UW vs. stanford by the numbers.
OFFENSIVE STATISTICS
Pac-12 ranks (National rank in parenthesis)
Scoring
Pac-12 leader: Oregon, 59.8 (National leader: Baylor, 69.7)
6. Stanford, 41.3 (21)
7. Washington, 39.8 (27)
Rushing offense
Pac-12 leader: Oregon, 332.5 (National leader: Oregon)
3. Washington, 288.8 (11)
6. Stanford, 218.0 (33)
Passing offense
Pac-12 leader: Oregon State, 420.6 yards per game (National leader: Baylor, 444.3)
8. Washington, 285.3 (32)
10. Stanford, 221.3 (79)
Total offense
Pac-12 leader: UCLA, 614.3 (National leader: Baylor, 751.3)
3. Washington, 574.0 (5)
8. Stanford, 439.3 (50)
Red-zone conversions
Pac-12 leader: Colorado, 100% (1 TD, 4 FGs in 5 tries)
3. Stanford, 93.3% — 14 of 15 scores with 9 TDs + 5 FGs (20)
6. Washington, 87% — 20 of 23 scores with 17 TDs + 3 FGs (44)
Sacks allowed
Pac-12 leader: Washington/Stanford/Oregon, 3 total (National leader: Nebraska/Navy, 2)
Long scrimmage plays (of 10 yards or more)
Pac-12 leader: Oregon State, 86 (National leader: Marshall, 84)
5. Washington, 75 (31)
10. Stanford, 54 (96)
DEFENSIVE STATISTICS
Scoring defense
Pac-12 leader: Washington/Oregon, 10.8 points per game (National leader: Louisville, 6.8)
T1. Washington, 10.8 (4)
5. Stanford, 19.5 (34)
Rushing defense
Pac-12 leader: Colorado, 91.3 (National leader: Florida, 53.5)
3. Stanford, 105.0 (21)
5. Washington, 132.0 (43)
Passing defense
Pac-12 leader: Washington, 156.8 (National leader: Michigan State, 130.5)
1. Washington, 156.8 (9)
8. Stanford, 238.5 (78)
Total defense
Pac-12 leader: Washington, 288.8 (National leader: Michigan State, 188.8)
1. Washington, 288.8 (14) — 3.80 yards per play (3)
7. Stanford, 343.5 (36) — 4.64 yards per play (23)
Red-zone defense
Pac-12 leader: Washington, 60% (National leader: Baylor, 44.4%)
1. Washington, 60% — 6 scores in 10 opponents’ attempts with 4 TDs + 2 FGs (5)
11. Stanford, 90% — 9 scores in opponents’ 10 attempts with 7 TDs + 3 FGs (98)
Sacks
Pac-12 leader: Utah, 3.75 per game (National leader: Memphis, 4.33)
2. Washington, 3.25 (10)
6. Stanford, 2.25 (33)
Long scrimmage plays allowed (of 10 yards or more)
Pac-12 leader: Washington, 29 (National leader: Baylor/Michigan State, 28)
1. Washington, 29 (3)
4. Stanford, 46 (27)
Penalties
Pac-12 leader: Arizona State, 3.5 per game (National leader: Boston College, 2.0)
3. Stanford, 4.8 per game, for 38.5 yards per game (28)
12. Washington, 10.8 per game, for 92.5 yards (125 out of 125)
INDIVIDUAL STATISTICS
Passing yards
Pac-12 leader: Sean Mannion, OSU, 403.6 yards per game (National leader: Mannion)
8. Keith Price, Washington, 261.0 per game (31); 9 TDs, 2 INT, 72.3% completion rate
10. Kevin Hogan, Stanford, 208.0 per game (63); 10 TDs, 3 INT, 63.2% completion rate;
Passer rating
Pac-12 leader: Kevin Hogan, Stanford, 174.6 (National leader: Bryce Petty, Baylor, 239.53)
1. Kevin Hogan, Stanford, 174.6 (11)
2. Keith Price, Washington, 173.6 (12)
Rushing
Pac-12 leader: Bishop Sankey, Washington, 151.8 yards per game (National leader: Sankey, 151.8)
1. Bishop Sankey, Washington, 151.8 (1); 104 carries for 607 yards, 5 TDs; 5.84 ypc
5. Tyler Gaffney, Stanford, 96.25 (30); 73 carries for 385 yards, T TDs; 5.27 ypc
Receiving
Pac-12 leader: Paul Richardson, Colorado 162.3 yards per game (National leader: Richardson)
9. Ty Montgomery, Stanford, 81.8
13. Kevin Smith, Washington, 67.3
15. Kasen Williams, Washington, 63.8
16. Devon Cajuste, Stanford, 61.0
20. Jaydon Mickens, Washington. 53.5
Comments
-
interesting stuff, thanks
-
Confirms what we already knew about the offense - racking up tons of yards, need to commit to FINISHING.
Usually teams that rack up lots of yards are eventually going to score lots of points. My guess is this offense will do a better job of punching it in, but mostly because they can't really do much worse.
It will be interesting to see how the defensive stats hold up now that the varsity schedule begins. -
We win this one
-
DisagreePassion said:From the Seattle Times Husky Blog:
OFFENSIVE STATISTICS
Pac-12 ranks (National rank in parenthesis)
Scoring
Pac-12 leader: Oregon, 59.8 (National leader: Baylor, 69.7)
6. Stanford, 41.3 (21)
7. Washington, 39.8 (27)
Rushing offense
Pac-12 leader: Oregon, 332.5 (National leader: Oregon)
3. Washington, 288.8 (11)
6. Stanford, 218.0 (33)
Passing offense
Pac-12 leader: Oregon State, 420.6 yards per game (National leader: Baylor, 444.3)
8. Washington, 285.3 (32)
10. Stanford, 221.3 (79)
Total offense
Pac-12 leader: UCLA, 614.3 (National leader: Baylor, 751.3)
3. Washington, 574.0 (5)
8. Stanford, 439.3 (50)
Red-zone conversions
Pac-12 leader: Colorado, 100% (1 TD, 4 FGs in 5 tries)
3. Stanford, 93.3% — 14 of 15 scores with 9 TDs + 5 FGs (20)
6. Washington, 87% — 20 of 23 scores with 17 TDs + 3 FGs (44)
Sacks allowed
Pac-12 leader: Washington/Stanford/Oregon, 3 total (National leader: Nebraska/Navy, 2)
Long scrimmage plays (of 10 yards or more)
Pac-12 leader: Oregon State, 86 (National leader: Marshall, 84)
5. Washington, 75 (31)
10. Stanford, 54 (96)
DEFENSIVE STATISTICS
Scoring defense
Pac-12 leader: Washington/Oregon, 10.8 points per game (National leader: Louisville, 6.8)
T1. Washington, 10.8 (4)
5. Stanford, 19.5 (34)
Rushing defense
Pac-12 leader: Colorado, 91.3 (National leader: Florida, 53.5)
3. Stanford, 105.0 (21)
5. Washington, 132.0 (43)
Passing defense
Pac-12 leader: Washington, 156.8 (National leader: Michigan State, 130.5)
1. Washington, 156.8 (9)
8. Stanford, 238.5 (78)
Total defense
Pac-12 leader: Washington, 288.8 (National leader: Michigan State, 188.8)
1. Washington, 288.8 (14) — 3.80 yards per play (3)
7. Stanford, 343.5 (36) — 4.64 yards per play (23)
Red-zone defense
Pac-12 leader: Washington, 60% (National leader: Baylor, 44.4%)
1. Washington, 60% — 6 scores in 10 opponents’ attempts with 4 TDs + 2 FGs (5)
11. Stanford, 90% — 9 scores in opponents’ 10 attempts with 7 TDs + 3 FGs (98)
Sacks
Pac-12 leader: Utah, 3.75 per game (National leader: Memphis, 4.33)
2. Washington, 3.25 (10)
6. Stanford, 2.25 (33)
Long scrimmage plays allowed (of 10 yards or more)
Pac-12 leader: Washington, 29 (National leader: Baylor/Michigan State, 28)
1. Washington, 29 (3)
4. Stanford, 46 (27)
Penalties
Pac-12 leader: Arizona State, 3.5 per game (National leader: Boston College, 2.0)
3. Stanford, 4.8 per game, for 38.5 yards per game (28)
12. Washington, 10.8 per game, for 92.5 yards (125 out of 125)
INDIVIDUAL STATISTICS
Passing yards
Pac-12 leader: Sean Mannion, OSU, 403.6 yards per game (National leader: Mannion)
8. Keith Price, Washington, 261.0 per game (31); 9 TDs, 2 INT, 72.3% completion rate
10. Kevin Hogan, Stanford, 208.0 per game (63); 10 TDs, 3 INT, 63.2% completion rate;
Passer rating
Pac-12 leader: Kevin Hogan, Stanford, 174.6 (National leader: Bryce Petty, Baylor, 239.53)
1. Kevin Hogan, Stanford, 174.6 (11)
2. Keith Price, Washington, 173.6 (12)
Rushing
Pac-12 leader: Bishop Sankey, Washington, 151.8 yards per game (National leader: Sankey, 151.8)
1. Bishop Sankey, Washington, 151.8 (1); 104 carries for 607 yards, 5 TDs; 5.84 ypc
5. Tyler Gaffney, Stanford, 96.25 (30); 73 carries for 385 yards, T TDs; 5.27 ypc
Receiving
Pac-12 leader: Paul Richardson, Colorado 162.3 yards per game (National leader: Richardson)
9. Ty Montgomery, Stanford, 81.8
13. Kevin Smith, Washington, 67.3
15. Kasen Williams, Washington, 63.8
16. Devon Cajuste, Stanford, 61.0
20. Jaydon Mickens, Washington. 53.5 -
Forecast is for sunshine and mid-80's. Will Sark be in shorts and a visor?
-
That our non-conference slate was comparatively difficult (notwithstanding ISU) makes those statistics all the more impressive. Hmmm.dnc said:Confirms what we already knew about the offense - racking up tons of yards, need to commit to FINISHING.
Usually teams that rack up lots of yards are eventually going to score lots of points. My guess is this offense will do a better job of punching it in, but mostly because they can't really do much worse.
It will be interesting to see how the defensive stats hold up now that the varsity schedule begins. -
Comparatively difficult to what? Playing schools for the blind?Gladstone said:
That our non-conference slate was comparatively difficult (notwithstanding ISU) makes those statistics all the more impressive. Hmmm.dnc said:Confirms what we already knew about the offense - racking up tons of yards, need to commit to FINISHING.
Usually teams that rack up lots of yards are eventually going to score lots of points. My guess is this offense will do a better job of punching it in, but mostly because they can't really do much worse.
It will be interesting to see how the defensive stats hold up now that the varsity schedule begins. -
stats are for loosers (c)
TheGlove -
While overrated, BSU isn't a pushover and we also played a B10 team at a neutral-hostile site. Stanford and Oregon have yet to face teams that can punch them back a little bit.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Comparatively difficult to what? Playing schools for the blind?Gladstone said:
That our non-conference slate was comparatively difficult (notwithstanding ISU) makes those statistics all the more impressive. Hmmm.dnc said:Confirms what we already knew about the offense - racking up tons of yards, need to commit to FINISHING.
Usually teams that rack up lots of yards are eventually going to score lots of points. My guess is this offense will do a better job of punching it in, but mostly because they can't really do much worse.
It will be interesting to see how the defensive stats hold up now that the varsity schedule begins. -
None of the teams UW has faced would have been a challenge for Stanford or Oregon either.Gladstone said:
While overrated, BSU isn't a pushover and we also played a B10 team at a neutral-hostile site. Stanford and Oregon have yet to face teams that can punch them back a little bit.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Comparatively difficult to what? Playing schools for the blind?Gladstone said:
That our non-conference slate was comparatively difficult (notwithstanding ISU) makes those statistics all the more impressive. Hmmm.dnc said:Confirms what we already knew about the offense - racking up tons of yards, need to commit to FINISHING.
Usually teams that rack up lots of yards are eventually going to score lots of points. My guess is this offense will do a better job of punching it in, but mostly because they can't really do much worse.
It will be interesting to see how the defensive stats hold up now that the varsity schedule begins.
Arizona State is better than anyone UW has faced, and Stanford boatraced them.






