\n
I walked into the bar right at the end of that series of 7\u2019s at the end of the first half. It looks like Keelon and the offense had been able to rack up scores without really having to put that many good plays together: putting up 28 points from only 13 successful plays<\/strong> in the first half is huge, at over 2 points per successful play! That\u2019s not a metric I track closely \u2014 it\u2019s something like the Explosiveness Index, which is weirdly not loaded in this game\u2019s data this week \u2014 but you\u2019ll have to believe me that it\u2019s remarkable.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
The other good \u201cI skipped the game; how\u2019d it go?\u201d chart is the Play Map. And, similar to the Play Maps in the relative shootout against FSU last week, it was a spiky one: that 75-yarder to Lotzier Brooks in the 1st quarter was not only the longest play for the Tide this season<\/strong>, it was also the beginning of a delightful trend in this game.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
Keelon connected with receivers on long shots six more times in this game, plus we put up 3 more explosive rushes. And really, we hardly saw many \u201cnon-explosive successful plays\u201d until the 4th quarter, when burning clock became more important than scoring.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n
Another metric we haven\u2019t talked about this season: that \u201cAverage Extra Yards\u201d dotted line here. It\u2019s an odd bird, but tries to support Success\/Efficiency metrics by asking, \u201cwell, how successful <\/em>were the plays exactly?\u201d And they were very successful in this one, with lots of extra yards gained in that first half. Things drifted during the 2nd half \u2014 a mum 3rd quarter, plus a 4th quarter clock drain \u2014 but by then the extra yards had already basically decided the game.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
But yes, you\u2019re right, it wasn\u2019t perfect<\/em>. I\u2019d love to say this was \u201cTua vs. Vanderbilt 2018\u201d all over again, but the Tide is still a work in progress.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
Because, yeah the offense still isn\u2019t coming out the gate at a run. That\u2019s another 3-and-out, at home no less, where Grubb had a \u201cplan A\u201d and it didn\u2019t pan out again. For what it\u2019s worth, \u201cplan A\u201d this time was to Run the Dang Ball, which should make the Gumps around here happy even in failure \u2026 right? Right!?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
Anyway, Grubb (2026 edition) does <\/em>seem to have a good \u201cPlan B\u201d each game, and this time, it was \u201clet the budding star quarterback Throw the Dang Ball.\u201d<\/strong> So, we get a 1-shot touchdown, then drives of 9, 6, and 5 plays, all with above average SRs and strong Explosiveness. Pawwwl the coach made the Tide a dang Air Raid offense Pawl<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
The Gamecocks did start to sniff out \u201cPlan B\u201d at some point, and you can see some less-than-inspiring drives that followed, but a few long drives towards the end of the game put us back on track.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n
And you can see the same effect in the SR\/XR line chart: Alabama started off dead as a doorknob before soaring into a ~50-60% (high) SR range for the rest of the first half. Things got sleepy in the 3rd \u2014 we can\u2019t have everything we desire, I suppose \u2014 before rounding out in the 4th quarter.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n
To South Carolina\u2019s credit, they were pretty steady! And by \u201cpretty steady,\u201d I mean \u201csteadily below average in both major metrics\u201d and the decisive losers of this football game. Cluck cluck.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n
Sure, we\u2019d love to see more out of the running game: 10% XR is actually really solid for rushing explosiveness \u2014 we don\u2019t break down Run vs. Pass here, we just call \u2019em explosive if it\u2019s a 15-yard play \u2014 but that <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n
But when you\u2019ve got a passing line that looks like this, it\u2019s hard to complain too much: we nearly doubled up South Carolina in Passing Efficiency<\/strong> and outperformed \u2019em on the ground too. Those are easy wins in a game that we weren\u2019t expecting to be a cakewalk.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
You know, at the end of the day Keelon only threw the ball 27 times. It\u2019s not nothing<\/em>, but for a game where we had to lean on the Passing game, he made quick work of it, with a 59% Passing SR<\/strong> (not including the 2 sacks) and 26% Passing XR<\/strong>, which is flirting with the \u201cTua Zone.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
(LaNorris Sellers and the Gamecocks\u2019 passing game was pretty ghastly, with an INT as the cherry on top. Let\u2019s not dwell on it, it stinks in here.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
And, listen, this is not my favorite chart coming out of this game, given all these unsuccessful rushes. I mean, Daniel Hill, where\u2019s our efficiency gone, my friend? And you younger backs: did we not have the juice today? (It\u2019s the gameplan, the OL, the predictability, yada yada).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n
But Keelon\u2019s rushing line <\/em>still counts, folks. And that\u2019s 4\/5 successful rushes<\/strong> for him (80% Rushing SR), with an explosive one in there to keep things spunky.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
Kevin Riley got an attempt in there as well \u2014 along with 2 receiving <\/em>attempts; interesting! \u2014 and we got to see A.K. Dear on the football field in Crimson for the first time in 2026.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n