Fans of the Texas program who still have hope for incumbent starting QB Tyrone Swoopes - yes, there are some - usually point to 2014 games like Oklahoma and Iowa State as instances when the Texas offense went "up-tempo." These eternal burnt-orange optimists claim Swoopes was a much better quarterback in this setting. But was he? That's the big question, and it's the one we'll answer in this column.
The quote below surely indicates that Swoopes, himself, believed (even back in 2014) that speeding up the tempo of play made things more "easy."
"The (up-tempo) helps - definitely - because the defense doesn't have time to get, I guess some of the calls they could get before when we huddle up, they don't have time to set things up, so they give us real simple looks, and it's easy to go out there and just play." - Texas QB Tyrone Swoopes after the 2014 Oklahoma loss
And it might make things more easy, but does it make the offense, as a whole, better? Did it make Tyrone Swoopes a better, more accurate quarterback? It's an important question coming into the 2015 season. The Texas staff has made significant changes to the Longhorns offense - with the "tempo" of the thing being the single biggest buzzword associated with the transition.
Stopwatch in hand, we welcome you back to …
. . .
The Deep Dig
The "trolls" of the Texas fan base were right.
When Charlie Strong was hired at Texas, he was a man with an open offensive coordinator position and also an open checkbook. When the announcement was made that Strong would bring with him to Austin his offensive coordinator from Louisville, Shawn Watson, the fan base went nuclear.
Collectively, the group screamed that the move didn't make sense and reeked of a "comfort hire." Watson was an offensive mind that had just produced a phenomenon in QB Teddy Bridgewater, but did so in a pro-style system that would not appeal to high-profile recruits in Texas who came up predominantly in spread offenses and, at the skill positions, were largely products of the Lone Star State's growing 7-on-7 football culture.
These athletes want the ball in space. But, Strong had a plan - and it was the wrong one. Strong cares most about defense and that is clear. He once believed that if the stepchild offense can play a grinding, ball-control brand of football, that would be all that was needed. Leave the rest up to his monsters of the defensive side. The scores may look like those of baseball games, but none of this would matter as long as they had "Ws" next to them in the record books.
One year later, well … Welcome to the Big 12. The fan base isn't usually right, but even it saw right from the start what it took Strong an entire season to realize.
. . .
The eternal burnt-orange optimist will point to the horrible play of the offensive line, the youth of the team, the massive wave of suspensions, the widespread player attrition that came with Strong to Texas and the lack of even a mediocre quarterback for 2014's very uninspiring results, but the fact of the matter is that Charlie Strong's first season at Texas was doomed from the start.
The offense was a dud. A rusty old lemon in a lot where the customers are interested in sporty rides with new-car smells.
It certainly does not make Strong a bad coach or anything less than an elite developer of defensive talent. At the Deep Dig, we believe he is, and will remain, a top-5 head coach in the nation. However, it does make him wrong in his initial plans for what Texas would eventually be offensively during his tenure as head coach:
"I would say probably 98 percent of this state is a spread offense," Strong said at his opening press conference of 2015 spring football, explaining the change to a spread system. "You see it during the recruiting process, because what happened in recruiting, everybody wants to know what type of offense are you going to run. The key players that you need to really recruit, those guys are the ones that are in the spread offenses. So that's what you're looking for. What we did is that we looked at it as 98 percent of the offenses in this state are from that background. So when we bring players into our program, let's not change them."
We at the Deep Dig dare the Orangebloods community to say this exact sentiment does not seem very, very familiar. The only difference now, one year later, is that it's the head coach of the football team making the statement and not posters on a message board. Posters on a message board who were called out by many an eternal burnt-orange optimist for being bad fans and trolls.
. . .
So, here we are - once again - with a fan base divided. This time, it's over the quarterback. With the change to the spread system, many Texas fans have communicated the notion that RS freshman QB Jerrod Heard would be a perfect fit. Heard - one of the most prolific spread-offense QBs in recent Texas high school football history - has a winning mindset, great wheels and an assumed level of comfort in the system.
Heard was considered the crown-jewel of the 2014 recruiting class and fans danced in the streets when he committed to the Longhorns. Some of these fans argue that Heard's "inability to grasp the offense" in 2014 stems from the difficult terminology and nature of Watson's 2014 system. Now that Texas is going to the spread; speeding things up - basically, right into Heard's wheelhouse - well, "watch out!"
The Swoopes versus Heard debate is tired and not what the column is about, but it does bring up an interesting idea. OB staffer Anwar Richardson came poking around the Deep Dig this week to see if we kept records for "time elapsed on play-clock between snaps" in one of the dusty shelves lining our dark basement. He said he'd like to know the data on how Tyrone Swoopes performed in situations where the offense was sped up … basically, he wanted to know if the new Texas offense, right under everyone's noses, might actually be sliding right into Tyrone Swoopes' wheelhouse, too.
. . .
Here we present our passing "tempo" data from six 2014 games in Kansas State, Iowa State, UCLA, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. The charts used are our Deep Dig offensive line grade logs, and we've added five columns on the right for passing plays, indicating the series in the game, the play's down, the amount of time elapsed on the play-clock before the ball was snapped on passing downs, whether the pass was a completion or an incompletion and the net yardage result. Where times are not listed in the shaded boxes, it indicates the flow of the game being disrupted, allowing extra time to communicate a play from coach to quarterback to team. ST stands for official stoppages or starts and changes-of-possession. PEN indicates the play occurred coming off of a penalty. TO indicates the play occurred coming off a timeout.
. . .
Some other takeaways from the data:
- During truly "hurried up" passing plays where only 15-20 seconds elapsed on the play-clock, Swoopes had a 72.7 completion percentage and was sacked one time over 12 passes (8.3% sack-rate compared to a 7.1% sack-rate on the 2014 season). His completion percentage for 2014 on the season was 55.13% for comparison.
- During passing plays where the tempo was "just a bit" sped up with 20-30 seconds of play-clock time elapsed, Swoopes had a 52.27% completion percentage and was sacked four times over the snaps yielding the exact same 8.3% sack-rate accumulated in the hurry-up snaps.
- During passing plays which lagged getting the calls in and pushed the limits of the time clock with 30-40 seconds elapsing before the ball was snapped, Swoopes had a 63.08% completion percentage, had a 5.1% sack-rate and threw his only two interceptions of the sample, one a pick-six.
- During passing plays that occurred coming off of play stoppages such as penalties, timeouts, and changes of possession where extra time was allowed to get a play-call dialed in and communicated, Swoopes had a 60% completion percentage and a 5.1% sack-rate (with one being a sack-TD vs. Tech).
. . .
Speaking of sack-rates, we thought it would be interesting, since we have all the data in one place here, to see how dependent Swoopes was on good offensive line play in being effective as a passer over the six-game sample:
- on plays where the cumulative protection scores of the offensive line were significantly below-average, Swoopes had a 41.7% completion percentage and a 25% sack-rate.
- on plays where the cumulative protection scores were slightly below-average, Swoopes had a 53.4% completion percentage, a 10.66% sack-rate and one pick-six.
- on plays where the cumulative protection scores were average to slightly above-average, Swoopes had a 64.9% completion percentage, a .01% sack-rate and one interception.
- on plays where the cumulative protection scores significantly above-average, Swoopes had a 70% completion percentage and a zero-percent sack-rate.
- on plays where Tyrone Swoopes was pressured or hit as he was throwing the football, his completion percentage was 39.4%.
. . .
What it means
Where to start?
- If we look at the game-by-game data alone, it can be confusing. After all, Tyrone Swoopes had his best day as a passer for the entire 2014 season versus Oklahoma State according to the ESPN Adjusted Quarterback Rating (86.8), but this was the game where the most time (on-average) elapsed on the play-clock prior to passing snaps. Furthermore, Swoopes had an Adjusted QBR for the 2014 season of 55.3 and the only games in our sample here where he had a worse QBR than his season-average were Kansas State (46.1) and Texas Tech (51.1), the two games in the sample where, on-average, the time elapsed on the play-clock prior to passing downs were the two lowest. If looking at numbers on average for the entire game, it almost seems that a shorter time elapsed on the play-clock prior to passing snaps actually has a very clear and inverse relationship to his QB rating.
- But, when selecting 12 snaps (from just under 400 total examined) that allowed less than 20 seconds to elapse on the play-clock prior to the snap (an admittedly small sample), Swoopes was ice-cold, throwing completions at a 72.7% clip, much better than his 58.3% average on the season.
- Offensive line play clearly had a part in Swoopes' struggles and his achievements. There is a clear positive relationship between our cumulative protection scores at the Deep Dig and completion percentage.
- Swoopes, when taking his full allotment of time allowed by the play-clock to get the play in to the huddle and then get his players aligned, usually with instructions and a just a little tiny bit more time to process things … was much better than the Swoopes who was semi-hurried in running a pro-style offense.
CONCLUSION: With Tyrone Swoopes, you will have to pick one or the other between a pro-style offense and a spread offense. When things get slightly "sped up" in the normal operation of the more complicated pro-style scheme (something that will inevitably happen thanks to variance in game flow and script), Swoopes currently stinks. However, when given enough time (an extra 7-10 seconds) to process the upcoming play and get his bearings about him, he is capable of being a good Big 12 quarterback. In a small sample, when running a "hurry-up" offense, Swoopes has a completion percentage which is better than his best game of the entire 2014 season.
. . .
And in choosing one or the other, the Texas coaches have chosen the sped-up spread attack. Not because of Tyrone Swoopes - goodness, no. He'll be out of the picture in two years.
Remember the trolls we talked about at the beginning, the ones who said "the elite recruits don't want to play in Shawn Watson's boring system?" Well, the trolls were right. Texas desires to build a recruiting dynasty and moving to the spread is simply the latest step. It's a perfect time to remind you that at the Deep Dig, we live in constant anticipation of a future Texas monster. ]