Expected Wins Model for 2011 Football Season
I briefly mentioned this before the start of the last season, but I have built a model for Michigan football wins, based on tracking data since the 1990 season. It is not that sophisticated, and I don't have any charts to put up on the front page, but I thought it was relevant because it projected us for 7.3 wins last season (clearly impossible, but I didn't round for precision's sake).
I won't get into all of the nuts and bolts, but the model's "expected wins" is based solely on the quality of play from all the major positions on a football team: QB, RB, WR/TE, OL, DL, LB, DB, and Special Teams. Each category receives a +1 (good), 0 (neutral), or -1 (bad). Below is a chart summarizing historical wins versus expected wins since 1997:
| Year | Wins | Expected Wins | Difference |
| 2011 | 8.2 | ||
| 2010 | 7 | 7 | (0.3) |
| 2009 | 5 | 6 | (0.7) |
| 2008 | 3 | 2 | 0.5 |
| 2007 | 9 | 10 | (0.8) |
| 2006 | 11 | 12 | (1.3) |
| 2005 | 7 | 10 | (2.8) |
| 2004 | 9 | 11 | (1.6) |
| 2003 | 10 | 10 | 0.2 |
| 2002 | 10 | 8 | 1.8 |
| 2001 | 8 | 8 | (0.2) |
| 2000 | 9 | 8 | 0.8 |
| 1999 | 10 | 11 | (0.6) |
| 1998 | 10 | 10 | 0.2 |
| 1997 | 12 | 11 | 0.5 |
As you can see, the model has been accurate in predicting the number of wins to within one win for 10 out of the last 14 seasons. The four years that stand out as abberations:
- 2002: Breakout years from Chris Perry and Braylon Edwards. Really solid year from Navarre. Beat expectations.
- 2004-2006: My model is a little tough on Lloyd and his coaching staff for these years. The model assumes that based on the quality of players, we should have had more wins during the winding down of Lloyd's tenure at coach. I could be being a bit harsh on Lloyd here, but I feel that many posters would agree - and the prior years are clearly not "anti-Lloyd" (he had a net positive influence in four of the previous six years).
Enough of the background. Where does the 8.2 come from in the 2011 column? Well, it's all based around what we'll inherit from the 2010 team (again, this is based on players only - the coaching shows up in the variance). I assume that "+1" will remain for QB/WR/OL, and the "-1" for DBs and Special Teams will go to net zeroes. Based on a total of +3, you get to 8.2 expected wins for next year.
Now, to take a look at the best and worst case scenarios.
- Best case: One of the RBs steps up and gets a stranglehold on the starting spot (+1). DL improves so much under a 4-3 scheme that it also becomes a +1. LB, DB, and ST play all remain a net zero. Under this scenario, the model projects +5, or 9.8 wins.
- Worst case: We don't sign a kicker in this class and ST remains -1. The young DBs remain a -1 as they are confused by a new scheme and are still relatively raw. No one is able to fill Mouton's role, and LB takes a dive to a -1. All offensive rankings stay the same. Under this scenario, the model projects breakeven, or 5.7 wins.
I know that range is pretty tight, but I believe in it. I do believe Best Case is more reasonable than Worst Case, because we've brough in Hoke-Mattison and to expect the defense to actually take a step back would be a hard pill to swallow. Also, the model lends itself to being more accurate in years where there isn't great attrition (such as this year).
I'm interested to get your guys' thoughts as I try to make some improvements and what categories I can include. Hopefully this is at least interesting for a Wednesday morning/mid-morning thread.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:58 AM ^
I'm not even going to lie, another loss to little brother would honestly drive me into insanity....that is if these last few years havent already
January 19th, 2011 at 12:00 PM ^
However that W next to Iowa in Kinnick is a tough sell for me.
January 19th, 2011 at 12:02 PM ^
i struggled with that game too, but i figured since its coming at the end of the season.. and big blue when be hitting on all cyllanders.. they could pull that one off. to be honest the MSU and Iowa games, in my book, are a coin flip.
January 19th, 2011 at 12:13 PM ^
See I see Iowa as weaker next year. They've lost most of there RBs, WRs, Stanzi, and their biggest contributors on D. I think they settle into one of their down years in the Iowa Cycle.
January 19th, 2011 at 2:52 PM ^
I hate u based soely on ur little brother prediction. Id rather lose to Purdue and Northwestern than lose to MSU again. I can't take 4 years in a row.
January 19th, 2011 at 12:07 PM ^
7-5 to 9-3 seems possible. If the defense can improve quite rapidly I would go with a 9-3 or even a 10-2 record. However, I believe the defense will make improvements but they are still young and have a new (better) DC. So, I would go with 8-4
Did your model account for all boundary conditions?
January 19th, 2011 at 12:10 PM ^
i took into account the relationship between the moon and the sun on the day the game was played. I also did some weather forecasting to predict game conditions and analyzed which team had the best personnel for said conditions. /S
In all honesty, i'm loving next years schedule. No PSU, no Wisky, 8 home games. I think given that, and the large amount of returning players we have (and D Rob), brady has some pretty nice things in place to have a nice 2011-2012 season.
January 19th, 2011 at 12:20 PM ^
of the 8 wins are vs ND and MSU I'll be happy. We're a long way from beating OSU.
January 19th, 2011 at 12:21 PM ^
Hopefully your right. 8 wins and a bowl win/game in Hoke's first yr will allow him to never have to pay for a meal in Ann Arbor again.
January 19th, 2011 at 12:51 PM ^
With the schedule rotation taking Whisky and PSU off the plate and the graduating of two deeps this lays out a path for ten wins minumum. That is why it was important to make the cc this year. we need a year like this to ease controversy giving the new staff with great news to recruit tha 2012 class with. Positive press will come now that Coach Hoke has put Drew Sharp in his place. I mean by that, suffering fools will be treated like suffering fools, he will help you look verrrrry funnny and a chuckle will be had at your expense, while I roll my eyes to put an exclamation point on your brilliance. Defense will improve based on expierence and four man front, kicking game will improve due to the increase in coaching, last years example will mean more coaching for this years team.Offense may slow down the speed at which they score but will still score and give the defense less time on the field. We did have some redshirts who will have an impact this year. looking for a good year and little brother being back in his rightful place.Go Blue.
January 19th, 2011 at 1:07 PM ^
Have any of us ever been anywhere close to correct with all these predictions?
January 19th, 2011 at 1:48 PM ^
In 2008: I predicted 6-6. The team finished 3-9 . 3 games off!
In 2009: I predicted 7-5. The team finished 5-7. 2 games off!
In 2010: I predicted 8-4. The team finished 7-5. 1 game off!
In 2011: I predict 8-4. Based on the trends above I should be correct for this coming season!
January 19th, 2011 at 1:14 PM ^
I've got my money on 10-2 with losses to Nebraska and ohio. The only other game I'm worried about is the msu game
January 19th, 2011 at 1:59 PM ^
is there a hatersgonnahate.jpg specifically for stats nerd discussions?
If not, there should be.
January 19th, 2011 at 3:22 PM ^
I got eight with my unscientific method of looking at the schedule and predicting wins and losses. Last year, I got 10 games right out of the 11 I predicted. I got MSU wrong and called OSU what I called a "toggle game" with a bowl. My rationale was that if they lost to OSU, they would get a winnable bowl game. Little did I know that Delaney's ego would transcend his ability to assess fair matchups in bowl games, and that a team ranked in the 50's would have to face a team deserving of top twenty status.
The net result was that they won two less than I expected counting the bowl season.
This year, I have losses to ND, Iowa, and Nebraska, with either a loss to TSIO or an earlier bonehead loss to an inferior team. That works out to 8-4. It remains to be seen if the addition of Nebraska can improve conference depth enough to offset the effects of Delaney's ego when negotiating bowl pairings.
January 19th, 2011 at 9:23 PM ^
The game is played by humans, and no retroactive "I told you so" model can factor that in.
The players here now are coming off some real hard times. They have a momentary bump up in emotion from a new coach hire--or they are all "wait and see" and the moment adversity sets in they could just all go, "Well, here it comes again"
I point to last year. New QB who is lighting it UP going into the MSU game. Everything going right--and *WHAMMO an interception in MSU territory and the rest is history. In fact, the downturn might have started with barely beating Indiana.
Point is, you can stay up all night all you want making charts and telling us how great they are and applying them to old seasons--but these are kids who are possibly going to be tender emotionally.
A bad early season loss, an injury or two, and their "muscle memory" of the collapse of the last two seasons rears its ugly head again.
A lot will depend on this staff's ability to coach this team over humps while maintaining level heads during the real good times.
Too many question marks--these types of models are probably best applied after a season has gone by with Hoke at the helm.