Here's The Averageball: A Correction

was "massive boner".

Especially in college football, I think that composite numbers can obscure interesting data. We know that coaches game plan differently based on the opponent. One would expect that the tomato cans would get different treatment than the 'real' teams and composite data like that presented here will obscure these differences.

In the Utah game, Borges clearly used the pass to set up the run. It goes w/o saying that sample size is an issue but there it is. Hoke will do it, at least, sometimes.

To be fair, Brian, Brady Hoke never said MANBALL. Nor did he say "TREMENDOUS VAN OUSTANDING RIVER" (although that would be my favorite quote of all time if it happens). He has preached physicality since he has become coach, but that doesn't necessarily translate to 3 yards and a cloud of dust as you and Mathlete have just illustrated.

That being said, I do think the post was informative if only in the last sentence. Even with the flawed data, you made the prediction that:

"When push comes to shove I think Michigan will go with what works, whatever that is."

And if Hoke says he's going to let Borges run the offense and he decides to incorporate elements of pro-style, thats fine by me. I think Hoke will hopefully allow the flexibility to do whatever works on offense, whether its an RR spread, a 5 WR spread, a pro-set, hell maybe let Denard run a Rick Leach-style option. Your conclusion was dead on despite the data.

Also, how do you block quote in plain text?

GO BLUE!

Good catch Brian, as others noted in the comments.  Overall, though, I think this shows that Hoke isn't wed to the "manball" mantra that people have attached to him; he wants to win, and trusts his offensive coordinator to call the plays he feels give them the best chance of accomplishing that.  I don't expect that Borges will look at thie offense and try to throw Vincent Smith at the A gap 30 times a game, and so right now I could care less what Hoke says to the blue hairs to keep them happy.

I believe when people say Man Ball they are refering to a situation when we need to get a yard or two and we line up and run it right at them.

It's a situation when they know we are going to run it, and we still do what we want and get the couple yards.

The percentage of run plays called on 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down has a minimum influence on the Man Ball equation.

based on the misinterpretation.  Also, the "...Secret Mike Leach" reference was tremendous.

Edit: Not much fixin' required actually. 

As others have said Manball is an invention of this blog.  When Hoke talks he talks about letting Borges run the offense.  Hoke's own lips keep saying "I'm not an offense guy" while Brian keeps typing "MANBALL!".  

At SDSU Hoke and Borges had a second team all conference QB and put two WRs in the NFL.  That right there are all the stats you really need.  Clearly SDSU was kicking out enough receptions to get two WRs draft.  That means Hoke wasn't just going twin TE heavy sets and running.  Rather Borges was developing the QB and getting the recieving corps plenty of catches, to the point they got love from NFL scouts.

I think the problem is we need to come to a middle ground here.  Late era Carr offenses were definitely paleolithic.  Never was so little done with so much talent (Henne, Edwards, Avant. Manningham, Breaston, Arringtion).  Look at the spread passing attack we pulled out in Carr's last game against Florida.  I think 90% of the fanbase went "WTF?  Why have we not been running that for the last few years?!".  

On the flip side a lot of us have flound memories of MANBALL.  Fourth and 1 against Northwestern.  Northwestern is desperately loading up the defensive line.  Yet I was sitting there smirking knowing it is futile because we're just running off left tackle and Jake Long is going to make sure Hart gets at least three yards.  

End of the day Borges seems like a good mix here.  He uses shotgun, he uses under center.  He had a very productive running back and TE but he also put WRs in the NFL.  End of the day we're getting a guy who makes productive offenses.  They might not be flashy but they're productive and he's backed up by a Hoke and Mattison coached defense.   That's a reciple for a good result.

So the blog has created a strawman, killed it, and then claimed that the strawman was wrong because it was made of straw.  Its like the stages of loss and grief sports blog style. 

I hope that having actual football to talk about will cure all.

Anyone else hoping that we run a fullback dive out of the I formation on the first play?  It would just be too damn funny to imagine all the heads asploding.

Easy for me to say, but I actually suspected the data really meant how the 1^stdown was acquired, rather than 1^stdown play calling…  The tip off was the presence of “penalty” in the chart, which makes no sense related to play calling.  It is a perfect example of cherry picking a stat that backs up your opinion, rather than letting the stats help to form your opinion.  i.e. if the data had shown that Hoke liked to run on first down, we would never have seen it on this blog.  Of course I was too lazy to actually research it myself…

I still don’t understand why the RR faction is so anti-Hoke.  Any moron can admit, myself included, that the RR offense was flourishing… it was going to be magnificent in a couple more years.  As a skeptic from the beginning I can be Manball enough to admit that the “Spread offense can work in the Big 10” is settled law.  No more debate.  But as great as the offense was, or was going t be, the defense was so pathetic that its remarkable crappiness actually more than offset the offense’s success.

In any case, I enjoyed the fundamentally flawed analysis.  Keep up the (99.9% accurate) good work

I think there are three things that created this ManBall discussion:

1. Hoke openly saying he hates zone blocking and spread offenses, which have been very good to us in the past and which our current roster is suited to play.
2. Fear of a Carr-era conservative play-call that sees us rushing off-tackle time and again as the defense cackles with glee.
3. Fear of a Carr-era clock management style that sees us go into a shell when we have a 3-point lead or sees us punt from the opponent's 35 yard line.

Those three things have blended together and have resulted in a fear that the offensive progress and optimism born the last two years will go back to the late-era Carr style.  I'm not sure the data supports that no matter how you slice it while looking at Borges' resume. 

The only thing that really concerns me at this point is Hoke's obvious disdain for zone blocking when it has been proven to be a successful approach in many different types of offenses.  I'd much rather hear him say "our base offense will not use a lot of zone blocking, but there is a time and place for everything and I expect Borges to determine when to use each type of technique based on situation and personnel." 

Other than that comment, the only remaining concern won't be settled until we see the players on the field.  Coaches are definitely stubborn and creatures of habit.  Carr refused to unleash his NFL talent until that final bowl game.  Rodriguez refused to let his defensive coaches do their thing and insisted upon a system that we had neither the players or coaches to run.  The best coach/leader is one who knows his limitations and trusts his subordinates to do their jobs.  Let's Hope the early evidence is correct and Hoke will leave Borges to do what he thinks is best.

I'm not so sure a near 50-50 distibution sheds any light on the question at hand. I bet game theory principals would show that having a strong lean in either direction would only be justified if you had a vast talent advantage or were extremely good at one thing (a la Wisconsin). Tipping your hand is never sound strategy when the opponents are evenly matched. Ball St and SDSU were never in any other circumstance.

The other instance I could see  having a particular bias is justified is if your scheme has sufficient inherent misdirection or flexibilty that it doesn't matter if the opponent knows whether you are going to run or pass (Tom Osbourne, Georgia Tech, Mike Leech).

I guess the final instance would be back in the day when the rules made passing a questionable idea.