FAMU Game Notes

- Even though the Bulls scored 51 points in this game, the offense didnt really start moving the
ball consistently until the game was well in hand. Garbage time is filtered out of these stats,
so we can see that while the game was still within a few possessions (up until the end of
USFs first drive of the third quarter), the offense was average at best.

- The success rate (48.89%) is impressive on its own, but a power running team should
probably even put up a better number against FAMU. Because we cant calculate opponent
averages for FCS teams, we cant get an opponent-adjusted number for this game, but it
wouldnt be anything to write home about.

- You can see USFs strategy starting out they wanted to run the ball down FAMUs throat
and protect Quinton Flowers from throwing too much (80% running plays in the first quarter).
When this wasnt working quite as well as expected (a 46% success rate on running plays in
the first quarter is good against a decent opponent, but this is FAMU), they switched up and
threw the ball a little more in the second quarter. It wasnt pretty, but Flowers did a good
enough job against an abhorrently weak FAMU secondary that the Bulls were able to start
moving the ball with ease by the middle of the second quarter. When this happened, the
game was pretty much over.

- Thats because the USF defense played out of their minds, even against an FCS foe. If you
think Im being too hard on the offenses fairly decent numbers, check out what the defense
did (FAMUs success rate: 7.7%!) Thats more indicative of the talent gap between these two
teams. There was almost zero chance of FAMU winning this game with the way USFs
defense played; if they didnt move the ball on first down, they were absolutely toast.

- USFs strategy in the first quarterrun, run, and run some more really hurt their IsoPPP
(explosiveness) numbers. Once they committed to passing the ball a bit, they ripped off big
play after big play with pretty much no resistance from the Rattlers. When your receivers are
getting obscene amounts of separation, that will happen. You can see that the Bulls kept
things fairly conservative on early downs (Standard Downs IsoPPP is pretty poor), but when
they were forced to pass, FAMU rarely made them pay (Passing Downs IsoPPP is stupidly
high).

- USF didnt have much of a defined strategy in this game. In the first quarter they dipped their
feet in to try to gauge how seriously they needed to take FAMU e.g. pounding Mack and
Tice over and over again and found out the answer was not very when the Rattlers
offense couldnt move the ball an inch on the Bulls D. Its hard not to shake the feeling that
this game was very much Taggart and company throwing stuff at the wall against a vastly
inferior foe and seeing what stuck but hey, youre allowed to do that when youre playing
FAMU. Against a half-decent FCS team, though, USFs first-half struggles mightve gotten
them in an early hole.
FSU Game Notes

- This game looked like a gem at the time. A bit of the luster has worn off since FSUs
defense might not be quite as lights-out as we thought at the time, and Dalvin Cook, while a
great back, still ran absolutely bonkers on the Bulls D. Still, the offenses struggles are the

main reason why AdjS&P saw this game as a bad one for the Bulls the defense played
better than expected, but the offense was honestly useless for a vast majority of the game. It
was a great effort by the Bulls defense (-7.31% is an A-level performance, and this is still the
best game that the USF pass D played all season), and a pitiful job by the USF offense, even
against a really good FSU defense. The Bulls ,were absolutely abominable passing
(-16.87%), which killed any hope they had of hanging around.

- It was a really simple story in this one. The defense played lights out in the first half (holding
FSU to a 14% success rate in the first quarter is just nasty), but the one bust on the Dalvin
Cook touchdown run put them in a tough hole to dig out of. An early touchdown shouldnt be
an insurmountable hole, but like. the USF offense could not move the ball to save their
lives. The run game was working okay early on, and Taggart and company were content to
pick up 4-5 yards a pop and resort to the short passing game when needed. That isnt
necessarily a bad strategy, but its got a few problems: A) The FSU defense eventually sold
out against the run and dared Quinton Flowers to pass. Those 4-5 yards a pop disappeared
quickly in the second half, and B) the second the USF offense fell behind the chains in the
game, they were useless (9% SR on passing downs and 15% SR on passes are nauseatingly
bad numbers). Once FSU forced USF to pass with the exception of the wide-open wheel
route to DErnest Johnson, when the game was probably out of reach anyway this game
was toast.

- Of course, it didnt help that the USF defense, which again, did a marvelous job for most of
the game, particularly getting pressure on Everett Golson and disrupting the passing game (I
think a lot of USFs successes in Pass D this season have been due to the pressure from the
defensive line, but the defensive backs made some nice individual plays in coverage as well),
finally caved to Dalvin Cook in the second half. This isnt really a bad thing: the D still played
better than average against the run (-2.17% AdjS&P, and remember: the lower the number,
the better on defense, and zero is average). The Bulls didnt let the Noles run all over them
a 38% SR on the ground is pretty strong for a defense but when Cook found a slimmer of
room, he took it to the house (18 yards per successful run play is just disgusting). Cook has
been doing the same thing to everyone this season he really may be the best back in the
country so theres no shame in this defensive performance. Its just that once Cook broke
loose, there was no way in heck that the USF offense was going to keep pace. USF spent the
game trying to string together bunt singles, FSU hit home runs.

- All in all: USF defense was great, USF offense was bad. The Bulls played a C game against
FSU (-3.08% AdjS&P which means that the Bulls were 3.08% worse than the average
performance against the Noles this season), and a C game against a Top 15 team usually
gets you blown out. This wasnt a bad game, but its also not really one where just a few
breaks mightve swung it the other way; the Noles were the better side. Even USF as theyre
playing now probably doesnt come within single digits.
Maryland Game Notes

- The Bulls worst game of the season to date, and its not even close (a -14.00% AdjS&P
means that USF played like, pretty much the worst team Maryland will play all season. Its a
strong F-level performance).

- The offense played better than they did against FSU but not that much better. The better
raw numbers can be attributed to the fact that Marylands defense is bad and FSUs is pretty
great. The usual suspects persisted: USF still couldnt pass (27% SR, -10.53% AdjS&P), and
while the running game was very efficient at 50% SR, it wasnt nearly explosive enough (you
can see the extremely low IsoPPP) to carry the team up and down the field. The Bulls needed
to pass to keep pace with Maryland, and they couldnt. This was a losing offensive
performance even if the defense hadnt imploded.

- And oh boy, did the defense implode. This was the first sign of the pass defense problems
that would flare up from time to time over the first half of the season. They kept the Terps from
moving up and down the field at will (42% SR is more or less average, though its better than
a bad Terps offense was accustomed to), but the Terps hit big play after big play on the USF
secondary, posting an IsoPPP of over 2 through the air, which is very bad. The only thing
keeping the Bulls from posting horrifying defensive numbers was the run defense, which
continued to be a strength and pretty much didnt let Maryland move the ball on the ground at
all. This, unfortunately, did not matter; the Terps did all the damage they needed through the
air (21.64% passing AdjS&P, which is a contender for the worst number a Bulls unit has
posted yet this season).

- The Bulls just werent in town from the opening snap. The score stayed fairly close early,
somehow, but the Terps outplayed the Bulls soundly in the first quarter (-22.76% AdjS&P) and
the second (-20.03%). The Bulls finally started to right the ship in the third quarter, but when
Maryland scored to open the second half, the game was really already out of reach. If the
Bulls fail to reach a bowl this season, theyre going to wish they had another crack at
Maryland. They could probably beat Maryland with a C-level game (somewhere near zero to
-5% AdjS&P); they brought their F game.
Memphis Game Notes

- The highlight of this game was the Bulls defense stepping up against a powerful Memphis
offense, bottling up both the run (-10.31% AdjS&P) and the pass (-7.74% AdjS&P). This was
a wonderful all-around performance by the USF D, and was very much enough to spring the
upset.

- The best part of the defenses performance was that they temporarily shored up what had
previously been a weakness big plays. The Memphis offense thrives on big plays, and if
you check the IsoPPP numbers, you can see that USF did a great job of limiting them across
the board especially on passing downs, which given the Bulls leaky secondary, had been
an issue.

- Unfortunately, the offense just wasnt there to match. After a strong first quarter where they
pounded the ball down the Tigers throats on the ground (the Bulls ran over 80% of the time in
the first quarter, and they did so effectively, with well over a 50% SR), Memphis clearly figured
they needed to stack the box and force USF to throw. This caused problems.

- You know the popular narrative around this game where Willie Taggart stuck to the run when
it clearly wasnt working and didnt start passing the ball until it was far too late? Well, that
narrative is very, very true. Faced with a Memphis offense that was finally starting to find its
bearings and a Memphis defense that was selling out against the run USF kept running. It

did not work! Between the second and third quarters, USF ran 75% of the time, to the tune of
a 25% Success Rate.

- Its not that the passing game started magically working in the fourth quarter USF still ran
the ball (-3.72% AdjS&P) better than they passed (-5.67%), but they at least had to present
the threat of passing to keep Memphis honest. They didnt in this game, but Id like to think
that the fourth quarter was a bit of a wake up call for Taggart and company USF has a
strong running game, but they need to complement that with some sort of downfield threat, or
they wont beat anyone worthwhile.

- I dont want to go as far as to say that USF would have won this game if they had passed
more, but they certainly wouldve had a fighting chance in the fourth quarter. As it stands, they
wasted a fantastic defensive performance against a great offensive team. The Bulls
dominated the first quarter (17.02%) before doing pretty much nothing in the second and third
quarters. When they finally decided to pass, they won the fourth quarter (2.63%), but it was a
bit too late.

Syracuse Game Notes:

- This will probably be the best game USF plays this season, and its almost entirely because
of the offense. The defense was not great a 1.45% AdjS&P against Syracuse is not stellar
but they played well enough for three quarters, and their failures in the third quarter were
cancelled out by USF literally being an unstoppable juggernaut in the third. Not sure well see
a quarter like USFs third quarter in this game for a long time the Bulls converted at a
stupidly good 85.7% SR, and never even reached a passing down. This was Willie Taggarts
offense run to perfection; the Bulls ran 64% of the time, but passed enough to keep Syracuse
on their toes. It was beautiful, and for a half, unstoppable. The fourth quarter was pretty
fantastic too a 76.9% SR. If USF posted these numbers against Alabama, they would win
(they wouldnt be able to post these numbers against Alabama, but you get my point).

- This also started the recent trend of USF being a hair more explosive than usual, which is
really key if their offense is going to keep up its strong play. If you look at the IsoPPP
numbers, you can see that USF doesnt have much explosiveness going in the running game,
but thats okay the Bulls dont need to break off huge running plays, just keep the chains
moving. The threat of big plays needs to come from the passing game, and with a passing
IsoPPP near 2.0, the Bulls had plenty of them. Thats what we need from the USF offense
an efficient running game, and enough firepower in the passing game to punish defenses
when they creep up to the line.

- Yes, the USF defense was pretty unremarkable (48% SR to Syracuse is not great), but to
their credit, they didnt allow too many big plays you can see this in the defensive IsoPPP
numbers. This wound up being key in this gameboth teams moved the ball well, but USF
was picking up huge chunks of yardage in the second half, whereas Syracuse was mainly
nickel and dime-ing it down the field.

- Its fair to be a little concerned about USFs passing defense after this game. Syracuse was
able to throw the ball at a pretty high success rate, and the USF defense posted another
positive AdjS&P (which, remember, is bad for defenses) at 1.45%. Oddly enough, USF did an
average job on standard downs (2.69%) and got roasted on passing downs, when they had
the Orange behind the chains (an abysmal 27.05%). This suggests some issues with the
secondary: when the Bulls expected the Orange to pass, their defense got burned.

- The Bulls could genuinely play with most teams in the country if they played like this. At an
9.97% AdjSP, Id grade this one out at a very solid A-level performance, and really USFs only
performance above C-level all season. Thatll probably need to change for the Bulls to make
a bowl UCF can probably be beaten with a C performance, but thats likely it (this was
accurate the Bulls played C level against Navy, and lost).
UConn Game Notes

- Another encouraging game for the USF offense. While it wasnt a huge breakout like the
Syracuse game, the Bulls put up their second straight positive Offensive AdjS&P at 3.07%.

- Heres the kicker, though: despite the Bulls gaudy rushing totals, they were absolutely saved
in this game by their passing offense. I said the Bulls would do well to play half as well
through the air as they did against Syracuse and Quinton Flowers and company posted a
ludicrous, season best 14.23%. Yes, thats mostly on the strength of a handful of big plays,
but thats okay USF doesnt need efficiency from their passing game right now, just
explosiveness. If they make defenses respect the threat of a downfield passing game, theyll
get all the efficiency they need from their running game. And, for what its worth, the Bulls
passed at a 44% SR, even better than they ran.

- This game had a bizarre progression. UConn dominated the first half thanks to A) not a ton of
resistance from the USF defense, who didnt play a great game, and B) the UConn defense
shutting down the USF running game pretty much entirely. Thankfully, a few fortunate
bounces and Husky mistakes not only kept the Bulls in the game, but even had them in the
lead at halftime. All this said, a better team than UConn likely has the game already won by
halftime if USF were to play this poorly again.

- But to Willie Taggarts credit, he didnt make the same mistakes against UConn that he did
against Memphis. When UConn pretty much shut down the run, he didnt continue banging
his head against a brick wall; he let Flowers and company rip a handful of times. It wasnt
pretty, and Flowers made plenty of mistakes, but they hit just enough big plays downfield that
UConn was forced to respect the passing game and then Marlon Mack and company went
to work against a tired Huskies front. No matter how good the Bulls running game is, theyre
not going to move the ball effectively against nine men in the box. As soon as the Huskies
backed off, this game was toast the USF defense settled in a bit, and the Bulls picked up a
two-score lead through a rare combination of running and passing success.

- This wasnt a great game on the whole, though. USFs Overall AdjS&P still falls in the
negatives at -1.58%, which is below average and somewhere in between as good as the
Bulls played against FSU and Memphis. A C-level game gets you blown out against FSU,
keeps you alive against Memphis, and beats UConn. The Bulls are good at playing C-level
right now they did so against both SMU and Navy, and were able to blow out the Mustangs

and hang around with the Midshipmen. I still think the Bulls will need a B-level performance
down the stretch to make a bowl.

- The reason the AdjS&P number is so low is the defense, which quietly played another
mediocre game. If the USF offense and defense both click in the same game, this team could
be dangerous. But that hasnt happened yet, and theres not necessarily reason to expect it to
given what weve seen.
SMU Game Notes

- What a bizarre game. AdjS&P sees this as USFs third above-average performance of the
season, but only barely 0.14% isnt blowing anybody away (the other two were Memphis
and Syracuse). This was actually USFs worst offensive performance of the season, but they
coupled it with their best defensive performance of the season.

- The Bulls couldnt move the ball at all against a really porous SMU defense early on, which
was extremely concerning. Thankfully, the USF defense did a tremendous job shutting down
the Mustangs attack. This game was really big for the D, which had been slipping lately. It
takes two things to play terribly on offense and still put up 38 points: A) playing a team as bad
as SMU, and B) a lights-out defense. The Mustangs couldnt pass (-7.93%), and they couldnt
even dream about running (-14.64%).

- The game was back and forth early as USF struggled to find their footing on offense, but they
eventually did (I mean, sort of) while SMU never got anywhere. The fact that USF could not
pass in the slightest in this game (25% SR against a team that usually allows 44% yikes) is
concerning, as is the fact that their only source of offense was Quinton Flowers scrambling
around for his life, but I think its fair to look at it this way: First, the Bulls were playing without
their best offensive player in Marlon Mack, and second, when all else fails on offense, you
want to have players who can just say screw it and take over the game. Flowers did so
here, and it was an incredible performance. The Bulls probably win this game even if Q
doesnt go absolutely bonkers on the ground, but they win it by something like 17-14.

- A friendly addition to the USF offense in this game: an explosive running game! The Bulls had
gotten all their explosiveness out of the passing game to this point, but you can see that their
run IsoPPP is higher than its been all season. Long Flowers scrambles are not entirely
sustainable, but they did the job in the game sans USFs best player.

- Yeah, its vaguely concerning that USF couldnt pass the ball whatsoever against the worst
secondary theyll see all season. Had they passed this poorly against, like pretty much any
other team, they wouldve been in huge trouble. But SMU is bad. Have I mentioned that?

- Still, this was unequivocally a good performance when you consider the loss of Mack and the
all-out domination of the USF D.
Navy Game Notes

- It never feels good to see a win trickle away in the fourth quarter like that, but this game was
not nearly as bad as many USF fans seem to be convinced it was. It was almost entirely

average (-0.92%), a hair under if you really want to be picky. As it stands, its USF fourth-best
performance in eight games. That doesnt sound that bad, does it?

- Despite the strong start from Rodney Adams kickoff return TD, Navy really had the upper
hand in the entire first half. It was a total clash of stylesNavy didnt really attempt to pass
and just tried to slowly nickel and dime the USF defense to death. Theyre really, really good
at it. The fact that the Midshipmen set all sorts of records on the ground in this game and
AdjS&P still sees USF playing a pretty good game defensively shows just how unstoppable
the Navy offense has been this season. USF, meanwhile, was totally out of sorts. The fact
that they couldnt run the ball at all is just bafflingMack, Flowers and Johnson were all
banged up, but there is no excuse for this team to be posting a -23.49% rushing AdjS&P ever.
Thats legendarily bad.

- The only things that kept USF afloat were the Adams return TD and a handful of big plays in
the passing game. USF was dreadful on the ground and inefficient through the air, but when
they completed passes, they made them count. This was by far USFs highest IsoPPP of the
season, and it came against a pretty stingy Navy defense. Take away a couple of big passing
plays and this was probably the worst USF offensive showing of the seasonbut you cant
discount those big plays. This does beg the question of why USF still ran more than they
passed in the second half, but to Willie Taggarts credit, his overall pass percentage (45% of
USFs plays were passes) is extremely high for him.

- USFs had some trouble running the ball early in games, but when the passing game is
working, theyre usually able to wear the opponents defense down late and start finding big
running lanes (think of the UConn game). You get the feeling that that could have happened
here, but Navy just refused to let USF touch the ball in the fourth quarter. The Bulls ran just
eight plays in the fourth quarter (and none of them were successful) to 20 for Navy. Sure,
Adams fumble and Johnny Wards penalty might have cost them a chance to even that tally
up, but you have to give credit to the Navy offense for wearing down an aggressive USF D
that seemed to finally have their number in the third quarter.

- The passing defense AdjS&P is remarkably skewed by Navy only completing two passes, but
its still worth applauding the USF defense for taking away any hope of Navy moving the ball
through the air.

- Point is, USF was very much alive in this game, and played a borderline top 25 team to a
near-draw. Thats pretty good! Maybe they couldve won with a couple more breaks, but dont
beat yourself up over this oneNavys the better team, they played the better game, and
probably were the hardest game left on the Bulls schedule. This doesnt necessarily bode
poorly for the final four games.

- I wont go as far as to say it bodes well, either, because Im still really concerned with how
poorly USF ran the football, even with their three top players banged up. If theyre all healthy
against ECU, Id expect that number to approach average again. If it doesnt, its going to be
really, really hard to beat the Pirates and it might be time to press the panic button. But
certainly not before then.