If I'm reading this correctly, your hypothesis is "More Film = lower offensive production." If we want to investigate that claim, we can do so without comparing UM to other teams, simply by comparing it to itself. I tallied the (points for) and (total yards) for each game and averaged them.
If your assumption is correct, we expect that teams with more film will allow fewer points and fewer yards than each team previous, since they've got more film to use to figure the offense out.
Stats taken from ESPN box scores:
UCONN 30 pts, 473 yds
ND 28 pts, 532 yds
UMASS 42 pts 525 yds
BG 65 pts, 721
IND 42 pts 574 yds
MSU 17 pts 377 yds
IOWA 28 pts 522 yds
PSU 31 pts 423 yds
ILL 45 pts (reg) ~ 600 yds (total was 676)
PUR 27 pts, 395 yds
WISC 28 pts 442 yds
MEAN Points for: 35 total yards: ~500
MEAN(Big10) 31 pts., total yards ~476
MEAN(Big10-PUR) points for: 32, total yards: ~490 (Removed becasue weather was so different from most other games)
1. I don't think the data supports your hypothesis that more film -> less offense. Wisconsin had a LOT more film than MSU against more "quality" opponents, so we would expect a MUCH better day from the Wisconsin D. Yet MSU was able to put a lid on the Michigan Offense more adeptly than Wisconsin, Iowa, or PSU. Also, teams like ILL got crushed by UMs offense despite having lots of film showing the UM Offense having "bad" days vs. MSU, IOWA, and PSU.
2. There seems to be a slight downward trend as the season trails off, but more data would be required to determine if A. it is a real effect or my perception, and B. whether this is explained entirely by increased quality of our opponents defenses.
3. take with a grain of salt, as this has a small sample size and does not take into account the quality of opponent defense. I assume that teams like MSU, PSU, IOWA, and WISC and ILL are all roughly equivalent on defense, which is probably not true.