this week in unintentionally grim-sounding recruiting headlines
Edit: Sorry, this has already been posted.
As of recently, Scout had K Commit Matt WIle as an NR. Turns out, they think we got ourselves a pretty darn good kicker.
|2011 Scout.com HS Football Rankings (full list):|
|Pos: K||Pos Rank: #4||Pos Rating:|
That's right. The number FOUR kicker in the nation. One of only 9 to get that coveted third star.
Rivals still has him at a 2 star, 5.3, and ESPN still logs him as a 74, but it looks like Scout has made a much more recent update.
That should push us nicely ahead of certain folks in East Lansing. I know it's just recruiting, but any time we can beat Sparty...
Rittenberg came out with his B10 rankings earlier tonight. Either he scored some extra cat nip tonight or rushed this because his Ma was calling him to come out of the basement for a late dinner.
Northwestern & Illinois above Michigan?!
Illinois can only play on half a field and Northwestern was stricken by the Angry QB Hating God. How are they in this position?
PSU above Iowa and Illinois?!
Both these teams crushed PSU. I know they didn't have McGloin, but I doubt the outcome would change with him in.
LOLophers above Indiana?
Granted Indiana has not won a conference game, but I feel that they would if they played the LOLophers.
Agree? Disagree? Thoughts?
OK, this isn't a hard-core statistical analysis like the Mathlete would do, just some fun with numbers. We have a rather bipolar team this year (Offense #5 in TO, Defense #105 in TD), and I thought it would be interesting to look at what our opponents' Total Offense and Total Defense stats would look like if they hadn't played us - and what kind of a difference it would make in their overall ranking of NCAA stats.
The NCAA stats are not linear, of course, and a difference of 1 yd/gm can be a large or small difference in rankings depending on how closly spaced everyone is. So as I cautioned, this isn't a hard-core statistical exercise. It is interesting to look back at the early games and see how well we did in comparison to what other teams ended up doing against them - what seemed like a good or bad performance at the time may look different in retrospect.
Part the First: Offense
We know our offense is great, but what kind of damage has it done to the Total Defense (TD) ratings of our opponents? Here they are thus far:
|Opponent||Games||Yards Yielded||Yds/gm||NCAA Rank|
What would these guys' defensive stats look like if they hadn't played Michigan?
|Opponent||Total Offense, M||
Opp. Avg - M,
M Total Offense,
*Opponents' average Total Defense yards per game, minus the Michigan game
**Michigan's Total Offense in game as a % of the opponent's average TD minus the Michigan game
So Michigan has gained above our opponents' average yardage yielded in every game thus far, and their TD ranking has suffered as a result. What's the damage?
|Opponent||TD Rank With M||TD Rank Without M||Difference|
Average change in Total Defense ranking for all opponents: -10.1 places.
Part the Second, Defense
So the flipside of this, then, is how much has our defensive suckitude helped out our opponents stat sheet? Where would they rank in TO without having played us? We'll run the same tables again, but from the opposite tack:
|Opponent||Games||Yards Gained||Yds/gm||NCAA Rank|
First thing that jumps out at me is that none of these are world-beater offenses thus far. They're functional and solid for the most part, but even the best is merely above average. We can't really blame our bad defensive performances on having come up against a bunch of awesome offenses. Anyway, how'd they do against us?
|Total Offense, Opp||
Opp. Avg - M,
Opp Total Offense,
% of Opp Avg - M**
* Opponents average offensive performance, minus the Michigan game
** Opponents TO as a percentage of their average offensive performance, minus the Michigan game
|Opponent||TO Rank With M||TO Rank Without M||Difference|
Average boost to opponents' Total Offense NCAA ranking: +7.1 places
So we've had four really bad defensive outings (ND, Ind., MSU, Ill.) and a four decent ones (UConn, Iowa, PU, BG). The PSU game doesn't look so bad from this perspective - still not good, but far from our worst outing when compared to others.
Part the Third: Summary
Michigan's O Difference
on Opp TD Ranking
Michigan's D Difference
on Opp TO Ranking
|Connecticut||-10||+1||W, Good O, OK D|
|Notre Dame||-10||+19||W, Good O, Terrible D|
|Bowling Green||-17||0||W, Awesome O, OK D|
|Indiana||-11||+14||W, Good O, Terrible D|
|Michigan State||-1||+16||L, OK O, Terrible D|
|Iowa||-10||-2||L, Good O, OK D|
|Penn State||-8||+4||L, Good O, Bad D|
|Illinois||-20||+14||W, Awesome O, Terrible D|
|Purdue||-4||-2||W, OK O, OK D|
Takeaways from these numbers (as opposed to other numbers or observations):
- We played well at Iowa and were beaten by a better team.
- We played badly against MSU on both sides of the ball; they might have beaten us anyway with good performances, but not likely.
- The loss to PSU doesn't look like such a bad outing from this angle. Maybe PSU is better than we gave them credit for.
- Awesome offense wins, terrible defense doesn't necessarily lose.
- Our offense is better at offending than our defense is bad at defending.
- Winning is more fun than losing.
So it has been interesting reading about Cam Newton's potential cheating problems and character issues. We'll see how this plays out.
My question is whether or not this will have an impact on the MNC. More specifically, I could easily see that this might take a long time to come to a resolution. Into 2011, at least. Knowing this, would the guys behind the curtain who pull the strings allow Auburn into the MNC? Options would be to let Auburn play, then deal with it after the truth comes out. Or, to blackball Auburn, so as not to have to deal with this possibility. Not a pleasant place to be.
SIAP, didn't see this amid the deluge of MGoMembers servicing Denard...
I know, it's just a blogger. But then again, kinda cool to see us at the top of a poll...