Chris Lowe on turnovers

[jabohog]

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec
With all the talk about Brandon Allen, I thought this and other mistakes (penalties, etc.) cost us more games than the passing game. I know his performance included some of this, but let's say Brandon is fixed but we keep doing these kind of things, do we win more games? I don't think so, but that's just me.

[Prestworthy]

Wow last in turnover margin for the last 3 seasons and it's not close.

[Ugly Uncle]

The shocking number to me is how few turnovers we forced.  Not really shocked, because it was noticeable while it happened, but our defense has been HORRIBLE at forcing turnovers.

[Fayettechill14]

By year:

2011: +1
2012: -19
2013: -9

If we can just go even this year I think we can win 5-6 games on that alone. It really is worth that much.

[Smokehouse]

By year:

2011: +1
2012: -19
2013: -9

If we can just go even this year I think we can win 5-6 games on that alone. It really is worth that much.

Luckily turnovers are very dependent on luck. We can probably expect some regression to the mean with turnover margin.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec
With all the talk about Brandon Allen, I thought this and other mistakes (penalties, etc.) cost us more games than the passing game. I know his performance included some of this, but let's say Brandon is fixed but we keep doing these kind of things, do we win more games? I don't think so, but that's just me.

Ironically enough, given opportunities for T/O's (and not all can be attributed to Allen last season), our offense committed fewer T/O's per play than we did in 2012 when TW was at QB. Yes, you heard me right.

In 2012 we committed 1 T/O for every 26.6 offensive plays that we ran.

In 2013 we committed 1 T/O for every 33.7 offensive plays that we ran.

Not taking sides in any way here or trying to take up for Allen, just stating the facts.

Not only that, but our defense in 2012 created 1 T/O for every 71.6 plays that our opponents ran, while in 2013 our defense created 1 T/O for every 58.1 plays that our opponents ran.

All that being said, since 2001 when we have had a positive T/O Ratio we averaged giving up 21 T/O's and averaged creating 29 against our opponents per season, a +7 difference on an average of 13 games per season (a 9-4 average). A +.59 T/O Ratio average.

When we have had a negative T/O Ratio we have averaged giving up 24 T/O's and averaged creating only 17 T/O's against our opponents per season, a -7 difference on an average of 12 games per season (6-6 average). A -.60 T/O Ratio average.

In 2013 we had a net -9 or a -.80 T/O Ratio, giving up 23 and only gaining 14.

I think we were closer to at least a 6 win season last year than anyone realizes, but it was just the timing of the T/O's, like Collins fumble near the Miss State goal line or Allen's pick 6's at key moments that knocked the skids out (and the momentum) from underneath the team.

And keep in mind that this was only in Bielema's first year. I think that we will be far better this year in terms of wins and losses than we were last year, provided that we improve on our T/O Ratio and don't give up T/O's in key situations.

JMO

[Adam Stokes]

Beilema was doing nothing but preaching that we need to make sure that we "don't beat ourselves."  He had a good record with that at Wisconsin and I think we will slowly see Arkansas get to that level.

[WizardofhOgZ]

By the way, here is the link to the specific article, so you don't have to scroll down and look for it:

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/82099/ball-security-in-the-sec

[ricepig]

I prefer apple, but will eat peach. The reason we don't force many, is because we weren't in the picture when the pass was completed. We did a pretty decent job of stripping the QB when we got a sufficient pass rush.

[ChitownHawg]

Coach Smith seem to indicate they are placing more emphasis on creating turnovers. I think beyond losing the possession you have a huge swing in "mo". Our guys never seem to quit, but they sure could have used something to get excited about. Take the Conley hit that ended practice. My understand was the defense was going crazy.

Being in Chicago I have seen a lot of the Bears the last few years. No one ever accused them of being an offensive dynamo, but they succeeded due to their multi turnover games.

Our coaches know this and I expect us to continue to climb the chart.

[ChitownHawg]

Ironically enough, given opportunities for T/O's (and not all can be attributed to Allen last season), our offense committed fewer T/O's per play than we did in 2012 when TW was at QB. Yes, you heard me right.

In 2012 we committed 1 T/O for every 26.6 offensive plays that we ran.

In 2013 we committed 1 T/O for every 33.7 offensive plays that we ran.

Not taking sides in any way here or trying to take up for Allen, just stating the facts.

Not only that, but our defense in 2012 created 1 T/O for every 71.6 plays that our opponents ran, while in 2013 our defense created 1 T/O for every 58.1 plays that our opponents ran.

All that being said, since 2001 when we have had a positive T/O Ratio we averaged giving up 21 T/O's and averaged creating 29 against our opponents per season, a +7 difference on an average of 13 games per season (a 9-4 average). A +.59 T/O Ratio average.

When we have had a negative T/O Ratio we have averaged giving up 24 T/O's and averaged creating only 17 T/O's against our opponents per season, a -7 difference on an average of 12 games per season (6-6 average). A -.60 T/O Ratio average.

In 2013 we had a net -9 or a -.80 T/O Ratio, giving up 23 and only gaining 14.

I think we were closer to at least a 6 win season last year than anyone realizes, but it was just the timing of the T/O's, like Collins fumble near the Miss State goal line or Allen's pick 6's at key moments that knocked the skids out (and the momentum) from underneath the team.

And keep in mind that this was only in Bielema's first year. I think that we will be far better this year in terms of wins and losses than we were last year, provided that we improve on our T/O Ratio and don't give up T/O's in key situations.

JMO

Good point. Two turnovers in the 1st Q are much different than in the 4th when you are coming from behind or trying to hold a lead.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Good point. Two turnovers in the 1st Q are much different than in the 4th when you are coming from behind or trying to hold a lead.

That's true, but you can't afford to give up 2 T/O's in the first quarter either, that tends to put you behind the 8-ball and make you play catch-up all game long.

[Oklahawg]

Turnovers are directly related to the ability needed to produce them. If the DBs are too slow to be able to play in-your-face man defense they will not get a lot of INTs.

Offensive TOs matter, of course, but there is no way to predict that the 2012 or 2013 defense would have been able to "hold serve" if you don't commit turnovers. Defensive TOs avoid scores at some point. That is huge.

TOs might not have gotten us bowl eligible but toss in speed issues in the return game and we might have been 6-6.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Turnovers are directly related to the ability needed to produce them. If the DBs are too slow to be able to play in-your-face man defense they will not get a lot of INTs.

Offensive TOs matter, of course, but there is no way to predict that the 2012 or 2013 defense would have been able to "hold serve" if you don't commit turnovers. Defensive TOs avoid scores at some point. That is huge.

TOs might not have gotten us bowl eligible but toss in speed issues in the return game and we might have been 6-6.

But as mentioned above, our offense and defense were better per play ran on average, or defended against, than the 2012 team. Our big problem seemed to be the timing of the T/O's that seemed to occur at key junctures in the most important games (I know, they were all important) that might have turned the tide of momentum in our favor at key moments.

Instead, they worked against the collective "psyche" or mental toughness of the team in those games. We were young, we are still pretty much young, but I believe that this team has learned and grown from what they experienced last year and with a more aggressive, play-making approach, I think the defense might provide the added edge to get us over the top between being unsuccessful and successful. Time will tell.

[ChitownHawg]

That's true, but you can't afford to give up 2 T/O's in the first quarter either, that tends to put you behind the 8-ball and make you play catch-up all game long.

Muskogee, understood. I was more trying to make the point the timing of the turnover can possibly be more important than the number of turnovers.

[ChitownHawg]

But as mentioned above, our offense and defense were better per play ran on average, or defended against, than the 2012 team. Our big problem seemed to be the timing of the T/O's that seemed to occur at key junctures in the most important games (I know, they were all important) that might have turned the tide of momentum in our favor at key moments.

Instead, they worked against the collective "psyche" or mental toughness of the team in those games. We were young, we are still pretty much young, but I believe that this team has learned and grown from what they experienced last year and with a more aggressive, play-making approach, I think the defense might provide the added edge to get us over the top between being unsuccessful and successful. Time will tell.

My points exactly. More eloquently stated though. 

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Muskogee, understood. I was more trying to make the point the timing of the turnover can possibly be more important than the number of turnovers.

I agree, but I think that both the number of T/O's and the timing of those are equally important. If you go all game long and never have a T/O and you get down to the last 6 minutes of the 4th Qtr and you are 3 points down on your opponent, but you start a drive from your own 20 and drive to their 30 and then fumble the ball away or throw a pick on their 15, you are screwed and the wind is taken out of your sails.

I agree that it would have been preferable to have sustained the T/O early, but point is, whenever it comes it is damaging. Early T/O's can potentially put you down by 14 and force you fight back. Second half T/O's can crush the spirit of a team, particularly if they are competing at the time (see last years A&M game).

[urkillnmesmalls]

Ironically enough, given opportunities for T/O's (and not all can be attributed to Allen last season), our offense committed fewer T/O's per play than we did in 2012 when TW was at QB. Yes, you heard me right.

In 2012 we committed 1 T/O for every 26.6 offensive plays that we ran.

In 2013 we committed 1 T/O for every 33.7 offensive plays that we ran.

Not taking sides in any way here or trying to take up for Allen, just stating the facts.

Not only that, but our defense in 2012 created 1 T/O for every 71.6 plays that our opponents ran, while in 2013 our defense created 1 T/O for every 58.1 plays that our opponents ran.

All that being said, since 2001 when we have had a positive T/O Ratio we averaged giving up 21 T/O's and averaged creating 29 against our opponents per season, a +7 difference on an average of 13 games per season (a 9-4 average). A +.59 T/O Ratio average.

When we have had a negative T/O Ratio we have averaged giving up 24 T/O's and averaged creating only 17 T/O's against our opponents per season, a -7 difference on an average of 12 games per season (6-6 average). A -.60 T/O Ratio average.

In 2013 we had a net -9 or a -.80 T/O Ratio, giving up 23 and only gaining 14.

I think we were closer to at least a 6 win season last year than anyone realizes, but it was just the timing of the T/O's, like Collins fumble near the Miss State goal line or Allen's pick 6's at key moments that knocked the skids out (and the momentum) from underneath the team.

And keep in mind that this was only in Bielema's first year. I think that we will be far better this year in terms of wins and losses than we were last year, provided that we improve on our T/O Ratio and don't give up T/O's in key situations.

JMO

I think timing of the turnovers does make a big difference, as well as where they occur on the field.  Heck...I remember one year under HDN where it seemed like we turned it over on a kick return or a muffed punt once a HALF!  That's just like giving the opposition 50+ yards of field position for free, with a free trip to the red zone. 

I completely agree that last season, there was a lot of contributing factors to the turnover issues.  Experience plays a part in that, and while we always talk about "blue chip" athletes, when you're realistically talking about a team that is primarily constructed of 3 star players that are thrust right into action, it's a recipe for disaster.  They get excited, and are in the process of thinking about the big picture, and they forget the simple things like ball security.  Oops.

These stats do tell a compelling story though.  We have to do better with the turnover margin, and I don't see how anyone can refute that it has had a detrimental effect on the last two seasons.   

[OneTuskOverTheLine™]

Luckily turnovers are very dependent on luck. We can probably expect some regression to the mean with turnover margin.

Tell that to the Honey Badger... He was a NYC foozbawl pick pocket..

[ChitownHawg]

Luckily turnovers are very dependent on luck. We can probably expect some regression to the mean with turnover margin.

Peanut Tillman creates turnovers. He simply looks to strip the ball every time he tackles someone. No luck there.

Defenses practices takeaways. Where the ball bounces once it hits the ground is luck - good takeaway defenses creating the turnover is skill.

[urkillnmesmalls]

We'll never win the turnover battle, if we don't create any. 

Signed,

Captain Obvious

It's right up there with never winning any baseball games if you don't score any runs. 

[ChitownHawg]

We'll never win the turnover battle, if we don't create any. 

Signed,

Captain Obvious

It's right up there with never winning any baseball games if you don't score any runs.

Not sure who you are talking to but that kind of is my point. Luck has little to do with turnovers - they are created. I had to say so due to someone else chalking them up to luck.

But Captain Obvious is a childhood hero of mine! 

[LZH]

Ironically enough, given opportunities for T/O's (and not all can be attributed to Allen last season), our offense committed fewer T/O's per play than we did in 2012 when TW was at QB. Yes, you heard me right.

In 2012 we committed 1 T/O for every 26.6 offensive plays that we ran.

In 2013 we committed 1 T/O for every 33.7 offensive plays that we ran.

We attempted 158 more passes in 2012 than we did in 2013, but had only 5 more INT's.  I don't know the numbers, but I'd guess that many more turnovers are a result of INT's than fumbles....which fits BB's run-heavy offensive strategies quite well.  Actually, I think it was you MHF that posted on here about five or six years ago how the turnover ratio was the true "Secret", football's law of attraction or the God number, etc.  I don't remember the figure, but whoever wins the TO battle wins an incredibly high percentage of games.

I may not care much for BB, but his brand of football will do well in this conference if he gets some more good football players in here.

[Smokehouse]

Peanut Tillman creates turnovers. The simply looks t strip the ball every time he tackles someone. No luck there.

Defenses practices takeaways. Where the ball bounces once it hits the ground is luck - good takeaway defenses creating the turnover is skill.

That bounce is more important than you think. Yes, some defenses will be better at forcing turnovers than others. That's not what I'm saying. It's just that the +/- of a defense is not that extreme in the long run. The Saints were something like +15 the season they won the Super Bowl, fell to +6 or so the next season. Still a good defense with elite players, just hard to consistently get (or lose) big numbers of turnovers.

[kchogfan14]

Luckily turnovers are very dependent on luck. We can probably expect some regression to the mean with turnover margin.

Luck? Luck has absolutely nothing to do with it!

A defense MAKES turnovers with pressure on the QB, tight coverage, hitting the receivers and the running backs with a desire to create turnovers. Luck only has to do with the bounce of the ball AFTER it is fumbled!

[Oklahawg]

To echo MHF (and others) on the notion of emotional response and timing...

...the late 70s OU Sooners had as much swagger as any team I've ever watched. I liked them, else I would have hated them just as much as the late 80s Miami teams.

OU rushed for over 5000 yards in 1978. The real story? The defense had 28 INTs and 50 forced turnovers, roughly 2.5 and 4.0 per game. In 1980, OU had five fumbles vs Nebraska (lost 2). The 1978 team was #1 when they lost at NU 17-14, recording 9 fumbles (losing six).  The only fumble that mattered, though, was on the last drive when OU was (predictably) driving down the field, ready to pull out their "Sooner Magic" that Switzer always bragged about: Billy Sims fumbled on the 3-yard line with 3:27 left in the game. Ouch.

They had the swagger. Turnovers were something that did not affect them. Even nine in a game. To the then #4 team in the country. At that team's home field (in the midst of a 300-game home sellout streak). Well, they affected them when the last one happens 3 yards from the EZ (and a likely win) with 3:27 to go.

[HogFanatic]

Chris Lowe strikes again. Captain Obvious says, "if your team's turnover ratio is in the plus column, they will be more successful than if it were in the negative."

And no, turnovers are not "luck". Not in any sport. The offense practices taking care of the ball, the defense practices taking it away. Look at hogs basketball. They force gobs of turnovers. They do it with pressure defense and they jump passing lanes. Same thing in football. You have to practice it and expect it as a defense. The football hogs haven't been good at it in awhile.

[3kgthog]

So, the things BB teams were supposed to be good at we are actually terrible at? Makes sense.

[jkstock04]

Chris Lowe strikes again. Captain Obvious says, "if your team's turnover ratio is in the plus column, they will be more successful than if it were in the negative."

And no, turnovers are not "luck". Not in any sport. The offense practices taking care of the ball, the defense practices taking it away. Look at hogs basketball. They force gobs of turnovers. They do it with pressure defense and they jump passing lanes. Same thing in football. You have to practice it and expect it as a defense. The football hogs haven't been good at it in awhile.

I agree with what you said about the turnovers...was actually thinking the same thing. No chance this turnover ratio stuff simply equates to luck.

[ChitownHawg]

So, the things BB teams were supposed to be good at we are actually terrible at? Makes sense.

Look at the numbers. The year BEFORE CBB we were -19 and with him we were -9. That is a pretty good swing in the right direction. Nice logic there Einstein - did you even read the article or contemplate it? I guess haters will be haters no matter what.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Peanut Tillman creates turnovers. He simply looks to strip the ball every time he tackles someone. No luck there.

Defenses practices takeaways. Where the ball bounces once it hits the ground is luck - good takeaway defenses creating the turnover is skill.

That's true and that was the reason for Collins fumble near MSU's goal line. Here's the video. 5:30 remaining at the Miss State 13 yard line.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=10024277

And the big play before the fumble that got us to the MSU 13.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=10024275

[jkstock04]

Look at the numbers. The year BEFORE CBB we were -19 and with him we were -9. That is a pretty good swing in the right direction. Nice logic there Einstein - did you even read the article or contemplate it? I guess haters will be haters no matter what.

I read the article and did not see those stats. From what I read it showed the last three seasons combined. Guess I'm no Einstein either. Either that or maybe you didn't read it.

[DeltaBoy]

Solid Tackling and Creating Turnovers will help Brandon Allen a ton.

[hogsanity]

When you go several consecutive seasons with horrid defensive recruiting your defense is horrible.  When your lb's and db's cant tackle, and can't find the ball in the air, you don't get many turnovers, and that is what we have seen.

[ChitownHawg]

I read the article and did not see those stats. From what I read it showed the last three seasons combined. Guess I'm no Einstein either. Either that or maybe you didn't read it.

Sorry I should have clarified that I was quoting from Fayettechill's post. See below. He is very solid with his research so I take his numbers as being correct.

And this wouldn't be the first thread on Hogville where people comment without reading the article. Plus just tired of people using every thread to take a shot at CBB.

By year:

2011: +1
2012: -19
2013: -9

If we can just go even this year I think we can win 5-6 games on that alone. It really is worth that much.

[ChitownHawg]

Bumping this to the top to see if I can get others to discuss this. I am kind of bored with the uniform / logo topic. 

[wholehog92]

The lack of turnovers is directly related to the quality of our defense.  RBs are far more likely to give up the ball at the end of the run when a whole gang of guys is taking a shot at pulling the ball out than one guy struggling just to make the tackle.  You are far more likely to actually recover that fumble when you have 11 guys in the area of the fumble than you are with the one guy who made the tackle buried under the back and 5 free blockers looking for people to block standing around the ball.  You are far more likely to make an INT when your safety is within 1 yard of the catch than if he's not even in the picture.

In this league the offense is going to give up some turnovers with the level of defense we face.  The only way to even it out is to improve our overall defense.

Captain obvious strikes again of course.

[Hawgon]

There are turnovers and there are turnovers.  We were inordinately high in pick sixes and very long interception returns last year.  Five fumbles at the 40 probably don't hurt you as bad as one pick six does, never mind one in two or three games running.

[hogsanity]

Bumping this to the top to see if I can get others to discuss this. I am kind of bored with the uniform / logo topic. 

wont get much action, requires talking defense, and most people here have no use for, or desire to talk about defense. They find it boring.

[ChitownHawg]

There are turnovers and there are turnovers.  We were inordinately high in pick sixes and very long interception returns last year.  Five fumbles at the 40 probably don't hurt you as bad as one pick six does, never mind one in two or three games running.

So what you are saying is some turnovers are apple and some cherry? 

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I read the article and did not see those stats. From what I read it showed the last three seasons combined. Guess I'm no Einstein either. Either that or maybe you didn't read it.

In 2012 we turned the ball over 31 times and only gained 12 T/O's. A net of -19.

In 2013 we turned the ball over 23 times and gained 14. A net of -9.

That's a net improvement by 10.

No one need be an "Einstein" to read recorded stats. Just sayin.

www.ncaa.org

[TheRazorbackGuy]

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec
With all the talk about Brandon Allen, I thought this and other mistakes (penalties, etc.) cost us more games than the passing game. I know his performance included some of this, but let's say Brandon is fixed but we keep doing these kind of things, do we win more games? I don't think so, but that's just me.

Turnovers change momentum in the game

[Music City Hog]

This is what happens when your talent is waaaaay worse than your opponents talent on a week in and week out basis.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

This is what happens when your talent is waaaaay worse than your opponents talent on a week in and week out basis.

I'll disagree with that. Even lesser talent can exercise great ball control. Now in your QB that might be right because it depends a great deal upon the quality of decisions that are made by the QB and the arm strength to make certain throws successfully. But to make a blanket statement about overall talent having something to do with the overall T/O Margin, is stretching it a bit, IMO.

[LZH]

This is what happens when your talent is waaaaay worse than your opponents talent on a week in and week out basis.

I thought it was because Ash was a crappy DC.

[ChitownHawg]

I thought it was because Ash was a crappy DC.

It was.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I thought it was because Ash was a crappy DC.

Maybe not crappy, but he definitely had an inability to adjust his defense to the talent on hand.

[aar0n]

This is what happens when your talent is waaaaay worse than your opponents talent on a week in and week out basis.

Not necessarily true.  You're only allowed 10 hours a week or so per NCAA rules for practice, and you can spend all 10 of those hours devoted to making the least skilled football team in the world the best at ball security and turnovers.  The problem is, they won't be good at anything else.

[LZH]

Maybe not crappy, but he definitely had an inability to adjust his defense to the talent on hand.

I was poking fun at the folks whose explanation for our pitiful defense last year was "we have no talent", then it immediately switched to "Ash wasn't very good" right after he left.

I don't remember what exactly happened on every play, but I can't help but think that one of us could have randomly picked a defensive set on that final drive at LSU and could have done a better job than he did....couldn't have done any worse.  I know you can't go out on the field and make plays for the players, but when they were pinned in inside their own 5 yd line his calls weren't very aggressive.  I certainly know hindsight and 20/20 and all that, but with nothing else to lose and everything to gain, playing it safe while they had a backup freshman QB and 99 yard to go just made no sense to me.

[DeltaBoy]

The Hogs giveth but they rarely taketh away Cursed be the Hogs.