No, I'm not posting here because I think it's time to fire Ault. If we play like this against San Jose State, we'll talk.
It's easy to forget this, but, when Oregon isn't playing NFL-level defenses fielded by SEC teams, this is precisely what they do to people. Even against LSU, they managed to score 27 points while committing four turnovers. Most teams would be fortunate to score at all under such conditions. Last year, they did what they are doing to us against just about every team on their schedule until Auburn proved that, yes, it's possible to stop Oregon's high octane offense if you field the Carolina Panther's starting defense against it.
The good news, at least from where I'm sitting, is our offense is moving the ball fairly effectively against a solid defense. Granted, there have been a few miscues, and it's clear our offensive line isn't as solid as it was last year, but Lantrip looks comfortable back there and our running game is holding its own. When we're not playing national championship contenders, it will be much more obvious that we've only lost half a step there since last year. Our defense, meanwhile... well, it's not really fair to knock them. Our secondary is about as mediocre as always, but our linebackers are doing a good job of pressuring the quarterback. Sadly, Oregon's offense is explicitly built to punish teams when they pressure the quarterback, or when they attempt to focus on coverage, or when they attempt to stop the run, or when they step on to the field at all.
The simple truth is Oregon is really, really good, and has a lot more talent on both sides of the ball than we do. They also have Nike funneling money into the program, while we have troubles filling a 30,000 seat stadium. As tempting as it might be to pin this one on Ault, it would be like blaming Belgium for not putting up a better fight against Germany in World War 2. We lost this game the instant it showed up on our schedule - the only question was whether or not Oregon would forget that. If they beat LSU, we might have had a chance. They didn't, so we didn't.
Don't feel bad - Oregon will make a lot of schools look silly. We're just their first victim of the year; we'll be in good company soon enough.
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
FCA 2011
Suddenly it's September, and time to look forward to another season of Wolf Pack football.
This blog was created in 2007 by a couple of guys who were more than a little disappointed in the team's advancement in over the previous 3.5 seasons and felt more than a little crushed by it. More than anything it was an emotional response to a rather lackluster product; a product of men with the talents and skills to do better...much, much better. And in posts dating back nearly another four seasons we have produced ample testament backing up our stance of disappointment.
Disappointment is the recurring theme here.
But through all of that we never really wanted to see Ault terminated. He was and still is an institution in Reno and Nevada at large and should be able to maintain the dignity that goes along with that. Nevada football = Chris Ault in no uncertain terms, and none of us wanted to see him stripped of that dignity by a lackluster 3rd tenure. This, in a very simplified nutshell, became our raison d'être.
In 2010 a string of magical moments, too numerous to recount here, captivated the Wolf Pack Nation. There were ample times to doubt, but through it all Ault and the 2010 staff & athletes gave us all something truly special and for that all Wolf Pack fans are perpetually indebted.
Therefore, in honor of their collective efforts we will put a hiatus on our blogging efforts here.
Now that's not to say that we may not feel the need to pick back up even before the end of the season...time will tell for that one. We do love blogging about our beloved Wolf Pack, whether statistical analysis, post-game musings, or just plain randomness, so it may be a rather tough sabbatical. But as of September 5th, 2011 it feels like the right thing to do.
This blog was created in 2007 by a couple of guys who were more than a little disappointed in the team's advancement in over the previous 3.5 seasons and felt more than a little crushed by it. More than anything it was an emotional response to a rather lackluster product; a product of men with the talents and skills to do better...much, much better. And in posts dating back nearly another four seasons we have produced ample testament backing up our stance of disappointment.
Disappointment is the recurring theme here.
But through all of that we never really wanted to see Ault terminated. He was and still is an institution in Reno and Nevada at large and should be able to maintain the dignity that goes along with that. Nevada football = Chris Ault in no uncertain terms, and none of us wanted to see him stripped of that dignity by a lackluster 3rd tenure. This, in a very simplified nutshell, became our raison d'être.
In 2010 a string of magical moments, too numerous to recount here, captivated the Wolf Pack Nation. There were ample times to doubt, but through it all Ault and the 2010 staff & athletes gave us all something truly special and for that all Wolf Pack fans are perpetually indebted.
Therefore, in honor of their collective efforts we will put a hiatus on our blogging efforts here.
Now that's not to say that we may not feel the need to pick back up even before the end of the season...time will tell for that one. We do love blogging about our beloved Wolf Pack, whether statistical analysis, post-game musings, or just plain randomness, so it may be a rather tough sabbatical. But as of September 5th, 2011 it feels like the right thing to do.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Reflections on 2010
Winning cures all ills.
We just completed the best season in modern Nevada football history. We won the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl, secured a share of the WAC championship, beat Boise State in a stunning thriller of a game, and finished the year 13-1. We finished the year in the top 15 for the first time... well, probably ever, though I wouldn't be terribly surprised if somebody found us ranked up there in the '40s or something. Long story short, if you're a Nevada Wolf Pack fan, there's nothing to complain about.
So I won't.
Instead, let's dish out some random thoughts to end the 2010 season and get ourselves ready for the 2011 season...
WAC Bowl Games
Our predictions for the WAC bowl season weren't exactly flawless. The Las Vegas Bowl was neither an amazing game, nor did a vengeful god make its appearance and smite both teams from the field. Instead, Boise State handily beat a mediocre Utah team that looked a lot better on paper than it did on the field. Our prediction of the uDrive Humanitarian Bowl was dead on; if Fresno State wanted anything to do with blue turf before, they certainly don't now. The Sheraton Hawaii Bowl was an overwhelming win... for Tulsa. Oh yes, and the main object of our affection coached the best Wolf Pack team in history through a successful (if sloppily played) bowl game. Don't worry, we were there.
If this is what it's like to be wrong, I don't want to be right.
Ault's Letter to the Community
He wrote it, I read it. You should too.
Post-Kaepernick Life
Chris Murray at the RGJ is continuing his fantastic work this season in covering all things Wolf Pack, this time with a look at our 2011 lineup. It's an interesting read - our offense might look very different from the rush-heavy offense we've come to enjoy over the past couple of seasons. Thank goodness we start against New Mexico to get some of the early bugs out.
Thoughts on 2011
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. The bad news is that our schedule is going to be much tougher - better teams than us have played in Autzen Stadium and left thoroughly embarrassed and dispirited, and I don't expect us to do much better. The good news? With Boise State leaving for the Mountain West a year before us, we have as good of a shot as we're ever going to get for an undivided conference championship. Hawaii will remain spunky, of course, but the rest of the conference is looking pretty mediocre, Fresno State included. Question is, will we have the talent and the schemes to pull it off?
Past that, attendance will be the big question mark for us. We've noted several times (as has the RGJ, frankly) that community, financial, and facility support for our football team is at or near the bottom of the Mountain West. The numbers don't lie - if we don't find some way to improve, we're going to be at the bottom of the conference far more often than not, regardless of who's coaching the program. We're not competing against Idaho or San Jose State anymore; UNLV might be the only team in the MWC with consistently worse attendance than we do. The good news is we've proven that, if there's a quality product on the field, Reno will show up to support the Wolf Pack. However, there has to be quality on both sides of the field - Reno simply isn't a city that's willing to watch a top-25 team beat the tar out of a doormat, even if that top-25 team is us.
Case in point, here were our attendance figures:
September 2 (Eastern Washington): 16313
September 11 (Colorado State): 18098
September 17 (California): 28809
October 9 (San Jose State): 20636
October 30 (Utah State): 11558
November 20 (New Mexico State): 10906
November 26 (Boise State): 30712
Realistically, assuming the Wolf Pack doesn't flop early against its schedule, we should be in better shape attendance-wise in 2011 than we were in 2010. I don't anticipate us selling out Mackay for every home game (it'd be cool if we did, mind you), but I also anticipate us averaging better than 19,576. The good news is our 2011 home schedule will be much more interesting than SJSU, Utah State, and NMSU - in fact, our most challenging conference games (Hawaii, Fresno State, and Louisiana Tech) are all at home. In short, our home conference schedule is chock full of meaningful games, which should boost attendance somewhat. Throw in UNLV and we might average over 22,000.
I can't wait!
Anyway, that's it for now. Lest anyone think we've completely swallowed the trademarked powdered fruit drink, I will note that we were still rather turnover-prone in the bowl game, but I'm willing to give Ault and his crew the benefit of the doubt and assume it was just post-finals rust.
For once, they've earned it.
Here's to next year!
We just completed the best season in modern Nevada football history. We won the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl, secured a share of the WAC championship, beat Boise State in a stunning thriller of a game, and finished the year 13-1. We finished the year in the top 15 for the first time... well, probably ever, though I wouldn't be terribly surprised if somebody found us ranked up there in the '40s or something. Long story short, if you're a Nevada Wolf Pack fan, there's nothing to complain about.
So I won't.
Instead, let's dish out some random thoughts to end the 2010 season and get ourselves ready for the 2011 season...
WAC Bowl Games
Our predictions for the WAC bowl season weren't exactly flawless. The Las Vegas Bowl was neither an amazing game, nor did a vengeful god make its appearance and smite both teams from the field. Instead, Boise State handily beat a mediocre Utah team that looked a lot better on paper than it did on the field. Our prediction of the uDrive Humanitarian Bowl was dead on; if Fresno State wanted anything to do with blue turf before, they certainly don't now. The Sheraton Hawaii Bowl was an overwhelming win... for Tulsa. Oh yes, and the main object of our affection coached the best Wolf Pack team in history through a successful (if sloppily played) bowl game. Don't worry, we were there.
If this is what it's like to be wrong, I don't want to be right.
Ault's Letter to the Community
He wrote it, I read it. You should too.
Post-Kaepernick Life
Chris Murray at the RGJ is continuing his fantastic work this season in covering all things Wolf Pack, this time with a look at our 2011 lineup. It's an interesting read - our offense might look very different from the rush-heavy offense we've come to enjoy over the past couple of seasons. Thank goodness we start against New Mexico to get some of the early bugs out.
Thoughts on 2011
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. The bad news is that our schedule is going to be much tougher - better teams than us have played in Autzen Stadium and left thoroughly embarrassed and dispirited, and I don't expect us to do much better. The good news? With Boise State leaving for the Mountain West a year before us, we have as good of a shot as we're ever going to get for an undivided conference championship. Hawaii will remain spunky, of course, but the rest of the conference is looking pretty mediocre, Fresno State included. Question is, will we have the talent and the schemes to pull it off?
Past that, attendance will be the big question mark for us. We've noted several times (as has the RGJ, frankly) that community, financial, and facility support for our football team is at or near the bottom of the Mountain West. The numbers don't lie - if we don't find some way to improve, we're going to be at the bottom of the conference far more often than not, regardless of who's coaching the program. We're not competing against Idaho or San Jose State anymore; UNLV might be the only team in the MWC with consistently worse attendance than we do. The good news is we've proven that, if there's a quality product on the field, Reno will show up to support the Wolf Pack. However, there has to be quality on both sides of the field - Reno simply isn't a city that's willing to watch a top-25 team beat the tar out of a doormat, even if that top-25 team is us.
Case in point, here were our attendance figures:
September 2 (Eastern Washington): 16313
September 11 (Colorado State): 18098
September 17 (California): 28809
October 9 (San Jose State): 20636
October 30 (Utah State): 11558
November 20 (New Mexico State): 10906
November 26 (Boise State): 30712
Realistically, assuming the Wolf Pack doesn't flop early against its schedule, we should be in better shape attendance-wise in 2011 than we were in 2010. I don't anticipate us selling out Mackay for every home game (it'd be cool if we did, mind you), but I also anticipate us averaging better than 19,576. The good news is our 2011 home schedule will be much more interesting than SJSU, Utah State, and NMSU - in fact, our most challenging conference games (Hawaii, Fresno State, and Louisiana Tech) are all at home. In short, our home conference schedule is chock full of meaningful games, which should boost attendance somewhat. Throw in UNLV and we might average over 22,000.
I can't wait!
Anyway, that's it for now. Lest anyone think we've completely swallowed the trademarked powdered fruit drink, I will note that we were still rather turnover-prone in the bowl game, but I'm willing to give Ault and his crew the benefit of the doubt and assume it was just post-finals rust.
For once, they've earned it.
Here's to next year!
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Nevada vs. Boston College: Statistics at a Glance
It's time for the final countdown, and with it some long overdue comparative stats.
Point spread as of 01/04/2011: Nevada minus 7.5; O/U 55.
Rushing Offense
Nevada: 3rd (323.31 YPG)
Also leads the nation in rushing TDs (52).
Boston College: 88th (133.25 YPG)
Not even close in rushing TDs (9).
Passing Offense
Nevada: 53rd (229.62 YPG)
A respectable 21 airborne touchdowns.
Boston College: 94th (175.33 YPG)
A...somewhat less spectacular 13, 5 fewer than Nevada Southern.
Total Offense
Nevada: 2nd (535.54 YPG)
Also second nationally with 6,962 total yards; 75 TDs ranks 3rd nationally.
Hawai'i ranks first in total yards with 7,009 - & they've already played their bowl game.
Boston College: 106th (308.58 YPG)
Compare with 3,703 total yards and 24 TDs.
Scoring Offense
Nevada: 5th (42.62 PPG)
Also tied for 2nd with TCU in TDs scored (70).
Boston College: 109th (18.92 PPG)
Just edging out Nevada Southern.
Rushing Defense
Boston College: 1st (962 for 80.17 YPG)
This is the ACC we're talking about.
Nevada: 23rd (1,620 for 124.62 YPG)
The next stat will mellow that out a bit.
Pass Defense
Boston College: 81st (229.83 YPG)
Meh.
Nevada: 108th (252.69 YPG)
Somewhat shockingly, I still say this is less "meh" watching the team down the stretch.
Total Defense
Boston College: 13th (3,720 for 310.00 YPG)
And Boise State is 3rd, so?
Nevada: 66th (4,905 for 377.31 YPG)
Bend, but don't break...bend, but don't break...bend, but don't break...
Scoring Defense
Boston College: 19th (19.50 PPG)
More respectable than their offensive categories by a long shot.
Nevada: 35th (22.08 PPG)
Tied with Georga and SDSU; not bad company, I'd say.
Penalties
Nevada: 29th (Penalties: 67 Yards: 638 PPG: 5.15 YPG: 49.08)
Dear OL: Please keep the false starts to a minimum. Thanks in advance.
BC: T 46th (Penalties: 68 Yards: 610 PPG: 5.67 YPG: 50.83)
There are so many ties on this list this category is almost a draw.
Punt Returns
Nevada: 59th (8.19 YPR)
Meh.
Boston College: 104th (4.64 YPR)
It does beat out Miami (FL) and Tennessee...then again, it beats out Miami and Tenn.
Kickoff Returns
Boston College: 120th (17.59 YPR)
Dead...frickin'...last. I knew we'd find one sooner or later.
Nevada: 38th (22.67 YPR)
Mike Ball rules. And, yes, I'd be saying this regardless.
Punt Returns Against
Boston College: 5th (90 yards, 3.75 YPR)
Whatever, the Pack is fair catching anyway...probably
Nevada: 57th (102 yards, 8.50 YPR)
Kickoff Returns Against
Boston College: 20th (916 yards, 19.91 YPR)
Not included: 4 touchbacks.
Nevada: 113th (1929 yards, 26.07 YPR)
Not included: 16 touchbacks.
Turnover Margin
Boston College: T 24th (+0.58)
It's an overrated statistic anyway.
Nevada: 30th (+0.46)
Not bad considering how the year started.
TOP
Nevada: 8th (32:38)
Higher than 112 other FBS teams.
Boston College: 74th (29:16)
Lower than 73 other FBS teams.
Point spread as of 01/04/2011: Nevada minus 7.5; O/U 55.
Rushing Offense
Nevada: 3rd (323.31 YPG)
Also leads the nation in rushing TDs (52).
Boston College: 88th (133.25 YPG)
Not even close in rushing TDs (9).
Passing Offense
Nevada: 53rd (229.62 YPG)
A respectable 21 airborne touchdowns.
Boston College: 94th (175.33 YPG)
A...somewhat less spectacular 13, 5 fewer than Nevada Southern.
Total Offense
Nevada: 2nd (535.54 YPG)
Also second nationally with 6,962 total yards; 75 TDs ranks 3rd nationally.
Hawai'i ranks first in total yards with 7,009 - & they've already played their bowl game.
Boston College: 106th (308.58 YPG)
Compare with 3,703 total yards and 24 TDs.
Scoring Offense
Nevada: 5th (42.62 PPG)
Also tied for 2nd with TCU in TDs scored (70).
Boston College: 109th (18.92 PPG)
Just edging out Nevada Southern.
Rushing Defense
Boston College: 1st (962 for 80.17 YPG)
This is the ACC we're talking about.
Nevada: 23rd (1,620 for 124.62 YPG)
The next stat will mellow that out a bit.
Pass Defense
Boston College: 81st (229.83 YPG)
Meh.
Nevada: 108th (252.69 YPG)
Somewhat shockingly, I still say this is less "meh" watching the team down the stretch.
Total Defense
Boston College: 13th (3,720 for 310.00 YPG)
And Boise State is 3rd, so?
Nevada: 66th (4,905 for 377.31 YPG)
Bend, but don't break...bend, but don't break...bend, but don't break...
Scoring Defense
Boston College: 19th (19.50 PPG)
More respectable than their offensive categories by a long shot.
Nevada: 35th (22.08 PPG)
Tied with Georga and SDSU; not bad company, I'd say.
Penalties
Nevada: 29th (Penalties: 67 Yards: 638 PPG: 5.15 YPG: 49.08)
Dear OL: Please keep the false starts to a minimum. Thanks in advance.
BC: T 46th (Penalties: 68 Yards: 610 PPG: 5.67 YPG: 50.83)
There are so many ties on this list this category is almost a draw.
Punt Returns
Nevada: 59th (8.19 YPR)
Meh.
Boston College: 104th (4.64 YPR)
It does beat out Miami (FL) and Tennessee...then again, it beats out Miami and Tenn.
Kickoff Returns
Boston College: 120th (17.59 YPR)
Dead...frickin'...last. I knew we'd find one sooner or later.
Nevada: 38th (22.67 YPR)
Mike Ball rules. And, yes, I'd be saying this regardless.
Punt Returns Against
Boston College: 5th (90 yards, 3.75 YPR)
Whatever, the Pack is fair catching anyway...probably
Nevada: 57th (102 yards, 8.50 YPR)
Kickoff Returns Against
Boston College: 20th (916 yards, 19.91 YPR)
Not included: 4 touchbacks.
Nevada: 113th (1929 yards, 26.07 YPR)
Not included: 16 touchbacks.
Turnover Margin
Boston College: T 24th (+0.58)
It's an overrated statistic anyway.
Nevada: 30th (+0.46)
Not bad considering how the year started.
TOP
Nevada: 8th (32:38)
Higher than 112 other FBS teams.
Boston College: 74th (29:16)
Lower than 73 other FBS teams.
Nevada's Season Record
1.) W, at Nevada: 49 Eastern (FBS, 9-2): 24
2.) W, at Nevada: 51 Colorado State (3-9): 6
3.) W, at Nevada: 52 California (5-7): 31
4.) W, Nevada: 27 at BYU (6-6): 13
5.) W, Nevada: 44 at Nevada Southern (2-10): 26
6.) W, at Nevada: 35 San Jose State (1-11): 13
7.) L, at Hawai'i (9-3): 27 Nevada: 21
8.) Bye
9.) W, at Nevada: 56 Utah State (4-7): 42
10.) W, Nevada: 63 at Idaho (5-7): 17
11.) W, Nevada: 35 at Fresno State (7-4): 34
12.) W, at Nevada: 52 New Mexico State (2-10): 6
13.) W, at Nevada: 34 Boise State (10-1): 31
14.) W, Nevada: 35 at La Tech (5-7): 17
Boston College's Season Record
1.) W, at BC: 38 Weber State (FCS, 6-5): 20
2.) W, at BC: 26 Kent State (5-7): 13
3.) Bye
4.) L, Virginia Tech (11-3): 19 at BC: 0
5.) L, Notre Dame (8-5): 31 at BC: 13
6.) L, at North Carolina State (9-4): 44 BC: 17
7.) L, at Florida State (10-4): 24 BC: 19
8.) L, Maryland (9-4): 24 at BC: 21
9.) W, at BC: 16 Clemson (6-7): 10
10.) W, BC: 23 at Wake Forrest (3-9): 13
11.) W, BC: 21 at Duke (3-9): 16
12.) W, at BC: 17 Virginia (4-8): 13
13.) W, BC: 16 at Syracuse (8-5): 7
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Bowl Season Has Begun!
It's official - the first bowl games are in the books. This coincidentally included the uDrive Humanitarian Bowl. Earlier, we said this:
So, how did Fresno State do? How about Northern Illinois 40, Fresno State 17?
Right.
On an entirely non-football related front, if you're looking for a simple and inexpensive gift for someone, I strongly recommend the Humble Indie Bundle. It's a suite of computer games for Windows, Mac, and Linux and you get to name your own price. Want to pay $0.01? You can do that. Want to pay $100? You can do that too - heck, if you want this sort of thing to happen again, I recommend a number closer to the $100 than the $0.01. Either way, you can download the games as many times as you want. Added bonus? No DRM - this means no product keys, no "utilities" installing themselves with the games monitoring your every move, nothing. You download them, you install them, you run them. Heck, you could download the installers, put them on a USB key, and give them to your friends. Nobody will stop you.
Hey, this saves you money for Wolf Pack merchandise from Silver & Blue Outfitters. Just sayin'.
- uDrove Humanitarian Bowl: Good news, WAC fans! The Humanitarian Bowl is no longer sponsored by a now-defunct computer manufacturer, nor is it sponsored by a regional chain of truck stops. Instead, it's now sponsored by a company that makes mobile applications to handle trucking paperwork. Seriously. As an added bonus, it's Fresno State's turn to shiver on the blue turf this winter, and they're playing a Northern Illinois team that will not only be better acclimated to the cold but is also looking for its 11th win. Don't be surprised if this turns into a laugher.
So, how did Fresno State do? How about Northern Illinois 40, Fresno State 17?
Right.
On an entirely non-football related front, if you're looking for a simple and inexpensive gift for someone, I strongly recommend the Humble Indie Bundle. It's a suite of computer games for Windows, Mac, and Linux and you get to name your own price. Want to pay $0.01? You can do that. Want to pay $100? You can do that too - heck, if you want this sort of thing to happen again, I recommend a number closer to the $100 than the $0.01. Either way, you can download the games as many times as you want. Added bonus? No DRM - this means no product keys, no "utilities" installing themselves with the games monitoring your every move, nothing. You download them, you install them, you run them. Heck, you could download the installers, put them on a USB key, and give them to your friends. Nobody will stop you.
Hey, this saves you money for Wolf Pack merchandise from Silver & Blue Outfitters. Just sayin'.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Bowling
It's official - we're going to the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl in San Francisco. If you haven't already purchased tickets, I encourage you to do it here. Prices are reasonable, relative to other bowl games ($40 for the cheap seats), the location is easy enough to get to, it's on a Sunday in January (no fighting holiday plans), and Boston College isn't a bad opponent. If you're a Nevada fan, be thankful we're playing Boston College instead of Tulsa or Northern Illinois.
How will we do? Well, according to Sagarin's rankings, we should be an 11 point favorite(!). That said, I think a close victory would be more in order - Boston College's players will be fully rested and they're no strangers to bowl games, so they'll be ready to play. As for our squad, I don't think it will take much for the team to prepare itself for this one - that last bowl loss against SMU was absolutely embarrassing for everyone involved, so motivation shouldn't be an issue.
How well do we think we'll do? Let's just say the FireChrisAult.com crew purchased tickets to this bowl and have every intention of not only showing up to it but rooting for our Wolf Pack every step of the way.
With that out of the way, let's dig into some interesting tidbits about this bowl season...
That's it for now, though I'm sure we'll come up with more as the weeks pass.
How will we do? Well, according to Sagarin's rankings, we should be an 11 point favorite(!). That said, I think a close victory would be more in order - Boston College's players will be fully rested and they're no strangers to bowl games, so they'll be ready to play. As for our squad, I don't think it will take much for the team to prepare itself for this one - that last bowl loss against SMU was absolutely embarrassing for everyone involved, so motivation shouldn't be an issue.
How well do we think we'll do? Let's just say the FireChrisAult.com crew purchased tickets to this bowl and have every intention of not only showing up to it but rooting for our Wolf Pack every step of the way.
With that out of the way, let's dig into some interesting tidbits about this bowl season...
- The Sun Belt has three teams in bowl games. It's true. Troy (R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl), Florida International (Little Ceasers Bowl), and Middle Tennessee State (GoDaddy.com Bowl) all received and accepted invitations. That's what happens when the major conferences aren't able to fill their bowl allocations. It's also what happens when you have 70 bowl invitations to send and only 120 teams in the FBS.
- MAACO Las Vegas Bowl: The entire reason Boise State was invited to this one was because the Pac-10 couldn't fulfill the invitation (this is also why Washington is playing Nebraska again in the Holiday Bowl). Utah, meanwhile, was riding high until they fell apart against TCU a few weeks back. This has the potential to be an amazing football game between two fantastic teams. It also has the potential to be a fantastic target for a vengeful god and his asteroids of doom, assuming said god was a Wolf Pack fan and shared our hatred of Boise State, the state of Utah, and Las Vegas. Either way, it's a win-win.
- uDrove Humanitarian Bowl: Good news, WAC fans! The Humanitarian Bowl is no longer sponsored by a now-defunct computer manufacturer, nor is it sponsored by a regional chain of truck stops. Instead, it's now sponsored by a company that makes mobile applications to handle trucking paperwork. Seriously. As an added bonus, it's Fresno State's turn to shiver on the blue turf this winter, and they're playing a Northern Illinois team that will not only be better acclimated to the cold but is also looking for its 11th win. Don't be surprised if this turns into a laugher.
- Sheraton Hawaii Bowl: Hawaii is good and they're playing at home. Tulsa is also good but is a little shaky on the road. Don't be surprised if Hawaii wins overwhelmingly.
- This blog isn't going anywhere. If you're offended by its existence, think of it this way - at least we're reasonable and willing to give Ault credit when he does well. Imagine what would happen if we let the domain lapse and someone with less sense took over. Ever read the comment section of the RGJ?
That's it for now, though I'm sure we'll come up with more as the weeks pass.
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Nevada Opponent Records through 12/04/2010
Eastern Washington (10-2, 7-1 Big Sky)
Defeated S.E. Missouri State (9-3, 7-1 OVC) 37-17
(FCS Playoffs, round 2)
Nevada Southern (2-11, 2-6 MWC)
Lost at Hawai'i (10-3, 7-1 WAC) 21-59
SJSU (1-12, 0-8 WAC)
Lost at Idaho (6-7, 3-5 WAC) 23-26
Hawai'i (10-3, 7-1 WAC)
Defeated Nevada Southern (2-11, 2-6 MWC) 59-21
Utah State (4-8, 2-6 WAC)
Lost at Boizzee State (11-1, 7-1 WAC) 14-50
Idaho (6-7, 3-5 WAC)
Defeated SJSU (1-12, 0-8 WAC) 26-23
Fresno State (8-4, 5-3 WAC)
Defeated Illinois (6-6, 4-4 Big Ten) 25-23
Boise State (11-1, 7-1 WAC)
Defeated Utah State (4-8, 2-6 WAC) 50-14
All others were idle.
Nevada's opponents went 5-3 for the week ending 12/04/2010, and, including Louisiana Tech and their loss to Nevada, are a combined 73-87 on the season.
Defeated S.E. Missouri State (9-3, 7-1 OVC) 37-17
(FCS Playoffs, round 2)
Lost at Hawai'i (10-3, 7-1 WAC) 21-59
SJSU (1-12, 0-8 WAC)
Lost at Idaho (6-7, 3-5 WAC) 23-26
Hawai'i (10-3, 7-1 WAC)
Defeated Nevada Southern (2-11, 2-6 MWC) 59-21
Utah State (4-8, 2-6 WAC)
Lost at Boizzee State (11-1, 7-1 WAC) 14-50
Idaho (6-7, 3-5 WAC)
Defeated SJSU (1-12, 0-8 WAC) 26-23
Fresno State (8-4, 5-3 WAC)
Defeated Illinois (6-6, 4-4 Big Ten) 25-23
Boise State (11-1, 7-1 WAC)
Defeated Utah State (4-8, 2-6 WAC) 50-14
All others were idle.
Nevada's opponents went 5-3 for the week ending 12/04/2010, and, including Louisiana Tech and their loss to Nevada, are a combined 73-87 on the season.
Nevada at Louisiana Tech: Final Statistics
Rushing Offense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 301.42 YPG
at La Tech: 360 (+58.58)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 177.00 YPG
vs. Nevada: 104 (-73.00)
Passing Offense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 235.50 YPG
at La Tech: 159 (-76.50)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 221.73 YPG
vs. Nevada: 188 (-33.73)
Total Offense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 536.92 YPG
at La Tech: 519 (-17.92)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 398.73 YPG
vs. Nevada: 292 (-106.73)
Scoring Offense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 43.25 PPG
at La Tech: 35 (-8.25)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 27.64 PPG
vs. Nevada: 17 (-10.64)
Rushing Defense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 126.33 YPG
at La Tech: 104 (-22.33)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 154.82 YPG
vs. Nevada: 360 (-205.18)
Pass Defense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 258.08 YPG
at La Tech: 188 (-70.08)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 302.09 YPG
vs. Nevada: 159 (-143.09)
Total Defense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 384.42 YPG
at La Tech: 292 (-92.42)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 456.91 YPG
vs. Nevada: 519 (+62.09)
Scoring Defense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 22.50 PPG
at La Tech: 17 (-5.50)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 30.27 PPG
vs. Nevada: 35 (+4.73)
Penalties
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: PPG: 5.25 YPG: 49.92
at La Tech: 3 (-2.25) for 29 yards (-20.92)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: PPG: 4.91 YPG: 43.36
vs. Nevada: 6 (+1.09) for 55 yards (+11.64)
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 301.42 YPG
at La Tech: 360 (+58.58)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 177.00 YPG
vs. Nevada: 104 (-73.00)
Passing Offense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 235.50 YPG
at La Tech: 159 (-76.50)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 221.73 YPG
vs. Nevada: 188 (-33.73)
Total Offense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 536.92 YPG
at La Tech: 519 (-17.92)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 398.73 YPG
vs. Nevada: 292 (-106.73)
Scoring Offense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 43.25 PPG
at La Tech: 35 (-8.25)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 27.64 PPG
vs. Nevada: 17 (-10.64)
Rushing Defense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 126.33 YPG
at La Tech: 104 (-22.33)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 154.82 YPG
vs. Nevada: 360 (-205.18)
Pass Defense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 258.08 YPG
at La Tech: 188 (-70.08)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 302.09 YPG
vs. Nevada: 159 (-143.09)
Total Defense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 384.42 YPG
at La Tech: 292 (-92.42)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 456.91 YPG
vs. Nevada: 519 (+62.09)
Scoring Defense
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 22.50 PPG
at La Tech: 17 (-5.50)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 30.27 PPG
vs. Nevada: 35 (+4.73)
Penalties
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: PPG: 5.25 YPG: 49.92
at La Tech: 3 (-2.25) for 29 yards (-20.92)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: PPG: 4.91 YPG: 43.36
vs. Nevada: 6 (+1.09) for 55 yards (+11.64)
Punt Returns
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 8.50 YPR
at La Tech: 2.00 YPR (-6.50)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 13.33 YPR
vs. Nevada: 18.00 YPR (+4.67)
Kickoff Returns
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 22.80 YPR
at La Tech: 21.30 YPR (-1.50)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 23.18 YPR
vs. Nevada: 27.00 YPR (+3.82)
Punt Returns Against
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 7.64 YPR
at La Tech: 18 YPR (+10.36)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 5.89 YPR
vs. Nevada: 2 YPR (-3.89)
Kickoff Returns Against
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 25.99 YPR
at La Tech: 27.00 (+1.01)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 21.13 YPR
vs. Nevada: 21.30 (+0.17)
Turnover Margin
Nevada
through 12/03/20010: +0.50
at La Tech: 0 (N/C)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: -0.45
vs. Nevada: 0 (N/C)
TOP
Nevada
through 12/03/2010: 32:08
at La Tech: 38:46 (+6:38)
La Tech
through 12/03/2010: 27:19
vs. Nevada: 21:14 (-6:05)
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Big Picture Time
It's been a bit since we looked beyond the statistics and really started digging into what this year means for the Wolf Pack and for Ault. Since we're near the end of the season and staring into the maw of a shared WAC championship, assuming we take care of business against Louisiana Tech, let's spend a moment and look at where we're at.
First, the good: Ault and the Wolf Pack have done a fantastic job this year. It's impossible to overstate this. We've won our big games, we beat the #4 team in the country, we beat a Pac-10 team for the first time in a long, long time, and we're nationally ranked for the first time since Dewey defeated Truman. We have excellent depth in the running back position. Our defensive coaching and performance has improved dramatically under Andy Buh, continuing a progression that began under Nigel Burton. Ault has displayed considerable flexibility in his offensive doctrine, switching to a running style that plays to our strengths far better than the passing attack he favored in the past. Let's give credit where credit is due - Ault has done an amazing job this year.
Honestly, we didn't know he had it in him. We're not complaining.
That said: Where do we go from here? How long will we be able to maintain success? Has Ault actually changed his stripes, humbled himself a little, and adopted a pragmatic and effective level of flexibility that will guarantee success for our program? How good will we be when we lose our NFL-caliber quarterback? How good will our defense be when our average time of possession isn't a staggering 32:45?
Will we win our next bowl game?
The good news is that, if Ault truly has learned his lesson, humbled himself a bit, and focused on creating an environment that encourages high-performing assistants to come to our program and stick around for a while, this blog is going to be incredibly pointless. Personally, I can live with that - we're Nevada football fans here first, and our love for Nevada football far transcends any grievances we might have against Ault, most of which were based on past performance. None of us on this side of the Blogger text window have any personal issues with Ault - we just didn't think he was doing a very good job when we started this thing a few years ago. If that changes, and it certainly looks like it has, our opinions will change too. There's some precedent here, of course: Bill Simmons, the incredibly popular ESPN.com columnist, had this to say about Doc Rivers before the Celtics started competing for championships:
Now? Let's just say Simmons doesn't talk about Doc Rivers much anymore. Seriously - look it up. Not a single article mentioning him since the conclusion of the Celtics' 2008 championship season. Some might call that a coincidence. Some might call it a conspiracy. I'll just call it common sense. Rivers was bad, then he improved, now he's good. It happens in life, and there's no reason the same sequence of improvement can't happen to Ault. If that's what's happening before our very eyes, maybe we'll change the name of this blog to "FireChrisAultSomeLove.com" or something. I don't know. We'll cross that bridge when we get to it. Please note that, if we choke against Louisiana Tech or lose in the Kraft Hunger Emerald Nut Potato Bowl in New Canada, we'll keep the light on for you.
With that out of the way, let's talk long term. We're going to the MWC, though it's going to take another year and we're going to be $500,000 poorer, not including the bowl money we won't get next year since the WAC gets to keep that, too. Even if TCU leaves and even if the better parts of the WAC join the MWC with us (Utah State does improve the MWC's basketball profile significantly - considering how Boise State is almost a liability on that front and considering how we've had a fair amount of recent success in that sport, it would still be good for us if they followed Hawaii), the MWC will be a significantly better conference for us. At the very least, UNLV will be a conference game, which frees up an extra out-of-conference scheduling slot for a school that will actually improve our regional recruiting profile. Meanwhile, the only schools in the MWC that are consistently mediocre in football these days, excluding our in-state rivals, are New Mexico and Wyoming, and I guarantee you both are consistently far better programs than New Mexico State, San Jose State, and possibly Idaho. Colorado State is in a down period at the moment, but they had some success in the past, Air Force is improving, and San Diego State is going to a bowl game this year. Even if Hawaii (not a bad football program these days) and Utah State join us, it's going to be a much tougher conference than the WAC. Bear in mind that, when all is said and done, all three current top 25 teams in the WAC will be in the MWC, along with two "others receiving votes" teams (Air Force, San Diego State) and a traditionally decent football team (Fresno State). That's six nationally competitive football teams out of nine or ten possible programs, which is definitely on par with any other major conference in the country.
This brings us to a topic we've brought up here in the past, and which even the RGJ is starting to sniff out a bit. On paper, we will arguably be the weakest program in the MWC. Our football attendance, unless Utah State joins the conference, will be at the bottom of the conference. Our stadium will be the smallest in the conference; in fact, even if we sold out every single game, our average attendance would be no higher than fifth. Since attendance and revenue are closely correlated, that means we'll be dead last in football spending, with the potential to be, at best, middle of the conference. That's not a recipe for long-term success, regardless of whose at the helm, and any potential coaching or assistant coaching hire with an ounce of sense will recognize that. Clearly Groth and the rest of the athletic department have some serious work to do in order to put our program in a position where it can be consistently competitive. Given the numbers we're working with, it's frankly nothing short of miraculous that we've been able to remain competitive in the WAC, much less consistently contend for conference championships.
There is hope, though. Take Stanford, which is currently #4 in the BCS standings. It's in a large, prosperous metropolitan market with no other nationally competitive teams in its market. You would think that such a school would be able to routinely fill a 50,000 seat stadium. You would be wrong.
Why is this encouraging for us? Simple - it shows there are no shortcuts. Truth is, attendance and success are linked, even here. As our program has become more successful, our average attendance has incrementally improved. Boise State certainly didn't start its football program averaging over 30,000 fans per game - that took time. Years worth of time. Better yet, attendance will most certainly improve as more competitive conference foes play in our stadium. The community has proven time after time that it will happily put butts in seats, even if the weather is poor, as long as the game is worth showing up for and the opponent is credible. Nobody wants to see San Jose State, New Mexico State, and the like. Colorado State, on the other hand, commands a local crowd even when they're not very good. We're in a city with plenty of entertainment options, so, if Wolf Pack football wants better attendance, it needs to be entertaining, and it needs to be consistent about it.
We're getting better on that front, both on the team level and the opponent level.
So, that's where we're at. If we can continue to build on this season, continue to remain competitive in whatever conference we play in, and beat a big time opponent once in a while, our attendance will continue to improve until it's consistently competitive with the rest of our conference. Heck, if we continue to play well, we might even build up a bit of a national following. Until then, though, we'll be playing from behind. Fortunately, we're getting pretty good at that.
Silver and blue are far more fashionable colors than blue and orange anyway.
First, the good: Ault and the Wolf Pack have done a fantastic job this year. It's impossible to overstate this. We've won our big games, we beat the #4 team in the country, we beat a Pac-10 team for the first time in a long, long time, and we're nationally ranked for the first time since Dewey defeated Truman. We have excellent depth in the running back position. Our defensive coaching and performance has improved dramatically under Andy Buh, continuing a progression that began under Nigel Burton. Ault has displayed considerable flexibility in his offensive doctrine, switching to a running style that plays to our strengths far better than the passing attack he favored in the past. Let's give credit where credit is due - Ault has done an amazing job this year.
Honestly, we didn't know he had it in him. We're not complaining.
That said: Where do we go from here? How long will we be able to maintain success? Has Ault actually changed his stripes, humbled himself a little, and adopted a pragmatic and effective level of flexibility that will guarantee success for our program? How good will we be when we lose our NFL-caliber quarterback? How good will our defense be when our average time of possession isn't a staggering 32:45?
Will we win our next bowl game?
The good news is that, if Ault truly has learned his lesson, humbled himself a bit, and focused on creating an environment that encourages high-performing assistants to come to our program and stick around for a while, this blog is going to be incredibly pointless. Personally, I can live with that - we're Nevada football fans here first, and our love for Nevada football far transcends any grievances we might have against Ault, most of which were based on past performance. None of us on this side of the Blogger text window have any personal issues with Ault - we just didn't think he was doing a very good job when we started this thing a few years ago. If that changes, and it certainly looks like it has, our opinions will change too. There's some precedent here, of course: Bill Simmons, the incredibly popular ESPN.com columnist, had this to say about Doc Rivers before the Celtics started competing for championships:
Doc Rivers stinks as an NBA coach.
After watching him butcher my favorite team for 15 months and 134 games, I feel pretty comfortable making that assessment. On the surface, Doc seems fine. He always dresses nicely, his interviews are good, and his "Come on, guys, let's go!" clap ranks among the best in the league. When his team blows a winnable game -- which happens often, by the way -- you can always count on him to look sufficiently disappointed, almost like how Tony Almeida looks on "24" whenever Jack decides to disobey him. Doc has that look down pat. And if you weren't paying attention, you would almost think that he wasn't the problem here.
Well, I think he's the problem.
Now? Let's just say Simmons doesn't talk about Doc Rivers much anymore. Seriously - look it up. Not a single article mentioning him since the conclusion of the Celtics' 2008 championship season. Some might call that a coincidence. Some might call it a conspiracy. I'll just call it common sense. Rivers was bad, then he improved, now he's good. It happens in life, and there's no reason the same sequence of improvement can't happen to Ault. If that's what's happening before our very eyes, maybe we'll change the name of this blog to "FireChrisAultSomeLove.com" or something. I don't know. We'll cross that bridge when we get to it. Please note that, if we choke against Louisiana Tech or lose in the Kraft Hunger Emerald Nut Potato Bowl in New Canada, we'll keep the light on for you.
With that out of the way, let's talk long term. We're going to the MWC, though it's going to take another year and we're going to be $500,000 poorer, not including the bowl money we won't get next year since the WAC gets to keep that, too. Even if TCU leaves and even if the better parts of the WAC join the MWC with us (Utah State does improve the MWC's basketball profile significantly - considering how Boise State is almost a liability on that front and considering how we've had a fair amount of recent success in that sport, it would still be good for us if they followed Hawaii), the MWC will be a significantly better conference for us. At the very least, UNLV will be a conference game, which frees up an extra out-of-conference scheduling slot for a school that will actually improve our regional recruiting profile. Meanwhile, the only schools in the MWC that are consistently mediocre in football these days, excluding our in-state rivals, are New Mexico and Wyoming, and I guarantee you both are consistently far better programs than New Mexico State, San Jose State, and possibly Idaho. Colorado State is in a down period at the moment, but they had some success in the past, Air Force is improving, and San Diego State is going to a bowl game this year. Even if Hawaii (not a bad football program these days) and Utah State join us, it's going to be a much tougher conference than the WAC. Bear in mind that, when all is said and done, all three current top 25 teams in the WAC will be in the MWC, along with two "others receiving votes" teams (Air Force, San Diego State) and a traditionally decent football team (Fresno State). That's six nationally competitive football teams out of nine or ten possible programs, which is definitely on par with any other major conference in the country.
This brings us to a topic we've brought up here in the past, and which even the RGJ is starting to sniff out a bit. On paper, we will arguably be the weakest program in the MWC. Our football attendance, unless Utah State joins the conference, will be at the bottom of the conference. Our stadium will be the smallest in the conference; in fact, even if we sold out every single game, our average attendance would be no higher than fifth. Since attendance and revenue are closely correlated, that means we'll be dead last in football spending, with the potential to be, at best, middle of the conference. That's not a recipe for long-term success, regardless of whose at the helm, and any potential coaching or assistant coaching hire with an ounce of sense will recognize that. Clearly Groth and the rest of the athletic department have some serious work to do in order to put our program in a position where it can be consistently competitive. Given the numbers we're working with, it's frankly nothing short of miraculous that we've been able to remain competitive in the WAC, much less consistently contend for conference championships.
There is hope, though. Take Stanford, which is currently #4 in the BCS standings. It's in a large, prosperous metropolitan market with no other nationally competitive teams in its market. You would think that such a school would be able to routinely fill a 50,000 seat stadium. You would be wrong.
Harbaugh also expressed disappointment in Stanford's attendance figures this season. The school averaged just 40,042 fans at the 50,000-seat Stanford Stadium, selling out only for the game against Southern California.
Why is this encouraging for us? Simple - it shows there are no shortcuts. Truth is, attendance and success are linked, even here. As our program has become more successful, our average attendance has incrementally improved. Boise State certainly didn't start its football program averaging over 30,000 fans per game - that took time. Years worth of time. Better yet, attendance will most certainly improve as more competitive conference foes play in our stadium. The community has proven time after time that it will happily put butts in seats, even if the weather is poor, as long as the game is worth showing up for and the opponent is credible. Nobody wants to see San Jose State, New Mexico State, and the like. Colorado State, on the other hand, commands a local crowd even when they're not very good. We're in a city with plenty of entertainment options, so, if Wolf Pack football wants better attendance, it needs to be entertaining, and it needs to be consistent about it.
We're getting better on that front, both on the team level and the opponent level.
So, that's where we're at. If we can continue to build on this season, continue to remain competitive in whatever conference we play in, and beat a big time opponent once in a while, our attendance will continue to improve until it's consistently competitive with the rest of our conference. Heck, if we continue to play well, we might even build up a bit of a national following. Until then, though, we'll be playing from behind. Fortunately, we're getting pretty good at that.
Silver and blue are far more fashionable colors than blue and orange anyway.
Nevada at Louisiana Tech: Statistics at a Glance
Rushing Offense
Nevada: 4th (301.42 YPG)
Also leads the nation in rushing TDs (47).
La Tech: 36th (177.00 YPG)
Passing Offense
Nevada: 47th (235.50 YPG)
La Tech: 60th (221.73 YPG)
Total Offense
Nevada: 3rd (536.92 YPG)
La Tech: 47th (398.73 YPG)
Scoring Offense
Nevada: 6th (43.25 PPG)
Also tied for 2nd with TCU in TDs scored (70).
La Tech: T 57th (27.64 PPG)
Rushing Defense
Nevada: 26th (126.33 YPG)
La Tech: 66th (154.82 YPG)
Pass Defense
Nevada: 108th (258.08 YPG)
La Tech: 117th (302.09 YPG)
Total Defense
Nevada: 71th (384.42 YPG)
La Tech: 114th (456.91 YPG)
Scoring Defense
La Tech: 85th (30.27 PPG)
Nevada: 39th (22.50 PPG)
Penalties
La Tech: 13th (Penalties: 24 Yards: 477 PPG: 4.91 YPG: 43.36)
Nevada: T 27th (Penalties: 63 Yards: 599 PPG: 5.25 YPG: 49.92)
Punt Returns
La Tech: 14th (13.33 YPR)
Nevada: 56th (8.50 YPR)
Kickoff Returns
La Tech: 33rd (23.18 YPR)
Nevada: 40th (22.80 YPR)
Punt Returns Against
La Tech: 27th (106 yards, 5.89 YPR)
Nevada: T 45th (84 yards, 7.64 YPR)
Kickoff Returns Against
La Tech: 24th (1120 yards, 21.13 YPR)
Nevada: 112th (1767 yards, 25.99 YPR)
Turnover Margin
Nevada: T 26th (+0.50)
La Tech: T 89th (-0.45)
TOP
Nevada: T 14th (32:08)
Tied with Louisiana-Monroe
La Tech: 113th (27:19)
Stats courtesy of ncaa.org
Nevada: 4th (301.42 YPG)
Also leads the nation in rushing TDs (47).
La Tech: 36th (177.00 YPG)
Passing Offense
Nevada: 47th (235.50 YPG)
La Tech: 60th (221.73 YPG)
Total Offense
Nevada: 3rd (536.92 YPG)
La Tech: 47th (398.73 YPG)
Scoring Offense
Nevada: 6th (43.25 PPG)
Also tied for 2nd with TCU in TDs scored (70).
La Tech: T 57th (27.64 PPG)
Rushing Defense
Nevada: 26th (126.33 YPG)
La Tech: 66th (154.82 YPG)
Pass Defense
Nevada: 108th (258.08 YPG)
La Tech: 117th (302.09 YPG)
Total Defense
Nevada: 71th (384.42 YPG)
La Tech: 114th (456.91 YPG)
Scoring Defense
La Tech: 85th (30.27 PPG)
Nevada: 39th (22.50 PPG)
Penalties
La Tech: 13th (Penalties: 24 Yards: 477 PPG: 4.91 YPG: 43.36)
Nevada: T 27th (Penalties: 63 Yards: 599 PPG: 5.25 YPG: 49.92)
Punt Returns
La Tech: 14th (13.33 YPR)
Nevada: 56th (8.50 YPR)
Kickoff Returns
La Tech: 33rd (23.18 YPR)
Nevada: 40th (22.80 YPR)
Punt Returns Against
La Tech: 27th (106 yards, 5.89 YPR)
Nevada: T 45th (84 yards, 7.64 YPR)
Kickoff Returns Against
La Tech: 24th (1120 yards, 21.13 YPR)
Nevada: 112th (1767 yards, 25.99 YPR)
Turnover Margin
Nevada: T 26th (+0.50)
La Tech: T 89th (-0.45)
TOP
Nevada: T 14th (32:08)
Tied with Louisiana-Monroe
La Tech: 113th (27:19)
Stats courtesy of ncaa.org
Nevada's Season Record
1.) W, at Nevada: 49 Eastern (FBS, 9-2): 24
2.) W, at Nevada: 51 Colorado State (3-9): 6
3.) W, at Nevada: 52 California (5-7): 31
4.) W, Nevada: 27 at BYU (6-6): 13
5.) W, Nevada: 44 at Nevada Southern (2-10): 26
6.) W, at Nevada: 35 San Jose State (1-11): 13
7.) L, at Hawai'i (9-3): 27 Nevada: 21
8.) Bye
9.) W, at Nevada: 56 Utah State (4-7): 42
10.) W, Nevada: 63 at Idaho (5-7): 17
11.) W, Nevada: 35 at Fresno State (7-4): 34
12.) W, at Nevada: 52 New Mexico State (2-10): 6
13.) W, at Nevada: 34 Boise State (10-1): 31
Louisiana Tech's Season Record
1.) W, at La Tech: 20 Grambling State (FBS 9-2): 6
2.) L, at #17 Texas A&M (9-3): 48 La Tech: 163.) L, Navy (8-3): 37 at La Tech: 23
4.) L, Southern Miss (8-4): 13 at La Tech: 12
5.) L, at Hawai'i (9-3): 41 La Tech: 21
6.) W, at La Tech: 24 Utah State (4-7): 6
7.) W, at La Tech: 48 Idaho (5-7): 35
8.) L, at Boise State (10-1): 49 La Tech: 20
9.) Bye
10.) L, Fresno State (7-4): 40 at La Tech: 34
11.) W, La Tech: 41 at New Mexico State (2-10): 20
12.) W, La Tech: 45 at San Jose State (1-11): 35
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Nevada at Louisiana Tech: All-Time Football Data
The Tenth Meeting
Not too surprisingly this 'rivalry' doesn't even date back to the 20th century. Nevada took the WAC's forgotten Bulldogs down to the wire in their first meeting (the year La Tech took the conference crown), but would have to wait until their own conference championship season before earning their W in this series, and have not lost in the series since that time.
All Time (Nevada 5-4) Scoring:
Nevada: 344 [38.22222222 PPG]La Tech: 257 [28.55555556 PPG]
Dif: Nevada +87
Ault (Nevada 5-1) Scoring:
Nevada: 221 [36.83333333 PPG]La Tech: 120 [20.0 PPG]
Dif: Nevada +101
The Series (Ault-coached games appear with an asterisk):
October 13, 2001
La Tech: 45 at Nevada: 42
(La Tech won WAC championship)
La Tech: 45 at Nevada: 42
(La Tech won WAC championship)
October 26, 2002
at La Tech: 50 Nevada: 47
at La Tech: 50 Nevada: 47
October 25, 2003
La Tech: 42 at Nevada: 34
La Tech: 42 at Nevada: 34
September 6, 2004
at La Tech: 38 Nevada: 21
at La Tech: 38 Nevada: 21
October 15, 2005
at Nevada: 37 La Tech: 27
(Nevada shared WAC championship)
at Nevada: 37 La Tech: 27
(Nevada shared WAC championship)
November 18, 2006
Nevada: 42 at La Tech: 0
Nevada: 42 at La Tech: 0
December 1, 2007
at Nevada: 49 La Tech: 10
at Nevada: 49 La Tech: 10
November 29, 2008
Nevada: 35 at La Tech: 31
Nevada: 35 at La Tech: 31
at Nevada: 37 La Tech: 14
Nevada Opponent Records through 11/27/2010
California (5-7, 3-6 Pac-10)
Lost to Washington (5-6, 4-4 Pac-10) 13-16
BYU (6-6, 5-3 MWC)
Lost at Utah (10-2, 7-1 MWC) 16-17
Nevada Southern (2-10, 2-6 MWC)
Lost at San Diego State (8-4, 5-3 MWC) 14-48
SJSU (1-11, 0-7 WAC)
Lost at La Tech (5-6, 4-3 WAC) 38-45
Hawai'i (9-3, 7-1 WAC)
Defeated NMSU (2-10, 1-7 WAC) 59-24
Idaho (5-7, 2-5 WAC)
Lost at Fresno State (7-4, 5-3 WAC) 20-23
Fresno State (7-4, 5-3 WAC)
Defeated Idaho (5-7, 2-5 WAC) 23-20
New Mexico State (2-10, 1-7 WAC)
Lost to Hawai'i (9-3, 7-1 WAC) 24-59
Nevada's opponents went 2-6 for the week ending 11/27/2010 (Eastern Washington, Colorado State, and Utah State were bye) and are a combined 53-76 on the season.
Lost to Washington (5-6, 4-4 Pac-10) 13-16
BYU (6-6, 5-3 MWC)
Lost at Utah (10-2, 7-1 MWC) 16-17
Lost at San Diego State (8-4, 5-3 MWC) 14-48
SJSU (1-11, 0-7 WAC)
Lost at La Tech (5-6, 4-3 WAC) 38-45
Hawai'i (9-3, 7-1 WAC)
Defeated NMSU (2-10, 1-7 WAC) 59-24
Idaho (5-7, 2-5 WAC)
Lost at Fresno State (7-4, 5-3 WAC) 20-23
Defeated Idaho (5-7, 2-5 WAC) 23-20
Lost to Hawai'i (9-3, 7-1 WAC) 24-59
Nevada's opponents went 2-6 for the week ending 11/27/2010 (Eastern Washington, Colorado State, and Utah State were bye) and are a combined 53-76 on the season.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Nevada vs. Boise State: Final Statistics (or Oh Yeah, Boy...sie)
Yes, Boise, that just happened: your uppance has come.
The Broncos have a good fan base, and some amazing fans who make it up. However every year I end up surrounded by pompous, arrogant Boise fans who seem personally affronted by my daring to root against their team on Nevada's home turf; I am thrilled that you were finally taken down a peg and excited that it happened here.
On with the game stats.
Rushing Offense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 304.36 YPG
vs. BSU: 269 (-35.36)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 205.40 YPG
at Nevada: 145 (-60.4)
Passing Offense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 233.36 YPG
vs. BSU: 259 (-25.64)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 323.40 YPG
at Nevada: 348 (-24.6)
Total Offense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 537.73 YPG
vs. BSU: 528 (-9.73)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 528.80 YPG
at Nevada: 493 (-35.80)
Scoring Offense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 44.09 PPG
vs. BSU: 34 (-10.09)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 47.90 PPG
at Nevada: 31 (-16.90)
Rushing Defense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 124.64 YPG
vs. BSU: 145 (+20.36)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 72.30 YPG
at Nevada: 269 (+196.7)
Pass Defense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 249.91 YPG
vs. BSU: 348 (+98.09)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 156.90 YPG
at Nevada: 259 (+102.1)
Total Defense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 374.55 YPG
vs. BSU: 493 (+118.45)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 229.20 YPG
at Nevada: 528 (+298.8)
Scoring Defense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 21.73 PPG
vs BSU: 31 (+9.27)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 11.50 PPG
at Nevada: 34 (+22.5)
Penalties
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: PPG: 5.36 YPG: 42.82
vs. BSU: 4 (-1.36) for 29 yards (-13.82)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: PPG: 6.20 YPG: 58.20
at Nevada: 5 (-1.20) for 70 yards (+11.80)
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 304.36 YPG
vs. BSU: 269 (-35.36)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 205.40 YPG
at Nevada: 145 (-60.4)
Passing Offense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 233.36 YPG
vs. BSU: 259 (-25.64)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 323.40 YPG
at Nevada: 348 (-24.6)
Total Offense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 537.73 YPG
vs. BSU: 528 (-9.73)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 528.80 YPG
at Nevada: 493 (-35.80)
Scoring Offense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 44.09 PPG
vs. BSU: 34 (-10.09)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 47.90 PPG
at Nevada: 31 (-16.90)
Rushing Defense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 124.64 YPG
vs. BSU: 145 (+20.36)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 72.30 YPG
at Nevada: 269 (+196.7)
Pass Defense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 249.91 YPG
vs. BSU: 348 (+98.09)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 156.90 YPG
at Nevada: 259 (+102.1)
Total Defense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 374.55 YPG
vs. BSU: 493 (+118.45)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 229.20 YPG
at Nevada: 528 (+298.8)
Scoring Defense
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 21.73 PPG
vs BSU: 31 (+9.27)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 11.50 PPG
at Nevada: 34 (+22.5)
Penalties
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: PPG: 5.36 YPG: 42.82
vs. BSU: 4 (-1.36) for 29 yards (-13.82)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: PPG: 6.20 YPG: 58.20
at Nevada: 5 (-1.20) for 70 yards (+11.80)
Punt Returns
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 8.95 YPR
vs. BSU: 0.00 YPR (N/A)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 12.91 YPR
at Nevada: 28.00 YPR (+15.09)
Kickoff Returns
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 23.06 YPR
vs. BSU: 21.30 YPR (-1.76)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 23.78 YPR
at Nevada: 26.40 YPR (+2.62)
Punt Returns Against
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 6.22 YPR
vs. BSU: 28.00 (+21.78)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 12.60 YPR
at Nevada: 0.00 YPR (N/A)
Kickoff Returns Against
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 25.95 YPR
vs. BSU: 26.40 (+0.45)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 21.18 YPR
at Nevada: 21.30 (+0.12)
Turnover Margin
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: +0.64
vs. BSU: -1 (-0.36)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: +0.60
at Nevada: +1 (+0.40)
TOP
Nevada
through 11/26/2010: 31:50
vs. BSU: 35:21 (+3:31)
Boise State
through 11/26/2010: 31:12
at Nevada: 24:39 (-6:33)
Box data courtesy of espn.com
Team Stat Comparison
| Boise St | Nevada | |
|---|---|---|
| 1st Downs | 21 | 28 |
3rd down efficiency | 4-10 | 9-17 |
4th down efficiency | 0-0 | 1-1 |
| Total Yards | 493 | 528 |
| Passing | 348 | 259 |
Comp-Att | 20-31 | 19-35 |
Yards per pass | 11.2 | 7.4 |
| Rushing | 145 | 269 |
Rushing Attempts | 30 | 52 |
Yards per rush | 4.8 | 5.2 |
| Penalties | 5-70 | 4-29 |
| Turnovers | 0 | 1 |
Fumbles lost | 0 | 0 |
Interceptions thrown | 0 | 1 |
| Possession | 24:39 | 35:21 |
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Nevada vs. Boise State: Statistics at a Glance
Team/National Rank/Stat
Nevada generally has slight edges on offense (except passing); BSU, on the other hand, has a HUGE advantage on defense (including the #1 rush defense in the nation).
Rushing Offense
Nevada: 4th (304.36 YPG)
Boise State: 20th (205.40 YPG)
Passing Offense
Boise State: 5th (323.40 YPG)
Nevada: 50th (233.36 YPG)
Total Offense
Nevada: 3rd (537.73 YPG)
Boise State: 4th (528.80 YPG)
Scoring Offense
Boise State: 2nd (47.90 PPG)
Nevada: 4th (44.09 PPG)
Rushing Defense
Boise State: 1st (72.30 YPG)
Nevada: 21st (124.64 YPG)
Pass Defense
Boise State: 7th (156.90 YPG)
Nevada: 103rd (249.91 YPG)
Total Defense
Boise State: 2nd (229.20 YPG)
Nevada: 67th (374.55 YPG)
Scoring Defense
Boise State: 2nd (11.50 PPG)
Nevada: 38th (21.73 PPG)
Penalties
Nevada: T 29th (Penalties: 59 Yards: 471 PPG: 5.36 YPG: 42.82)
BSU: 67th (Penalties: 62 Yards: 582 PPG: 6.20 YPG: 58.20)
Punt Returns
Boise State: 18th (12.91 YPR)
Nevada: 48th (8.95 YPR)
Kickoff Returns
Boise State: 24th (23.78 YPR)
Nevada: 37th (23.06 YPR)
Punt Returns Against
Nevada: 24th (56 yards, 6.22 YPR)
Boise State: 101st (126 yards, 12.60 YPR)
Kickoff Returns Against
Boise State: 61st (1525 yards, 21.18 YPR)
Nevada: 114th (1635 yards, 25.95 YPR)
Turnover Margin
Nevada: T 23rd (+0.64)
Boise State: 28th (+0.60)
TOP
Nevada: 19th (31:50)
Boise State: 31st (31:12)
Stats courtesy of ncaa.org
Nevada generally has slight edges on offense (except passing); BSU, on the other hand, has a HUGE advantage on defense (including the #1 rush defense in the nation).
Rushing Offense
Nevada: 4th (304.36 YPG)
Boise State: 20th (205.40 YPG)
Passing Offense
Boise State: 5th (323.40 YPG)
Nevada: 50th (233.36 YPG)
Total Offense
Nevada: 3rd (537.73 YPG)
Boise State: 4th (528.80 YPG)
Scoring Offense
Boise State: 2nd (47.90 PPG)
Nevada: 4th (44.09 PPG)
Rushing Defense
Boise State: 1st (72.30 YPG)
Nevada: 21st (124.64 YPG)
Pass Defense
Boise State: 7th (156.90 YPG)
Nevada: 103rd (249.91 YPG)
Total Defense
Boise State: 2nd (229.20 YPG)
Nevada: 67th (374.55 YPG)
Scoring Defense
Boise State: 2nd (11.50 PPG)
Nevada: 38th (21.73 PPG)
Penalties
Nevada: T 29th (Penalties: 59 Yards: 471 PPG: 5.36 YPG: 42.82)
BSU: 67th (Penalties: 62 Yards: 582 PPG: 6.20 YPG: 58.20)
Punt Returns
Boise State: 18th (12.91 YPR)
Nevada: 48th (8.95 YPR)
Kickoff Returns
Boise State: 24th (23.78 YPR)
Nevada: 37th (23.06 YPR)
Punt Returns Against
Nevada: 24th (56 yards, 6.22 YPR)
Boise State: 101st (126 yards, 12.60 YPR)
Kickoff Returns Against
Boise State: 61st (1525 yards, 21.18 YPR)
Nevada: 114th (1635 yards, 25.95 YPR)
Turnover Margin
Nevada: T 23rd (+0.64)
Boise State: 28th (+0.60)
TOP
Nevada: 19th (31:50)
Boise State: 31st (31:12)
Stats courtesy of ncaa.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)