Alabama and Texas and how they did against who they played.

[jadennis]

Since the teams didn't play a single common opponent, guessing how good their #1 and #2 defenses are is kind of confusing....because all those stats came against different opponents.

So I thought I'd look at how they did compared to the season average of each team they played.  

For example, Alabama held Kentucky to 301 yards of offense.  Was that 301 more or less than Kentucky's season average?  Kentucky averaged 331 yards, so the 301 yards was 91% of what they gained on average.  Therefore, Alabama held Kentucky 9% below their season average.

Example two....Texas scored 41 points on Missouri.  Well, was that a lot more than Missouri typically gave up on average? or a little more?  Missouri gave up 25 points per game this year, so Texas' 41 was 61% more than Missouri typically gave up on average for the year.

So here are the totals (only conference games were used).

Alabama
Opponents averaged 374 yds/gm this year, but only 273 against Alabama.  That's 73% of their season average.
Opponents averaged 27 pts/gm this year, but only 10 pts against Alabama.  37% of their season average.
Opponents gave up 344 yds/gm this year, but 366 to Alabama.  That's 6% more than their season average.
Opponents gave up 22 pts/gm this year, but 26 to Alabama.  That's 18% more than their season average.

Texas
Opponents averaged 402 yds/gm this year, but only 297 against Texas.  That's 74% of their season average.
Opponents averaged 29 pts/gm this year, but only 16 pts against Texas.  That's 55% of their season average.
Opponents gave up 362 yds/gm this year, but 392 to Texas.  That's 8% more than their season average.
Opponents gave up 25 pts/gm this year, but 39 to Texas.  That's 56% more than their season average.

So relative to their opponents, the defenses of Alabama and Texas did about the same in yards per game, holding their opponents to 73% and 74% of the season average of the teams they played.  

In scoring, Alabama did better, holding their opponents to a mere 37% of their average points per game.

On offense, both teams out-gained their opponents season averages by modest margins, only 6% and 8%.  Alabama also only modestly out paced the points per game that their opponents typically gave up, only score 18% more points.  But Texas was much more efficient in scoring, as they turned 8% more yards into 56% more points than they opponents gave up on average.

Looking at this, it looks like their defenses were about the same in relative dominance over their opponents averages.  But the Texas offense (or at least ability to score points) seems to be the main difference.  They score far more points on their opponents than the opponents typically gave up.  

And yes, today was kind of slow at work.

[eagleair89]

uat v Texas = 0-7-1

BCS bowl record:

Texas = 3-0
uat = 0-2

Record in Rose Bowl Stadium

uat = 4-2-1
Texas = 2-1-0

ps: even though this game is NOT the Rose Bowl game, here is a link to one of the more interesting tidbits of college football bowl history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1942_Rose_Bowl

so despite Duke's woeful football tradition.......they have hosted a Rose Bowl.  If you ever get to Durham, there is a bust of Wallace Wade outside of the stadium that is a spitting image of "Freddy Kruger"

[wreckingball]

Go Horns!!!

[GH2001]

as I stated in another thread:

Bama SOS - 4th  #2 D

Texas SOS - 30th   #3 D

Looks pretty cut and dry to me - on paper.

[wreckingball]

Strength of schedule is a debatable subject. If wherever you got your SOS rankings from really had bama at 4 the obviously we have know idea how good any team is because bama had a relatively easy schedule.

[RWS]

Strength of schedule is a debatable subject. If wherever you got your SOS rankings from really had bama at 4 the obviously we have know idea how good any team is because bama had a relatively easy schedule.

Beating Va Tech and monkey stomping UF really helped our SOS, especially with Va Tech only losing 2 more games. They will be in the final top 10 this season. UF will be in the top 5 at the end as well, especially after annihilating Cincinnati. But I agree, SOS is a very debatable subject in itself.

[GH2001]

Strength of schedule is a debatable subject. If wherever you got your SOS rankings from really had bama at 4 the obviously we have know idea how good any team is because bama had a relatively easy schedule.

Oh gee, I don't know - the official stats from the NCAA. Try CBSSportsline.

All Bowl Teams Bama played:
Va Tech
Arky
Ole Miss
Kentucky
USCe
Tenn
LSU
Auburn
Florida
and after tonight - Texas

No Bowl, but one win away from one and a decent team nonetheless
Miss St.

Bama crushed everyone on their schedule but LSU, Auburn and Tenn.


Bowl Teams Texas played:
Texas Tech - went down to the wire
Oklahoma - went down to the wire. With Bradford, Okl kills them.
Okl State - Texas blowout
A&M - went into the 4th quarter close
Mizzou - Texas blowout
Nebraska - should have lost

They had no other quality opponents on their schedule. Now with all of the above spelled out, please tell me you can see where Bama's schedule was substantially harder than Texas' schedule.

[RWS]

They had no other quality opponents on their schedule. Now with all of the above spelled out, please tell me you can see where Bama's schedule was substantially harder than Texas' schedule.

I think this is where it becomes difficult to put a score on the game. Alabama has played against a few good QBs in Mallett and Tebow, and shut them both down. The issue with Mallett is he doesn't have the supporting cast. Tebow has all the horses he needs. I don't think McCoy is as much of a running threat as Tebow, and he's not as physical either. The problem with Texas is they haven't really played anybody that will line up across from them and just kick them in the nuts for four quarters. I don't think they have played a team nearly as physical as Alabama is this season. They haven't played anybody with a tandem of Ingram and Richardson who will just run, run, then run some more. Its hard to guess how that will play out. 

[jadennis]

as I stated in another thread:

Bama SOS - 4th  #2 D

Texas SOS - 30th   #3 D

Looks pretty cut and dry to me - on paper.

But those stats right there are exactly why I did this thread.  

Alabama is #2 in total defense, holding their opponents to 241 yards per game.  But that doesn't mean much unless we know how many yards their opponents typically gained.  

Would 241 yards per game be very impressive if we knew that those opponents typically only gained 251 yards?  No.  The 241 would still look nice, but knowing it's only 10 yards better than what everyone else did against those teams, 241 doesn't look impressive.

In the SEC games, Alabama's opponents averaged 374 yards a game, so holding them to 273 was impressive.  But Texas' Big 12 opponents averaged 402 yards per game, and Texas held them to 297.  

So if we just compared the results, Alabama's 273 yards looks much more impressive than Texas' 297.  But again, Texas' 297 was against teams that averaged 402 per game.  You can't leave that detail out.

So Alabama held their opponents to 27% below their season average of 374 yards.  And Texas held their opponents to 26% below their season average.  

So while Alabama's 273 looks better than Texas' 297, you can see that both defenses had almost identical success in slowing their opponents and holding them to 26/27% below their season average.

As for strength of schedule...well, that's always subjective as to how that plays into it.  I would argue that Alabama played tougher teams in the SEC, even though the SEC wasn't as strong as usual up top.  But a detail that should be added in there, especially when comparing the two defenses, is that Texas probably faced slightly better offenses.  Arkansas, Auburn, and Ole Miss were some pretty good offenses, but LSU was horrible, and Kentucky, Miss State, S. Carolina, and Tennessee were all mediocre at best.

On the flip side, Texas faced weaker defenses on average.  But they also outscored their opponents by a much larger margin than Alabama did, as would be expected.  Alabama scored an average of 26 points against teams that gave up an average of 22 points.  That's only 18% better than the average team did against those same teams.  Texas, however, scored 39 points per game against teams that gave up only 25 points per game.  That's 56% better on average.

So yeah, Texas played a weaker schedule, particularly against weaker defenses....but they also killed those teams.

So what does it all mean?  Who the hell knows.  

[eagleair89]

I still prefer the 0-7-1 numbers.....

remember, it is ALL about tradition!

 :thumbsup:

WAR EAGLE

[jadennis]

Oh gee, I don't know - the official stats from the NCAA. Try CBSSportsline.

All Bowl Teams Bama played:
Va Tech
Arky
Ole Miss
Kentucky
USCe
Tenn
LSU
Auburn
Florida
and after tonight - Texas

No Bowl, but one win away from one and a decent team nonetheless
Miss St.

Bama crushed everyone on their schedule but LSU, Auburn and Tenn.


Bowl Teams Texas played:
Texas Tech - went down to the wire
Oklahoma - went down to the wire. With Bradford, Okl kills them.
Okl State - Texas blowout
A&M - went into the 4th quarter close
Mizzou - Texas blowout
Nebraska - should have lost

They had no other quality opponents on their schedule. Now with all of the above spelled out, please tell me you can see where Bama's schedule was substantially harder than Texas' schedule.

I'll start by saying I agree with you, mostly.

But not to the extent you show in the above lists.  Sure, Alabama played all those bowl teams, and beat most of them soundly.  But look closer:

Arkansas beat East Carolina strictly because the ECU kicker missed three straight game-winning FGs.
Ole Miss beat Oklahoma State because OSU had six turnovers in the 4th qtr alone, two leading to 2 TDs.
Kentucky lost to a decent Clemson team, no big deal.
S. Carolina lost to UConn.
Tennessee was destroyed by Virginia Tech.
LSU lost to a Big 10 team (that lost the only two games they played against quality opponents...Iowa and OSU).
Auburn beat a Big 10 team in OT.
Florida played lights-out against a coachless Big East team.

Texas Tech beat Michigan State solidly.
Oklahoma beat a good Pac 10 Stanford team.
Oklahoma State did everything possible to lose to Ole Miss.
A&M was killed by Georgia.
Missouri lost to a good Navy team who ran the ball 385 yards.
Nebraska probably had the most impressive win of the bowl season, embarrassing Arizona.

The way Arkansas, Ole Miss, Tennessee, South Carolina, and LSU performed doesn't look good for Alabama's schedule.  The way Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Nebraska played does help Texas' schedule.

Again, I agree that Alabama played the tougher schedule, no question really.  But to what extent?  I don't think it's as drastic as it seems.

Also, a disclaimer....don't take the fact that I live in Texas to have anything to do with me defending them (or trying to justify some things for them).  I'm from Atlanta and happened to marry a Texan.  And she's a Texas A&M grad on top of that....I have no connection or affection for Texas....just giving my opinion.

[RWS]

I still prefer the 0-7-1 numbers.....

remember, it is ALL about tradition!

 :thumbsup:

WAR EAGLE

I wouldn't take too much stock in it. Afterall, in pre-season, everybody was saying how Saban has never had back-to-back 10+ win seasons. Outside of Tebow, a first year starting QB hasn't done much in the SEC in a while. And so on, and so on. There has been plenty of "Alabama hasn't......" over the past two years.

[jadennis]

I wouldn't take too much stock in it. Afterall, in pre-season, everybody was saying how Saban has never had back-to-back 10+ win seasons. Outside of Tebow, a first year starting QB hasn't done much in the SEC in a while. And so on, and so on. There has been plenty of "Alabama hasn't......" over the past two years.

Can't believe you left Heisman off that list...especially since you just celebrated Heisman day.

[GH2001]

I'll start by saying I agree with you, mostly.

But not to the extent you show in the above lists.  Sure, Alabama played all those bowl teams, and beat most of them soundly.  But look closer:

Arkansas beat East Carolina strictly because the ECU kicker missed three straight game-winning FGs.
Ole Miss beat Oklahoma State because OSU had six turnovers in the 4th qtr alone, two leading to 2 TDs.
Kentucky lost to a decent Clemson team, no big deal.
S. Carolina lost to UConn.
Tennessee was destroyed by Virginia Tech.
LSU lost to a Big 10 team (that lost the only two games they played against quality opponents...Iowa and OSU).
Auburn beat a Big 10 team in OT.
Florida played lights-out against a coachless Big East team.

Texas Tech beat Michigan State solidly.
Oklahoma beat a good Pac 10 Stanford team.
Oklahoma State did everything possible to lose to Ole Miss.
A&M was killed by Georgia.
Missouri lost to a good Navy team who ran the ball 385 yards.
Nebraska probably had the most impressive win of the bowl season, embarrassing Arizona.

The way Arkansas, Ole Miss, Tennessee, South Carolina, and LSU performed doesn't look good for Alabama's schedule.  The way Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Nebraska played does help Texas' schedule.

Again, I agree that Alabama played the tougher schedule, no question really.  But to what extent?  I don't think it's as drastic as it seems.

Also, a disclaimer....don't take the fact that I live in Texas to have anything to do with me defending them (or trying to justify some things for them).  I'm from Atlanta and happened to marry a Texan.  And she's a Texas A&M grad on top of that....I have no connection or affection for Texas....just giving my opinion.

But the Bowl Matchups were pretty damned skewed to begin with. Kentucky and Tenn had no business playing Clemson and Va Tech. 2 wins and should have been for the ACC.

The SEC had 10 teams in bowls – all "virtually" seeded 1 thru 10. Everyone of these teams played one of the top 4-5 teams in all of the other conferences. Not once did an SEC team play the 7th, 8th, 9th or 10th best team from another conference. We played the best the other conferences had to offer. Match them up one for one and see what happens. Our 10 seed versus the ACC 10 seed. Our 9 vs Big Ten’s 9.  Our 8 vs. the Big 12’s 8 and so on. Some of those SEC teams had no business playing some of the teams that they did. Thats the con of putting 10 teams in bowls, 6 or 7 of those which are 7-5.