Dawg stat watch, Week 9

It’s a two-team duel for the East, so needless to say, the stat watch marches on.  Here’s where things stand now:

  1. Hold opponents under 17 points per game.  As a team, Georgia is yielding 20.38 ppg.
  2. Finish at least +8 in turnover margin.  Georgia’s turnover margin is +6.
  3. Average better than 380 yards per game on offense.  Georgia’s offense is averaging 404 ypg.
  4. Finish in the top five in total defensive yardage.  Georgia’s defense ranks fourth in total yardage.
  5. Finish in the top three in first downs.  Georgia is third in first downs.
  6. Finish no worse than third in passing yardage.  Georgia is third in passing yardage.
  7. Finish no worse than third in sacks.  Georgia is first in sacks.

Most of the statistical categories were shored up on Saturday.  The Dawgs dropped one slot in total defense, but are little more than a ypg behind South Carolina.  Considering each team’s opposition this week, Georgia stands a good chance of reclaiming third.

The one that’s a little shaky appears to be defensive scoring.  But this week’s game and the game against Kentucky should offer good opportunities to whittle that number down.


Filed under Georgia Football, Stats Geek!

29 responses to “Dawg stat watch, Week 9

  1. Macallanlover

    I really think you should alter the defensive scoring stat to only scores against the defense. I realize a score is a score, and that is what counts in the W/L column, but it is like penalizing a pitcher for intentional walks, or a Qb for an INT thrown in a Hail Mary situation at the end of the half/game. Maybe fair to hold the defense accountable for scores even if the opponent gets the ball insode the 10, but a pick 6, or ST return isn’t on the D. Notice that CTG said we only gave up 10 to uf? He doesn’t hold his guys responsible for the 10 ST points. This defense, since the 2nd half of Boise, has been pretty damned solid. And making me more and more confident about facing anyone but Ok State, or Houston….those gunslinging teams.

    • Mac, I’m comparing apples and apples here. That was the metric that was in play in the other seasons Georgia played in the SECCG.

      • Kevin

        in those seasons, were we giving up over a TD per game in non-defensive scores??

        • I doubt it, but why does that matter here?

          • Biggus Rickus

            It speaks to the actual quality of the defense rather than tying them to a stat they can’t control, which is kind of the point of the metric I think.

            • BCDawg97

              Agreed that it isn’t a fair stat to a defense’s ability. But it has never been just what the official “defense” gives up. When the offense turns the ball over, they are on “defense”. On ST, you are playing “defense” trying to keep the other team from scoring. And the stat is the same for all teams – their ST and turnovers are accounted just as UGA’s is.

              • Griff

                I agree with the way you compare the stats Senator, but just for giggles the defense is giving up a little over 15 pts per game if you subtract 42 pts (21 off of USCe, 7 off MSU, 7 off Vandy, and 7 off UF). Those are the scores that our offense or special teams gave up.

                • Puffdawg

                  You guys are definitely missing the point. It is not about how much the defense is surrendeing. It is about how much as a whole the team is surrendering – INCLUDING offensive and ST gaffes – relative to our past successful teams. I agree with Bluto’s approach here. After all, that is the entire point of this exercise.

                  It should also be noted he is including any non defensive surrendered points by those past teams as well.

                  • We understand the point, but I think WFDawg (below) points out what we’d all like to see.

                    Knowing our defense is good but wanting to know how it compares to the D’s of yesteryear.

                    I’d also like to see non defensive points given up by the “defense” in years past. It just feels as though that this year is one of the highest, if not the highest when our (actual) defense has been its best

                  • Cosmic Dawg

                    You are correct, sir.

      • WFdawg

        Fair enough on the apples to apples. Wonder if any enterprising fan has done the oranges to oranges comparison of points allowed by the defense alone. FWIW, I’d propose conceding 3 pts for any time the opponent has starting field position w/in our own red zone.

      • Macallanlover

        Senator, I understand, but agree with the others, there should be a better way for stats to be collected. The hardest part would be knowing what other teams had the same issues, at least until the stats were kept that way. Until then, I will give us a little leeway there since the point is to have a stand-up defense, and I think I have arrived at the point of accepting that this year, thankfully. I was a slow convert to CTG versus others but this group is clicking on all eight (well, maybe seven as the short passes are still a significant weakness.)

    • AusDawg85

      Be nice if somebody took responsibility for ST play.

      It’s Tuesday…time to focus on the next game, so I blame Bobo!


  2. Rick

    How long ago was it that we were hearing “yea, the defense is playing alright, but where are the sacks?” Wasn’t that earlier this month?

  3. The Negative Wackos Continue to say that we have not played anybody or beaten anybody that counts so the stats are skewed. I continue to disagree.

    • Skeptic Dawg

      It is true that this team has yet win a game against a team with an actual pulse (apparently Vandy is the closest). That being said, a W over the Gaytors is always nice no matter how crappy they are. The Dawgs very well may end up 10-2 and yet not beat anyone worth a damn.

      • JasonC

        It is correct that we haven’t beaten a top team, but we are winning and to be honest, we are winning without playing at our full potential yet. The Florida game was a perfect example of that. Every team is going to have ugly games or at least stretches of games. If you can win those games despite playing ugly, you have the chance to have a good season.

        • adam

          Everyone is also very quick to label Florida as a bad team.

          They’re certainly not good… But I think any team in the country would get killed by LSU and Bama if they lost their top 2 QB’s and a guy like Demps (responsible for a lot of their ST and offensive success).

          We faced a much better Florida team than LSU did and they had more time to prepare. And it was in their own back yard. That Auburn loss was after 2 weeks of getting beaten to a pulp. And those two (very important) players were out. Brantley obviously was a mess against us, but he was still better than what Florida threw at Bama (outside of the first few minutes, obviously), LSU, and Auburn.

          Florida’s not a great team, but they’re probably better than their record indicates.

          They may just lose to Vandy and prove me wrong, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they won out – if Brantley gets back to full strength and Demps stays healthy, that is.

      • Biggus Rickus

        I daresay Mississippi State has a pulse. Their four loses have come by 7 to Auburn, 13 to LSU, 14 to Georgia and 2 to South Carolina.

    • Sparrow

      This is killing me. Over at edsbs all of the Florida fans are lamenting a) that their team is horrible and b) their horrible team couldn’t beat our “horrible” team. I get that we have special teams derp, an unfortunately, shall we say, unpredictable, offense, but the defense… Errant passes and ham hands haven’t kept us from scoring (and as I recall, Florida was purported to have a decent defense) or racking up yards. So maybe we aren’t a machine on offense the way that you might expect or hope, but that doesn’t prove that we are a bad football team.

      Are there areas of improvement? Of course. I would really like to see us smooth things out before Tech and the bowl game. How this coverts us into a bad football team, I don’t understand. This pattern of hindsight belittling of our opponents didn’t bother me after the Miss State game, but it bothers me now. We aren’t LSU or Bama, I get that. But we sure as hell aren’t Vandy or Auburn, either.

      • Sparrow



      • Hogbody Spradlin

        Don’t worry too much about what they say at EDSBS. Based on the writing, they’re all on acid, mescaline, or shrooms over there anyway.

        • AlphaDawg

          Any time I read edsbs i think of this “We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a saltshaker half-full of cocaine, and a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers… Also, a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether, and two dozen amyls. Not that we needed all that for the trip, but once you get locked into a serious drug collection, the tendency is to push it as far as you can. The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge, and I knew we’d get into that rotten stuff pretty soon.”

  4. JasonC

    Don’t we play NM State this week, not Kentucky?

  5. I need help from a Stat Geek . I followed the rules to the Fla/Ga drinking game and I can’t remember a thing, I was hoping someone who is good with numbers(I can no longer remember any of my pass codes much less do any ciphering) could re-watch the game and give some estimate of how much I had to drink.

  6. Brian

    We’re probably going to kick of 8 or 9 times, which means we’re not likely to hold them under 20pts…A reasonable # of those KOs will be returned for TDs.