I typically post some form of this chart every offseason. The original impetus for posting was when Doug Nussmeier stated in the offseason before the 2017 season that the Gators were focused on red zone scoring because that was the cause of their scoring woes.
Yards per play vs. points per game for FBS schools in 2020. (Will Miles/Read and Reaction)
But that’s not what the data says. This chart is from the 2020 season, but it’s been the same in every chart I’ve made since that 2017 offseason. The best correlation to scoring out there is looking at yards per play for each team.
That means that explosive plays are critical to scoring because that’s the main driver to having a high yards per play average. So with Kadarius Toney (17 explosives), Kyle Pitts (15) and Trevon Grimes (10) moving on, where are those plays going to come from?
Year-to-year explosiveness
I was on the Kadarius Toney train early on in his Gators career.
You could see how explosive he was, but it wasn’t until I started looking at his statistics that it became clear how explosive. Toney was injured for much of 2019 and so only had 13 targets and 10 catches. But out of those 13 targets, he had 3 explosive (20+ yard) plays (23%).
In 2020, Toney was pretty much the same player in regards to explosiveness, with an explosive per target percentage of 20 percent. The difference is that he was targeted 86 times, which meant that his 17 explosives were a significant part of the offense.
Even more significant though, Toney had a catch per target ratio of 77 percent in 2019 and then 81 percent in 2020. I think this suggests that Toney was open often and the QB wasn’t having to squeeze the ball into tight spots where it could be knocked away.
The same analysis shows a similar trend for Kyle Pitts, who had a catch per target ratio of 68 percent in 2019 and 66 percent in 2020. The difference is that Pitts was more explosive (20% explosive per target in 2020 vs. 11% in 2019). I think this says more about how Pitts was being used in the offense in 2019 than his abilities.
This kind of analysis is what gave me a clue last offseason that Toney, Pitts and Grimes would be able to step in for Swain, Cleveland, Hammond and Jefferson. Those guys had been just as explosive and were getting just as open as their predecessors.
At that point, especially for Toney, it was just a question of health.
What about 2021?
So that naturally begs the question, what about the receivers Florida has coming back in 2021?
Explosive and catches per target in 2020 for Pitts, Toney and Grimes vs. everyone else. (Will Miles/Read and Reaction)
At first glance, it actually doesn’t look too bad. Yes, the Gators coming back are less explosive than Toney, Pitts and Grimes, but that should probably be expected since those guys were special. But in the important catch per target metric, the 2021 Gators look to be roughly equivalent; i.e. they’re going to get open.
But that might be a little bit misleading. A huge part of the “everyone else” column is attributable to the running backs (78 targets, 66 catches, 11 explosives). Without the backs, Florida’s receivers had only a 59 percent catch per target ratio and still just a 13 percent explosive per target ratio.
But Florida is expecting to get much more production at running back from players like Demarkcus Bowman and Lorenzo Lingard. If those two can’t replicate the success of Dameon Pierce, Malik Davis and Nay’Quan Wright in the passing game, having a more explosive running game may not be a net gain for the Gators.
The numbers at the receiver and tight end positions were pretty surprising, at least to me. Kemore Gamble (10 catches on 24 targets), Jacob Copeland (23 catches on 40 targets) and Xzavier Henderson (8 catches on 18 targets) all were well below what I was expecting. That’s a problem considering Gamble is likely to receive a lot of time as the starting tight end and Copeland and Henderson are two of the main candidates to be big parts of the offense at receiver.
Five-star transfer Justin Shorter did have 25 catches on 39 targets (64%), but only 5 percent of those catches were for explosive plays. While some of this is attributable to how he was used, I think this does suggest that expecting Shorter to be more than a possession receiver might be misguided.
The guys who measure out well with these metrics are Keon Zipperer (11 catches on 15 targets), Trent Whittemore (10 catches on 12 targets) and Rick Wells (11 catches on 16 targets). Those aren’t the names you likely expect to be the leaders in 2021, but they may well be the guys who carry the load. Whittemore, in particular, turned 3 of his 10 catches into explosive plays, a ratio very similar to Kadarius Toney in 2019 when he also was injured.
The point is that this suggests that when Whittemore was in the game, he was getting open. Maybe that changes when the defense doesn’t have to key on Toney and Pitts, but I think it may suggest that Whittemore is the break-out candidate for 2021.
Takeaway
None of this is to say that another one of the young receivers won’t step up in a way that these statistics don’t suggest.
But I do think it would be naïve to ignore the fact that Gamble’s and Zipperer’s numbers are so different, or that the inconsistency we all see with Jacob Copeland may not go away (58% catch per target in 2020, 54% in 2019).
Fortunately, Copeland still has the ability to convert that relatively low catch rate into explosives (14% explosive per target in 2019 and 20% in 2020). And if he can raise his catch per target ratio up into the mid-60’s, he’s going to be a real problem for opposing defenses this season.
What I do think this data suggests is that Florida shouldn’t rely on major steps forward from multiple players. Expecting a giant jump in explosives for Shorter and a massive jump in consistency for Henderson is probably an unsuccessful strategy.
Instead, leaning on guys like Whittemore and continuing to incorporate the running backs into the mix is going to be the way to keep the passing game moving the ball consistently. Adding Emory Jones’ running ability to the mix is going to help Florida keep its yards per play average up fairly high.
Dan Mullen has a well-deserved reputation for having an offense that can move the ball regardless of the personnel. The Gators lost four NFL-quality receivers after 2019 and the offense got better. There weren’t a lot of people who saw Toney coming in 2020, at least not to become a first round NFL Draft pick. And certainly a lot of people didn’t see Freddie Swain progressing like he did from 2018 to 2019.
Mullen deserves the benefit of the doubt, and I think he’ll have these guys ready to go.
But this is a very different level of turnover at wide receiver than the one that occurred last season.
Happy Independence Day
Recently, I’ve been trying to take a few minutes every holiday to read a little bit more about that particular holiday.
So yesterday, I read something new (to me) about the Declaration of Independence. It turns out that the Declaration was not referenced much early on after the Revolutionary War. It was seen as a document that proclaimed America’s independence but not a seminal piece of literature.
Perhaps that’s because it just wasn’t seen that way. But perhaps it was because those people who wanted to keep slavery recognized that they could not rely on its principles to win that argument, and so it was easier not to reference it than to deal with the cognitive dissonance of having to defend views that did not align with its clear moral guidance.
Indeed, the Declaration was instrumental in ending American slavery and helping build equal rights under the law for everyone. Lincoln referenced it in a foundation-changing way in his Gettysburg Address in 1863. Frederick Douglass’ famous “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July” speech in 1852 addressed how the Fourth of July was not his because the Declaration had not been applied to him or his people. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke of the Constitution and the Declaration in his “I have a dream” speech as a promissory note to which every American was heir, but that had been withheld from Black people.
These speeches brought forth the moral indignation of good people of all races who demanded change because the principles behind the words of Lincoln, Douglass and King, Jr. are convicting. They draw on the ideals of the Declaration in a way that makes it clear to any person who opposes those words that they are in the moral wrong.
That’s why I worry when organizations like the New York Times suggest that the American flag is now a divisive symbol. That suggests that the Times believes that the undergirding principles of the nation are immoral rather than just the people empowered to apply them.
The problem with that is that institutions are always going to be comprised of individuals with varying morality, many of whom will apply their power to harm others. But it is the very existence of those founding principles that prevents that immorality from morphing into tyranny.
I’m not sure how you can read these words, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” and not appreciate their power.
My in-laws certainly appreciate them, as they immigrated here from Hong Kong in the 1970s and have now seen many western freedoms curtailed in Hong Kong as the Chinese regime has been more aggressive. Even as the instances of anti-Asian crimes goes up here at home, the value of living in a free society is clear.
That doesn’t mean this country is perfect. It doesn’t mean racism is non-existent or that everything is going to be fair in your – or my – life.
But it does mean something that my wife’s family wouldn’t go back to Hong Kong if given the choice. It does mean something that we met in college at UF while her mother and father worked blue collar jobs to fund her education. And it definitely means something that our kids are part of a new generation of children coming from 15 percent of all new marriages in the U.S. that are between spouses of a different race or ethnicity.
Good people can disagree about potential remedies or how to better live out the principles of the Declaration. But if we’re going to find common ground, we have to find it in those principles and then convince others that those provide a God-inspired framework by which we should live.
If not for us, then maybe for the Uyghurs.
Erik Wells
I think with the addition of these excellent transfer portal running backs to the older running backs, Emory Jones also has potential to provide some explosive plays from the QB position.
The Flag is divisive because it’s a symbol that Trump supporters have gravitated to, and therefore pundits from NYT and CNN have deemed it divisive. I’m embarrassed by the anti patriotic flavor of some of our representatives comments during Independence Day. I agree with your comments about the US being flawed, but getting better.
John Gibbons
Will:
More great insights! As I watch lots of tape from the 2 previous seasons your data insights re: Henderson, Shorter and Copeland you can see their inconsistencies and limitations; whereas Whittemore may in fact be huge moving forward. He had a number of highlight catches last year, especially the grab vs South Carolina in between 2 DB’s. The backs, particularly Wright and Davis ran wheel routes that tuned into major plays. I believe Bowman can do likewise but I’m unconvinced Linguard can do that. Hopefully both can.
The other factor in big plays is how accurate Trask was with the ball. Pitts TD vs. Ole Miss at the flag was a 20+ yard throw on the money. While EJ will be alright I’m not convinced we’ll see that type of accuracy again anytime soon. Although EJ might have to be if his elusiveness converts into big plays with his legs.
You hit the nail on the head when you said CDM is incredible at assessment of his talent and adjusting the play book accordingly. My confidence in that fact gives me the hope for this group. He will put them in position to make plays, and then he as specking order of who gets those plays. He already has some ideas after spring, and by the end of the Bama game will be fine tuning it for the remainder of the season.
LAstly, appreciated your comments regarding the DOI! Powerful insights and perspective. On one hand the country is divided, on the other hand the majority of Americans want this to stop and know how to treat one another with respect and dignity even during disagreements.
All the best!
John Ilowiecki
Appreciated your comments regarding the Declaration of Independence. Human history has seen a slow and sometimes halting move towards justice for all. We often forget the atrocities committed over the centuries and forget the progress that has been made.
The abolitionist Theodore Parker (in an 1853 sermon) said, “I do not pretend to understand the moral universe. The arc is a long one. My eye reaches but little ways. I cannot calculate the curve and complete the figure by experience of sight. I can divine it by conscience. And from what I see I am sure it bends toward justice.”
Still, backlash from the aggrieved will continue. They see the culture of acceptance from our youth as a threat to their way of life.
I’ve never understood why some nations desire authoritarian rulers. Thankfully, that train of thought does not carry the day here. Whenever an authoritarian movement rears its ugly head, it ultimately is rejected. We can thank our founding fathers and wide diversity of citizens for that.
OaklandGator
Will, I’m sorry but I feel compelled to add to your closing thoughts here a bit (and full disclosure, I’m speaking as someone who grew up poor, Black and in the American South).
“These speeches brought forth the moral indignation of good people of all races who demanded change because the principles behind the words of Lincoln, Douglass and King, Jr. are convicting. They draw on the ideals of the Declaration in a way that makes it clear to any person who opposes those words that they are in the moral wrong.”
These speeches were great, yes. But the “moral indignation of good people of all races” wasn’t brought forth by words alone, they were brought forth by a LOT of people fighting and dying in the struggle for equal rights, for the fulfillment of the promises of this country’s earliest documents (You sighting Douglass is right on the money, he was angry as hell and very much in the right in that speech).
“I’m not sure how you can read these words, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” and not appreciate their power.”
The 3/5ths comprise is pretty damning and follows that lofty rhetoric a decade later and predates Lincoln’s address by damn near 70 plus years (with the institution of slavery running throughout). As a Black person who’s lived their entire life in this country, the power of those words rings hollow at best for the country’s failure to meet them despite (I agree with you) their fundamental beauty and clear promise. Like with all these things, I read “with certain unalienable rights” and ask myself, “For whom?” In this country, at the time of their writing, not for people of color nor women (suffrage doesn’t come to fruition for another 100+ years).
“My in-laws certainly appreciate them, as they immigrated here from Hong Kong in the 1970s and have now seen many western freedoms curtailed in Hong Kong as the Chinese regime has been more aggressive. Even as the instances of anti-Asian crimes goes up here at home, the value of living in a free society is clear.”
This last bit. Running from the Declaration of 1776 to the Civil Rights Act of 1965, Black (and other, but primarily Black activists) are CONSTANTLY fighting to make the promise of the Declaration and the Emancipation Proclamation a reality (Southerner’s posit that the Civil War wasn’t about slavery and they’re right in that for the Union, the war indeed was NOT about slavery, not at its outset). In short, the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s, spearheaded by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the long-fought efforts of African Americans, led to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, outlawing discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or NATIONAL ORIGIN. Those last two words were included in the legislation deliberately and purposefully. Subsequently, immigration laws based on national origin came under serious review. The passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 (Hart-Celler Act) completely removed the quota system that had been put in place from the late 1800s following the Chinese building of the railroad to 1965.
Prior to ’65 your wife’s parents would have had an INCREDIBLY difficult time immigrating into this country; there is a reason Asian immigration into this country spikes in the period of your wife’s parents’ immigration. And that spike is tied directly to the failed promise and discriminating power of the words in the Declaration, in the Constitution. It’s not that folks aren’t proud of this country or the foresight of its founding fathers. It’s that to accurately access them we must acknowledge all aspects; the Declaration is incomplete without the struggle of the people to ensure the fulfillment of its promises (and acknowledging the failure of this nation’s leaders to do so is baked into that promise and is why some folks feel a blind celebration of these documents is a shirking of history).
I want to come back to your wife’s parents and the situation in Hong Kong (full disclosure, I’m writing from there right now, my partner is Chinese and I’m here visiting her and thus this post in particular sparked my first comment here, longtime lurker). The situation here is fraught, yes. But even with the Declaration in place and the Emancipation Proclamation in place, the US was HELL for Black folks heading into the 20th Century. The very same document you sight above was IN place and yet this country was hell and there was a quota preventing people like your wife’s family from entering. Blacks could not flee, and so we worked like hell (alongside a whole coalition of folks including White folks who, as you rightly state, felt morally compelled to action), to make this country live up to its ideals by fighting for legislation to amend, to better, to hold to task the documents you sight. And we did not do so for our sole benefit, it was to benefit the nation as a whole, which is why that NATIONAL ORIGIN was deliberately included.
When people speak critically of documents like the Declaration and the National Anthem, who’s third stanza we never sing because it includes the word “slaves” in it (“No refuge could save the hireling and slave/From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave”) at times like this, it’s with that history in mind, a history rooted in fact. This is the way we can raise a generation of citizens who will see redlining and gerrymandering and disproportionate sentencing and voting rights restrictions (the list goes on and on and on) and recognize these things for what they are, not what we are being deceived to believe them to be. Because if the Declaration and the Constitution had as many holes in them as they did then, without the complications of a technologically advanced and global society, how on earth can we expect there to not be enormous problems baked into governance and the willful manipulation of doctrines now?
I come in peace and mean no harm. I’ve been listening to you and Dave for a good long while and love what you do. You both do a great job of keeping politics out of things and speaking exclusively to what unites us, Gator Football. But this felt like an opening. And I would be remiss to not provide my perspective. Having seen you apply your thinking in very fair and measured ways when it comes to Mullen, the program, recruiting and development, this felt like a chance to throw some data at you from a different perspective in the same spirit and energy as those sports endeavors.
Will Miles
Appreciate your perspective. We all come with our own experiences that color the way in which we see the world and mind is certainly devoid of many of the experiences in your and your family’s history. I have no doubt that it has been incredibly difficult to be a minority in the US and particularly Black. Douglass being angry was absolutely justified, but my point was that the justification comes from the fact that the document’s words weren’t being lived out by an extremely flawed society. If the words don’t mean anything, then he had nothing to appeal to.
Today’s society is still extremely flawed, but I hope less so than back in Civil War times and less so than in the 1960s. It’s not perfect. Neither am I. Hopefully my kids will be more perfect than I am and theirs more perfect than them.
Steve Schweiger
Will:
Great stuff! Poor Doug, he really had no clue. Let’s hope dan can find those explosive.
Thanks so much for the Independence Day commentary it meant a lot and was spot on,