USC Trojan fans have fretted extensively the past two seasons as the team's offensive production has marginally declined. In hindsight this decline was somewhat inevitable after the 2005 season when the strongest offense in USC history largely departed for the NFL.
Still however the most recent Trojan squads did not match up to the level achieved by the 2002 to 2004 teams fielded by Head Coach Pete Carroll.
Whenever offensive points production falls off the normal fan and media tendency is to put all the blame on either the quarterback and/or the offensive coordinator. While this is indeed often the case there normally is more to the picture than initially meets the eye.
This article takes a closer look at USC football points production using five different categories across several years. The intent of the article is to analyze the points scored by the Trojans as well to identify the main sources of variation.
I did not fully include 2001 or 2002 in this study since the scoring drive charts were not all posted online by USC's Athletics Department for those games. For the few games I sampled however the same trend that I will explain below held true.
For starters lets review USC's total points production over the past seven years.
18 comments Last one added 11 months ago — Leave a Comment
Bill King 11 months ago
Great analysis. The short answer is that (according to the data you provided), 60% of the decline in scoring from 2005 to 2007 was due to the long field, non-turnover category. Another 32% comes from combined scores off turnovers and defense/special teams. This 32% is well documented as USC has declined conistently it their ability to force turnovers. However, the 60% from long drives is suprising and shocking, and points to a much larger issue with the offense.
Keep up the good work!
Edit Comment Cancel
Arthur Troy 11 months ago
Thanks Bill. Not sure which way you are coming up with the 60% figure that you mention? LF point trend is pretty flat and down by 10% or so when looked at on a year to year basis (e.g. 22-23 points in 2003-4 versus 21-20 points in 2006-2007). Categories 1-3 short field points which are a combination of things are down the most in comparing years (15-18 points in 2003-2004 versus only 9-12 points in 2006-2007). That is most of the delta when looked at on a year to year basis by category. I suspect you are measuring something else...it always comes down to what are you measuring, what baseline, and over what period, etc.
I was surprised though to see the overall improvement in 3rd and 4th down conversion % though and the big drop off in turnovers. I did not post something more detailed. It is a more true look at scoring conversion probability by field position. There has been a big decline in both short field scores and short field opportunities. I sent this to HC Pete Carroll via an intermediary. He was kind enough to respond and agreed that the TO drop off was a major concern for him and its affects on scoring were noticeable. Also he points out that there has been a drop off in "big plays" either +12 runs or +16 yard passes as well. That comes back to the players and the offense etc. JD Booty, CJ Gable, and Patrick Turner, etc. have not quite lived up to their predecessors yet. I hope to cover that drop off in another post soon.
Thanks again.
Art
Edit Comment Cancel
Trey Bradley 11 months ago
Wow... incredibly in depth. I'll have to go back and re-read some segments just to make sure I got it all. I'm glad you noted the game-shortening in 2006. That's important as there are some new rules in place this year that might have a similar effect.
Still, there aren't many BCS teams who can be uneasy about being "stuck" on 32 points per.
Great article, hope we can hear more from you this season.
Edit Comment Cancel
Thomas USC 11 months ago
The answer to the scoring decline is very simple and you don't need any graphs for it...
it is ALL about the OFFENSIVE COORDINATOR -
NORM CHOW was AWESOME,, after he left,,
the others trying to fill his shoes have been the OPPOSITE of awesome.
Hopefully, they pull their heads out of their arses, go to Norm Chow's clinics , and
improve a little bit.
It was very CLEAR that our 'o' coordinators have been getting their heads handed to them by their counterparts... it has been like watching a 10 year old at the wheel of a Ferarri.
The 'o' coordinator gameplanning and play-calling need to DRASTICALLY improve.
Edit Comment Cancel
Arthur Troy 11 months ago
The nice thing (to me at least) is that Norm Chow will be back in LA coaching for UCLA. That will be entertaining to watch. If you read the Titans Chat boards they absolutely ridiculed him in the NFL for his offense and inept play calling. It was sad to read to say the least...I have attended conferences where Norm presented at USC. I also have his book on the passing game, his old playbooks, and overhead coaching film, etc.
The year that Norm Chow was most in charge of the USC offense was 2001. After that it was modified by Pete Carroll. It was commented upon by Loel Schrader and Steve Bischeff in their book about USC football available on Amazon. Here is a passage from the book:
According to the authors:
Although there was little talk by the staff about a change in offensive strategy after the 2001 Las Vegas Bowl loss (USC lost 10-6 to Utah to finish the season with 6 wins and 6 losses), Carroll told the authors of this book the Trojans were "so awful, disgraceful," that he "decided that we were going to change the offense."
A former member of the staff said Carroll, in effect, "junked the BYU offense" Norm Chow brought with him to USC in 2001. Carroll turned to two professional coaches for assistance -- Alex Gibbs of the Denver Broncos and Jon Gruden, who was then at Oakland but moved to Tampa Bay. Denver had been known for possessing the best running attack in the NFL, and Gibbs was generally accorded most of the credit for developing it. Gruden was young, but he was known for his passing schemes and offensive brilliance. Each summer, Lane Kiffin has spent time with Gruden, who is head coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. His defensive coordinator is Monte Kiffin, Lane's father.
"I had decided we were going to do the whole offense over again," says Carroll. "I had gotten real frustrated with our offense, and I always wanted to be more involved to see if the things and concepts I liked would work. But I always gave in to the coordinators I had. This time, I decided this might be my last shot at being a head coach, and I'm not going to go down that way. I'm not going to leave it all on somebody else's shoulders. So, I spent the off-season working with the offense, and we recreated everything--philosophy-wise, rhythm, and principles--and the results have been phenomenal. The first game against Auburn, Carson Palmer was poppin' that ball around, and we were running the ball better. I even told the guys, 'I don't care if we're the best running team in the conference, just get it to average.' That was how high I set my goals then."
When Chow was praised for what "his" offense was doing, the offensive coordinator would make a point of saying, "It isn't *my* offense, it's Pete Carroll's offense." But most USC followers assumed Chow was just being modest, when, in fact, he was telling it like it was. (End of passage)
I'll be charting Norm's progress at UCLA the next couple of seasons. It should be great for a few articles.
Edit Comment Cancel
Erwin Wu 11 months ago
Wow, Arthur! Great stuff in your article, but even better job following up the response about the offensive coordinator. I full-heartedly believed that Steve Sarkisian was inferior to Norm Chow, and your reference from the book kind of opened up my eyes--although I'm still have some doubt until we see how the offense pans out with Sanchez at the helm--albeit I am super optimistic about our chances with Mark to get back the offensive prowess we once grasped. The scariest part, Arthur, is that even due to our offensive decline in the past two years under John-David, we still had chances to get into the BCS national championships the past two years (only to be beaten in a *rivalry* game in 2006 and unfairly left out to contend in 2007).
Edit Comment Cancel
Paul Peszko 11 months ago
Art,
Excellent, in-depth post as are all of your posts at WeAreSc. I had one question. Any data on the length of kick-off and punt returns averaged over the last two years? It seems to me that there would have been a fall off from the Bush era, especially back in 2006. It probably ticked up a notch or two in 2007 with RoJo and McKnight.
I'm glad you're posting on B/R now as well for all of our fans and writers here. Looking forward to more great stuff during the season.
Edit Comment Cancel
jabbar magou 11 months ago
Yeah,
that Chow guy was incredible. Incredibly calling 3 straight runs into the middle of the Cal line for Dennis when Dennis went down if a leaf fell on him. I agree. He was a flawless playcaller.
Get real! I liked Chow as well, but nobody is God. I think there are many factors to consider but in looking at the small turnover margin and the lack of scoring from defense/special teams; that's what stands out; however...
...don't forget that in regards to the stats, stats don't tell the whole story. When Booty went down with an injury, PC played it much more conservatively in regards to the offense. And, in the first 6-8 games of Booty's 1st season he also played it close to the vest.
All of those games will skew the stats; that's why stats are fun, but rather meaningless in the final event.
Edit Comment Cancel
Dave Nemetz 11 months ago
Wow, this is by far one of the best analytical articles I've read here on B/R - and I'm not just saying that because it's about my favorite team and alma mater. Great in-depth analysis, and a joy to read. I'd have to say that in addition to the added big play potential from McKnight and Stafon to increase the number of long scoring drives, there is a likelihood of more defensive turnovers this year with the depth and experience of the linebacking core, the maturation of Taylor Mays, and the emergence of some beastly new pass rushers along the D-line. I'd expect turnovers to increase this year, and it is up to Sanchez and the O to capitalize on them more. Thanks again Arthur and I look forward to your future contributions here.
Edit Comment Cancel
Lisa Horne 11 months ago
This gets my POTD! I have always maintained that one of the biggest reasons why USC hasn't been as good as a few years ago is due to turnover margin. Your graphs validate that. Outstanding read! Five stars!
Edit Comment Cancel
GoBears 2008 11 months ago
This a great article. When statistical analysis is applied to sports, it's usually only in the context of baseball. It's nice that this article applies the same methods to college football, and the link at the bottom is excellent as well. (in a word: POTD).
Edit Comment Cancel
Bill King 11 months ago
Arthur,
Here's the way I came up with 60%. First of all, I was just looking at 2007 (most recent year) compared to 2005 (peak year). Overall scoring dropped 16.5 ppg. Non-TO LF Drive scoring dropped 9.9 ppg. 9.9 is 60% of 16.5. In other words, a real high-level (dumbed-down) view says that 60% of the scoring decline from 2005 to 2007 was in Non-Turnover long-field drives.
I sometimes get accused of making things too complicated. Hopefully my 2nd attempt was better!
Edit Comment Cancel
Arthur Troy 11 months ago
Thanks Bill. I figured it had to be something like that. You essentially made a peak to bottom comparison comparing two years (2005 and 2007) if I understand now. I was making a broader point across the entire series. I figured we were using different comparison points somehow. That is usually the case in this sort of thing.
The other way to look at is using averages across the set of data points. The average for example is 36.24 points overall across the series. A low year (I'll exclude the terrible 2001 season) such as 2006 scored 30.46 points which leaves a gap of just under 6 points per game. On average that difference is *roughly* about 1/3rd LF points and 2/3 SF points. I am leaving out the unfortunate problem that the game was also about 10% shorter that season as well.
Either way though USC has a "gap" on scoring and they need to close it or fans will not be happy I guess. I'll have a follow up post in a few days that also shows the decline in the big play category that Coach Carroll mentioned. Thanks again. Art
Edit Comment Cancel
RUBEN SANCHEZ 11 months ago
this is a new year, a NEW trojan O .I do beleive that we will be quite impressed on how sark , sanchez and crew lead a young but very talented trojan team to many victories this season.(12-0) Oh, and dont forget rey-rey,cushing,mays and the extremley fast and physical "D" AS THEY SHUT DOWN every one this season!!!!! FIGHT ON.. FIGHT ON!! RTSTROJAN ,REPRESENTING ALL THE WAY FROM HARRISON ,ARKANSAS.
Edit Comment Cancel
Doug Brent 11 months ago
Excellent Art, thank you.
One small point: there is something of a self-correcting, closed-loop system when looking at percentage completion of fourth downs. Although I can't prove it statistically, it sure seemed to me last year that with a less explosive and reliable offense, the Trojans were more conservative on fourth down attempts, thus possibly impacting their relative success on fourth downs. When doing this article with 2008 data, it might be interesting to look at the raw numbers of attempts as well as percentage completion. Or, perhaps look at the length of fourth down plays. In 2005, it sure seemed that if the Trojans were on their half of the field, they'd go for it on fourth down.
Edit Comment Cancel
Isaac Elyacharshuster 11 months ago
Wow, excellent work man. Could this of possibly been someone's end of the year stat project?
Edit Comment Cancel
Heber Smith 11 months ago
The quoted portion of the book is pure Pete Carroll self-agrandizing. His ego constantly overwhelms the truth. Count how many time he says "I" in those paragraphs. Really, no one else was even there with a suggestion?
Chow is the master of "elegant play calling." He had different personel after the first year so, of course, things were changed to take advantage of that. In at least one practice where I was present, Chow drove Carroll to the point of red-faced screaming because the defense was getting beaten.
Give Carroll credit for recruiting but not play calling on offense.
For the truth get in touch with Carson Palmer or Matt Leinart.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jon Ellsworth 11 months ago
Chow was very good for the QB's. He coached receivers for years at BYU and it could be inferred that he learned Quarterbacking there from the likes of Mike Holmgren. Carroll may not have been too involved in the offensive X's and O's, but getting Chow to work with Gruden and Gibbs, not to mention bringing in Wisconsin's Tim Davis, only complemented Chow's passing game knowledge and coahing ability, which in my opinion are exceptional. Too bad he had to work with Vince Young in the NFL.
I'm a BYU fan for years, and recognize that Chow could pass the ball on anybody, but could never put together a sophisticated running game. And let's face it, the big years of USC were largely power running and Norm's ability to match up receivers well against a defense and coaching the QBs & WRs how to exploit things.
That said, I have been worried about the USC offense, particularly since Tim Davis left. The 2007 Rose Bowl was two identical zone running offenses that nearly produced the exact same results had not Pete had Michigan's number since the 2004 Rose Bowl. USC has too much size and power to be a strictly zone team. Zone blocking and spread offenses are meant for leveling the playing field for smaller teams, something USC does not need to try to do (see Michigan v. Appalachian St.).
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.