Friday, April 08, 2005

Trying to make sense of BC’s offense

I loved watching Paul Peterson play. His ability to keep plays alive with his feet and willingness to throw balls downfield gave me a feeling that we were in every game. And his 11-2 record as a starter, proved that when he was around, we were. Yet, our raw offensive numbers were not dramatically better this season. In fact, even with the shorter season, there was a decline in Total Offense. Was it due to the drop off in talent at Running Back? A lift from the good special teams play? The poor output against Syracuse? The inability to finish off a few key drives? I am not sure, but plan on using the offseason to figure out. In the meantime look at the key numbers of the last five seasons for Boston College’s offense under the much maligned Dana Bible. [SCROLL. TABLES ARE FUNKY IN BLOGGER.]

YearTotal PointsTotal OffenseTotal Passing Total Rushing
2003 (13 game season)370525528882367
2002 (13 game season)392507430102064

Unexpectedly our best offenses don’t correlate to our best records. In fact you would say the most accomplished and talented squads were the 2001 and 2004 teams. So were do I go from here? I am going to do my best to figure out what makes a difference in record, in play and in talent. Because on the surface it would appear that the players are interchangeable and Dana Bible’s teams are good for 340 points and seven wins every year. (I’ll also try to factor in defense, special teams and strength of schedule.)

I just think there has got to be a reason Peterson won and our other QBs have been slightly above average. I'll post any progress as I dig deeper.

And if anyone has access to drive BC drive charts or play-by-play logs, send me an email.