Improvement. It is what we all want to see.
I stayed up very late last night mulling over ways to compare Team 118's defense against that of last year's version.
After much thought, I created the following graphic as a way to compare apples to apples, or as the case may be, "blow-outs" to "blow-outs." Is there really improvement?
The short answer I believe is yes, and significantly so.
The data set is interesting. First, three of the four blow out 2013 losses were away games. Venue is an important part of the equation, as winning away is more difficult than winning at home and having data in that hostile environment is crucial. Second, the four "blow-outs" were all against opponents ranked in the top ten at the time the game was played. Interestingly the average ranking of our 2013 blow-out loss was against an opponent ranked #5. In essence, these losses came against a team ranked about fifth and played on the road. Or, our average 2013 blow-out loss loss came against a team that is perceived as being what Oklahoma was last night. If that comparison is true, the relationship between the 2013 and 2014 performance could be telling.
In Tennessee's four worst losses in 2013, the opponent won by an average of 35 points and did so by scoring, on average, 47.5 points a game against Tennessee's much maligned 2013 defense.
Last night, Oklahoma won by 24 points. That means that Tennessee's combined defense and offensive production, against a top 5 team, increased by 31.4% against the average. Compared both individually and against the average, Tennessee held Oklahoma to the lowest point difference of the data set. That is significant improvement, but also requires a look at offensive ability so it isn't solely indicative of defensive improvement.
Oklahoma scored a total of 34 points, including a defensive touchdown. Even with the pick 6 included, Tennessee decreased the points allowed against the average by 28.4%, and that was the second lowest total points allowed in the data set. If you remove the pick 6 and PAT from the calculation, UT's defense cut the points allowed by 43% against the average.
Total yards allowed is also an improvement. Oklahoma gained 454 yards, the lowest of the data set, and a 15.4% improvement from the average.
I also wanted to see, as a measure of efficiency, how many yards the defense allowed for each point the opponent scored. It took Oklahoma moving the ball 13.4 yards to score 1 point. Or, to score the equivalent of a touchdown (even including the pick 6), the Sooners had to move the ball 80 yards. Compare that to Oregon that only had to go 70, Bama that had to go 64, or Auburn that had to go 52. In other words, Tennessee made the vaunted Oklahoma offense go the equivalent of about 13 more yards per touchdown against the average, and farther per touchdown than all but one other game in the data set.
Bottom line, as a total metric against an average top 5 team that would have been a blow out loss last year, Tennessee improved by 31.4%, defensively Tennessee improved by 28.4% against the averages when looking at total points scored (6 of which came against the offense), and Tennessee's defense held the Sooner's to the fewest yards allowed against the data set, while cutting 15.4% of all yards allowed against the average.
There is another, less tangible, difference as well. The Oklahoma game was contested much farther than the 2013 blow outs. Whether you believe that Oklahoma didn't give up until the final whistle, or not, they kept their starters in far longer than Auburn, Bama, Oregon or even Mizzou did in 2013. That means that 2013 wasn't as bad as it could have been making the comparison to the improvement against Oklahoma look even less impressive than it really is.
*It should also be noted that last year's substantially similar Oklahoma team put up 45 points on Bama. Also, Oklahoma converted about 50% of 3rd downs against Bama and only 25% against UT. THIRD DOWN FOR WHAT!!!
I stayed up very late last night mulling over ways to compare Team 118's defense against that of last year's version.
After much thought, I created the following graphic as a way to compare apples to apples, or as the case may be, "blow-outs" to "blow-outs." Is there really improvement?
The short answer I believe is yes, and significantly so.
The data set is interesting. First, three of the four blow out 2013 losses were away games. Venue is an important part of the equation, as winning away is more difficult than winning at home and having data in that hostile environment is crucial. Second, the four "blow-outs" were all against opponents ranked in the top ten at the time the game was played. Interestingly the average ranking of our 2013 blow-out loss was against an opponent ranked #5. In essence, these losses came against a team ranked about fifth and played on the road. Or, our average 2013 blow-out loss loss came against a team that is perceived as being what Oklahoma was last night. If that comparison is true, the relationship between the 2013 and 2014 performance could be telling.
In Tennessee's four worst losses in 2013, the opponent won by an average of 35 points and did so by scoring, on average, 47.5 points a game against Tennessee's much maligned 2013 defense.
Last night, Oklahoma won by 24 points. That means that Tennessee's combined defense and offensive production, against a top 5 team, increased by 31.4% against the average. Compared both individually and against the average, Tennessee held Oklahoma to the lowest point difference of the data set. That is significant improvement, but also requires a look at offensive ability so it isn't solely indicative of defensive improvement.
Oklahoma scored a total of 34 points, including a defensive touchdown. Even with the pick 6 included, Tennessee decreased the points allowed against the average by 28.4%, and that was the second lowest total points allowed in the data set. If you remove the pick 6 and PAT from the calculation, UT's defense cut the points allowed by 43% against the average.
Total yards allowed is also an improvement. Oklahoma gained 454 yards, the lowest of the data set, and a 15.4% improvement from the average.
I also wanted to see, as a measure of efficiency, how many yards the defense allowed for each point the opponent scored. It took Oklahoma moving the ball 13.4 yards to score 1 point. Or, to score the equivalent of a touchdown (even including the pick 6), the Sooners had to move the ball 80 yards. Compare that to Oregon that only had to go 70, Bama that had to go 64, or Auburn that had to go 52. In other words, Tennessee made the vaunted Oklahoma offense go the equivalent of about 13 more yards per touchdown against the average, and farther per touchdown than all but one other game in the data set.
Bottom line, as a total metric against an average top 5 team that would have been a blow out loss last year, Tennessee improved by 31.4%, defensively Tennessee improved by 28.4% against the averages when looking at total points scored (6 of which came against the offense), and Tennessee's defense held the Sooner's to the fewest yards allowed against the data set, while cutting 15.4% of all yards allowed against the average.
There is another, less tangible, difference as well. The Oklahoma game was contested much farther than the 2013 blow outs. Whether you believe that Oklahoma didn't give up until the final whistle, or not, they kept their starters in far longer than Auburn, Bama, Oregon or even Mizzou did in 2013. That means that 2013 wasn't as bad as it could have been making the comparison to the improvement against Oklahoma look even less impressive than it really is.
*It should also be noted that last year's substantially similar Oklahoma team put up 45 points on Bama. Also, Oklahoma converted about 50% of 3rd downs against Bama and only 25% against UT. THIRD DOWN FOR WHAT!!!
Last edited:
