FanPost

2010 Week 4 Report Card

Even if Texas Tech did not actually play last week, it did not mean that the college football universe stood still. 

So this week we bring our second installment of the Weekly Report Card which includes updated national rankings, corrections from last week and some new measurements.

Not only that, but the bye week gave me some time to put together some data on our special teams as well.

And per the Colonel's request, we've done away with all the fancy fonts, and turned the Report Card into something people can actually read. 

Back to basics.

Just consider the changes to this edition's report card as tweaks.  To the average reader, it will still look the same. 

And if your still unimpressed, don't blame Seth, blame it on the talent (or lack thereof).

More after the jump!

Corrections/Updates

First let's get to the corrections. 

Last week's version did not include figures for fumbles. So those have been updated.  Texas Tech's defense recovered fumbles against UNM and Texas.  Hat tip RaiderCode9! 

However, I can't seem to confirm that we recovered a fumble against SMU.  The box scores say we did, but the drive summaries do not.  Can anybody help a blogger out?

Also, last week I erroneously displayed our winning percentage in 2009 as 64%.   It should have read 69.2%.   To avoid further confusion, this field has now been updated to read "(9-4) 69.2%", which reflects Tech's record in 2009. Thanks TechMSA08.

I've also updated TTU's Week 1 and Week 2 Sagarin Rankings per RedRaiderForLife95's post.  Hat tip sir, and thanks!

Sagarin does not leave a paper trail of week to week performance figures, so we have to try our best to stay on top of things.

Clarifications

The 2009 figures are meant to be a benchmark against which to measure our results in 2010. 

The black font categories compare our current averages to the cumulative average of all 13 games in 2009.  

The blue font categories compare our national rankings so far with our final 2009 year end ranking for a particular category.  The blue 2010 figures will also change weekly.

The red font categories compare our 2010 scheduled opponents' performance against our 2009 scheduled opponents' performance.

In all instances, the 2010 figures will change as the season progresses, but the 2009 figures will stay the same.

I hope that makes sense. If not, please let me know.

Also, I'm reducing the viewing options from 3 to 2.  Now when you click on the image, you should get a large image to pop up.  PDF versions are there for those who are into PDF.

OFFENSE

In "Section 1. Overall Performance" I've added two new categories under Opponents'  Rankings:  Total Offense and Total Defense.

These categories should allow us to better assess our offensive and defensive performance.  Tech may have racked up 462 yards against New Mexico, but then again New Mexico's defense is currently ranked 118 in Total Defense, so you know, maybe our gaudy performance numbers are not such a big deal (not yet anyway - UNM's season is still young).

Similarly, UT is still ranked second in Total Defense  despite their dismal overall performance against UCLA, so in light of that ranking perhaps we can all feel better about our 144 net yards in total offense that week.   I know I do (sarc).

The 2009 Total Offense and Total Defense figures do not include North Dakota State, because it is an FCS program (D1-AA for all you old timers), and the NCAA did not record this figure when comparing the various FBS teams. 

In "Section 2:  Offense" I've added a "Pass Attempts per Sack" category.   This ratio gives us a better idea about the quality of the O-line blocking.  The higher the number, the better the performance.  For example, against New Mexico, in 42 passing attempts (41 passing attempts plus 1 sack), our QB was sacked just 1 time.  If our O-line can do that every game, we'll be in great shape!  However, against Texas we gave up 1 sack every 10 passing attempts - not so great for obvious reasons.

I've also included a new Sub Section, entitled "Play Calling."  In this subsection, we measure types of plays called (rushing and passing) as well as Time of Possession.   Since our play calling mix is a topic of interest, I thought we'd like to see how our play calling varies from week to week.  If Tuberville reverts to 3 yards and a cloud of dust - we'll be able to call him on it - I'm sure he cares!

Week_4_offense_medium

Click on the image to see the enlarged version. Click the image again when the new page comes up - that should get you the big version you crave. Here's the PDF  for those of you who are into PDF.

DEFENSE

In "Section 3: Defense" I've also added a "Pass Attempts per Sack" category.  For the defense, we want this figure to be as low as possible.   According to these stats, through the first three games, we've recorded 1 sack for about every 12 passing attempts.  That's impressive.

In "Section 4: Penalties" I've included National Rankings for Penalty Yards allowed.

  Week_4_defense_medium

Click on the image to see the enlarged version.  Here's the PDF  for you PDFers.

SPECIAL TEAMS

In "Section 5:  Special Teams" I've added 6 relevant categories.

Week_4_special_teams_medium 

Click Image to magnify.  And the PDF

Observations

Given the bye week, there's not too much to say here other than that we have moved up and down a bit in the various rankings.  Texas' defeat probably cost us points in the Sagarin rankings. We fell from 21 last week to 29 this week.   Our rushing per game fell from 113 to 116, so officially through Week 4 we have not improved in a single offensive category since last year.  Iowa State hopefully will change some of that.

Our defensive performance looks even better in most categories.

Look forward to your thoughts and comments. Hopefully, this version is a little better than the last.

WEBER STATE UPDATE

One more new edition to the Weekly Report card - the Weber State Update

By the time Weber State rolls around, we should be more than prepared to assess this elusive opponent. 

Remember, chance favors the prepared mind.

Currently sitting in a 5 way tie for third place in the 9 team Big Sky Conference, the Wildcats are clinging to a 2-2 record, coming off a much needed win against the UC Davis Aggies.

Boston College 38 - Weber State 20 - Loss

Weber State is no stranger to playing against high caliber FBS schools.  The Wildcats opened the season against Boston College on the road, losing a heartbreaker 38-20.

Down just 24-3 in the second quarter, the Wildcats showed their moxie by closing the gap to 24-10 with just over 3 minutes left in the half. 

Unfortunately, the Cats'  defense  could not quite rise to the occasion surrendering 63 yard and a touchdown just  1:30 minutes later. 

The 31-10 halftime deficit proved to be insurmountable.  On a positive note, the Cats outscored the Eagles 10-7 in the second half. 

During the game, the Cats generated 381 yards of total offense.

The loss dropped Weber State to 3-43 in games against Division 1 FBS teams.

Did you know, that since the NCAA split Division 1 in 1978, only four schools - UCLA, Southern Cal, Washington, and Notre Dame - have not scheduled an FBS (1-AA) opponent?

Weber State 50 - Northern Colorado 47 (4 OT) - Win

Playing in the friendly confines of Ogden, Utah in front of 7,200 plus raucous fans, Weber State racked up 463 yards of total offense against Big Sky nemesis Northern Colorado in a wild shoot out. 

This game was all about perseverance. Everything that could go wrong did go wrong:

The Cats lost 6 fumbles (including two by the normally sure-handed FB Vaingamalie Tafuna) matching the total number of fumbles lost during the entire 2009 season.

In the third overtime period, poised to score on Northern Arizona's one yard line, the Cats' stadium lights suddenly went out - the lights were preprogramed to shut down at 10:00 pm assuming that the game would be well over by then.  Too bad nobody told the Cats.  After a 15 minute delay - apparently it takes 15 minutes to turn on the lights in Ogden - the Cats scored on the ensuing play.

When asked about the game, Senior QB Cameron Higgins noted, "This was even crazier than the 73-68 game three years ago at Portland State."

Higgins threw for 340 yards, becoming the second Weber State quarterback ever to eclipse the 10,000 yard passing mark.  (The first QB?  Why, Wildcats legend, 1981 Walter Payton Award Winner and 16 year NFL veteran Jamie Martin of course !)

As quoted in the Ethopian Review (these guys get coverage we could only dream of - fortunately for Seth, it looks like he will be able to satisfy his Weber State fix even while far from home), Northern Colorado's head coach Scott Downing said of Higgins, "He's one of the finest quarterbacks we've got in the country in (the Football Championship Subdivision) and possibly in all of Division I football," Downing said. "This is a guy that's done it for three years and he'll continue to do it this year."

Next week:  Game Summaries for then number 21 ranked Weber State's upset defeat at the hands of Sacramento State and victory over UC Davis.  Weber State's brutal early season gauntlet ends this weekend when the Cats host Big Sky rival Eastern Washington Eagles (yes, THOSE Eastern Washington Eagles) in Ogden, before a much needed bye week.

<em>This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Viva The Matadors' writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Viva The Matadors' writers or editors.</em>

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

Join Viva The Matadors

You must be a member of Viva The Matadors to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Viva The Matadors. You should read them.

Join Viva The Matadors

You must be a member of Viva The Matadors to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Viva The Matadors. You should read them.

Spinner

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9347_tracker