Cal's Offense vs Everyone Else On Their Schedule So Far

[SuperDuck]

I went through Cal's game stats vs all of their opponents this year except Sacramento State to see how their offense fared against everyone else, so we could compare those stats to the game last night. I tend to discount the Northwestern game a bit because it was their first game and it was on the road. Also, they played Sacramento State in their second game.

A few takeaways. First, Cal ran 93 offensive plays against the Ducks. They had 84 plays vs both UW and Northwestern, but the rest are all in the low 70's. I think the Ducks held up fairly well considering that amount of plays. Also, they didn't have Armstead either.

Cal averaged 6.0 yards per play overall against the Ducks, 5.1 rushing and 6.7 passing. That's a lot less than they had vs Arizona, Colorado and WSU, but not as good as Northwestern, UW and UCLA. They ran up 573 yards on just 72 plays against Arizona.

I included the 4th down conversions because those extend drives rather than punting.

I also included a few key game stats. The combination of their turnovers and the matchup vs the UW defense were killers. They made a lot of mistakes in that game, that's why they only scored 7 points.

Also, with the exception of 3 plays, they played Jared Goff at QB the entire game vs UCLA.

The very next week they then played backup QB Luke Rubenzer 12 plays vs the Ducks for 55 total yards, 48 rushing. That had to have put Pellum on his heels.

Here are all the stats:

vs Oregon: Total Yards 560, 93 Plays, Avg gain per play 6.0, Rushing 5.1, Passing 6.7, 4th down 3-5, Scored 41 Points

vs Northwestern: Total Yards 414, 84 Plays, Avg gain per play 4.9, Rushing 2.5, Passing 7.7, 4th down 2-3, Scored 31 Points (First game of the season)

vs Arizona: Total Yards 573, 72 Plays, Avg gain per play 8.0, Rushing 4.6, Passing 12.7, 4th down 0-1, Scored 45 Points

vs Colorado: Total Yards 585, 72 Plays, Avg gain per play 8.1, Rushing 4.2, Passing 10.9, 4th down 0-0, Scored 59 Points

vs WSU: Total Yards 589, 71 Plays, Avg gain per play 8.5, Rushing 3.1, Passing 10.5, 4th down 2-3, Scored 60 Points


vs UW: Total Yards 368, 84 Plays, Avg gain per play 4.4, Rushing 1.9, Passing 6.0, 4th down 2-4, Scored 7 Points (Cal had 5 fumbles, lost 3 fumbles and one was returned 100 yards for a TD. They made several mistakes in this game, plus this was a really bad matchup for Cal's offense. They had no answer for Danny Shelton, Shaq Thompson and company. They lost 43 yards on sacks.)


vs UCLA: Total Yards 366, 73 Plays, Avg gain per play 5.0, Rushing 1.8, Passing 7.4, 4th down 1-1, Scored 34 Points (Luke Rubenzer: Rush twice, Pass once = 15 Total Yards)

[OregonFan4Life]

What's your point? I mean Cal has a good offense, but I would expect Oregon to be better than the likes of Arizona and Colorado if they're a potential playoff team.

[DAT_man_again]

Not to be the one to make excuses, but the offense put the D in a really bad spot twice. And their last TD was in garbage time. Looked a lot worse than it was. Probably should have held Cal in the high 20s.

[SuperDuck]

What's your point? I mean Cal has a good offense, but I would expect Oregon to be better than the likes of Arizona and Colorado if they're a potential playoff team.

There are several points. Cal had at least 9 and as many as 21 fewer plays against other teams than they did against Oregon. You look at that and the average yards per play vs other teams and the total yardage Cal had doesn't look nearly as bad.

[pezsez1]

Great post!

A few takeaways. First, Cal ran 93 offensive plays against the Ducks.

It blows my mind how so many people overlooked this.

This is what happens when your offense commits two first-half turnovers and then sputters for much of the second half.

The actual data also supports my view that our defense is no worse than average.

Not to be the one to make excuses, but the offense put the D in a really bad spot twice.

Why is it that people are afraid to place blame on our offense, yet they don't think twice (or once) about dogpiling on the defense? It's like the offense peed their pants in the first half, yet we're mad at Don Pellum for not changing their underwear.

[OregonFan4Life]

What's your point? I mean Cal has a good offense, but I would expect Oregon to be better than the likes of Arizona and Colorado if they're a potential playoff team.

There are several points. Cal had at least 9 and as many as 21 more plays against other teams than they did against Oregon. You look at that and the average yards per play vs other teams and the total yardage Cal had doesn't look nearly as bad.

And I see that, but if that's the goal for this defense, to perform better against Cal than Colorado and Arizona, then that is very concerning. I think we should have higher standards for this defense than that.

[pezsez1]

I think we should have higher standards for this defense than that.

I agree, and I think everyone else does, too.

At the same time, we also have to acknowledge the personnel we have on the field and adjust our expectations accordingly.

I'm not as informed on Xs and Os as some people here, but it seems pretty obvious that our LBers just aren't very good this year. It also seems obvious that we're exceptionally weak against pass-heavy teams. I mean, we keep hearing from coaches that Derrick Malone is our best LB in coverage, right? Isn't that saying something?

Still, though, our D has made big stops when needed most, and our one loss this year was more the fault of our offense not being able to keep Arizona's offense off the field.

Even in the Cal game, our D came up huge in the second half after mistakes by the offense and special teams allowed Cal to close the gap before halftime.

[OregonFan4Life]

I think we should have higher standards for this defense than that.

I agree, and I think everyone else does, too.

At the same time, we also have to acknowledge the personnel we have on the field and adjust our expectations accordingly.

I'm not as informed on Xs and Os as some people here, but it seems pretty obvious that our LBers just aren't very good this year. It also seems obvious that we're exceptionally weak against pass-heavy teams. I mean, we keep hearing from coaches that Derrick Malone is our best LB in coverage, right? Isn't that saying something?

Still, though, our D has made big stops when needed most, and our one loss this year was more the fault of our offense not being able to keep Arizona's offense off the field.

I agree, our LB's are probably the worst in the conference, they really are a weak link. I'm not saying Oregon should be shutting teams out but should strive for better than giving up 41 points to Cal but giving up less yardage per play than Colorado and Arizona.

[QuackininBama]

Why is it that people are afraid to place blame on our offense, yet they don't think twice (or once) about dogpiling on the defense? It's like the offense peed their pants in the first half, yet we're mad at Don Pellum for not changing their underwear.

The offense scored 59 points. Holy smokes what else could they have done? The offense "peed their pants". DUDE, they scored 38 points in the first half. What game were you watching?

[SuperDuck]

What's your point? I mean Cal has a good offense, but I would expect Oregon to be better than the likes of Arizona and Colorado if they're a potential playoff team.

There are several points. Cal had at least 9 and as many as 21 more plays against other teams than they did against Oregon. You look at that and the average yards per play vs other teams and the total yardage Cal had doesn't look nearly as bad.

And I see that, but if that's the goal for this defense, to perform better against Cal than Colorado and Arizona, then that is very concerning. I think we should have higher standards for this defense than that.

That's not anyone's "goal". That's simply the reality of the situation. Cal's offense is very good! When you give an outstanding offense like that more opportunities, they're almost always going to rack up more yards. If Goff has good protection he can sit back there and pick most defenses in the nation apart. The have 7 very good receivers and a good enough running game to keep opposing defenses honest. I'll be shocked if they don't go to a Bowl game this year. They may even beat Stanford!

You have to consider that we don't have great depth in the secondary either. Ifo, Troy Hill and company were on the field for all or nearly all of those snaps. Do you think they might have gotten just a little bit tired at some point?

If we could hold opponents to an average of between 18-25 points per game and keep their average yards per play down, this defense would be doing really well, considering how long they're on the field. If I'm not mistaken, I think we were in the low 20's when we went to the national championship. I'll have to check that.

[pezsez1]

The offense scored 59 points. Holy smokes what else could they have done? The offense "peed their pants". DUDE, they scored 38 points in the first half. What game were you watching?

You're taking my statement out of context, and I won't let you do that.

I'm not complaining about the things the offense did right. In fact, I'm not complaining about the offense at all. I'm happy with our offense.

My issue isn't with the team... my issue is with half-cocked people on this forum. I am calling out people who are ignoring huge blunders on offense and special teams which led directly to Cal scoring 14 first-half points. People who pin that all on the defense aren't thinking.

We were poised to enter halftime with a lead of nearly 20 points, but those huge mistakes -- not huge failings by our D -- allowed Cal to close the gap. THEN, when we had the ball to start the third, our offense failed to move the ball. Cal would have taken the lead had our D not gotten a huge stop. And our offense sputtered for much of the quarter, failing to really break the game open until being bailed out by Cal's dropped punt.

It definitely wasn't a banner day for our defense, but sloppy play by our offense really put Cal in the position to LEAD in the second half.... but people are totally fearful of criticizing our zomgawesome offense.

If you're going to point fingers, do it right!

[fpsduck]

[GoDucksIn09]

I would say one mark of how good a team is at in defense is if the offense turns the ball over then the defense comes in and holds that offense to 3 points. Ask just about any coach other than ones at Oregon and will hear coaches say our offense turned the ball over but our defense did a great job and held them to 3 points. I will admit that on a couple of drives the defense was behind the 8 ball but a god defense would hold them to 3. We clearly do not have a defense that can do that.

[pezsez1]

Our defense has done that in other games. It just didn't happen against Cal.

Again, our defense isn't great, but it's not bad, either. Why do you people insist it has to be one or the other?

I feel like we need a new term to go along with "NegaDucks."

Today, we're dealing with "DramaDucks."

[Duck07]

How many times did that awesome defense force Cal to kick a FG in the RZ? 0 times.

The Cal offense went into the RZ 6 times and 6 times they came away with a TD. If you want to make an argument that this is an average defense, you better explain why there weren't any FG attempts or turnovers inside the RZ.