10-03-2011, 03:50 PM
I tend to disagree with this analysis. I'd call what Stanford did to UCLA "Level 2 Domination."
Level One Domination: Complete, utter destruction; there is no thought of what might have gone differently, etc. Might as well have never shown up. Examples from last year: Stanford @ Washington; Oregon State @ Stanford; UC East Bay/the University of South Central.
Level Two Domination: A handy win in which the winning team has beaten its opponent soundly, though not so badly that you couldn't imagine weaknesses.
That said, UCLA wasn't really in the same ballpark as us. UCLA averaged 5.5 yards per play, which, if sustained over the entire season, would place them 11th in the Pac-12 (for last year, it would've landed them 6th). Stanford's 6 yards per play makes it look as if the game was closer than it was; however, I'd argue this was a case of the stats being deceptive. Two Stanford drives were kneel-down type deals; they ought to be removed. I'd also argue--though this is perhaps a bit more controversial--that the 12 play, 55 yard drive should also be removed from the calculations. My logic is this: Stanford was more interested in time than yardage. Once you remove that you get an average of 7 yards per play, which is up to our typical standards of excellence.
Or, let's look at it another way. A team can only get the yardage that's put in front of it. Field position, in other words, is a big factor. Let's look at how each team compared at gaining yardage (minus penalties) as a percentage of the possible yardage gained (100% means you scored touchdowns on every offensive possession).
Stanford: 71.5%
UCLA: 52.9%
Part of the reason the yardage totals look so close is that Stanford just had fewer yards to gain--we started multiple possessions on UCLA's half of the field.
Level One Domination: Complete, utter destruction; there is no thought of what might have gone differently, etc. Might as well have never shown up. Examples from last year: Stanford @ Washington; Oregon State @ Stanford; UC East Bay/the University of South Central.
Level Two Domination: A handy win in which the winning team has beaten its opponent soundly, though not so badly that you couldn't imagine weaknesses.
That said, UCLA wasn't really in the same ballpark as us. UCLA averaged 5.5 yards per play, which, if sustained over the entire season, would place them 11th in the Pac-12 (for last year, it would've landed them 6th). Stanford's 6 yards per play makes it look as if the game was closer than it was; however, I'd argue this was a case of the stats being deceptive. Two Stanford drives were kneel-down type deals; they ought to be removed. I'd also argue--though this is perhaps a bit more controversial--that the 12 play, 55 yard drive should also be removed from the calculations. My logic is this: Stanford was more interested in time than yardage. Once you remove that you get an average of 7 yards per play, which is up to our typical standards of excellence.
Or, let's look at it another way. A team can only get the yardage that's put in front of it. Field position, in other words, is a big factor. Let's look at how each team compared at gaining yardage (minus penalties) as a percentage of the possible yardage gained (100% means you scored touchdowns on every offensive possession).
Stanford: 71.5%
UCLA: 52.9%
Part of the reason the yardage totals look so close is that Stanford just had fewer yards to gain--we started multiple possessions on UCLA's half of the field.