i-form
No, Upon Further Review series is not comprehensive. Most years are absent Ohio State and bowl games (including last year), and 2014 checked out after Indiana. That said, I challenge you to find a greater cache of free data than Brian's masterful charting of Michigan plays going back to the DeBord Throws Rock age.
Every so often I pull all that into a massive Excel file and try to learn things like how spread the offense was, favorite plays, etc. Let's dive in shall we?
What're those pie charts at top? Shows the relative efficiency (by yards per play on standard downs) and the mixes of Michigan's backfield formation choices. For "standard downs" I mean 1st and 2nd downs when the offense wasn't trying to do a clock thing or go a super-long or super-short distance. So no garbage time, no two-minute drills, no goal line, and no going off on Bowling Green and Delaware State. The idea is to show which offense did they get in when they had the full gamut to choose from, and how many yards did it get when the goal presumably was to get as many yards as possible.
Nothing very surprising there. Rodriguez ran his shotgun offense, Borges inherited Denard and Devin and still managed to jam them half-way into an under-center offense in three years. Then Nussmeier ran his zone melange single-back thing. Harbaugh did what Hoke always dreamed of doing, and the offense climbed back to about where Hoke's offense was with a senior (but oft injured) Denard.
---------------------------------
[Hit THE JUMP for each year's most charted play, visualized Hennecharts, how many TEs Harbaugh used, how many rushers defenses sent, and LOOOOOTS of charts.]
The dorm room has a shrine to Fred Jackson they call "Like Borobudur but more majestic"
Seth, doctor of blogging, is acting residential advisor for South-of-South Quad Residence Hall, Floor 1. Having heard reports that the occupant of Rm. 219, registered as "Michigan's Running Game" has 'not been himself' lately, the good doctor attempts to ascertain the source of his charge's recent morosity. He knocks on the door…
So, hey Michigan's Running Game.
Hey.
Alright if I come in?
Sure.
You've been kinda quiet this semester.
Yeah.
… Look, I haven't known you to be the kind of dude to go into a shell. Not since you broke up with DeBord, anyway. Um, you okay there man?
… [sigh].
What's wrong?
Oh you know, things.
Year | Rush YPC* | Rush S&P+ | Rk |
---|---|---|---|
2010 | 6.05 | 137.3 | 2 |
2011 | 6.19 | 141.7 | 4 |
2012 | 5.77 | 120.8 | 23 |
* (Called running plays when Denard is QB, no short situations. 2012 stats are through Nebraska because this is from my UFR database and Brian hasn't UFR'ed Minnesota yet. S&P+ is a Fremeau EDIT: Bill Connelly (they're all football outsiders) stat that measures success based on down, field position, and strength of opponent. Higher is better. FWIW these stats have been screwy this year but I think rushing yardage is the part that's actually working.)
That's…that's not so bad man, 5.77 YPC is pretty respectable.
Yeah but I'm supposed to be much better than 'pretty respectable.'
Cause Denard and Toussaint and most of the line back?
That and I'm MICHIGAN fergodsakes. Plus I think a lot of that 5.77 is Denard shooting off long runs against Air Force and Purdue. Here's a table so you know what I mean.
I see. Wait, what the hell is that?
A table of all the runs charted in that stat. So like that gray peak is the 2010 offense getting lots of 4-yard runs, and the yellow peak is the 2011 offense getting stopped for just 2 yards a lot. And the lines at the bottom are polynomial trend lines.
Poly—? Dammit man, I'm a doctor, not a physicist.
See how the yellow and gray lines follow the same trend but the blue one doesn't? The 2012 offense is ripping off big runs more often, but not getting those 5- to 12-yard runs with the same regularity.
I understand. I'll see if I can find what's going on. You mind if I ask some questions?
Sure.
[After THE JUMP: Is it for want of play calling, tougher competition, or Molk?]
Borges/Borges
"Without effort, he had learned English, French, Portuguese, Latin. I suspect, nevertheless, that he was not very capable of thought. To think is to forget a difference, to generalize, to abstract. In the overly replete world of Funes there were nothing but details, almost contiguous details."
---Jorge Luis Borges, Funes, the Memorious
The above reference is to a short story my 11th grade English teacher (Hi Mrs. Bruton!) would be very proud I remembered. In it a fictional JL Borges speaks of conversations with a young autistic savant named Funes. Funes is so mathematical he invented his own way of counting. Then he dies of congestion of the lungs. So it goes.
The other pic is from an early M presser with Al Borges when he was asked how he would use Denard. There were contiguous details: You gotta use him. We'll think up some ways to utilize those legs. We're going to run our offense. The voice was sharp, mocking.
And through the season the thoughts of the young Borges were realized:
They were ways, but not the way.
We have all moved on from the last three years. We have t-shirts and memes and a competent defense and a win over Ohio and a new spiteful way of referring to our rival. Yet until Shane Morris is zipping DOs to myriad tight ends in the flat there is going to be a Godwin's Law*-ishness about discussing the offense that best fits the offensive personnel at Michigan because we fired the guys who invented it.
------------------------------------------
* Technically it's a corollary.
------------------------------------------
First a note that advanced users can skip: I'm using formation because each formation comes with a set of strengths and weaknesses selected by the guy calling the plays. Once the ball is snapped all hell breaks loose and it's way harder to judge decisions or coaching. Of the relevant formations, the I-form is great for running because you get two backs (one usually a lead blocker) immediately moving toward the line of scrimmage and your play's chosen point of attack, but not great for passing because either you're committing two eligible receivers and precious QB time to a run fake, or you're immediately showing pass when the RBs are bailing out of the QB's drop line. The Ace is basically I-form but you swap the FB for a WR or TE. It's a compromise formation, slightly better for passing, not great at either.
Formation | Plays | YPA |
---|---|---|
Shotgun | 259 | 7.2 |
I-Form | 58 | 4.2 |
Ace | 36 | 11.4* |
Denard Jet | 12 | 3.3 |
Fritz | 7 | 9.3 |
Pro-Set | 2 | 2.0 |
The shotgun's fundamental running flaws can be somewhat mitigated by: 1) Zone Blocking, which lets the runner scan for creases like a QB instead of hitting a certain spot ASAP, 2) Backs who can see and accelerate quickly into those gaps, 3) A run-threat QB who can keep the defense from teeing off the tailback, 4) Spreading receivers out so that their defenders are too far away to help the inside running game, and 5) Optioning and the threat thereof, e.g. Rich Rodriguez's zone read.
These are kind of very specialized things to get, and you need like three or four of them just to get shotgun running on par with the natural advantages of I-form running. If you can run out of an I against eight in the box you are indefeatable; if you can run out of a shotgun AND your running QB can pass you are indefeatable. So it's not like the way is the only way. The reason your friendly bloggers are always yelping "shotgun! shotgun!" is because by the above rationale, a team with Molk, Toussaint, and Denard, and which used to have Rodriguez himself coaching them, should be pretty awesome at running from the shotgun, which is still the best passing formation.) /tutorial.
------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
Chart of formation tendencies (pass & run)
Excised: Plays when the score differential >16, 4th quarters, plays inside the M or opponent's 3 yard line.
Opponent | Run% | Plays | Gun | I-Form | Ace | DR Jet | Fritz | Pro |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Western Michigan | 55.6% | 27 | 70.4% | 22.2% | 7.4% | - | - | - |
Notre Dame | 42.9% | 28 | 75.0% | 25.0% | - | - | - | - |
Eastern Michigan | 68.4% | 38 | 84.2% | 7.9% | 7.9% | - | - | - |
San Diego State | 62.1% | 29 | 82.8% | 13.8% | 3.4% | - | - | - |
Minnesota | 54.5% | 22 | 68.2% | 4.5% | 9.1% | - | 18.2% | - |
Northwestern | 55.9% | 59 | 76.3% | 10.2% | 6.8% | 6.8% | - | - |
Michigan State | 39.2% | 51 | 88.2% | 11.8% | - | - | - | - |
Purdue | 60.0% | 50 | 48.0% | 22.0% | 18.0% | 4.0% | 8.0% | - |
Iowa | 56.0% | 50 | 46.0% | 28.0% | 18.0% | 8.0% | - | - |
Illinois | 70.0% | 50 | 80.0% | 14.0% | 6.0% | - | - | - |
Nebraska | 64.3% | 56 | 83.9% | 7.1% | 5.4% | - | - | 3.6% |
Ohio State | 70.2% | 47 | 85.1% | 4.3% | 6.4% | 4.3% | - | - |
Grand Total | 58.8% | 507 | 74.0% | 14.0% | 7.7% | 2.4% | 1.6% | 0.4% |
The games where Michigan was 25% I-form were, as predicted, at the beginning of the season. The Fritz took its place against Minnesota and then it was all shotgun ru…
Okay so it was inexplicably becoming a team that passes 60% of the time in a trash tornado against MSU and then two game-plans which look absolutely identical. Because Purdue's defensive ends were pliant this worked brilliantly against Purdue as Borges called mannish plays to the end. The thing is for some odd reason he didn't stop I-forming the Purdue game away until it was the 4th quarter of the Iowa game.
Here's a weird thing though: when I run the same numbers for '09 and '10, Rich Rod was way I-Form against Iowa as well. 20% I-form in fact, when he was 96% gun all other games combined. He did it both years, and only for Iowa. Is there some Lloyd-Ferentz pact to run substantially more I-forms versus each other every year?
Anyway it went away. Illinois looks like an intermediary step but 7 of the 8 plays from the I were during that interminable 14-point lead after the defense had established itself as 2006-ian. Following that game it almost disappeared from 1st downs (chart in excessive charting area post-jump*). It's the same story just more dramatic. Red Zone is more so, as the I-form was largely abandoned in the red zone during relevant plays of the last three games of the season:
So it is at this point where Funes the Manballious makes his impression on the young Borges, or vice versa, and the rational meets the abstract, and the result is sublime.
Gregory Shamus|Getty
32