Chris Cosh: Should He Stay Or Should He Go? Measuring His Progess Over Three Years

Much anger has been exerted on this site for the perceived lack of progress that has been the trademark of the Chris Cosh Defense. This year, however, after winning ten games (with several key late-game defensive heroics) the narrative has emerged that Cosh has seriously improved this defense from a year ago. So, the question is begged, which is the correct viewpoint? The only way to know for sure is by comparing the numbers from every year.

	Overall Defense
Year	YPG	Rank	Passing	Rank	Rushing	Rank	Total	YPP
2011	398.80	76	3207	104	1578	39	4785	5.66
2010	445.69	106	2786	52	3008	119	5795	6.40
2009	339.92	39	2815	83	1265	16	4079	5.40

Initially, based solely off the overall yardage numbers, you would have to say that yes, Cosh has improved the defense. A closer examination, though, reveals that while Cosh has improved the rushing defense from an abysmal 119 ranking and 3008 yards, his passing numbers declined from a 52 ranking to 104th and 3207 yards, with one game (Cotton Bowl!) left to play. However, his passing numbers did not increase as much as his rushing numbers decreased (421 yard vs 1430 yards), thereby accounting for the improvement seen in his overall numbers. Furthermore, we have played a much tougher schedule this year, especially in regards to passing teams, so further examination is required based upon his performance against the opposing team's average game totals.

	Difference Per Game
Year	Total Yards*	Passing Yards	Rushing Yards	YPP	3rd Down %**	RZ TD %**	RZ FG %**	Red Zone %**
2011	-40.49	10.17	-50.66	-0.20	-1.74	-2.58	-3.78	-8.99
2010	37.15	-9.73	46.89	1.16	2.96	6.30	-1.85	4.45
2009	-38.73	-13.43	-25.30	-0.06	1.55	1.03	-5.60	-4.57

*To make the comparison more informative, I have excluded the KSU game stats from each team's overall numbers.

**Percentages are measured in percentage points. So, if we held a team to 2.75 below their season average of 30%, we would have held them 27.25%.

Unfortunately for those advocating for Cosh's removal (myself included), these numbers would suggest that this has been the best defense of the Bill Snyder 2.0 era. While the total yards are on par with 2009, 3rd down and Red Zone defense have shown marked improvement. Our only hope of finding statistical proof of decline is to look at other defensive stats, such as INTs and Sacks, which have been remarkably consistent over the years.

	Miscellaneous Defense
Year	Interceptions	Rank	Sacks	Rank
2011	18	T5	19	T83
2010	13	T49	20	T85
2009	13	T30	20	T82

But that consistency is misleading. If you compare those numbers next to the number of plays that were run, you find that this defense has dropped off somewhat in sack production. That could be an indicator that the our ability to pressure the quarterback has declined.

	Per Play Defense
Year	Pass Attempts	Sack %	INT %	Yards Per Pass Attempt	Rush Attempts	Yards Per Rush Attempt	Yards Per Play
2011	447	4.25%5	4.03%	7.17	399	3.95	5.66
2010	400	5.00%	3.25%	6.97	507	5.93	6.40
2009	395	5.06%	3.29%	7.12	362	3.49	5.40

What does all of this mean? Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions, but to me, the numbers show that Cosh, when given the right athletes, can coach against the run. He is really good at stopping the rush in 2/3 years (and historically bad in the other year, but there was a noticeable lack of speed at linebacker).

However, his pass defense has remained consistently weak. The only "good" year he had , 2010, was in retrospect not very good at all and only in comparison to how awful we were against the run. This also seems to fit well with real world events. We now have a Co-Defensive Coordinator in charge of passing. Perhaps that is because Cosh is not that good against the pass? And if you look back on when our defense dropped off after 2003, it also coincided with the rise of the passing offense. I would submit that the reason for that was that Cosh could not come up with a scheme to contain those offenses. I would also submit that he still has not done so.

Except we are forgetting something here. These numbers have been 'deflated' from the weaker non-conference teams. If we only include stats from games against major conference competition, we see a different story.

Difference Per Game							Difference Per Game vs FBS							Difference Per Game vs BCS
Year	Total Yards	Passing Yards	Rushing Yards	YPP			Year	Total Yards	Passing Yards	Rushing Yards	YPP			Year	Total Yards	Passing Yards	Rushing Yards	YPP
2011	-40.49	10.17	-50.66	-0.20			2011	-23.12	13.69	-36.82	-6.57			2011	-19.53	22.09	-41.62	0.12
2010	37.15	-9.73	46.89	1.16			2010	38.28	-16.93	55.21	1.19			2010	37.24	-15.94	53.19	1.19
2009	-38.73	-13.43	-25.30	-0.06			2009	-13.02	1.58	-14.60	0.40			2009	-5.41	6.58	-11.99	0.52

These numbers show us that against the 2009 defense may not have actually been that good, once you remove the two FCS teams and UL-Lafayette from the schedule. Furthermore, Cosh's 2011 defense also weakens considerably when faced with stiffer competition. Only his 2010 defense was a consistent performer; it was bad across the board.

Still, Cosh's 2011 defense is pretty stout against the run. Whether tat is because teams don't bother running against us because they know they can pass, or whether it is simply because Arthur Brown is a beast, we can not say definitively at this point. All we know for sure is that against BCS competition, Cosh's defense has improved by 90 yards against the run, and regressed by 40 yards against the pass.

For anyone interested, here is the raw data set from which I drew these numbers:

2011 Defense
				Total Offense				Offense Per Game					Against KSU					Difference
Opponent	W	L		Total	Passing	Rushing		Total	Passing	Rushing	YPP		Total	Passing	Rushing	YPP		Total	Passing	Rushing	YPP
EKU	7	5		3966	1624	2324		360.55	147.64	212.91	5.45		129	119	10	2.43		-231.55	-28.64	-202.91	-3.02
Kent St.	5	7		2839	1664	1175		258.09	151.27	106.82	3.94		199	81	118	3.37		-59.09	-70.27	11.18	-0.57
@Miami	6	6		4533	2785	1748		412.09	253.18	158.91	6.06		411	272	139	7.09		-1.09	18.82	-19.91	1.03
Baylor	9	3		6426	3928	2498		584.18	357.09	227.09	7.54		429	346	83	6.92		-155.18	-11.09	-144.09	-0.62
Missouri	7	5		5343	2627	2716		485.73	238.82	246.91	6.42		326	214	112	4.94		-159.73	-24.82	-134.91	-1.48
@TT	5	7		5067	3679	1388		460.64	334.45	126.18	5.67		580	461	119	6.04		119.36	126.55	-7.18	0.37
@KU	2	10		3636	1798	1838		330.55	163.45	167.09	4.72		286	210	76	3.92		-44.55	46.55	-91.09	-0.80
Oklahoma	9	3		5695	3861	1834		517.73	351.00	166.73	6.20		690	520	170	9.20		172.27	169.00	3.27	3.00
@OSU	11	1		6109	4133	1976		555.36	375.73	179.64	7.01		575	502	73	9.13		19.64	126.27	-106.64	2.12
aTm	6	6		5482	3245	2237		498.36	295.00	203.36	6.17		482	210	272	5.42		-16.36	-85.00	68.64	-0.75
@Texas	7	5		4538	2204	2334		412.55	200.36	212.18	5.58		310	119	191	4.19		-102.55	-81.36	-21.18	-1.39
ISU	6	6		4346	2387	1959		395.09	217.00	178.09	4.97		368	153	215	4.72		-27.09	-64.00	36.91	-0.25
																AVG		-40.49	10.17	-50.66	-0.20

Some interesting items from this season:

1. We only allowed opponents to gain more than their season average in 3 games this season. We were 1-2 in those games. (TT, OU, OSU)

2. Despite going into 4OT with aTm, we still managed to keep them under their season average in every category (including total yards) except rushing.

2010 Defense
				Total Offense				Offense Per Game					Against KSU					Difference
Opponent	W	L		Total	Passing	Rushing		Total	Passing	Rushing	YPP		Total	Passing	Rushing	YPP		Total	Passing	Rushing	YPP
UCLA	4	8		3487	1573	1914		317	143.00	174.00	4.67		313	120	193	5.00		-4.00	-23.00	19.00	0.33
SW Mizz. State	5	6		4233	2043	2190		423.30	204.30	219.00	4.53		447	281	166	5.30		23.70	76.70	-53.00	0.77
*ISU	5	7		3516	1969	1547		319.64	179.00	140.64	5.94		293	122	171	4.30		-26.64	-57.00	30.36	-1.64
UCF	11	3		4892	2518	2374		376.31	193.69	182.62	5.86		344	92	252	5.00		-32.31	-101.69	69.38	-0.86
Nebraska	10	4		5574	2108	3466		428.77	162.15	266.62	5.70		587	136	451	11.30		158.23	-26.15	184.38	5.60
@KU	3	9		3557	1942	1615		323.36	176.55	146.82	4.33		331	228	103	4.00		7.64	51.54	-43.82	-0.33
@Baylor	7	6		6179	3649	2530		514.92	304.08	210.83	6.40		683	404	279	9.00		168.08	99.92	68.17	2.60
OSU	11	2		6763	4496	2267		563.58	374.67	188.92	6.92		511	298	213	6.70		-52.58	-76.67	24.08	-0.22
Texas	5	7		4590	2784	1806		417.27	253.09	164.18	5.24		412	272	140	4.80		-5.27	18.91	-24.18	-0.44
@Missouri	10	3		5325	3292	2033		443.75	274.33	169.42	5.60		440	208	232	6.90		-3.75	-66.33	62.58	1.30
@Colorado	5	7		4314	2672	1642		392.18	242.91	149.27	4.95		476	225	251	6.80		83.82	-17.91	101.73	1.85
@UNT	3	9		4503	2077	2426		409.36	188.82	220.55	5.32		459	161	298	8.70		49.64	-27.82	77.45	3.38
*Syracuse	8	5		4197	2375	1822		381.55	215.91	165.64	4.97		498	239	259	7.70		116.45	23.09	93.36	2.73
																AVG		37.15	-9.73	46.89	1.16

2009 Defense
				Total Offense				Offense Per Game					Against KSU					Difference
Opponent	W	L		Total	Passing	Rushing		Total	Passing	Rushing	YPP		Total	Passing	Rushing	YPP		Total	Passing	Rushing	YPP
UMASS	5	6		3942	2419	1523		394.20	241.90	152.30	5.59		212	102	110	3.50		-182.20	-139.90	-42.30	-2.09
@UL-Laf.	6	6		4054	2513	1541		368.55	228.45	140.09	5.05		287	185	102	4.40		-81.55	-43.45	-38.09	-0.65
@UCLA	7	6		4027	2710	1317		335.58	225.83	109.75	5.01		359	186	173	6.20		23.42	-39.83	63.25	1.19
Tenn. Tech	6	5		2981	1765	1216		298.10	176.50	121.60	5.04		107	126	-19	2.40		-191.10	-50.50	-140.60	-2.64
*ISU	7	6		4370	2239	2131		364.17	186.58	177.58	5.28		371	164	207	5.50		6.83	-22.58	29.42	0.22
@TT	9	4		5381	4474	907		448.42	372.83	75.58	5.89		739	554	185	9.90		290.58	181.17	109.42	4.01
aTm	6	7		5754	3347	2407		479.50	278.92	200.58	5.92		301	314	-13	4.40		-178.50	35.08	-213.58	-1.52
Colorado	3	9		3528	2533	995		320.73	230.27	90.45	4.47		244	184	60	3.60		-76.73	-46.27	-30.45	-0.87
@Oklahoma	8	5		5052	3466	1586		421.00	288.83	132.17	5.43		458	294	164	6.40		37.00	5.17	31.83	0.98
KU	5	7		4768	3483	1285		433.45	316.64	116.82	5.79		301	241	60	4.70		-132.45	-75.64	-56.82	-1.09
Missouri	8	5		4794	3278	1516		399.50	273.17	126.33	5.68		433	298	135	8.50		33.50	24.83	8.67	2.82
@Nebraska	10	4		4151	2193	1958		319.31	168.69	150.62	5.28		267	166	101	4.20		-52.31	-2.69	-49.62	-1.08
																AVG		-38.73	-13.43	-25.30	-0.06

*game played at "neutral" location

Poll

Has Cosh improved enough, if at all, to merit his continued role as D-coordinator?

20%

Yes

4 votes

40%

No

8 votes

40%

Whatever, Cosh is a putz and needs to go.

8 votes

20 votes | Poll has closed