Stats say the darndest things.

More fun with statistics from Georgia’s inexplicable (metrically speaking) 2010 season –

Start with this chart from kleph’s latest analysis.

2010 Total Allowed Sacks and Allowed Tackles for Loss

Despite not having a single running back with what I’d call Moreno-esque ability to escape negative-yardage rushing plays, Georgia managed to lead the conference in avoiding tackles for loss.  Some credit should go to Aaron Murray for that, but perhaps some should go to the oft-maligned offensive line.  Although I don’t want to go too far in the credit department, because the Dawgs were strictly middle of the pack in sacks allowed.

If you find that muddled message slightly amusing, you’ll split your sides over something Bill Connelly posted today.  Bill explores the whole “plays good against bad teams, not so good against good teams” theme that many of us have pointed to in a generic sense to explain why Georgia’s stats for the season shed so little light on how those Dawgs wound up 6-7.

For those of you who buy into that explanation, you won’t be surprised to find out that Bill’s results support that; indeed, Georgia ranked third on his overall list correlating team play with opponent strength.  But here’s the funny part – on offense, Georgia actually held its own against its better opponents, relatively speaking.  It’s just that the defensive correlation was so strongly off the charts it skewed the overall results.  As for what that bodes this season, your guess is a good as mine (or Bill’s).



Filed under Georgia Football, Stats Geek!

9 responses to “Stats say the darndest things.

  1. JaxDawg

    This is exactly why I believe our defense will vastly improve, as will our team. And I say this taking into account the fact that our offense lost many weapons and “should” not be as productive.


  2. AlphaDawg



  3. Jim

    The statistical anamolies around last season give me further conviction that the problem is coaching.

    The mean reversion around turnovers from ’09 to ’10 that we were all hoping for happened as well – look at what that got us. To me that is more evidence of a lack of coaching and preparedness.

    When the stats say you should win and you don’t i can’t think of any other way to explain it. Blaming it on bad luck only goes so far.


    • HamDawg11

      I can’t totally disagree with your point about coaching, but fumbling near the goal line and/or when setting up a game-winning FG have little to do with coaching. However, the 3rd down play calling vs Arky… can’t look anywhere but coaching. Yeah, Ealey missed the block, but it’s hard to overcome stupid play calling.

      Last year was just a case of Murphy being on our side the entire year. Maybe we can kick him across the field and lady luck will be with us in ’11.


      • Mayor of Dawgtown

        The fumble at the end of the UGA-Colorado game was as a result of a bad offensive playcall. The play that was called was a draw, meaning that the line pass blocks for a count and then lets the D-linemen through, the QB acts like he is going to pass, then suddenly hands off the ball to the RB. The D-linemen are supposed to run themselves out of the play and the RB then runs until he his tackled by the safety. The problem was nobody in the whole stadium thought that UGA was going to pass in that situation and the D-linemen all ran straight to the back, hitting him and causing the fumble. The Colorado D-linemen were interviewed about this play after the game and they all said that they totally ignored the pass fake because they knew in that situation UGA had to run the ball to run clock and set up for the field goal. Bad call OC–cost us the game.That loss is totally on Bobo. I also agree with you about the Arkansas game–that’s two losses you can lay on bad playcalls near the end by Bobo.


        • Because if you get hit by the D Linemen then you HAVE to fumble?

          Are you suggesting we should have actually passed in that situation and NOT merely attempted to set up for optimal field goal position, just to keep ’em guessing?

          Or are you just saying that we should have run a more vanilla smashmouth running play, since we weren’t fooling anyone anyway? I could agree with that, but then you’re also expecting your back to get hit, which might cause a fumble…


          • Mayor of Dawgtown

            (1) All the Colorado D-linemen ignored the fake and King was hit by more than one almost simultaneously with him getting the ball, dramatically increasing the chance of a fumble which, indeed, did happen. (2) No, I do not advocate a pass in that situation.(3) Run a simple running play to set up the field goal, then kick it and win the game.


      • Jim

        My take is a little different. yes, we had some bad luck (probably karma given some good bounces we got in years prior to win games while not playing particularly well) but a better coached team would never allow Murphy to enter the equation against Colorado (really? Colorado? weren’t we their most recent victory?) OR UCF OR Miss State.

        Well coached teams with our talent win with authority, even against decent teams. Doing so take Murphy out of a lot of equations. We have not done that in some time.


  4. Last year the problem was the D could not compete with the better teams. The O did fairly well against them, as did the Special Teams.
    However, The ol also did not perform up to its capabilities & all the big men (O & D) were exhausted by the fourth quarter.
    Those problems have been recognized & steps are being taken to rectify those problems. I just don’t buy into the lack of coaching philosophy.