Blue and Gold Illustrated

Nov. 7, 2016

Blue & Gold Illustrated: America's Foremost Authority on Notre Dame Football

Issue link: https://comanpub.uberflip.com/i/744639

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 19 of 63

20 NOV. 7, 2016 BLUE & GOLD ILLUSTRATED too many tough third-down situations, which Kelly has expressed on mul- tiple occasions this season. The more long-distance situations an offense puts itself in, the harder it is to convert third-downs at the rate required to be a consistently efficient and effective offense. THIRD DOWN YARDAGE FACED 3rd 3rd 3rd Avg. Team Long Med. Short 3rd Down N. Dame (79) 49.4% 24.1% 26.6% 7.20 Ohio St. (103) 38.8% 19.4% 24.3% 5.97 Clemson (90) 36.7% 28.9% 34.4% 5.96 This graph does not include goal- to-go situations. It shows third-and- long (third-and-seven or more), third- and-medium (four to six yards) and third-and-short (three yards or less) situations. These numbers help to explain why Notre Dame struggles to convert third-downs at a higher rate, at least compared to other top offenses. The team's average third-down distance is 7.2 yards, which would be considered third-and-long on stat sheets. Clemson and Ohio State are both under six yards per third down. For most of the season, Ohio State was closer to five yards per third-down at- tempt on average, but it spiked after its loss to Penn State, a game in which the Buckeye offense put itself in 16 third-and-long situations. Ohio State converted just four of those third-and- long downs. Notre Dame has been in third-and- long almost half the time it ends up third down. Despite the fact it converts third-and-longs at a higher rate than both Clemson and Ohio State, the vol- ume with which it finds itself in those situations is damaging to the offense. Diving into the statistics even further shows an even greater issue for the Irish offense. Ohio State faced a third-and-10 or longer situation 21 times through seven games, while Clemson has faced 20 such situations. Ten of Ohio State's third-and-10 or more situations came against Penn State, which happened to be its only loss of the season. Notre Dame faced 25 third-and-10 or more situations in its first seven games despite facing 11 fewer total third downs than Clemson and 24 fewer third downs than Ohio State. This means Notre Dame's rate of fac- ing third-and-extra long is significantly higher than both schools. Notre Dame faced a third-and-ex- tra long on 31.6 percent of its snaps through seven games, compared to just 22.2 percent for Clemson and 20.4 percent for Ohio State. FIRST-DOWN SUCCESS LEADS TO THIRD-DOWN SUCCESS Kelly is correct when he states that his offense is not efficient enough on first down, and Notre Dame's strug- gles on that down leads to many of the third-and-longer situations the Irish face. Notre Dame's first-down statistics are a bit misleading, so they must be broken down a bit. FIRST DOWN STATS Team Plays Yards Avg. 20+ Gains 0- Gains N. Dame 179 1198 6.7 21 50 Clemson 189 1199 6.3 14 46 Ohio St. 209 1411 6.8 15 40 As these numbers show, Notre Dame is right along with Clemson and Ohio State when it comes to av- erage yards per first-down play, and the Irish offense actually churned out gains of 20 yards or more at a higher clip than both offenses by a pretty significant margin. The issue for Notre Dame is that it produces too many negative plays, especially on first down. In over a quarter of its first down plays in its first seven games, Notre Dame either remained at the line of scrimmage or lost yards. Those types of plays are keeping Notre Dame down. Consider the Stanford game. On Notre Dame's first seven first-and-10 situations, it gained at least three yards on six of those plays and only once came up with no gain. Those gains came on Notre Dame's first three pos- sessions in which it scored 10 points in just less than one and a half quarters. On its next 16 first-and-10 situa- tions, Notre Dame had a zero gain or lost yards nine times and also threw an interception. During those seven possessions the Irish came away with zero points and went on to lose 17-10. Consider the tackles for loss and sacks allowed by the three schools. N. Dame — 41 TFL and 19 sacks allowed Clemson — 30 TFL and seven sacks allowed Ohio St. — 27 TFL allowed and 11 sacks allowed Allowing this many negatives is a primary factor in Notre Dame put- ting itself in so many third-and-long situations. Moving forward, the plan is rela- tively fundamental. Notre Dame must be more effective running the ball on first down, which will require game plans that do a better job establishing the run game, and better execution of the game plan. When it throws the ball, Notre Dame has to do a better job of protecting quarterback DeShone Kizer and com- ing up with a more efficient game plan. If those items can happen, Notre Dame's offense will not only continue to put up big numbers, it will do so in a way that gives the team an even greater chance of winning games. ✦ Despite returning only one experienced wide receiver in senior Torii Hunter Jr., the Irish are slightly more explosive this year, averaging plays of 20-plus yards on 8.7 percent of their plays compared to 8.5 percent last season. PHOTO BY RICK KIMBALL

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Blue and Gold Illustrated - Nov. 7, 2016