Each week I put together a unofficial blog poll entry and as an analysis piece I like to look at each team's record against winning and losing FBS teams. I thought it would be interesting to take those records at a conference level. I also found out something interesting about Michigan's schedule when compared nationally. First conferences
|Avg# FBS Winning Teams Faced|
Hey, so ah, PAC-10 way to get out there and get after it. Oregon and Stanford combined have only faced 7 winning teams (two of which are each other). The other piece of fun here is the mighty SEC falling below the ACC and Big East.
That's great but what did they conferences do against those schedules?
Win % vs FBS teams with winning recoreds
|Win% vs FBS teams with winning record|
So here the SEC gains some respect back by posting a good overall winning percentage. But I think it's safe to say that Big 12 and Big 10 teams should fair pretty well come bowl time.
Now lets get closer to home since we've arguably established that the Big Ten is a pretty good conference.
Let's see how each Big Ten team did against FBS teams with winning records.
So we see that only three teams played as many or more winning teams than Michigan this season. And look as ol Wiscy down there toughing it out with 5 games against winning competition and yet there they go to the Rose Bowl. So Michigan played one of the toughest Big Ten schedules what about nationally.
Of all 120 teams in the FBS 11 faced as many winning teams and only 2 faced more winning teams than Michigan. And of this group Michigan is tied for 5th for the best winning percentage. With only two teams posting winning records. And holy hell ND. I guess that's the price you pay for being independent.
And finally here is a look at teams with winning records against FBS teams Team Games
Anyway, take that for what it's worth. I just found it interesting at how small the number of teams that post winning records against teams that have winning records (26), that Big Ten looks a lot tougher than I thought and really that Michigan's schedule was as tough as it was. Carry on with the coaching debate.
Let me first say I am not an RR hater. In fact, I wanted him to succeed as badly as anyone, and am appalled at the crap he has had to put up with, and the unwillingness of so many fans to acknowledge that he had so many poorly stocked (not unstocked) cupboards at some many position groups upon his arrival.
That said, I am just as frustrated as anyone else at the current mess.
Fact is, as has been posted elsewhere today, the 2008 and 2009 offenses scored more points in the first halves of Big Ten games than the 2010 offense did. That is incredible. To wit:
|Year||PF, 1st halves vs B10||PA, 1st halves vs B10||M turnovers, 1st halves vs B10|
Stark improvement in the second halves this year, but because by the end of the 3rd quarter in the MSU, Wisc, Iowa, PSU and OSU games most or all the necessary damage had been done, each took its foot partially or completely off the gas in the 4th quarter until (Iowa and PSU) pressed, in which cases both merely got the clinching score needed.
|Year||PF, 2nd halves vs B10||PA, 2nd halves vs B10||M turnovers, 2nd halves vs B10|
Sure, there are myriad ways to interpret these stats. Few of them reflect well on the 2010 team, or RR.
You can never win or lose a game in the first half, but you can come close. A game's dynamic changes completely if a team gets out to a three-score lead.
I've looked at the play-by-plays and drive charts closely for this year's team, and for the 2008 team. And yes this year's team is a yard-gaining machine. The record-holder in M history -- well, or at least as far back as the late 1930s, when official NCAA stats started being kept. Indeed, 500 yards a game is impressive. On paper.
It is far less impressive when so many of those yards are gained between the 20s, or at least don't make it all the way in.
For instance, here is a look at how our first-half drives in Big Ten play (save half-ending kneel-downs) went:
|TDs||FGs||Missed FGs||Punts||Downs||Fumble lost||Interception|
(For those adding up, these TDs and FGs add up to 93; the fumble return vs Purdue brings the number to 100. And one of the first-half turnovers occurred on a KOR vs Wisc, hence the fumbles lost and INTs immediately above add up to 11, not 12).
There were many long first-half drives in Big Ten play that ended badly -- in fumbles, interceptions, on downs, or missed field goals. These mistakes effectively rendered all those yards gained on those drives moot. They're no more helpful to the scoring cause than punt yards. Because, really, when the 08 team kept punting from around its own 40, the other team would get the ball at around its 20 without having been scored on. The only difference with this year's team making so many mistakes in the first half is that the other team would acquire the ball at about the same location on the field, but instead of after a punt, rather after an M turnover, or on downs, or after a missed FG. There is no difference on the scoreboard.
A mistake prone-team renders its gaudy yard totals moot with its mistakes.
23 turnovers (whole game) in Big Ten play last year, and 23 turnovers in Big Ten play this year. That's almost 3 per game.
Ain'ta gonna cut it.
I know this should be on MGoBoard, but my points were stripped.....
Michigan takes home Wolverine-Buckeye challenge trophy for first time, assisted by support from U-M football coach Rich Rodriguez
Ann Arbor, Mich. - U-M racked up a victory over Ohio State this week, signing up more people to the state’s organ donor list and winning the annual Wolverine-Buckeye challenge.
U-M signed up 79,958 donors to Ohio State’s 57,083 in the challenge that ended at midnight on Thanksgiving.
"We all enjoy winning a victory against our rival from Ohio," says Tony Denton, Executive Director of University Hospitals and Chief Operating Officer, U-M Hospitals and Health Centers.
"But the real winners will be the people who rely on these life-saving gifts, organs and tissues that will give thousands of people a second chance at life," Denton says.
Every day, 19 people die while waiting for an organ transplant and another 138 people are added to the national waiting list. The University of Michigan Health System began a new effort this year, dubbed Wolverines For Life, to encourage organ, tissue, eye, blood, and bone marrow donation by U-M employees, patients, students, alumni, fans and everyone in the state of Michigan.
To kick off this effort, U-M Football Coach Rich Rodriguez, along with Health System leaders, encouraged people to join in the annual Wolverine-Buckeye challenge. The challenge allowed people to sign up as organ donors upon their death and have their pledge tallied for their favorite school.
Rodriguez did radio spots and shared his weekly press conference Monday with a 16-year-old transplant recipient, Andrew Majors. Andrew, who is 16 and goes to Eisenhower High School in Shelby Township, Mich., received both a liver and kidney transplant as a baby at the University of Michigan Health System.
Anne Murphy, administrator of the University of Michigan Transplant Center, thanks Coach Rodriguez and the entire football staff for helping promote the annual challenge. This is the first time U-M has won the contest since it began in 2006.
"Organ donation saves lives. Anybody can sign up to be an organ donor. We hope this win will continue to draw awareness to the importance of signing your state’s donor registry to make sure your decision is respected after your death," Murphy says.
"We will be thrilled to accept and display the Wolverine-Buckeye challenge trophy for the next year."
The U-M leaders emphasize that after signing up as donors, every U-M fan should tell family members or other loved ones they have done so.
U-M co-sponsors the Wolverine-Buckeye Challenge with Gift of Life Michigan, which is the state’s federally designated organ and tissue recovery organization. You can still sign up on the state’s donor registry at www.giftoflifemichigan.org. Gift of Life Michigan, in collaboration with the Michigan Eye-Bank, provides all services necessary for organ, tissue and eye donation.
U-M has one of the oldest and largest transplantation programs in the country and U-M surgeons perform transplants of hearts, lungs, pancreases, livers, kidneys, and corneas. About 400 to 450 transplants are done at U-M annually, mostly kidney transplants followed by liver, heart, lung and pancreas.
This isn't supposed to be a defense of RR or an indictment. This is just a simple way to look at the importance of experience in putting together a winning team.
I took the top 9 teams in the BCS standings (3x3 fit my screen nicely in excel, that's why 9...) and also looked at 3 under peforming classic power houses (Michigan, Texas, Florida). I pulled the depth charts from Rivals.com:
A few takeaways:
- Every team in top 8 had 73% of their starters as either Juniors or Seniors. Bob Stoops should be coach of the year at #9 Oklahoma...the big difference with Oklahoma appears to be that the young guys are playing because they are just better than the vets. They have plenty of age on the two-deep.
- There are only 9 total freshmen starting for the top 9 teams.
- There are only 3 true freshmen (denoted by *) starting combined for the top 9 teams.
- As it stands today, 3 of our 5 losses have been to teams in the top 8 of the BCS. Those 3 teams only have 1 starting freshmen, and he's a redshirt.
- WTF with Texas and Florida? Especially Florida, they are an experienced team...I thought I would find that Florida and Texas are young, but not so much...
I didn't do the math for all of the BCS teams, but a quick look at the rest showed the same story, nobody outside of Oklahoma is even close to us in youth.
Feel free to do what you will with these numbers, IMO, it's more proof that the importance of experience can't be overstated. Conversely, the importance of roster management also can't be overstated so you don't end up in these kind of situations. That pretty much sums up the argument for/against firing RR. Yin/Yang and what not.
QB - Michigan has a pro style QB in Devin Gardner (6-5, strong arm, will sit in the pocket) remember he turned Josh Johnson into a pro QB at San Diego. If Tate transfers and Denard switches positions depth becomes an issue but other wise good.
RB- Mike Cox is a big back who can run and I think would do very well in a pro style system (I know he has not played much but has looked good when he has played and according to reports by rivals is the fastest of the RBs) not to mention that Denard might switch to RB and he would do well in any system.
WR - We are loaded with 3 guys that might play at the next level and would fit in any system (Roundtree, Stonum, Hemingway), plus lots of long term depth.
TE- We have two coming back (Koger and Moore) and given some time he might get get one or two Freshmen in this class not to mention that Watson might move back (if he is given a 5th year by the coaches) Overall they will be ok at this position next year but depth will be a major issue.
OL- The linemen are going to have to get bigger and stronger but there is a lot of experence coming back (4 guys with over a year of starting experience and by all accounts Barnum and Schofield are going to be good), though once again long term depth is a major issue.
DL- We return 3 starter that played in a 3-man front although Roh is undersized for a 3-man front. Overall DL should be a strengh but we have major depth issues.
LB - We don't have a lot of 3-4 outside LB who have played but guys like Ken Wilkins, Jim Ryan, and Brandon Herron played similar rolls in High school and could transition well. Guys like Kovacs and Cam Gordan may be asked to pay LB, With Demens and Mike Jones I think we are ok up the middle but depth is a major problem at the two MLB spots
CB/S - We have a lot of expernece coming back given how many young players have gotten to play this year. Then with Troy and JT coming back I think this could be a position of strength. I could see Troy and JT at the corners (although I personally think the D is at its best when Troy is at FS) Ray at FS and Carvin at SS. Depth at CB should be good although there could be a lack of depth at FS.
Special Teams - They have a really good punter, Stonum is a soild return guy and my hope would be that they let Odoms returns punts. As far as the kicking game goes lets pray they get a good freshman; otherwise I think Ryan Van Bergen [Ed-M: RVB can kick?] gives us the best kicking option.
Offense overall- There is a lot to work with although building depth at both OL and QB will be very important to long term success.
Defense overall – Yes the D is bad but remember that Stanford’s D last year ranked 90thin the nation (not much better than ours) yet Vic Fangio (Stanford’s Defense Coordinator) has this years team ranked 24 and while there D is very disciplined and tuff they do not have many athletes in the front 7 and still made major improvements.