• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

The Chinander Scorecard

The_CornTorch

The_CornTorch

Scout Team
5 Year Member
So a couple of times now in various interviews with the media, DC Erik Chinander has identified the defensive statistics that he believes are the best measuring stick for a defense like his.

Earlier this Spring, he said:

“So there’s no need to put much stock in total yards allowed, Chinander said. He emphasizes ‘stats that work for us.’ Takeaways. Sacks. Yards allowed per carry. Explosive plays allowed. Points on defense.”

And just last week, he said:

“You need tackles for loss, you need sacks, you obviously need turnovers if you’re going to pair up with a Scott Frost offense. What I’m concerned with is (tackles for loss) stats, turnovers, limiting explosive plays, percentage on third down and percentage on red zone. Turnovers is king for me.”

Which got me thinking… well shoot, here’s a man that’s laying out there exactly how he thinks he should be evaluated. So how did he do? And after waiting long enough, I didn’t see any write ups, so I decided to figure it out for myself.

I started calculating percentage gains/declines, and it just wasn’t working. And my deck needs another coat of stain before sundown. So, I’ll just leave it as a simple table for now.

All stats are courtesy of cfbstats.com. All the math is my own (let’s hope I’m right.) And yes, if folks are interested, I’d be more than happy to update this during the season.


#GBR

The_Chinander_Scorecard.png
 
Last edited:

Wow, thanks for all the great work!

One thing though, you have turnover gain/margin listed rather than straight turnovers. A defense can create turnovers, which is the stat that Chinander discusses, but it cannot protect the ball, only the offensive side can do that...so I think only TO's should be on any defensive report card.

I think that UCF's defense using the Chinander criteria, doesn't look so hot. That said, I choose to believe he'll have greater success here at Nebraska.
 
Last edited:
Good catch.

So the way I'm counting Turnover Gain is just that – turnovers that the defense creates. So that's good.

But you're right about turnover margin – that includes the offense losing the ball – which I don't care about here.

Will update it when I get a chance.
 
OK, just updated the OP and changed it to Takeaways (interceptions + fumble recovery season total) and Takeaway Average (season takeaway total divided by number of games).
 



So my first reaction is that the Takeaway Average looks great. A lot to be excited about there.

But the Big Plays Allowed – yikes! I'm hoping that's just a style of play difference between the two conferences.

Admittedly, this is a hugely apples to oranges comparison currently. But it's an interesting first read.
 
The_CornTorch said:
So my first reaction is that the Takeaway Average looks great. A lot to be excited about there.

But the Big Plays Allowed – yikes! I'm hoping that's just a style of play difference between the two conferences.

Admittedly, this is a hugely apples to oranges comparison currently. But it's an interesting first read.
Click to expand...
That's a cool way to compare. I think you're right on the bolded part.

So 2016 UCF looked pretty decent. In 2017 the D looked good but the O performance shifted quite a bit other than big plays allowed. Gotta keep in mind that still resulted in an unbeaten season so saying it's not so hot doesn't do it justice. They came up big against Auburn. I'll bet a lot of that delta was the two games against USF and Memphis.
 
husker6 said:
That's a cool way to compare. I think you're right on the bolded part.

So 2016 UCF looked pretty decent. In 2017 the D looked good but the O performance shifted quite a bit other than big plays allowed. Gotta keep in mind that still resulted in an unbeaten season so saying it's not so hot doesn't do it justice. They came up big against Auburn. I'll bet a lot of that delta was the two games against USF and Memphis.
Click to expand...

I've heard SF say a couple times that Chinander's D was what kept UCF competitive in 2016. Essentially justification for why he brought him with from Florida to Lincoln.

Sacks and TFLs are pretty remarkable for that squad considering a brand new coaching staff. And Takeaway Average is above the B1G mark.
 
Last edited:
The_CornTorch said:
I've heard SF say a couple times that Chinander's D was what kept UCF competitive in 2016. Essentially justification for why he brought him with from Florida to Lincoln.

Sacks and TFLs are pretty remarkable for that squad considering a brand new coaching staff.
Click to expand...
Yep, and to your offer to keep it updated through the season, I would like to see that. I think you've got something interesting here.
 




Very interesting thank you @The_CornTorch. I think the reason he cares less about ypg is because thanks to SF offense. Teams are going to get more possessions and have a higher than normal time of possession. So overall numbers are less important than avg per possession.
So let's say on average a CFB team has 16 possessions per game. (I looked and could not easily find the stat so I am using a straw man stat.) Then lets further say because of the hurry up that a team gets 1 extra possession per qtr. Does not sound like much right. So that one extra per qtr would give you 25% more opportunities. In terms of total numbers if everything else went up 25%. The overall numbers would suffer while the average per drive could still remain the same. So if the average rushing yds per game CFB wide might be in the neighborhood of 200 ypg a 25%increase in opportunity might cause a 25% increase to 250 ypg.

This is only bad if the offense is not scoring at a high enough percentage to cover the increase in the opponents output. You could also expect to see the same in return yds against since there would potentially be more punts and kickoffs as well.
 
Vertical jump of your athletes is a statistic not kept by the NCAA that Tom Osborne used to cite as having a striking correlation with football success.

I really believe your defense sets up the offense by keeping the opponent on their own side of the 50 yard line.

I really believe winning a punting margin is critical. If their punter averages 36 yards but your averages 46 yards, with all else equal, the momentum is in your favor.

Tom Osborne was a big believer keeping the legs fresh on the field. He advocated a healthy rotation of fresh legs. It also was his desire to win the time of possession game. If there had been a stat for shortest time that each letterwinner was on the field, I bet the mid-90's Huskers had the lowest national number. Those teams played deep in a rotation and legs were kept fresh. They always had gas in the fourth quarter to spare.

Some of the most critical factors to success simply do not enjoy being part of the statistics.
 
MadRat said:
Vertical jump of your athletes is a statistic not kept by the NCAA that Tom Osborne used to cite as having a striking correlation with football success.

I really believe your defense sets up the offense by keeping the opponent on their own side of the 50 yard line.

I really believe winning a punting margin is critical. If their punter averages 36 yards but your averages 46 yards, with all else equal, the momentum is in your favor.

Tom Osborne was a big believer keeping the legs fresh on the field. He advocated a healthy rotation of fresh legs. It also was his desire to win the time of possession game. If there had been a stat for shortest time that each letterwinner was on the field, I bet the mid-90's Huskers had the lowest national number. Those teams played deep in a rotation and legs were kept fresh. They always had gas in the fourth quarter to spare.

Some of the most critical factors to success simply do not enjoy being part of the statistics.
Click to expand...
 
MadRat said:
Vertical jump of your athletes is a statistic not kept by the NCAA that Tom Osborne used to cite as having a striking correlation with football success.

I really believe your defense sets up the offense by keeping the opponent on their own side of the 50 yard line.

I really believe winning a punting margin is critical. If their punter averages 36 yards but your averages 46 yards, with all else equal, the momentum is in your favor.

Tom Osborne was a big believer keeping the legs fresh on the field. He advocated a healthy rotation of fresh legs. It also was his desire to win the time of possession game. If there had been a stat for shortest time that each letterwinner was on the field, I bet the mid-90's Huskers had the lowest national number. Those teams played deep in a rotation and legs were kept fresh. They always had gas in the fourth quarter to spare.

Some of the most critical factors to success simply do not enjoy being part of the statistics.
Click to expand...
Sorry hit post too quick.

The first three paragraphs are great info. Just not sure how they relate to the discussion. As for the 4th paragraph. I believe that is what SF is trying to set up as well. Seems to want to run his practices the same as TO. Where multiple teams of the offense are being run simultaneously. This gets everyone playing time in practice.
 



only number I wanna see improved is 93rd ranked Def over all from his last team
 
Thanks for doing this... I am impressed by the takeaways, defensive TDs and sacks, but I was disappointed in the other numbers. I hope they can shore up the 3rd down efficiency and still get the explosive numbers.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top