|
SCORING OFFENSE G TD XP 2XP
DXP FG Saf Pts Avg |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
5. Washington State.... 10 44 40
1 0 12 0 342 34.2 |
|
10.Washington.......... 10 26 26
0 0 11 0 215 21.5 |
|
|
|
SCORING DEFENSE G TD XP 2XP
DXP FG Saf Pts Avg |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
9. Washington.......... 10 38 35 0 0 16 0
311 31.1 |
|
10.Washington State.... 10 41 37 1 0 13 0
324 32.4 |
Their defense is almost as bad as ours - how is THAT
possible?
|
|
PASS OFFENSE G Att Cmp Int Pct. Yds
Avg TD Yds/G |
|
------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
6. Washington State.... 10 345 194 13 56.2 2766
8.0 23 276.6 |
|
8. Washington.......... 10 296 156 8 52.7 2223
7.5 10 222.3 |
|
|
|
PASS DEFENSE G Att Cmp Int Pct. Yds
Avg TD Yds/G |
|
------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
6. Washington.......... 10 344 232 9 67.4 2750
8.0 22 275.0 |
|
9. Washington State.... 10 385 231 10 60.0 2952
7.7 25 295.2 |
|
|
|
KICKOFF RETURNS G Ret Yds TD Avg |
|
------------------------------------------------ |
|
7. Washington.......... 10 37 757 0 20.5 |
|
10.Washington State.... 10 34 604 0 17.8 |
|
|
|
PUNTING G No. Yards Avg/P PR Avg
TB Net/P |
|
--------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
1. Washington State.... 10 48 1978 41.2 139 2.9
3 37.1 |
|
7. Washington.......... 10 45 1838 40.8 269 6.0
5 32.6 |
|
|
|
|--Gained--||---Lost---| |
|
TURNOVER MARGIN G Fum Int Tot Fum Int Tot Mar
Per/G |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
1. USC................. 10 11 18 29 4 8 12
+17 1.70 |
|
6. Washington..........
10 7 9 16 11 8 19 -3 -0.30 |
|
7. Washington State....
10 8 10 18 10 13 23 -5 -0.50 |
|
|
|
RUSHING OFFENSE G Att Yds Avg TD Yds/G |
|
-------------------------------------------------------- |
1. USC................. 10 397
2433 6.1 36 243.3
2. California.......... 10 397
2356 5.9 22 235.6
3. Washington State.... 10 393 2108 5.4 19
210.8 |
|
6. Washington.......... 10 352 1388 3.9 14 138.8 |
Did this surprise you? Both USC and Cal have
two good running backs (USC has about 7), so their
combined totals exceed that of Jerome Harrison. It
is notable that UW could have beaten Cal early in the
year.
|
|
RUSHING DEFENSE G Rushes Yards Avg. TD Yds/G |
|
---------------------------------------------------------- |
|
4. Washington.......... 10 372 1353 3.6 13
135.3 |
|
7. Washington State.... 10 416 1590 3.8 13
159.0 |
|
|
|
TOTAL OFFENSE G Rush Pass Plays Yards Avg/P
TD Yds/G |
|
---------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
3. Washington State.... 10 2108 2766 738 4874 6.6
42 487.4 |
|
8. Washington.......... 10 1388 2223 648 3611 5.6
24 361.1 |
|
|
|
TOTAL DEFENSE G Rush Pass Plys Yards Avg
TD Yds/G |
|
--------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
5. Washington.......... 10 1353 2750 716 4103 5.7
35 410.3 |
|
9. Washington State.... 10 1590 2952 801 4542 5.7
38 454.2 |
|
|
|
PUNT RETURN AVG G Ret Yds TD Avg |
|
------------------------------------------------ |
|
4. Washington State.... 10 25 304 1 12.2 |
|
10.Washington.......... 10 16 112 0 7.0 |
|
|
|
PASS EFFICIENCY G Att Cmp Pct Int Yds TD
Effic |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
5. Washington State.... 10 345 194 .562 13 2766
23 138.0 |
|
9. Washington.......... 10 296 156 .527 8 2223 10
121.5 |
WSU has been intercepted more than once a game.
|
|
PASS DEF EFFICIENCY G Att Cmp Int Pct. Yds TD
Effic |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
8. Washington State.... 10 385 231 10 60.0 2952 25
140.6 |
|
10.Washington.......... 10 344 232 9 67.4 2750 22
150.5 |
|
|
|
FIRST DOWNS G Rush Pass Pen Total |
|
----------------------------------------------- |
|
3. Washington State.... 10 94 119 16 229 |
|
9. Washington.......... 10 65 96 19 180 |
We've gained a lot
|
|
OPPONENT 1ST DOWNS G Rush Pass Pen Total |
|
----------------------------------------------- |
|
7. Washington.......... 10 76 129 15 220 |
|
10.Washington State.... 10 100 128 24 252 |
But given up even more!
|
|
SACKS BY G Sacks Yards |
|
--------------------------------------- |
|
1. Washington State.... 10 32 167!!!!! |
|
2. Oregon.............. 10 30 188 |
|
3. Stanford............ 9 29 187 |
|
4. USC................. 10 26 163 |
|
5. UCLA................ 10 24 135 |
|
6. Arizona............. 10 23 119 |
|
7. California.......... 10 22 123 |
|
8. Washington.......... 10 21 133 |
|
Arizona State....... 10 21 138 |
|
10.Oregon State........ 10 19 148 |
This was the biggest surprise to me. It feels
like we haven't gotten there all year. On the
other hand we've been burned again and again for big
plays while trying to get to the quarterback.
Maybe we need to back off a bit and spend more time
defending the pass? Or do we count on even more
sacks to bail us out, since UW is last in the Pac-10 in
sacks allowed (See below).
|
|
PENALTIES G No Yds Avg/G |
|
------------------------------------------ |
|
2. Washington.......... 10 60 476 47.6 |
|
6. Washington State.... 10 70 659 65.9 |
|
|
|
OPPONENT PENALTIES G No Yds Avg/G |
|
------------------------------------------ |
|
3. Washington.......... 10 81 672 67.2 |
|
5. Washington State.... 10 77 638 63.8 |
|
|
|
4TH-DN CONVERSIONS G Conv Att Pct |
|
------------------------------------------- |
|
6. Washington State.... 10 6 12 50.0 |
|
8. Washington.......... 10 8 19 42.1 |
Average - but look down...
|
|
OPP 4TH-DN CONVERT G Conv Att Pct |
|
------------------------------------------- |
|
7. Washington State.... 10 6 11 54.5 |
9. Washington.......... 10 12 18 66.7
When the game is on the line
and it is 4th and one - GO FOR IT!!!
|
|
|
|
RED ZONE OFFENSE G RedZone Percent TDs R/P FG-AT
Fumb/Int/Downs/Other |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
5. Washington State.... 10 34-43 79.1 24 14/10
10-12 2/ 3/ 2/ 0 |
|
6. Washington.......... 10 26-33 78.8 17 12/5
9-11 2/ 1/ 2/ 0 |
|
|
|
RED ZONE DEFENSE G RedZone Percent TDs R/P FG-AT
Fumb/Int/Downs/Other |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
4. Washington State.... 10 37-47 78.7 25 10/15
11-15 2/ 3/ 1/ 0 |
|
10.Washington.......... 10 38-41 92.7 25 11/14
13-13 1/ 0/ 0/ 2 |
If we can get inside the 20 we should score almost
every time. They should score ALMOST almost every
time. ;-)
|
|
3RD-DN CONVERSIONS G Conv Att Pct |
|
------------------------------------------- |
|
5. Washington State.... 10 55 143 38.5 |
|
10.Washington.......... 10 43 128 33.6 |
|
|
|
OPP 3RD-DN CONVERT G Conv Att Pct |
|
------------------------------------------- |
|
8. Washington State.... 10 66 159 41.5 |
|
9. Washington.......... 10 61 138 44.2 |
|
|
|
SACKS AGAINST G Sacks Yards |
|
--------------------------------------- |
|
1. USC................. 10 12 78 |
|
2. Washington State.... 10 14 87 |
|
7. Washington.......... 10 25 151 |
This has to cheer you up. We're twice as likely
to be celebrating over the prostrated body of a crumpled
quarterback as the Huskies - that hasn't been the case
very often. In the past couple games Isaiah
Stanback has become much more of a run threat to try to
offset this trend.
|
|
FIELD GOALS G Made Att Pct |
|
-------------------------------------------- |
|
4. Washington.......... 10 11 15 .733 |
|
6. Washington State.... 10 12 17 .706 |
|
|
|
PAT KICKING G Made Att Pct |
|
-------------------------------------------- |
|
1. Washington.......... 10 26 26 1.000 |
|
9. Washington State.... 10 40 43 .930 |
|
|
|
TIME OF POSSESSION G Total Time Avg/G |
|
---------------------------------------------- |
|
1. Oregon State........ 10 323:53 32:23 |
|
2. USC................. 10 307:08 30:42 |
|
9. Washington.......... 10 282:10 28:13 |
|
10.Washington State.... 10 267:49 26:46 |
|
Not the huge difference you would expect here, even
top to bottom. ON USC's part that might be because
they have been so far ahead in some games they've had a
lot of reserves in late in the game. |
|
KICKOFF COVERAGE G No. Yards Avg Retn TB
NetAvg |
|
------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
6. Washington State.... 10 63 3785 60.1 856 16
41.4 |
9. Washington.......... 10 44 2652 60.3 695 17
36.8
|
