/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47249786/usa-today-8813712.0.jpg)
Stanford @ USC
Top Plays
Play Number |
Offense |
Down-Distance-Spot |
Quarter |
Play Description |
Home Team Win Probability Before Play |
Home Team Win Probability Added |
61 |
USC |
2-13-54 |
2 |
Cody Kessler Pass to JuJu Smith-Schuster for 54, TOUCHDOWN |
0.709 |
0.139 |
94 |
Stanford |
2-10-17 |
2 |
Kevin Hogan Pass to Devon Cajuste for 17, TOUCHDOWN |
0.579 |
-0.119 |
106 |
USC |
4-3-33 |
3 |
Cody Kessler Pass to Darreus Rogers for 13, FIRST DOWN |
0.476 |
0.119 |
142 |
Stanford |
2-1-1 |
4 |
Remound Wright Rush for 1, TOUCHDOWN |
0.191 |
-0.101 |
108 |
USC |
2-9-19 |
3 |
Cody Kessler Rush for 18, FIRST DOWN |
0.572 |
0.090 |
A lot of the games we've reviewed this week had two or three plays that completely changed the vibe and rhythm of the game. This one really didn't.
Stanford 41, USC 31
Confused? Visit the Advanced Stats glossary here.
Basics | Stanford | USC | Nat'l Avg |
---|---|---|---|
Total Plays | 73 | 60 | |
Close Rate (non-garbage time) | 100.0% | ||
Avg Starting FP | 25.9 | 26.4 | 29.6 |
Possessions | 10 | 10 | |
Scoring Opportunities* |
7 | 6 | |
Points Per Opportunity | 5.86 | 5.17 | 4.82 |
Leverage Rate** | 71.2% | 70.0% | 68.7% |
Close S&P*** | 0.650 | 0.658 | 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?) | Stanford | USC | |
Total | 45.2 | 40.2 | |
Rushing | 18.8 | 15.0 | |
Passing | 26.4 | 25.2 | |
Success Rate (what's this?) | Stanford | USC | Nat'l Avg |
All (close) | 50.7% | 45.0% | 41.8% |
Rushing (close) | 45.7% | 51.9% | 42.8% |
Passing (close) | 59.3% | 39.4% | 40.7% |
Standard Downs | 50.0% | 47.6% | 47.3% |
Passing Downs | 52.4% | 38.9% | 29.8% |
IsoPPP (what's this?) | Stanford | USC | Nat'l Avg |
All (close) | 1.22 | 1.49 | 1.26 |
Rushing (close) | 0.90 | 1.07 | 1.06 |
Passing (close) | 1.65 | 1.94 | 1.49 |
Standard Downs | 1.09 | 1.20 | 1.10 |
Passing Downs | 1.53 | 2.32 | 1.81 |
Line Stats | Stanford | USC | Nat'l Avg |
Line Yards/Carry (what's this?) | 3.28 | 3.66 | 2.83 |
Std. Downs Sack Rt. | 6.7% | 0.0% | 4.7% |
Pass. Downs Sack Rt. | 16.7% | 7.1% | 6.6% |
Turnovers | Stanford | USC |
---|---|---|
Turnovers | 0 | 0 |
Turnover Points (what's this?) | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Turnover Margin | +0 | |
Exp. TO Margin | +0 | |
TO Luck (Margin vs. Exp. Margin) | +0 | |
TO Points Margin | +0 | |
Situational | Stanford | USC |
Q1 S&P | 0.660 | 0.787 |
Q2 S&P | 0.817 | 0.650 |
Q3 S&P | 0.479 | 0.570 |
Q4 S&P | 0.587 | 0.675 |
1st Down S&P | 0.622 | 0.656 |
2nd Down S&P | 0.564 | 0.644 |
3rd Down S&P | 0.704 | 0.758 |
Projected Scoring Margin: Stanford by 4.9 | ||
Actual Scoring Margin: Stanford by 10 |
Bill C: Damn, did USC look good early in this game. First 18 plays: 159 yards, two touchdowns. Even with Stanford moving the ball, it looked like it was just a matter of time. And then Stanford's defense -- thin, banged up, sure to crack -- stiffened up. The first eight carries by USC running backs gained 77 yards; the next 17 gained 68. And the Cardinal offense kept going.
Saman: Bill, that doesn't make me feel better. Something USC needs to figure out going forward is if they really do want to live or die by the big play. Although they scored on 6 possessions, 3 out of the 4 touchdowns came on drives that featured a big play (30 yards +) and only one sustained drive. Also of note: that drive started out on Stanford's 40 yard line thanks to a terrible punt. I'm not saying big plays are bad, explosiveness is fun, but when playing teams like Stanford the Trojans need to improve their ability to maintain drives.
Formations/Basics
Stanford | USC | |||
Backs-Wide | % of Plays | Yds/Play | % of Plays | Yds/Play |
0 backs, 5 wide | 1.4% | 10.0 | 1.7% | 54.0 |
1 back, 0 wide | 2.8% | 5.0 | ||
1 back, 1 wide | 1.4% | 0.0 | ||
1 back, 2 wide | 2.8% | 5.5 | 1.7% | 6.0 |
1 back, 3 wide | 26.4% | 6.8 | 42.4% | 6.1 |
1 back, 4 wide | 16.7% | 13.1 | 37.3% | 7.2 |
2 backs, 0 wide | 5.6% | 0.8 | ||
2 backs, 1 wide | 22.2% | 4.8 | ||
2 backs, 2 wide | 8.3% | 4.2 | 5.1% | 11.7 |
2 backs, 3 wide | 9.7% | 4.0 | 11.9% | 3.3 |
3 backs, 1 wide | 1.4% | 10.0 |
No Huddle? | % of Plays | Yds/Play |
Stanford | 9.7% | 10.7 |
USC | 100.0% | 7.3 |
Stanford | USC | |||
Hash | % of Plays | Yds/Play | % of Plays | Yds/Play |
Left | 40.3% | 6.7 | 35.6% | 7.5 |
Middle | 27.8% | 6.6 | 11.9% | 5.1 |
Right | 31.9% | 6.5 | 52.5% | 7.6 |
x
Passing
Stanford | USC | |||||
Passing | Comp Rt | Yds/Pass | Passing | Comp Rt | Yds/Pass | |
Behind Line | 3-3, 48 yards | 100.0% | 16.0 | 5-for-5, 22 yards | 100.0% | 4.4 |
0 to 4 | 4-4, 30 yards | 100.0% | 7.5 | 7-9, 25 yards | 77.8% | 2.8 |
5 to 9 | 4-6, 61 yards | 66.7% | 10.2 | 6-7, 73 yards | 85.7% | 10.4 |
10 to 19 | 5-8, 75 yards | 62.5% | 9.4 | 6-8, 146 yards | 75.0% | 18.3 |
20 to 29 | 1-1, 24 yards | 100.0% | 24.0 | 0-2, 0 yards | 0.0% | 0.0 |
30-plus | 1-2, 41 yards | 50.0% | 20.5 | 0-0 | N/A | N/A |
Stanford | USC | |
% Blitz: | 38.5% | 15.2% |
Avg. Rushers | 4.3 | 4.1 |
Passing (no blitz) | 13-15, 202 yards, 1 sacks, 12.6 yds. per att. | 21-27, 229 yards, 1 sacks, 8.2 yds. per att. |
Passing (blitz) | 5-8, 77 yards, 2 sacks, 7.7 yds. per att. | 4-5, 43 yards, 0 sacks, 8.6 yds. per att. |
Reason for INC/INT | Stanford | USC |
QB Fault | 4 | 1 |
Good Defense | 0 | 4 |
WR Fault | 1 | 2 |
Kevin Hogan had such an incredible amount of time to throw the ball and it shows in his completion numbers doesn't it? Something also to keep note of is the fact that aside from the 3 sacks he took, none of his throws were really affected by pressure. When he did find pressure he showed off his athleticism and scrambled for large gains. Cody Kessler continues to be pretty damn good, it absolutely helps when you have a talent like Juju Smith-Schuster to take a pass of 10 yards and turn it into a 54 yard TD and 15 yard pass and make it a 31 yard gain.
Rushing
Stanford | USC | |||
Rush-Yds | YPC | Rush-Yds | YPC | |
To Edge | 8-60 | 7.5 | 11-64 | 5.8 |
Toward Tackle | 20-61 | 3.1 | 10-63 | 6.3 |
Up Middle | 10-35 | 3.5 | 4-18 | 4.5 |
Although the averages for Stanford weren't exactly the greatest in terms of rushing average, the USC defense gave up 5+ yards a play on 1st down and an average of 8+ yards a play on 2nd down. That means the running game never really needed to haver more than 3.1 up the middle to get a first down. The USC defense was largely abysmal in this game and the numbers show it all over the place. In order to be a successful defense, you need to force your opponent into long downs and distances, something that the defense clearly failed to do. It should be said, all credit goes to Stanford because their offensive line was largely magnificent.
QB Activity
Stanford | USC | |||||
QB Move | Rushes-Yds | Passes-Yds | Sacks-Yds | Rushes-Yds | Passes-Yds | Sacks-Yds |
Rollout | 1-17 | 1-7 | ||||
Sack - in pocket | 1-(-9) | |||||
Sack - coverage sack | 1-(-2) | 1-(-7) |
For all the grief the defense is taking (rightfully so..) they did have 3 sacks in this game. Two of the sacks came on blitzes on 5 people and the 3rd came on when they rushed only 4. Funny enough, this is the season high for sacks in a game for the USC defense which probably doesn't make any Trojan fan feel any better.
This was a hugely disappointing game, and although the S&P+ picks have USC by 6. I honestly have no idea what this USC team is going to do on Saturday or going forward. I think the offense is truly elite, but if you have a defensive line as weak as USC's has been, if they lose Saturday. It could potentially get ugly pretty fast for Steve Sarkisian and Justin Wilcox.