |
Team Rush for -2 |
0.619 |
-0.095 |
In regard to the play bolded above ... STOP ELECTING TO KNEEL WITH SO MUCH TIME REMAINING, COLLEGE COACHES. No, Miami didn't have any timeouts left (and I don't believe the play-by-play data we receive includes timeouts, so Matt's probability tool can't do anything about that), so maybe the Hurricanes' real win probability wasn't quite 61.9%. Maybe it was only about 55%.
But like when I stay at 15 on blackjack even when the odds are slightly in my favor -- yes, I'm a chicken, just like the coaches I'm calling chickens -- coaches are forgoing odds out of fear more than reality (i.e. fear of what happened to Kansas City against Denver last week). But the worst-case scenario doesn't actually happen very often. You've got an awesome young QB and a fun receiving corps. Give them a chance to win the game.
Miami 36, Nebraska 33
Confused? Visit the Advanced Stats glossary here.
| Basics | Miami | Nebraska | Nat'l Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Plays | 75 | 77 | |
| Close Rate (non-garbage time) | 80.3% | ||
| Avg Starting FP | 30.6 | 25.4 | 29.6 |
| Possessions | 16 | 15 | |
| Scoring Opportunities* |
9 | 7 | |
| Points Per Opportunity | 3.67 | 4.43 | 4.82 |
| Leverage Rate** | 72.7% | 60.7% | 68.7% |
| Close S&P*** | 0.656 | 0.574 | 0.587 |
|
* 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?) | Miami | Nebraska | |
| Total | 49.6 | 42.6 | |
| Rushing | 14.2 | 15.4 | |
| Passing | 35.4 | 27.1 | |
| Success Rate (what's this?) | Miami | Nebraska | Nat'l Avg |
| All (close) | 48.5% | 37.5% | 41.8% |
| Rushing (close) | 45.2% | 47.6% | 42.8% |
| Passing (close) | 51.4% | 31.4% | 40.7% |
| Standard Downs | 52.1% | 44.1% | 47.3% |
| Passing Downs | 38.9% | 27.3% | 29.8% |
| IsoPPP (what's this?) | Miami | Nebraska | Nat'l Avg |
| All (close) | 1.34 | 1.37 | 1.26 |
| Rushing (close) | 0.99 | 1.02 | 1.06 |
| Passing (close) | 1.62 | 1.69 | 1.49 |
| Standard Downs | 1.33 | 1.11 | 1.10 |
| Passing Downs | 1.38 | 2.01 | 1.81 |
| Line Stats | Miami | Nebraska | Nat'l Avg |
| Line Yards/Carry (what's this?) | 2.87 | 3.54 | 2.83 |
| Std. Downs Sack Rt. | 4.6% | 5.9% | 4.7% |
| Pass. Downs Sack Rt. | 0.0% | 5.6% | 6.6% |
| Turnovers | Miami | Nebraska |
|---|---|---|
| Turnovers | 1 | 3 |
| Turnover Points (what's this?) | 6.0 | 18.7 |
| Turnover Margin | Miami +2 | |
| Exp. TO Margin | Miami +1.32 | |
| TO Luck (Margin vs. Exp. Margin) | Miami +0.68 | |
| TO Points Margin | Miami +12.7 points | |
| Situational | Miami | Nebraska |
| Q1 S&P | 0.801 | 0.412 |
| Q2 S&P | 0.613 | 0.600 |
| Q3 S&P | 0.723 | 0.553 |
| Q4 S&P | 0.584 | 0.714 |
| 1st Down S&P | 0.743 | 0.555 |
| 2nd Down S&P | 0.722 | 0.505 |
| 3rd Down S&P | 0.657 | 0.690 |
| Projected Scoring Margin: Miami by 19.7 | ||
| Actual Scoring Margin: Miami by 3 | ||
Basically, the projected scoring margin is saying "Surely Miami didn't blow that many scoring chances..." Alas, they did! Going 5-for-5 on field goals is a lovely accomplishment for any college kicker ... but asking him to kick five field goals is an admission of failure. But first-and-goal from the 1 turned into fourth down from the 6. First-and-goal from the 8 turned into fourth down from the 10. Third-and-1 from the 19 turned into fourth-and-6 from the 24.
And then, of course, the Hurricanes asked Michael Badgley to kick a field goal on fourth-and-1 from the 11, up 30-10, even though a touchdown would have completely put the game out of reach.
There's risk involved in going for it, and I don't really blame Al Golden and company for not being confident in their ability gain one yard on fourth-and-1 ... but fourth-and-1 odds are always in an offense's favor. Miami dropped the dagger in like four different ways, and then Nebraska's offense found a rhythm against a depleted secondary late.
And then, naturally, Miami won anyway. Weirdest game of the week.
Loading comments...