What is “Average” for Nebraska?
We spent a lot of time on this site last week discussing the word average. It started when Steve explored where Nebraska may or may not benefit from regressing to the mean in the upcoming season. That lead reader and frequent commenter, caveman99, to ask "What is average for a team with the expectations and talent level of Nebraska?" Intrigued by that question, I dipped a toe in the water and looked at the Huskers' defensive averages in three major categories over the past nine seasons and what they can tell us about expectations for the 2009 season.
Perhaps that started to answer the question of what is average for Nebraska, but it didn't address the larger question--what should be average for Nebraska?--so this weekend I took the plunge and looked nationally over the last five years at average rank in some major statistical categories. (Warning: Spreadsheets ahead.)
First, some notes about the data. To keep myself from getting the Excel bends I relied heavily on this "Coaching by the Numbers" piece Terry Bowden published on Yahoo.com last summer. Following the 2007 season, Bowden looked at each statistical category to determine "what exactly it is that the 10 best teams in college football are doing to be so successful." His research found that Rushing Defense, Scoring Defense, Total Defense, Turnovers Gained and Turnover Margin had the highest correlation between a Top 25 statistical finish and a Top 25 place in the polls, so that's where I started. I compiled the rank in each year for every FBS team over the last five years, arriving at an average national rank for each team and then sorting by that average to get a five year rank by category.
The only problem was those were all defensive categories, so I went ahead and took Bowden's top three offensive categories--Total Offense, Scoring Offense and 3rd Down Efficiency % (which only has four years of data on NCAA.com)--to see how they related to the defensive categories. For the winning percentage numbers you see in the sheets I used Stassen.com and I removed FAU and FIU from the mix as they didn't have five full seasons at the FBS level. Also, Stassen has already factored in Alabama's vacated wins so their five year WIN% shows up as .313 but for our purposes they actually won .642 percent of their games 2004-2008.
So what should be average for a program like Nebraska? You could define that a number of ways. I think the answer for all of us is "when Nebraska is Nebraska again," but even that it is pretty subjective. All-time the Cornhuskers have won at about a 70 percent clip, ranking 7th according to Stassen. Is that good enough? Between 1970-1999 Nebraska had the best WIN% in the country at .842, but that seems like the high end of the spectrum. Ultimately, my goal for Nebraska is to return to one of the top ten programs in the country and over each of the past five decades that's meant, at worst, a winning percentage of .725. Since 2004, the Huskers have won .580 percent of their games to tie for 40th in the nation. How do they climb back into the 72% range? Let's look at the teams that are already there.
Since 2004, 16 teams have won at least .725 percent of their games, a group that includes the last five national champions, the three best non-BCS teams (BSU, TCU and Utah) and three Big 12 teams in Texas, Oklahoma and Texas Tech. Below are their five year ranks in the defensive categories mentioned above along with their yearly average over that span:
What does this tell us? A couple of things:
--The Huskers have some work to do. Of all the categories Nebraska is closest to the mean in Rush Defense but you can probably attribute that to the offenses in the Big 12. Overall, Nebraska is at least 20 spots off the average for a top program of the last five years in every category minus rush defense in a conference that only had two Top 25 rushing offenses last year.
--Turnovers are nice, but they're no substitute for a good defense. We already know how awful--or unlucky depending on your perspective--Nebraska has been in this area, but the interesting thing here is the relatively sizable margin between the true defensive categories and the two turnover categories listed. For teams with a winning percentage of at least .725, they had an average five year rank of at least 17 in rush, total and scoring defense or an average yearly rank in the Top 25. Look at turnovers gained and turnover margin and the averages are a bit higher. A yearly average in the Top 40 has been good enough since 2004 and over the past five years the 40th ranked team in TO Margin has averaged +3.8 turnovers per year. That seems doable via talent or luck.
--How is Texas Tech on the list? The Red Raiders are certainly the outlier here in terms of defense--their five-year rank and average yearly rank are the worst in any of the defensive categories--but they're only slightly below average in terms of turnovers and we haven't looked at offense yet...
Below are the same 16 teams with their average ranks in the three offensive categories Bowden pulled out:
What do we learn here?
--Defense may not necessarily win championships by itself--good teams are good both ways--but it's definitely the more strongly correlated side of the ball. Across the board the offensive averages are higher and the good news is that Nebraska's right in the mix. The Cornhuskers were no worse than 11 spots off the pace in any of the three categories I looked at and essentially "there" in terms of total offense despite being 20 percentage points off in overall winning percentage.
--Here's how Texas Tech is on the list. The Red Raiders have the best total offense rank over the last five years and the second best scoring offense. But that's not necessarily as condemning as you may think. The other teams to make the top five in total offense are Texas, Louisville (.705 WIN%), Boise State and USC. Scoring Offense? Take out Louisville and add Hawaii and you have the same top five. Having a powerful offense still means something in regard to the bottom line of wins versus losses but so does the strength of your conference. Boise State has put up a ton of offense in the WAC and that's been good enough to win it in four out of the past five years. Texas Tech? They haven't even won the Big 12 South.
Admittedly, this is a fairly selective view of the data that's out there, limited a) by a former coach's year old data, and b) by my own free time to fiddle with spreadsheets. I will confess to harboring some illusions about my own ability to write, but I have no such inflated sense of ability when it comes to statistical analysis so if you have qualms or complaints with the process feel free to voice them.
With that disclaimer out of the way, I think there are some conclusions to be drawn. What is truly "average" for the program we want Nebraska to be? Top 40 in the major statistical categories seems to be the range overall, particularly on offense. Below that for a program with Nebraska's resources looks like underachieving.
Defensively the standard is a bit higher. The Top 25 is where the Blackshirts need to be defensively. Accomplish that and you can usually play the hand your dealt in terms of turnovers.
Makes you happy Dr. Tom hired a defensive minded coach, doesn't it?
Thanks again to caveman99 for planting this seed in my head. This may not answer the question, but hopefully it's a start.
6/23/2009
Thanks again to BRN for doing the number crunching that some of DONU’s less mathematically/statistically inclined fans can appreciate.
Bo pulled us out of the gutter. Strong D wins against mediocre teams, and some good teams. Winning teams get attention of big offensive players, who come to Nebraska, get wowed by our fans, and finish rebuilding what our perceptions of a solid Nebraska team looks like.
6/23/2009
Honestly, it really bothers me that USC has that .908 winning clip… and not just b/c they smoked us twice. Of course, they’re the west coast’s answer to Texas, recruiting wise. B/c they play in that weak a** Pac-10. Honestly of the two teams in that league that I think could give the Trojans a run for their money in a game, Oregon choked last year and UCLA is massively underacheiving/VERY slowly rebuilding, whichever you prefer. ASU fell off the map after that one good year.
6/23/2009
Brandon,
Kudos to you man, I think this really hones in on what we were trying to ascertain in previous discussions. I agree with Steve’s premise about regressing to the mean, but this clearly shows the mean for NU is much better than the median of 60. The great news in all of this is that the last couple of years, NU has exceeded the mean offensively, I expect this trend to continue in the near future.
Work is still needed on the defensive side of the ball. Comparing NU’s 2008 Defensive Stats to the Top 16 mean is interesting.
NU Top 16 ave
Total D: 55th 24th
Rush D: 21st ~24th
Scoring D: 80th ~22nd
TO Gained: 97th ~41st
TO Margin: 107th ~40th
All but one of the categories, Rush Defense, NU was behind the target mean. However since, according to Terry Bowden’s chart, Rush D is the #1 factor defensively for great teams, this played a large factor in NU’s improvement last year. Who can forget the ground yards NU gave up in 2007? Combined with a significant improvement in Total D, improving 57 spots from 2007 to 2008, and you have the story of 2008. Going back to the targets for the Blackshirts in 2009 here is what I would hope for:
-Total D: 320-330 yds/game (313 was 24th in ‘08)
-Rush D: 115-120 yds/game (116 got NU 21st in ‘08)
-Scoring D: 22/game (same as your criteria, this would put NU 40th per 2008 stats but would be a 40 position improvement from ‘08. Getting this to 20 or less would get NU into the target mean IMO)
-TO Gained: 25 or more (improvement of 8 in a season, which I feel is modest in a Pelini D, and would put NU in the target mean)
-TO Margin: I will stick with your goal of +1 a game, .33/game was good enough in ‘08 to get into target mean but frankly with a renewed focus on the ground game I can see NU really cutting down on the mistakes.
Overall I see these targets as very reachable and it gets me excited for 2009!!! Great stuff Brandon!
6/23/2009
Statistically speaking, to me, it doesn’t look that encouraging, defensively. What comforts me in this context, is thinking more in terms of what the team would be, by matching offenses and defenses, over these last 5 seasons.
It’s no coincidence that Nebraska’s best defenses in this time frame, ‘05 and ‘06, were predominately Solich program recruits. Zac Bowman in ‘05, being the shining exception. Once they graduated in ‘06, newer Callahan recruits couldn’t make up for Cosgrove’s et al coaching.
If you could’ve matched ‘05’s pressure defense to last years productive, consistent offense, you’d have a nice team. Probably, comfortably finishing into the top 25.
It’s interesting that in Brandon’s offensive chart, Nebraska compares well with the top 16 in total offense, but was less productive by about a third, in scoring. I see that as “balloon” yards, from a passing offense.
Comparing these Nebraska teams previous to last years, emphasis was so obviously weighted to offense, by the recruiting. Defensive recruit quality, especially all the unready JCs, created a disadvantaged lack of depth. It’s like the team got hit by a JC splatter gun.
Therefore, I’m again encouraged because it looks like the team’s striving to regain the traditional balance of competitive Nebraska teams.
Pelini’s recruiting classes, including the rushed ‘08 class, are actually pretty balanced. No major counter shift towards the defense. Just better more non JC defensive prospects, with a seemingly higher ceiling.
So, reviewing the statistics these last 5 seasons, they reflect the program’s flopping around because of unbalance.
Whether or not “order” is restored, competitive athletic balance would seem to be. Which, needed to be restored first, anyway.
6/23/2009
Let’s give credit where credit is due. USC deserves EVERY bit of the success they have earned since 2002. Three Heisman Trophy Winners, Two National Championships, 7 straight Pac-10 titles, BCS bowl game after BCS bowl game, goodness knows how many consecutive top-5 finishes, and don’t forget the canvas littered with previous opponents who were thought to be the Trojans measure in showdown/intersectional matchups: Iowa (pretty darn good 2002 Orange Bowl team Iowa had), Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oklahoma, Auburn, Virginia Tech, and many, many others were simply flattened by USC in the biggest of venues and biggest of games. They compare very favorably to what Florida State did from 1985-2000. As for recruiting, well Texas would love to do what USC does. Recruiting wise, and simply put, this is America’s team at the moment for high school prospects. New Jersey, Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Arkansas and many states in the Deep South have fed talent out to Los Angeles. But enough about them. . .
If we can stay healthy, the defensive line performs up to expectations, and if we can end the era of blown secondary assignments then we will be just fine. “What is truly “average” for the program we want Nebraska to be?” Well at some point we have to win 10+ games year in and year out, be an annual contestant in a BCS bowl game, and THE ONLY representative from the Big 12 North year in and year out in the Conference Championship Game. That’s average. I can temper my expectations for the moment because we have quite a bit of work ahead of us. But at some point Coach Pelini will have this sort of success, and it will be a pleasure to watch him get us there. . .
6/25/2009
James, you must also remember all the cheating going on at southern cow during the pete carol era. I’m sure the reggie bush escapades are only the tip of the iceberg. If other schools were allowed to give thousands of dollars in cash to a recruit, a $750,000 house for his family, and limo service; the recruiting landscape would level off very quickly.
6/25/2009
James, you must also remember all the cheating going on at southern cow during the pete carol era. I’m sure the reggie bush escapades are only the tip of the iceberg. If other schools were allowed to give thousands of dollars in cash to a recruit, a $750,000 house for his family, and limo service; the recruiting landscape would level off very quickly.