Inside the Numbers Part II

[StatTiger 3,188]

484-yards and 40 points on offense doesn't leave much to complain about but there should be some concern as the season progresses. Of Auburn's 63 offensive snaps, 5 of them accounted for 217-yards, which was 44.8% of Auburn's total offense.

Based on Auburn's talent level, experience and coaching, the 2006 Tiger offense was expected to be good but consistency will be the true key to success on offense. Auburn did struggle on 3rd down conversions and in the red zone. These are not glaring problems unless it becomes a trend.

Over the last 20-years of Auburn football, the 1997 offense was the most reliant upon big-plays in order to have success on offense. 30% of the total yardage gained during 1997 was from big plays. Take away the big plays and the 1997 offense finished 15th in average yards per play. They were 10th in overall yards gained per play.

In comparison, the 2004 Auburn offense was 3rd over the last 20-years in average yards per play. Take away their big plays on offense and their average per play only dropped to 5th. Last season, the Auburn offense was 6th in average yards per play but actually improved to 4th after taking away the big plays. It should be noted the 2005 offense was more efficient in the red zone than the 2004 offense because they were not as reliant on the big play to score points.

After one game, the 2006 offense would be #1 on the list in terms of yards gained per play but dropped to 6th place after taking away the big plays. Having a "big play" offense is not a bad thing unless it becomes the primary source of moving the ball and scoring points.

War Eagle!

[tigerfan1234 0]

It's just one game. I'm not worried about it. We did very well considering we were breaking in several new guys and were playing a name opponent. Let's put this one behind us because the team already has.

[Rocket City Tiger 4]

What you have to keep in mind is that what would have happened had those big plays not happened? Would have driven the ball with shorter plays and scored anyway? Most of those yards were big running plays that just happened to turn in to long plays, right?

Anyway, good stuff Stat. I don't think this is anything to get too excited over. WDE

[AUloggerhead 2,238]

Auburn did struggle on 3rd down conversions and in the red zone.

This is the thing I noticed about last Saturday. Of course, I think the 2004 team's success on 3rd down kind of spoiled me as I use them as the benchmark. They were like 60% completion or some sick number like that -- even with 3rd & long situations. I doubt if the 2006 or any other team can match that kind of success again so maybe it's unfair to compare them. Cox said in a post-game interview that they need to work more on 3rd down completions.

[abrnfanatc 6]

To me, the biggest reason for the 3rd down problems was the lack of a second receiver stepping up. CT was double teamed on almost every 3rd down, and while Prechae and Rod made some good catches otherwise, they were nowhere to be found on 3rd down.

It looked like the WSU defense was playing bump and run on them in those situations, and they couldn't get their routes run efficiently. It is just a matter of learning how to get off the CB's quicker, and they should be okay.

[AUloggerhead 2,238]

To me, the biggest reason for the 3rd down problems was the lack of a second receiver stepping up. CT was double teamed on almost every 3rd down, and while Prechae and Rod made some good catches otherwise, they were nowhere to be found on 3rd down.

It looked like the WSU defense was playing bump and run on them in those situations, and they couldn't get their routes run efficiently. It is just a matter of learning how to get off the CB's quicker, and they should be okay.

That and catching all the catchable balls. I saw a few drops on 3rd down that can't be explained except for the inexperience of the new receivers. Once they get over some of that, our O should start clicking.

[DKW 86 7,426]

Big plays were the result of the game plan. Run at them until they wear out and them break big plays.

Stat, can we break down the big plays from runs and passes?

Big pass plays may be more true BIG plays. Big run plays in the fourth may more reflect a wear the D down coaching job. I would cionsder them more to be not true BIG plays.

[RadioWryn 0]

I also thought the Auburn TE's had a poor day. That was one of the only positions I could look at receiving-wise and fret.

[Rocket City Tiger 4]

Perhaps it's just the circumstances, but have you ever noticed that we rarely audible into a pass. If I was an opposing DC, I'd tell my players to expect run on an audible...