blacklistedbully
10-01-2014, 04:17 PM
This is where the infamous Ole Miss hype comes in. They want you to believe Memphis was a quality win because Memphis was explosive offensively versus UCLA. Here's the problem with that:
Look at UCLA's defensive results in their other games. Pretty much every team that has played UCLA has either had their best offensive performance in total yards, or has come close. ASU amassed 626 total yards in their 35-point blowout loss to UCLA. Here is a partial list of teams that did an as good or better job of defending UCLA's opponents than did UCLA:
Weber State
Richmond
Austin Peay
Middle Tenn
North Texas
Kansas
New Mexico
In fact, of the 13 other teams UCLA's opponents have played, only 3 did appreciably worse than UCLA in total offense given up. So please, let's not pretend putting yards up on UCLA is the sign of a formidable offense. Some of these teams are FCS, and 4 of the FBS programs are in the lower half of the FBS in total offense. UCLA is currently ranked 99 out of 125 FBS teams for total defense. That's pretty telling on its own, but then consider that 3 of the 4 teams UCLA has played have the following Total Offense ranks:
#70 Virginia
#76 Memphis
#110 Texas
How bad does a defense have to be to rank #99 out of 125 when 3 of the 4 teams they've played are the above?
Start digging a little deeper at Memphis and their "explosive offense", and you discover:
Memphis opponent Austin Peay gave up 545 yds to Memphis, but 620 yds to Eastern Illinois.
Memphis opponent Middle Tenn gave up 480 yds to Memphis, but 718 yds to Western Kentucky.
Is Memphis really an "explosive offense" or is it more likely they have simply played really poor defenses?
In short, I think the truth is, UCLA is terrible defensively, relying on their offense to win for them, and Memphis' "offensive explosiveness" is due to the terrible defenses they have played, not because they have a great offense.
Holding Memphis to 104 yards is good, but let's peel away the hype and realize it was not a case of "holding down an explosive offense". Hype, hype, and more hype. Don't buy into it.
Look at UCLA's defensive results in their other games. Pretty much every team that has played UCLA has either had their best offensive performance in total yards, or has come close. ASU amassed 626 total yards in their 35-point blowout loss to UCLA. Here is a partial list of teams that did an as good or better job of defending UCLA's opponents than did UCLA:
Weber State
Richmond
Austin Peay
Middle Tenn
North Texas
Kansas
New Mexico
In fact, of the 13 other teams UCLA's opponents have played, only 3 did appreciably worse than UCLA in total offense given up. So please, let's not pretend putting yards up on UCLA is the sign of a formidable offense. Some of these teams are FCS, and 4 of the FBS programs are in the lower half of the FBS in total offense. UCLA is currently ranked 99 out of 125 FBS teams for total defense. That's pretty telling on its own, but then consider that 3 of the 4 teams UCLA has played have the following Total Offense ranks:
#70 Virginia
#76 Memphis
#110 Texas
How bad does a defense have to be to rank #99 out of 125 when 3 of the 4 teams they've played are the above?
Start digging a little deeper at Memphis and their "explosive offense", and you discover:
Memphis opponent Austin Peay gave up 545 yds to Memphis, but 620 yds to Eastern Illinois.
Memphis opponent Middle Tenn gave up 480 yds to Memphis, but 718 yds to Western Kentucky.
Is Memphis really an "explosive offense" or is it more likely they have simply played really poor defenses?
In short, I think the truth is, UCLA is terrible defensively, relying on their offense to win for them, and Memphis' "offensive explosiveness" is due to the terrible defenses they have played, not because they have a great offense.
Holding Memphis to 104 yards is good, but let's peel away the hype and realize it was not a case of "holding down an explosive offense". Hype, hype, and more hype. Don't buy into it.