How Important is Time of Possession?

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I know this is something discussed frequently involving our offense and another reason i here people say they want us to have an offense like Alabama's...Even though they didn't dominate ToP like many think.

Anyway, my friends at CBTN sent this number to me when I asked:

Over the last 2 seasons, the top 10 ToP teams won 59% of their games and 5 teams won 16+ games over these seasons.

Over the last 2 seasons, the bottom 10 ToP teams won 54% of their games and 4 teams won 16+ games over these seasons.

I have to say I thought there would be a larger difference.

[S.PadreIsl.Sooner]

TOP is huge when you're scoring at the end of those long drives. Otherwise, meh!

[sooner_born_1960]

I think more analysis is required.

[LRoss]

I HATE the TOP stat. I HATE the common commentator view of "They want to keep the ball on offense, because that keeps the opposing qb/wr/rb/explosive player or scheme/whatever on the sideline." As if padding your TOP gives your team more possessions than the opposition? As if scoring quickly is a bad idea?

Anyway, here's what I DO think can make a difference, is number of offensive snaps. Letting time tick off the clock in between plays doesn't wear down a defense, running more plays can. With that in mind, however, it seems to me like running plays are more effective at wearing guys down than passing plays (yes, I do understand that this can correlate with TOP). So if the goal or meaning of TOP is to wear down the D, I would look at total plays with an emphasis on running plays and ignore TOP completely. Of course, things like depth would also invariably factor in to translating into more points or wins, if there's twice the depth on D than O and they can keep rolling solid players in and out while the O wears themselves down, you've put yourself at a disadvantage.

Sorry, that got rambly. For what it's worth, I also HATE the "half-yard line" or "one-inch line" comments, as they clearly don't exist. But all this really means is that I'm a little uptight and have some issues.

[EatLeadCommie]

The ability to control the football and run clock is very important. That may or may not translate into more TOP, depending on the circumstance.

When you look at our NCG with Florida, that was their gameplan and it worked. They were able to grind out about 500 yards against our defense and run clock, then hold us short when they had to.

This is why the SEC can be effective in neutralizing spread attacks that rely on hitting you over the head with speed and points. If you can run clock and burn time on offense it means those spread attacks score fewer points and that your defense doesn't get worn out because it stays rested.

[LakeRat]

3rd down conversions is the make or break. IMO

[Dan Thompson]

I think it makes a difference when its late in the game and your driving and want to score with little or no time left on the clock.

Look at the Baylor game last year. We scored with enought time left on the clock for Baylor to come back and win. I have seen quite a few times in close games.

[Johnny Utah]

The ability to control the football and run clock is very important. That may or may not translate into more TOP, depending on the circumstance.

When you look at our NCG with Florida, that was their gameplan and it worked. They were able to grind out about 500 yards against our defense and run clock, then hold us short when they had to.
This is why the SEC can be effective in neutralizing spread attacks that rely on hitting you over the head with speed and points. If you can run clock and burn time on offense it means those spread attacks score fewer points and that your defense doesn't get worn out because it stays rested.

^^^This^^^
In that MNC game Florida posessed the ball for nearly 35 minutes and converted 12 out of 17 3rd downs. OU's TOP was nearly 10 minutes less, with 6 of 13 3rd downs converted. In every MNC game since the 2003 season the winning team had more time of possession (with the exception of TX over USC) as well as more rushing yardage.

[KantoSooner]

^^^This^^^
In that MNC game Florida posessed the ball for nearly 35 minutes and converted 12 out of 17 3rd downs. OU's TOP was nearly 10 minutes less, with 6 of 13 3rd downs converted. In every MNC game since the 2003 season the winning team had more time of possession (with the exception of TX over USC) as well as more rushing yardage.

So, let's say we had had, oh, Demarco Murray for that game. Does Demarco get us up to UF type 3rd down numbers? Probably, in my mind, at least. so, we convert 8-9 thirds instead of 6. How many extra minutes does that get us? It starts tightening up very quickly. Plus it adds more thirds to convert.

To me that was really the difference. It just wasn't that much, we just didn't have our starting RB for a very critical game against a team with a great defense.

[LRoss]

FWIW, I used to look at 3rd down conversions as a major stat as well. After a while I realized that's a little deceiving too, because really good offenses just aren't in 3rd down that much. I kind of look at it like 3rd down is a great opportunity for the d to get off the field (obviously), but 1st and 2nd down are opportunities for the o to move the ball without even giving the d that shot to make "just" one play and force a punt. IMO better to look at staying out of 3rd down completely than conversion %, although I'm not sure there's exactly a stat for that.

[jkjsooner]

I think the number of offensive plays is more important. I don't care if the clock runs or stops between plays. The number of plays is important because defense tends to tire quicker than offense.

That being said, if you are an underdog you want to shorten the game. It's easier for an underdog to win if the number of plays run is less. Think of it this way. If you roll a dice and I get a point for a 1 or 2 and you get a point with a 3-6, I have a chance if we only roll the dice a few times. If we roll it 100 times the probability of me winning is miniscule.

What I do think is B.S. is the concept of "keeping the offense off the field." Both teams are going to get roughly an equal number of offensive possessions so keeping a good offense off the field makes no sense to me - unless I think they're a better team in which case I do want to shorten the game (all things else equal).

[jkjsooner]

^^^This^^^
In that MNC game Florida posessed the ball for nearly 35 minutes and converted 12 out of 17 3rd downs. OU's TOP was nearly 10 minutes less, with 6 of 13 3rd downs converted. In every MNC game since the 2003 season the winning team had more time of possession (with the exception of TX over USC) as well as more rushing yardage.

And none of that makes any difference if we score in the red zone.

Their time of possession meant nothing until the fourth quarter when they wore us down and we couldn't stop Tebow. I don't think anyone doubts that controlling the ball can wear a defense down. But, again that's more about number of plays than TOP.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

And none of that makes any difference if we score in the red zone.

Their time of possession meant nothing until the fourth quarter when they wore us down and we couldn't stop Tebow. I don't think anyone doubts that controlling the ball can wear a defense down. But, again that's more about number of plays than TOP.

This

[Curly Bill]

It's always better when you have the football and the other team doesn't. That being said: the only stat that really matters is which team is better able to put the ball in the endzone, no matter how many minutes they hold onto it.

[texaspokieokie]

If running "no huddle" high speed offense, TOP isn't that important. Your defense being able to stop the other guy is what's important.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

If running "no huddle" high speed offense, TOP isn't that important. Your defense being able to stop the other guy is what's important.

When you watch OU play defense, do you ever feel like there is a point in the game where the other team goes "wow, I can move the ball on these chumps?". From that point on, it is like the other team is playing air. This isn't a new phenomenon either. The first time I remember it happening was against UNC in 2001 (right before I left the stadium to find an ark).

[jkjsooner]

When you watch OU play defense, do you ever feel like there is a point in the game where the other team goes "wow, I can move the ball on these chumps?". From that point on, it is like the other team is playing air. This isn't a new phenomenon either. The first time I remember it happening was against UNC in 2001 (right before I left the stadium to find an ark).

I remember that game. We learned a few things.

1. Our offensive line isn't very good.
2. Julius Peppers is very good.
3. Hybl really needs a good offensive line.

I don't remember the phenomenon you speak of though. The defense in 2001 was very good. I do remember the game being much closer than we thought it would be...

[SanJoaquinSooner]

The linear relationship between Time of possession per drive and Winning explains 32% of the variability in Winning.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I don't remember the phenomenon you speak of though. The defense in 2001 was very good. I do remember the game being much closer than we thought it would be...

UNC - http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/scores101/101237/101237343.htm -> With the late rally, North Carolina managed to outgain the
Sooners, 290-286.

After falling behind 35-14 midway through the third quarter, they rallied behind the play of quarterback Ell Roberson, eventually pulling within the final margin with seven seconds remaining. But Roberson's final pass, from midfield, was knocked down at about the 5-yard line as time ran out.

And that was maybe our best D under Stoops. It is just this weird thing that you see, you hold them for nothing for 3 or so possessions and then boom they get one first down and its off to the races on us.

[8timechamps]

I think it used to mean a lot more than it does now. When a team can score in under two minutes from anywhere on the field, and their philosophy is "we don't have to stop the other team, we just need to outscore them", then TOP means nothing. I am not going to look up Baylor's TOP, but that's a good example of how they play.

There are times when TOP is very important (say, like in a bowl game when one team can't stop the other from scoring), but I've thought for a while that the TOP was kind of meaningless.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

8, it still means something if you have a good defense.

The key with most modern offenses is that they still score on a % basis about the same as they did 20 years ago. They are just getting a lot more possessions. So whereas in the 80s you might be lucky to get 7 possessions a game and score 21 points, now you are getting 7 possessions in a half to score 21. If you have a great D and shorten the game you put much greater pressure on the team to make possessions count. This doesn't even get into below the line items like rhythm, momentum, etc.

[MI Sooner]

I think the number of offensive plays is more important. I don't care if the clock runs or stops between plays. The number of plays is important because defense tends to tire quicker than offense.

That being said, if you are an underdog you want to shorten the game. It's easier for an underdog to win if the number of plays run is less. Think of it this way. If you roll a dice and I get a point for a 1 or 2 and you get a point with a 3-6, I have a chance if we only roll the dice a few times. If we roll it 100 times the probability of me winning is miniscule.

What I do think is B.S. is the concept of "keeping the offense off the field." Both teams are going to get roughly an equal number of offensive possessions so keeping a good offense off the field makes no sense to me - unless I think they're a better team in which case I do want to shorten the game (all things else equal).

This, exactly. Coaches (and announcers who are former players/coaches) know way more about most aspects of football than I do, but I can't believe how many can't grasp this concept.

[Statalyzer]

I think the number of offensive plays is more important. I don't care if the clock runs or stops between plays. The number of plays is important because defense tends to tire quicker than offense.

Yep. Real time is important in determining rested vs tired. Game time isn't.

TOP is a reactive stat- winning teams get more of it because the losing team starts trying to stop the clock more.

It's the 2nd most overrated part of the game next to whether to take the ball first or defer.

[8timechamps]

8, it still means something if you have a good defense.

The key with most modern offenses is that they still score on a % basis about the same as they did 20 years ago. They are just getting a lot more possessions. So whereas in the 80s you might be lucky to get 7 possessions a game and score 21 points, now you are getting 7 possessions in a half to score 21. If you have a great D and shorten the game you put much greater pressure on the team to make possessions count. This doesn't even get into below the line items like rhythm, momentum, etc.

I agree with that. I guess since OU hasn't had a very good defense in a while, I haven't thought much about it. However, TOP in the Cotton Bowl could have been the difference in a W or an L, if the offense would've scored to start the second half.