Over The Pylon

Normally throughout game weeks we regale you with fun little items like stat comparisons and the like for the coming Cardinal opponent. As this week is the challenging opponent Open Date State, there is no substantive data to pour over. Except our own.Yesterday saw us ponder the offensive and defensive numbers, but today we focus on turnovers. Not the yummy kind… the soul crushing ones that make a victory damn hard to come by. Additionally, by special reader request we take a look at the 09 numbers compared to the 08 numbers. Hint: It isn’t good. Ballin’.

Part 3: Turnovers
The turnover story for a football team is essentially a two chapter book. The best teams in terms of turnover margin (and usually victories) not only don’t turn the ball over, they create turnovers as well for their opponent. As we chatted about yesterday, none of those things are going exceptionally well for the Cardinals this season.

At a paltry turnover margin of -11 (that’s 11 more giveaways than takeaways) the Cardinals are tied for 114th in FBS for total turnover margin. To break that down on a per game basis means that each and every game, on average, is going to feature at least one more turnover than takeaway, and in many cases, several. The bad news is only 3 teams in the entire division are worse than BSU in this particular category. The good news is two of them are BCS conference schools. That’s encouraging, right? Wait… it’s Georgia and Maryland? Nevermind. Let’s focus on the negative first… the turnovers lost.

The 09 Cardinals’ turnovers lost chart:

If the trend continues, then NIU should get at least two fumbles, since the Cardinals have followed up every zero fumble game this season with at least two coughed up the next week. Perhaps the bye week will throw off that logic. The two most surprising things here? More INTs at Army than at Auburn and a the combined 5 turnovers at Temple which was essentially wrapping paper and a nice bow on a victory for the Owls.

The 09 offensive stats and the 08 offensive stats weren’t compared, largely because I had no desire to become even more pissed off than I currently am, and there is no reason to throw salt on a freshly ripped off scab for a unit that nearly everyone thought would take a step back. The turnovers lost for 08 fall into that category somewhat, but are worth comparing… simply for comparison’s sake.

Now class… what do we notice here? For starters, there were 8 turnovers through 9 games in 2008. In 2009 we hit the 9 mark after game #3. The bigger picture question that is begged is whether or not a successful offense is predicated on not turning the ball over or whether not turning the ball over is predicated on a decent offense. I think it does speak volumes to the amount of regression though, considering the offensive playbook, risks, and downfield shots have been significantly reduced, and yet, the propensity to hold onto the football has been significantly reduced as well. To take it to the next level, if these drives that ended in turnovers at best resulted in scoring chances like TDs or field goals, or at worst diminished field position for the opponent through a punt, the Cardinals may have several more wins. Yes… turnovers lost are that important, and in this case, just as bad as everyone thought.

The second prong of the turnover plug is the turnovers gained. Teams throughout FBS rely on this to change momentum, create scoring opportunities, and give the offense better field position and the subsequently increased scoring opportunities. For BSU in 2009, it’s not a pretty sight.

The games that BSU was closes to pulling off a considerable “upset” like Toledo and Ohio are also the games where the turnovers gained were considerably higher than other weeks. Unfortunately in the MAC, with its ridiculous parity, those turnovers are the great equalizer in games where the outcome is in doubt.

Compare the above chart to the 08 Cardinals…

Most noticeable? The INT’s of course, but not only the 4 picked off against Akron. Past the season-opener against Northeastern, the Cards picked off at least one pass by each and every opponent. For a defensive secondary that took a considerable amount of heat compared to its highly touted Cardinal offensive counterpart, this defense was not only respectable, it was a game changer. It’s taken the Cards 9 games in 2009 to get 5 picks. They did it in 3 last season. They do have 1 more fumble recovered in 2009 than the same span in 2008, so that’s a plus.

Looking at the above charts, clearly the margin isn’t going to be favorable in comparison from last year to now. The aforementioned margin of -11 in 2009 is considerably different from the +9 through 9 games last season. That’s a difference of 20 for those not so good with negative numbers. Where the Cards finish this season is anyone’s guess, but the odds of putting up a margin that is even remotely respectable is going to be hard. Putting up a number that is even comparable to last season is damn near impossible. The 08 Cardinals finished +5 for the year. Knock out the Buffalo and Tulsa games and the Cards were +11 for the season overall. Yes… those two games sucked.

Turnovers… they are an  absolute killer. In fact, when really pressed for a reason behind the frustrations and struggles of this particular season, turnovers would be at, or at least near, the top of everyone’s list. To top off this craptacular turd turnover cupcake, the Cardinals’ next opponent is Northern Illinois… the leader of the MAC in turnover margin at +10. Something tells me that margin is going to go up a bit if history is any sort of indicator.

Filed under: Ball State, Statistics | Leave a comment »

Normally on Tuesdays we regale you with fun little items like stat comparisons and the like for the coming Cardinal opponent. As this week is the challenging opponent Open Date State, there is no substantive data to pour over. Except our own. Hence, the offensive and defensive production… presented in fancy graph format. Ballin’.

Part 2: Defense
The old adage goes something along the lines of “Defense Wins Championships” but there is no adage that explains what wins you a 1-8 start to your season. Plenty of blame to go around, a considerable margin of which goes to the offense (which we get to in our previous post), but there is still some level of responsibility for this start that falls squarely on the defense.

At face value, the defense hasn’t been dreadful. Being ranked 82nd in the nation in total defense is certainly not awful, and in reality, not all that different from last season’s 69th. However, and this is quite a sizeable however, is that this is the area of the team that most people pointed to before the season as the sole reason why these Cards wouldn’t have an epic sort of drop off. Experience, returning starters, and players capable of big plays all were sort of the life preserver that nearly every fan clung to in the spring and late summer.

Questions? Of course. Corner play for one, but really, that was about it. The safety corps was arguably tops in the MAC, the linebacking unit and front line was experienced and stout, and the recruits that garnered much of the attention were on the defensive side of the football. Suffice to say that this was the saving grace in terms of 2009. That was before the formation shifted from the 3-4 front of years past to the 4-3 of this season. Resulting in…

What good is there to take away from this graph? Well… after North Texas the rush never was as bad. PROGRESS! To be truthful, the graph above tells nothing of the defensive story this season. Frankly, Ball State in 2008 was one of those teams whose statistics and graphs was nowhere close to indicative of the success of the unit. The 08 Cards bent but rarely broke, and usually always found a way to come up with some sort of stop, turnover, or momentum shifter. This season? Not so much.

We’ve certainly mastered the bend part, unfortunately, that “don’t break” memo apparently didn’t get transmitted correctly. Big plays, a lack of turnovers, and an overall inability to get any sort of important stop is what colored the early season losses and the defensive failures. In what I like to call the Buffalo Principle, you could point to maybe 5 plays that if they go the other way, we’re at worst 4-5 right now. That’s a much different tone, attitude, and feel around this program and in the fanbase.

So where does the defense go from here? With remaining games against the 4th, 5th, and 6th ranked total offense statistical leaders in conference, it doesn’t bode well for 2009. Against NIU, the Cardinals are looking at an opponent with a run-first mentality. Against Western, a pass happy approach. In Central, a hybrid of sorts that usually gives defensive units fits and required a nail biter last season.

As if the opponents themselves and the talent lining up against the defense wasn’t enough to worry the Cardinals fans, the creation of gameplans so vastly different is compounded by the short mid-week schedules the Cards now have to battle. For a coaching staff raising questions about the ability to adapt, this may prove to either be a chance to prove folks wrong or the chance to many to say, “I told you so” in quick fashion about the entire Parrish regime.

Ironic that the coach known best for his offensive attack and schemes may very well find the ease of the offseason dictated by the performance of the unit he is virtually hands off with.

Filed under: Ball State, Statistics | Leave a comment »