2002 Champions vs. 2005 Buckeyes - statistically

[DaddyBigBucks]

If you've been watching the game threads, you know that I like to analyze a team based on:

1. How many more yards/pts they put up than what their opponent gives up on average
2. How many fewer yards/pts they give up than what their opponent produces on average

So how would this year's edition of The Ohio State Buckeyes fair in a comparison against the 2002 National Champions? For those who care, the answer follows:

Offensive Analysis

TEAM___TOTAL OFFENSE___Opp. DEFENSE___DIFFERENCE
2002______364.5 ypg________380.2 ypg_____-15.7 ypg__
2005______354.4 ypg________332.9 ypg______21.5 ypg__


TEAM___SCORING OFFENSE___Opp. DEFENSE___DIFFERENCE
2002_______29.3 ppg__________27.1 ppg________2.2 ppg__
2005_______24.8 ppg__________19.7 ppg________5.1 ppg__

Allow me to belabor the obvious: The 2005 Buckeyes have faced much better defenses, on average than the 2002 Buckeyes faced, and are performing relatively better.


Defensive Analysis

TEAM___TOTAL DEFENSE___Opp. OFFENSE___DIFFERENCE
2002______320.9 ypg________406.6 ypg______85.8 ypg__
2005______238.2 ypg________418.6 ypg_____180.4 ypg__


TEAM___SCORING DEFENSE___Opp. OFFENSE___DIFFERENCE
2002_______13.1 ppg__________29.1 ppg_______16.0 ppg__
2005_______13.6 ppg__________32.8 ppg_______19.2 ppg__

Is anyone wondering how this defense compares to the Championship defense of 2002? They've faced better offenses, are saddled with an offense that turns the ball over more than we did in 2002; and they are still outperforming the 2002 defense.

If you don't get misty eyed with Buckeye Pride when you watch these guys play, I hear the NBA is looking for fans.


As I analyzed the stats from '02, I recalled that the defense improved BIG TIME after Chris Gamble started playing every down (almost) at cornerback. The first game where this was done was the 13-7 classic against Penn State, in which Chris' Pick-6 was the difference in the game.

So let's compare 2002 before Chris at cb to 2002 after Chris at CB. This time I'll just show the DIFFERENCE columns...

DEFENSE

TEAM_________________DIFFERENCE Yards/gm___DIFFERENCE Pts/gm
2002 before CG at CB________45.7 ypg______________12.4 ppg_____
2002 with CG at CB_________139.3 ypg______________20.9 ppg_____


OK - So playing Chris Gamble at corner back turned a good defense into a defense that compares favorably to this year's unit. Now what? So now, let's look at the difference in the offense. You'll see why very soon.

OFFENSE

TEAM_________________DIFFERENCE Yards/gm___DIFFERENCE Pts/gm
2002 before CG at CB_______141.6 ypg______________4.4 ppg_____
2002 with CG at CB_________-60.3 ypg_____________-4.3 ppg_____


The increase in defensive production and decrease in offensive production are all the more remarkable when you consider that two of the final 6 games went into overtime (Illinois and Cryami); which should have pumped up offensive numbers for both teams.

OK - So why the drop off in offensive production? Several explanations come to mind.

• A drop off in Chris' own offensive production? - The numbers don't support that
• The opposing defense not spending as much time concentrating on him? - Not likely, #12 was our #1 receiver that year
• The weather affected offensive production late in the year? - Maybe a little
• Other teams watching film and discovering tendencies - Maybe
• Jim Tressel buttoning up the offense when he's got a lead or at least a defense he can count on? - Perhaps, but it worked

The upshot of all of this is that this year's offense is good enough to have won an NC with this year's defense behind them if they would play REAL Tresselball. On Tuesday, when JT said that the biggest problem this year is turnovers, he was absolutely right. That is the only significant difference between this year's team and the National Champions of '02. Plain and simple.

 

[Pheasant]

OK - So why the drop off in offensive production? Several explanations come to mind.

• A drop off in Chris' own offensive production? - The numbers don't support that
• The opposing defense not spending as much time concentrating on him? - Not likely, #12 was our #1 receiver that year
• The weather affected offensive production late in the year? - Maybe a little
• Other teams watching film and discovering tendencies - Maybe
• Jim Tressel buttoning up the offense when he's got a lead or at least a defense he can count on? - Perhaps, but it worked

This is great analysis, so I hope you don't mind me nitpicking you on one point. MoC being hurt had quite a bit to do with it, IMO. I'm sure if you analyzed the season the same way, but replaced Gamble with Clarret the numbers would be about the same.

This defense is great, greenies for you.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

DBB - nice research. I feel a good blog in your future.

 

[OSUBKIZ]

The main stat you overlooked-the W/L record. Comparing the two years is like comparing your wife to an ex-wife.:)

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

Findlay makes a great point about MoC. Before CG was switched to CB full-time, there were only two games in which the Bucks gained fewer yards than the opponent gave up on average. Those two games were Cincinnati and Northwestern. MoC didn't play at all vs. Cinci, and was hobbled and saw limited action against NW.

That having been said, after The Switch, OSU gained fewer yards than our opponents gave up on average in every single game we played. MoC played in some of those games.

As you can see, I'm not disagreeing with you. MoC's affect on the numbers is about the same, but even factoring MoC out; The Switch had an affect on offensive numbers.

 

[Guy Incognito]

What about Nugent
Nugent didnt miss a kick until the illinois game. I don\'t know how many 50 yarders he hit that year, but Houston missed a long one against Texas and another against PSU. I dont know if the PSU one would have mattered, but the texas miss helped cost us the game. I am not blaming him by any means, but he\'s not as good as Nugent. nobody is.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I don't think Nugent hit any 50+ that year, though I could just be forgetting one. Remember, he was just a soph in 02.

 

[GoBucks89]

Another thing to remember is that Nugent did miss one in the National Championship game. We also botched a fake field goal (some of the players didn't get the call). But we won anyway. Somehow, 17 points was enough to get us into overtime against an offensive powerhouse like Cryami.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

The statement "Is anyone wondering how this defense compares to the Championship defense of 2002? They've faced better offenses, are saddled with an offense that turns the ball over more than we did in 2002; and they are still outperforming the 2002 defense" leads me to believe that the 2002 stats are for the entire season, which would make the comparison invalid. You really think that the first five offenses we faced in 2002 (including Texas Tech and Washington State) were not better than the first five we faced this year? Aside from Texas, we haven't faced an offensive powerhouse, whilst TT and WSU were tearing it up in 2002. I believe our defense is close to where our 2002 defense was. In the first five games of 2002, our first-string defense gave up fives TDs (one to TT, zero to Kent, one to WSU, two to Cincy, one to Ind). In 2005, our first-string defense has also given up five TDs (zero to Miami, two to Texas, one to SDSU, zero to Iowa, two to PSU...although one shouldn't really count). But I think we need to wait through the end of the season before we make real comparisons, since our 2002 defense gave up only only two TDs in the last five regular season games (one to PSU, zero to Minn, zero to Purdue, one to Illi, zero to scUM).

 

[LordJeffBuck]

The upshot of all of this is that this year's offense is good enough to have won an NC with this year's defense behind them if they would play REAL Tresselball. On Tuesday, when JT said that the biggest problem this year is turnovers, he was absolutely right. That is the only significant difference between this year's team and the National Champions of '02. Plain and simple.

Not only is our offense creating too many turnovers (6 fumbles lost, 3 interceptions in 5 games), but our defense is not causing very many (3 fumbles recovered, 4 interceptions in 5 games; no turnovers caused against Penn State); and when the defense does create a turnover, the offense has not capitalized (see Texas game).

In addition, our defense has only 10 sacks for 60 yards, while our offense has allowed 16 sacks for 116 yards.

The main difference between the '02 and '05 defense, IMO, was that the '02 defense made several huge, game-turning plays throughout the year (Gamble's INT's vs. Cincinnati, Penn State, Wisconsin, and Purdue; Allen's INT vs. Michigan; Darrion Scott's forced fumbles against Cincinnati and Michigan; the key sacks against Miami in the Fiesta Bowl). For whatever reason, this verison of the Buckeye D hasn't made so many "impact" plays (and, as mentioned above, many potential impact plays have been squandered by the offense).

Finally, the Bucks are averaging over 5 penalties for over 50 yards per game. Penalties have cost the Bucks TD's on punt returns, and were a major factor in the Texas loss (especially the 15-yard penalty right before halftime which helped put the Longhorns in FG range).

Now maybe you can see why Tresselball isn't working to perfection this season.

EDIT: What Mili said, too.

 

[Jaxbuck]

What Mili said

PLUS

We won the 2002 NC in spite of the offense not because of it. Now 5 years later we're supposed to feel ok if the offense is just slightly better than '02's??

Using the 2002 offense as a bench mark to compare other JT offenses is like picking the smartest Hilton sister.

I like the research though, good post.

 

[BB73]

I don't think Nugent hit any 50+ that year, though I could just be forgetting one. Remember, he was just a soph in 02.

Nuge had a 51-yarder against Indiana in 2002. It was his only 50+ attempt that year. He finished 24 of 26 in FGs, and missed 1 XP in 42 tries.

And he was a finalist for the Groza award that was won by Nate Kaeding in 2002.

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

You really think that the first five offenses we faced in 2002 (including Texas Tech and Washington State) were not better than the first five we faced this year?

Texas Tech__488.2 ypg___372 vs OSU___116.2 yard difference
Kent State___335.1 ypg___358 vs OSU___-22.9 yard difference
WSU________421.9 ypg___280 vs OSU___141.9 yard difference
Cincinnati____397.5 ypg___415 vs OSU___-17.5 yard difference
Indiana______368.2 ypg___339 vs OSU___29.2 yard difference

AVERAGE____402.2 ypg___352.8 vs OSU__49.4 yard difference


Texas Tech__38.4 ppg___21 vs OSU___17.4 point difference
Kent State___16.8 ppg___17 vs OSU___-0.2 point difference
WSU________33.2 ppg____7 vs OSU___26.2 point difference
Cincinnati____29.2 ppg___19 vs OSU___10.2 point difference
Indiana______21.5 ppg___17 vs OSU____4.5 point difference

AVERAGE_____27.8 ppg___16.2 vs OSU__11.6 point difference


Based on this I would say that our first 5 opponents of '05 compare favorably to our first 5 of '02, as does our statistical defensive performance against them. Overall performance is another matter entirely.

Your comparison of the first team defenses is a fantastic point Mili. I would give you a greenie, but the system won't let me (I've given you one too recently).

The overarching points of my post remain:

1. Our defense is awesome
2. Our offense is good enough if they would just hang onto the ball

Throw in LJB's points about penalties and takeaways and that just about covers it.

 

[wdg01]

Basically we are playing like NC State did last year :2004:

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

Using the 2002 offense as a bench mark to compare other JT offenses is like picking the smartest Hilton sister

Oh, wait. That's true.



Yeah, 2002 proved that this offense is good enough to win if you don't make mistakes. Any comment I've made in this or any other thread should be understood to be within that context. "Good enough" outside of that context is not at all what I would suggest.