Holiday Bowl Preview: Special Teams

by norcalnick on Dec 13, 2011 3:00 AM PST in California Golden Bears Football

This is part 1 of a multi-part preview of Cal's Holiday Bowl matchup with Texas. How many parts? AS MANY AS WE DECIDE!

Cal's special teams are awful, right? They've been below average for years, and it hasn't seemed much different this year, has it? Well, that depends on which special teams units you're looking at. We haven't talked about special teams much this year - so would it surprise you to learn that, taken as a whole, Cal's special teams are entirely average, neither bad nor good?

Yep. According to Football Outsider's FEI rankings system, Cal has a special teams efficiency of -.021, 63rd in the country. For those unfamiliar with FEI, the rating system measures the positive and negative value of every meaningful play, ending with a single number scaled around zero. Positive numbers are good, negative numbers are bad. Cal's special teams efficiency is almost exactly zero.

So. Meh, I guess? For those under the impression that Cal's special teams are usually a liability, the news that Cal is merely mediocre might be of some comfort. Unfortunately, the bad news is that Texas actually has a pretty good special teams unit, ranked 10th in the country in FEI.

Of course, if that scares you it might be worth pointing out that compared to the impacts of offense and defense, special teams has a relatively small impact. For example, LSU's total F+ score is 38.1, of which special teams makes up just +3.5, which is still good for 3rd in the country. But if you ask Alabama fans about LSU's special teams advantage you might get some passionate opinions about how important it might be.

Let's go a little deeper into each segment of special teams after the jump:

Special Team Eff.

STE Rank

Field Goal Eff.

FGE Rank

Punt Return Eff.

PRE Rank

Kick Return Eff.

KRE Rank

Punt Eff.

PE Rank

Kickoff Eff.

KE Rank

California

-.021

.380

-.147

-.263

112

-.272

-.019

Texas

2.343

.454

.002

.103

-.111

-.129

On the Cal side of things, the stats say exactly what most Cal fans would expect - the Bears are pretty good at making field goals, even better at punting the ball, but pretty not great at returning kicks. The good and the bad cancel each other out and you're left with a mediocre unit. Obviously, it's not our chief concern right now but you'd be justified in worrying that there are basically two players providing clear positive value on special teams this year: Bryan Anger and Giorgio Tavecchio. Two seniors. Special teams is something to worry about for 2012.

Let's go unit by unit to see how Cal and Texas shape up:

Placekickers

The Longhorns have an excellent field goal kicker in senior Justin Tucker who is basically identical to Giorgio except he's perfect on extra points so far this year - so basically, they have Giorgio but their line doesn't allow kick blocks. The good news is that Texas hasn't blocked a field goal or extra point - yet.

Field Goal/PAT kicking advantage: EVEN

When Cal is kicking off

The Bears have an average kick coverage team - Giorgio's kick depth and hangtime are consistently mediocre, and while the Bears seem to frequently allow decent returns, the longest return they have allowed is 'just' 53 yards, so it's not like opponents are frequently starting in Cal territory or something.

Texas has three returners who all have averages in the range of 20 yards/return, but they really miss the abilities of running back Fozzy Whittaker, who had two touchdowns in just 10 returns before suffering a season ending injury against Missouri.

Advantage: Slightly to Texas

When Texas is kicking off

Simply put, Cal hasn't been getting any help from their kickoff returners. Other than one touchdown against Presbyterian I don't really recall the Bears ever starting drives beyond the 35 yard line or so, and even that far out is rare.

Justin Tucker sends the ball about 4 yards longer than Giorgio does, and as a result he has 12 touchbacks on 66 kickoffs. But opponents do have a solid average return and a touchdown against the Longhorns this year. Unfortunately the Bears don't appear to be in any position to take advantage of the weakest link in Texas' special teams.

Advantage: Texas

When Cal is punting

Bryan Anger averages 44.6 yards/punt. That's good. Opponents have only returned 16 of his punts, with a long return of 18 - that's even better. Long punts and hangtime means it doesn't matter how good the punt returner is - he won't have a chance.

Well, Texas does have a pretty good punt returner. Jaxon Shipley started the season at punt returner, but freshman corner back Quandre Diggs has taken over the role and excelled. Diggs has only returned 8 punts but he's averaging 22.6 yards/return. Those are scary numbers, and if we had a weaker punter I'd be worried. ANGER SMASH hangtime gives Cal the advantage over any punt returner, especially now that we've apparently abandoned our experiments with the rugby punt.

Advantage: Cal

When Texas is punting

Kicker Justin Tucker is doing double duty as the punter as well, and while his average yards/kick is an unimpressive 39.2, he's forced a decent amount of fair catches and has kept returners in check. That tells you that either Texas has good kick coverage or Tucker focuses on hangtime - or both.

In either case, Marvin Jones hasn't had many opportunities to impress as a punt returner, and the Bears haven't done much all year. Don't expect that to change.

Advantage: Slightly to Texas

Conclusions

Without Whittaker returning kickoffs and with Anger hopefully neutralizing Diggs, I wouldn't expect special teams to have a huge factor on deciding this game, at least in the obvious ways that make fans pull their hair out. Both teams have reliable specialists and there aren't any reasons to expect huge swings on blocked kicks or punts. Texas should win the field position battle on kickoffs but Cal should do better on punts, which might be just as well since Texas has a great defense (lots of punts) and a bad offense (not many kickoffs).

Keys to the game:

-Anger hangtime leading to many fair catches.
-Cal getting anything from the return game.
-BLOCK ON PATs FOR GOD'S SAKE!

Tweet Comment 19 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Addressing some points

When Texas is punting

Kicker Justin Tucker is doing double duty as the punter as well, and while his average yards/kick is an unimpressive 39.2, he’s forced a decent amount of fair catches and has kept returners in check. That tells you that either Texas has good kick coverage or Tucker focuses on hangtime – or both.

Tucker exclusively rugby punts. No hangtime to speak of.

Both teams have reliable specialists and there aren’t any reasons to expect huge swings on blocked kicks or punts.

I think Texas is first or second in blocked punts over the last decade. It wouldn’t hurt to spend some extra practice time addressing that.

Did you read my comment, or did you merely see that it disagreed and begin composing your response immediately? by BrooklynHorn

by run Bevo run on Dec 13, 2011 7:20 AM PST reply actions

Thanks for the info

Man, all of a sudden everybody is rugby punting.

The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS

by norcalnick on Dec 13, 2011 7:50 AM PST via mobile up reply actions

This isn't entirely true anymore.

Tucker used to kick more rugby punts, but this year he has kicked more conventional punts, at least at the home games. I went to every one, and many times wished he would go back to the rugby punt instead of the 25-35 yard conventional punt he kicked. See the Aggy game for examples. In fact one game this year I seem to remember a punt of like 12 yards thanks to the wind.

One thing that is not mentioned here that Texas has a definite advantage in is Tucker’s tackling. He had 5 solo and 2 assists. Tucker is not your conventional kicker, and after he kicks the ball he doesn’t hide from contact. That could be taken two ways though. Either he is fast, tough, and makes good on-field decisions, or his kicks are so short the coverage overruns the kick. I believe it’s the former, with a little of the “short kick” thrown in.

by dec3169 on Dec 13, 2011 7:51 AM PST up reply actions

Amending this...

Tucker had a 6 yd punt out of bounds against Rice. If that had been a rugby punt someone in the front row or a player on the sidelines would have suffered a broken nose or something.

by dec3169 on Dec 13, 2011 10:03 AM PST up reply actions

Harder to return a rugby punt....

…..because they get down to the ground more often and bounce around crazy-style. That could account for lack of returns against Texas, rather than “fair catches.”

by ososdeoro on Dec 13, 2011 8:54 AM PST reply actions

One of big disappointments for me this year has been the punt return game, or rather, the lack thereof. It seems like Tedford has put Marvin Jones back there just to “not make a mistake” and not really to make a play. Consequently, we haven’t really had muffed punt returns or fumbles, etc., although we have had the head-scratching fair catch inside the 10 yard line. There was one game (Washington State, I think) where both Jones and Allen were back returning punts.

Even last year with J.Ross, I thought we were a bit more daring in trying to make something happen on the punt return, but this year it seems to be: 1) secure the ball, 2) get a few yards if you can, 3) don’t turn the ball over, 4) make sure the offense gets a chance with the ball. It’s a very different mentality than when you have a guy like DeSean Jackson back there. To my untrained eye, it seems like Jones has had a relatively uneventful season as the primary punt returner and maybe that’s the way Tedford wants it.

by daveman on Dec 13, 2011 10:31 AM PST reply actions

I think you’re right about this (and I tend to side with Tedford, don’t make mistakes, and give the ball to the Offense to score).

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Dec 13, 2011 4:47 PM PST up reply actions

Yeah. I remember he had Syd fair-catching just about everything.

He tends to favor the sure-handed guy over the more dynamic returners (Jones over KA). For this game, I’d let KA field punts. Jones has some moves, but KA is ridiculous in space.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Dec 13, 2011 5:15 PM PST up reply actions

Special Teams

My attitude toward special teams is that people spend way too much time bitching about them. Yes, occasionally a game can turn on a key special-teams play, whether it’s a big return, kick, or block. But more often than not, special teams are irrelevant to the outcome of the game. Unless it’s the Big 10, or the 1890s, and the final score is, say, 6 to 3, the importance of field position is vastly overrated. Red-zone efficiency, 3rd-down efficiency, and big-play ability, on both sides of the ball, are ultimately what determines the winner and the loser. Cal could start each possession on the 50, and Oregon on its own 10, and the Ducks still blow out the Bears. Every time.

Thus, unless there is a game changer on the roster like Desean Jackson, then all I care about as a Cal fan is that the Bears keep the other team from making the big play. No blocks, no returns for a touchdown, and make most of your kicks. By my not-too-demanding standards, then, Cal’s special teams have been better than mediocre in 2011; I’d call them good, but not great.

Go Bears!

by California Pete on Dec 13, 2011 11:13 AM PST reply actions

I disagree. I don’t have the data or anything, so maybe someone who knows can bring it to the table, but I think people give WAYY less importance to special teams than they should. I suspect it’s very much underappreciated. Good play on special teams can absolutely be the difference between winning and losing. I wish Coach Tedford and his staff would pay more attention to it, not less. I think it can be one of those market inefficiency kinds of things that could be exploited potentially.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Dec 13, 2011 11:52 AM PST up reply actions

I think it can be one of those market inefficiency kinds of things that could be exploited potentially.

I was thinking about this idea as I was glancing at the FEI special teams standings and noticed that Virginia ‘Beamer-Ball’ Tech was only 66th in the country, with special teams play about on par with Cal’s.

It made me wonder how much special teams depends on coaching, and how much it depends on just having really good specialists. So much of special teams play can come down to just a few guys – your kicker and/or punter, and one or two returners.

(Of course, playing devil’s advocate, perhaps V. Tech special teams haven’t done much because every coach prepares ultra hard on special teams the week before they play the Hokies?)

The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS

by norcalnick on Dec 13, 2011 12:26 PM PST up reply actions

Is it really down to those few players, or does it come down to those players because they’re the only ones truly invested in special teams play? If coverage and blocking are considered unglamorous, or are treated like an afterthought by the coaches, then the players doing it aren’t going to be as motivated to do their jobs either. I’ve never thought that Tedford ever really cared that much about special teams, and Cal’s special teams have played like he didn’t really care throughout his tenure. Even in 2004, when the team was the best one we had, special teams made stupid mistakes all the time. I think we would have beaten USC that year if it weren’t for special teams.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Dec 13, 2011 1:13 PM PST up reply actions

yeah man can’t disagree more here. ST are suuuuuper important, especially with regard to field position.

The odds of Cal winning are inversely proportional to the odds of Cal winning.

by Spazzy Mcgee on Dec 13, 2011 11:20 PM PST up reply actions

Agree and Disagree

I think that special teams CAN be important. In addition to being physical, football is an emotional sport. I think a good return positively affects the mental aspect of the game. I’ve never been a QB, but if I were, I imagine I’d be much more confident about my ability to move the ball into the end zone if I’m starting from the 50, rather than the 20. Even if I am confident from the 20, I’m off the charts confident when I’m at the 50.

And if I’m on defense, same thing. I’m much more confident that I can stop the opposing team from putting points on the board if they’re on their own 20, rather than the 50.

Special teams sets that up. It’s less tangible than what you see during drives, but I do think it can make a difference.

The only thing I'm more passionate about than Cal ... is helping peeps have great sex.
SmartHotFun.Com

by smarthotfun on Dec 13, 2011 12:10 PM PST reply actions

This would presumably be a fairly easy proposition to test, if one had the data. How does the likelihood of scoring, or gaining at least one first down, vary by starting field position? Or how does the average gain of any particular play change with the position of the line of scrimmage? Do offenses indeed perform better the closer they get to the opponents’ end zone?

While on the topic of statistics, there has to be some way to tally up the net yardage achieved by a team over the course of the game—something like Total Special Teams (yards) that would be comparable to Total Offense and Total Defense.

Go Bears!

by California Pete on Dec 13, 2011 4:05 PM PST up reply actions

It’s a huge disparity between scoring from the 20, and scoring from the 40, but I’m too lazy to look it up. But our coverage as been pretty good this year.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Dec 13, 2011 4:50 PM PST up reply actions

Former UT coach

Muschamp used to refer to field position as a probability. If you get the ball at the 10, you have a 90% chance of not scoring. To my knowledge, there’s no real math behind it, but I find myself saying we have a 70% chance of scoring when we force a turnover and get it at their 30 and so on. Of course, when we were down to our 5th team RB and couldn’t figure out how to throw a pass, those odds staying locked in around 90% not scoring (regardless of field position).

by Inveigled&Foozled on Dec 14, 2011 11:52 AM PST up reply actions

I think the yards/punt averages are tough when trying to paint the whole picture

Anyone have Anger’s inside the 20, 10 and 5 yard line numbers and rankings?

I love Anger and I think we’re going to see a mighty drop off when he graduates.

6 1st round draft picks, 2 Super Bowl Champions and counting

by Another Successful Tedford QB on Dec 13, 2011 12:51 PM PST reply actions

I think Texas'

special teams may be less of a factor as generally starting field position has been pretty terrible for most of the year. It’s definitely not helped by the offense. It’s not uncommon for Texas to be starting behind the 20 after a punt.

At the same time, Tucker playing in all phases of kicking has not seemed to be ideal when it comes to the punting. There have been games where UT’s lucky if he punts it more than 35 yards. That said, if he’s in field goal range, you might as well consider it 3 points for Texas because he just doesn’t seem to miss. 50 yard kicks don’t seem to be a problem for him at all.

TEXAS FIGHT

by Darklust on Dec 15, 2011 11:02 PM PST reply actions

Comments For This Post Are Closed

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Golden Bears Football Schedule

Fresno St.	Sat 09/03	W 36 - 21
@ Colorado The Ralphie Report	Sat 09/10	W 36 - 33
Presbyterian	Sat 09/17	W 63 - 12
@ Washington UW Dawg Pound	Sat 09/24	L 23 - 31
@ Oregon Addicted To Quack	Thu 10/06	L 15 - 43
USC Conquest Chronicles	Thu 10/13	L 9 - 30
Utah Block U	Sat 10/22	W 34 - 10
@ UCLA Bruins Nation	Sat 10/29	L 14 - 31
Washington St. CougCenter	Sat 11/05	W 30 - 7
Oregon St. Building The Dam	Sat 11/12	W 23 - 6
@ Stanford Rule Of Tree	Sat 11/19	L 28 - 31
@ Arizona St. House Of Sparky	Fri 11/25	W 47 - 38
@ Texas Burnt Orange Nation	Wed 12/28	L 10 - 21