Statistically speaking:

[aubiefifty 18,248]

Statistically speaking: Auburn leads nation in critical offensive area

Published: Sep. 12, 2022, 7:05 a.m.

11-14 minutes

---

For all the troubles and inconsistencies Auburn’s offense has shown through its first two games this season, there’s one area in particular the Tigers have excelled at.

In fact, they’ve been the best in the nation in one critical aspect so far this season: red-zone conversions.

Auburn has scored on all eight of its trips inside opponents’ 20-yard lines this season, making Bryan Harsin’s team one of 36 FBS programs to have a 100 percent conversion rate in the red zone this fall. While that’s a considerable group of teams capitalizing on their trips inside the 20 -- with five other SEC teams among that cluster, including Vanderbilt (13-of-13), Tennessee (11-of-11), Alabama (10-of-10), Florida (4-of-4) and Texas A&M (1-of-1) -- Auburn is just one of six FBS teams that has scored a touchdown on each of its red-zone possessions through Week 2.

Read more Auburn football: Auburn opens as home underdog against No. 22 Penn State

Auburn defense feeling “antsy” after failing to force a turnover through two games

Grading Auburn’s 24-16 win against San Jose State

Auburn remained perfect in that regard thanks to three red-zone touchdowns in as many opportunities Saturday against San Jose State. It was far from a pretty win for the Tigers, who trailed at halftime before taking control in the second half, but they made the most of their opportunities against the Spartans. Jarquez Hunter, Tank Bigsby and T.J. Finley all punched in touchdowns inside the red zone to help Auburn survive an upset-filled Saturday across the sport.

The only other FBS team to boast a perfect red-zone touchdown rate with as many chances as Auburn this fall is Eastern Michigan, which has also gone 8-for-8 in finding the end zone from inside the 20-yard line. Among SEC teams, Florida and Texas A&M are the only others to score touchdowns on all of their red-zone trips, though the Gators have only had half as many opportunities as Auburn, going 4-for-4, and the Aggies have only one red-zone trip this season.

Here’s a look at how Auburn stacks up in that area and several other statistical categories, both in the SEC and among FBS teams, entering Week 3:

----

RUSHING OFFENSE (SEC rank, FBS rank)

2013: 328.3 (1st, 1st)

2014: 255.5 (2nd, 13th)

2015: 196.4 (5th, 35th)

2016: 271.3 (1st, 6th)

2017: 218.3 (4th, 26th)

2018: 167.5 (10th, 68th)

2019: 199.1 (4th, 33rd)

2020: 162.5 (7th, 67th)

2021: 161.5 (9th, 66th)

After Mercer: 285.0 (3rd, 14th)

After San Jose State: 247.5 (3rd, 14th)

Why: Auburn ran for 210 yards and three touchdowns against SJSU.

.

PASSING OFFENSE

2013: 173.0 (11th, 106th)

2014: 229.5 (7th, 66th)

2015: 173.6 (12th, 110th)

2016: 169.5 (14th, 112th)

2017: 233.4 (5th, 65th)

2018: 222.5 (9th, 74th)

2019: 207.5 (9th, 87th)

2020: 220.3 (10th, 71st)

2021: 240.0 (8th, 59th)

After Mercer: 212.0 (11th, 84th)

After San Jose State: 190.0 (12th, 103rd)

Why: T.J. Finley and Robby Ashford combined for 168 yards.

.

PASS EFFICIENCY OFFENSE

2013: 149.63 (6th, 24th)

2014: 156.79 (1st, 8th)

2015: 124.47 (10th, 79th)

2016: 135.17 (6th, 54th)

2017: 153.59 (5th, 13th)

2018: 140.11 (8th, 51st)

2019: 128.35 (9th, 89th)

2020: 122.96 (11th, 89th)

2021: 126.85 (12th, 94th)

After Mercer: 143.37 (9th, 61st)

After San Jose State: 123.23 (12th, 94th)

Why: Auburn’s quarterbacks completed 14-of-23 passes for 168 yards and two interceptions.

.

TOTAL OFFENSE

2013: 501.3 (2nd, 11th)

2014: 485.0 (2nd, 16th)

2015: 370.0 (10th, 94th)

2016: 440.8 (6th, 43rd)

2017: 451.6 (3rd, 26th)

2018: 389.9 (11th, 78th)

2019: 406.5 (6th, 64th)

2020: 382.8 (9th, 77th)

2021: 401.5 (10th, 67th)

After Mercer: 497.0 (7th, 49th)

After San Jose State: 437.5 (9th, 57th)

Why: Auburn had 378 yards of offense against SJSU.

.

SCORING OFFENSE

2013: 39.5 (2nd, 12th)

2014: 35.5 (4th, 35th)

2015: 27.5 (8th, 75th)

2016: 31.2 (6th, 49th)

2017: 33.9 (4th, 27th)

2018: 30.9 (8th, 47th)

2019: 33.2 (3rd, 28th)

2020: 25.1 (9th, 89th)

2021: 27.8 (11th, 71st)

After Mercer: 33.0 (9th, 67th)

Why: Auburn scored 24 points in Week 2.

.

SACKS ALLOWED

2013: 18 sacks, 1.29 per game (3rd, 22nd)

2014: 15 sacks, 1.15 per game (3rd, 15th)

2015: 19 sacks, 1.46 per game (4th, 33rd)

2016: 19 sacks, 1.46 per game (3rd, 27th)

2017: 36 sacks, 2.57 per game (10th, 100th)

2018: 23 sacks, 1.77 per game (6th, 39th)

2019: 18 sacks, 1.38 per game (4th, 18th)

2020: 20 sacks, 1.82 per game (6th, 41st)

2021: 22 sacks, 1.69 per game (5th, 31st)

After Mercer: 0 sacks, 0.00 per game (1st, 1st)

After San Jose State: 1 sack, 0.50 per game (2nd, 12th)

Why: Auburn allowed one sack against SJSU.

.

THIRD-DOWN CONVERSIONS

2013: 46.5 percent (4th, 24th)

2014: 52.5 percent (1st, 2nd)

2015: 41.3 percent (6th, 49th)

2016: 41.8 percent (4th, 53rd)

2017: 45.5 percent (3rd, 15th)

2018: 36.9 percent (11th, 90th)

2019: 40.5 percent (6th, 60th)

2020: 44.9 percent (6th, 32nd)

2021: 40.2 percent (8th, 61st)

After Mercer: 50.0 percent (7th, 40th)

After San Jose State: 42.1 percent (8th, 57th)

Why: Auburn converted four of its 11 third-down attempts in Week 2.

.

RED ZONE OFFENSE

2013: 88.5 percent (2nd, 21st)

2014: 87.9 percent (4th, 31st)

2015: 90.2 percent (2nd, 13th)

2016: 85.5 percent (5th, 52nd)

2017: 88.1 percent (6th, 36th)

2018: 81.1 percent (11th, 88th)

2019: 90.4 percent (3rd, 21st)

2020: 85.0 percent (6th, 50th)

2021: 84.8 percent (7th, 55th)

After Mercer: 100.0 percent (1st, 1st)

After San Jose State: 100.0 percent (1st, 1st)

Why: Auburn was 3-of-3 in the red zone with three touchdowns against SJSU.

RUSHING DEFENSE

2013: 162.1 (10th, 62nd)

2014: 168.8 (10th, 67th)

2015: 182.7 (11th, 81st)

2016: 132.8 (3rd, 27th)

2017: 137.0 (5th, 35th)

2018: 135.9 (6th, 32nd)

2019: 123.2 (4th, 25th)

2020: 163.4 (8th, 62nd)

2021: 128.1 (5th, 29th)

After Mercer: 74.0 (3rd, 25th)

After San Jose State: 64.0 (1st, 10th)

Why: Auburn held San Jose State to 54 yards rushing and just 1.9 yards per carry.

.

PASSING DEFENSE

2013: 258.6 (13th, 100th)

2014: 230.1 (12th, 68th)

2015: 222.5 (11th, 63rd)

2016: 229.2 (9th, 67th)

2017: 182.4 (5th, 18th)

2018: 219.5 (7th, 58th)

2019: 213.8 (8th, 47th)

2020: 242.6 (4th, 79th)

2021: 245.8 (12th, 96th)

After Mercer: 197.0 (7th, 56th)

After San Jose State: 236.0 (11th, 83rd)

Why: Auburn allowed 275 yards through the air against SJSU.

.

PASS EFFICIENCY DEFENSE

2013: 126.88 (9th, 63rd)

2014: 124.19 (10th, 52nd)

2015: 116.99 (8th, 31st)

2016: 116.83 (4th, 22nd)

2017: 113.84 (4th, 19th)

2018: 118.12 (6th, 31st)

2019: 120.71 (9th, 32nd)

2020: 139.34 (7th, 75th)

2021: 136.73 (9th, 75th)

After Mercer: 122.63 (9th, 66th)

After San Jose State: 120.06 (10th, 63rd)

Why: SJSU’s Chevan Cordeiro completed 24-of-40 passes for 275 yards.

.

TOTAL DEFENSE

2013: 420.7 (12th, 86th)

2014: 398.8 (9th, 64th)

2015: 405.2 (13th, 71st)

2016: 361.9 (5th, 28th)

2017: 319.4 (5th, 14th)

2018: 355.4 (8th, 38th)

2019: 337.0 (7th, 28th)

2020: 406.0 (6th, 63rd)

2021: 373.8 (9th, 61st)

After Mercer: 271.0 (3rd, 35th)

After San Jose State: 300.0 (6th, 40th)

Why: Auburn allowed 329 yards of total offense against SJSU.

.

SCORING DEFENSE

2013: 24.7 (9th, 48th)

2014: 26.7 (10th, 62nd)

2015: 26.0 (11th, 54th)

2016: 17.1 (4th, 7th)

2017: 18.5 (3rd, 12th)

2018: 19.2 (4th, 14th)

2019: 19.5 (6th, 17th)

2020: 24.7 (4th, 38th)

2021: 21.8 (5th, 27th)

After Mercer: 16.0 (8th, 48th)

After San Jose State: 16.0 (6th, 42nd)

Why: Auburn allowed 16 points in Week 2.

.

SACKS

2013: 32 sacks, 2.29 per game (4th, 46th)

2014: 21 sacks, 1.62 per game (11th, 95th)

2015: 19 sacks, 1.46 per game (13th, 104th)

2016: 25 sacks, 1.92 per game (8th, 75th)

2017: 37 sacks, 2.64 per game (5th, 25th)

2018: 38, 2.92 per game (3rd, 16th)

2019: 28 sacks, 2.15 per game (9th, 64th)

2020: 26 sacks, 2.36 per game (6th, 53rd)

2021: 35, 2.69 per game (7th, 40th)

After Mercer: 1 sack, 1.00 per game (7th, 71st)

After San Jose State: 4 sacks, 2.00 per game (3rd, 61st)

Why: Auburn had three sacks against SJSU.

THIRD-DOWN DEFENSE

2013: 33.0 percent (1st, 13th)

2014: 36.0 percent (4th, 29th)

2015: 44.9 percent (13th, 109th)

2016: 34.8 percent (4th, 25th)

2017: 32.9 percent (3rd, 20th)

2018: 34.7 percent (6th, 30th)

2019: 29.9 percent (2nd, 8th)

2020: 50.3 percent (14th, 121st)

2021: 35.8 percent (7th, 37th)

After Mercer: 44.4 percent (10th, 92nd)

After San Jose State: 38.7 percent (10th, 87th)

Why: SJSU converted 4-of-13 third-down tries against Auburn.

.

RED ZONE DEFENSE

2013: 73.1 percent (2nd, 10th)

2014: 74.1 percent (4th, 13th)

2015: 75.5 percent (5th, 15th)

2016: 74.4 percent (3rd, 11th)

2017: 83.3 percent (6th, 64th)

2018: 82.9 percent (9th, 64th)

2019: 71.8 percent (2nd, 8th)

2020: 76.3 percent (3rd, 27th)

2021: 81.6 percent (6th, 58th)

After Mercer: 100.0 percent (8th, 78th)

After San Jose State: 87.5 percent (12th, 83rd)

Why: San Jose State scored on four of its five red-zone trips, with one touchdown and three field goals.

.

NET PUNTING

2013: 40.54 (2nd, 9th)

2014: 37.44 (12th, 67th)

2015: 37.58 (7th, 54th)

2016: 39.90 (5th, 21st)

2017: 35.61 (14th, 115th)

2018: 41.91 (2nd, 5th)

2019: 38.50 (9th, 63rd)

2020: 38.70 (9th, 64th)

2021: 41.79 (3rd, 20th)

After Mercer: 29.00 (11th, 111th)

After San Jose State: 39.75 (8th, 66th)

Why: Auburn’s Oscar Chapman averaged 43.3 net yards on three punts in Week 2.

.

KICK RETURNS

2013: 23.40 (5th, 27th)

2014: 20.03 (11th, 82nd)

2015: 27.94 (2nd, 4th)

2016: 19.04 (12th, 100th)

2017: 23.22 (3rd, 25th)

2018: 21.52 (6th, 48th)

2019: 20.50 (7th, 67th)

2020: 21.96 (6th, 43rd)

2021: 23.88 (6th, 25th)

After Mercer: 7.67 (12th, 108th)

After San Jose State: 5.20 (14th, 127th)

Why: Auburn had two kickoff returns totaling 3 yards.

.

KICK RETURN DEFENSE

2013: 25.79 (14th, 121st)

2014: 21.73 (9th, 84th)

2015: 21.17 (12th, 61st)

2016: 18.00 (1st, 13th)

2017: 27.20 (14th, 129th)

2018: 19.44 (3rd, 39th)

2019: 22.30 (11th, 96th)

2020: 26.67 (13th, 121st)

2021: 17.36 (3rd, 15th)

After Mercer: 13.00 (8th, 35th)

After San Jose State: 13.67 (4th, 20th)

Why: Auburn allowed one 15-yard kick return against SJSU.

.

PUNT RETURNS

2013: 11.78 (2nd, 22nd)

2014: 17.82 yards per return (1st, 4th)

2015: 11.93 yards per return (7th, 28th)

2016: 10.69 (5th, 24th)

2017: 8.52 (8th, 51st)

2018: 10.75 (6th, 39th)

2019: 12.83 (4th, 18th)

2020: 9.11 (6th, 44th)

2021: 8.30 (7th, 60th)

After Mercer: 9.00 (3rd, 35th)

After San Jose State: 11.17 (4th, 33rd)

Why: Keionte Scott had one 22-yard punt return against SJSU.

.

PUNT RETURN DEFENSE

2013: 7.0 (8th, 51st)

2014: 7.79 (10th, 72nd)

2015: 12.43 (11th, 110th)

2016: 3.17 (1st, 8th)

2017: 11.43 (14th, 108th)

2018: 3.36 (3rd, 9th)

2019: 17.29 (14th, 130th)

2020: 2.75 (3rd, 17th)

2021: 4.12 (2nd, 23rd)

After Mercer: 0.00 (1st, 12th)

After San Jose State: 0.00 (1st, 13th)

Why: Auburn has not allowed a punt return through two games.

.

TURNOVER MARGIN

2013: even, 0.0 per game (9th, 61st)

2014: plus-seven, 0.54 per game (4th, 27th)

2015: plus-two, 0.15 per game (8th, 51st)

2016: plus-three, plus-0.23 per game (6th, 42nd)

2017: minus-one, 0.07 per game (7th, 71st)

2018: plus-nine, 0.69 (3rd, 16th)

2019: plus-six, 0.46 per game (3rd, 27th)

2020: plus-four, 0.36 per game (6th, 38th)

2021: plus-one, 0.08 per game (8th, 64th)

After Mercer: minus-two, minus-2.00 per game (13th, 106th)

After San Jose State: minus-four, minus-2.00 per game (14th, 121st)

Why: Auburn threw two first-quarter interceptions against SJSU.

.

PENALTY YARDS PER GAME

2013: 40.64 (7th 30th)

2014: 68.92 (14th, 112th)

2015: 46.38 (7th, 34th)

2016: 36.54 (1st, 6th)

2017: 38.36 (2nd, 13th)

2018: 56.69 (9th, 75th)

2019: 55.23 (10th, 74th)

2020: 49.82 (7th, 56th)

2021: 46.38 (6th, 44th)

After Mercer: 20.00 (2nd, 5th)

After San Jose State: 52.50 (7th, 53rd)

Why: Auburn committed nine penalties totaling 86 yards in its Week 2 win.

Tom Green is an Auburn beat reporter for Alabama Media Group. Follow him on Twitter @Tomas_Verde.