rundown of Michigan's riser
Getting To Know You: South Carolina And Michigan
Filed under:
SUMMARY SEASON STATS – SOUTH CAROLINA AND MICHIGAN
This diary will highlight the offensive and defensive success of South Carolina and Michigan against their respective schedules. Save for the stats from the Ohio State gam, Michigan’s numbers have appeared previously in a diary, so they are updated now with the totals from The Game.
What I have done as well as produce a summary table which will allow you to compare their average success in passing and rushing on both sides of the ball to the conference averages, and in here, you will find numerically what has been said on the board for the past day – these are well-matched teams, good defenses, average (in their conference) offenses and similarly matched with regards to the points they score and the points they yield.
SUMMARY TABLES:
|
|
Michigan Passing Off. |
Michigan Rushing Off. |
Michigan Passing Def. |
Michigan Rushing Def. |
Mich Scoring Off. |
Mich Scoring Def. |
|
AVERAGE |
197.8 |
185.7 |
155.4 |
157.3 |
30.0 |
18.8 |
|
STD. DEV |
71.2 |
86.5 |
44.6 |
71.7 |
17.4 |
10.7 |
|
MEDIAN |
187.0 |
159.0 |
161.5 |
128.0 |
33.0 |
15.0 |
|
CONF. AVG. |
207.4 |
178.4 |
204.7 |
157.0 |
28.7 |
24.0 |
|
|
S. Carolina Passing Off. |
S. Carolina Rushing Off |
S. Carolina Passing Def. |
S. Carolina Rushing Def. |
S. Carolina Scoring Off. |
S. Carolina Scoring Def. |
|
AVERAGE |
229.5 |
151.3 |
193.3 |
119.0 |
31.4 |
17.4 |
|
STD. DEV. |
100.6 |
65.7 |
93.8 |
57.6 |
11.3 |
11.3 |
|
MEDIAN |
214.5 |
157.5 |
165.5 |
87.0 |
33.0 |
15.0 |
|
CONF. AVG |
234.5 |
167.6 |
219.7 |
149.3 |
30.1 |
23.0 |
It is difficult to do a direct comparison of the two teams, being in different conferences with different competition and no common opponents, but even when looking at these charts, I think there is a very interesting similarity, and it is something which will not be news here but is interesting to see in this format. The performance on defense for both teams is a little more consistent than on offense, although in a few games, South Carolina gave up quite a few, especially in the air.
MICHIGAN AND SOUTH CAROLINA – RUSHING AND PASSING OFFENSE:
MICHIGAN AND SOUTH CAROLINA – RUSHING AND PASSING DEFENSE:
MICHIGAN AND SOUTH CAROLINA – SCORING OFFENSE AND DEFENSE:
MICHIGAN AND SOUTH CAROLINA – CAT PHOTO:
December 3rd, 2012 at 2:49 PM | 
With a small (n=12) sample
With a small (n=12) sample
December 3rd, 2012 at 3:01 PM |
Nice work
Nice work
by following Seth's advice and adding the cat!
On a serious note I think it will be intereseting to see who starts at QB for us, seeing that SC gives up some yardage in the passing game. I am hopeful for some playcalling similar to what we did against Iowa as opposed to Ohio...
"It is better, of course, to know useless things than to know nothing."
"The world is given to me only once..."
December 3rd, 2012 at 4:01 PM |
Florida Game
Florida Game
Florida actually rushed for 89 yards, not 48. Shockingly, 48 is the number of rushing ATTEMPTS by UF in that game.
It's worth pointing out that Florida only accumulated 183 yards in their victory over SCar. This is a very, very good defense. The only team that found consistent success on the ground was LSU, and they did it with a decidedly MANBALL strategy between the tackles. That does not bode well for our offense, since most of our blocking between the tackles is...not good.
As for SCar's offense, they have accurate passers and better receivers that we've faced for most of the year. If NW could move the ball through the air against us, believe that SCar can too.
I expect this game to be somewhat similar to last year's Sugar Bowl. We will be overmatched, but we are good enough to pull out a win if we can get some turnovers and make some big plays.
Thank you, Coach Hoke, for bringing Michigan back.
December 3rd, 2012 at 4:43 PM |
As For The Rushing Defense...
As For The Rushing Defense...
Apologies to all for the error in the table, and thanks to Ron Utah for pointing it out.
As to the rushing defenses of these teams, South Carolina does give up only 3.11 yards per rush on average, whereas we are at 3.77 yards per rush, and this is despite the number of carries being fairly close (459 attempts on South Carolina, 497 attempts against us). We gave up over 400 yards more total rushing than they did - 1,428 yards for them versus 1,872 yards for us. Their losses (LSU and Florida) are two of the three teams in the SEC whose rush defense is statistically better than South Carolina's as well.
"Funny isn't it, how naughty dentists always make that one fatal mistake."
Follow the random tweets of a Michigan alum - http://twitter.com/#!/LorneEC3
December 3rd, 2012 at 4:50 PM |
It's hard to accumulate a
It's hard to accumulate a
It's hard to accumulate a bunch of yards when your average drive starts at the opponent's 10 yard line.
Granted, Florida's offense mostly sucks and that game was pretty weird, but Florida was reasonably efficient on offense until they built a big lead on several short-field TDs, at which point they realized SC wasn't doing anything on offense and decided to kill the rest of the game by predictably running up the middle DeBord-style.
December 3rd, 2012 at 4:50 PM |
Sorry
Sorry
DP
December 3rd, 2012 at 11:40 PM |
Why are you not posting your
Why are you not posting your
Why are you not posting your charts full size? It's a distraction to have to click in to get to the detail. Just wondering why?
December 4th, 2012 at 12:14 AM |
Fair Question...
Fair Question...
The charts themselves are actually fairly large (over 1000 pixels wide in the case of this diary), so rather than shrink them and possibly run the risk of some missing out on numerical detail, which I include in the charts, I've been linking to the full-size images so hopefully no one has to strain to read them. I know it opens an extra pane unless people opt for a new tab, like in Chrome, but I didn't want people to miss on details and after some reader commentary, it seemed more accommodating to approach it like this. I can always post the straight HTML images as well as the thumbnails, if some don't want to click through.
"Funny isn't it, how naughty dentists always make that one fatal mistake."
Follow the random tweets of a Michigan alum - http://twitter.com/#!/LorneEC3
December 5th, 2012 at 11:33 AM |
It's a Drupal Seth thing.
It's a Drupal Seth thing.
It's a Drupal Seth thing. You can do both at once clickable full size charts - but I think... if this is your medium I would change the fonts to fit the column for impact. I'm not speaking as an expert - I suck at this - but as a reader I really appreciate design... and of course content.
Thanks again for your time and work.
December 4th, 2012 at 12:38 AM |
Love the cat,
the charts look
Love the cat,
the charts look
Love the cat,
the charts look like a equalizer pattern for in-a-gadda-da-vida.
Or a discrete fast fourier transform...
life is like a box of chocolates... and you got the Whizzo Quality Assortment
December 4th, 2012 at 7:21 PM |
I posed a rundown of the
I posed a rundown of the
I posed a rundown of the gamecock players in this thread. Enjoy.
http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/michigan-v-south-carolina-outback-bowl?page=2
With a small (n=12) sample size, I almost think it's more helpful to look at the median, rather than the mean. Thanks for providing that!
Interestingly, SCar is better on both offense and defense in that respect, but the point spreads are exactly the same. But this year is really a Tale of Two Michigans; we demolished Illinois/purdue, but how much does that really tell us about how good we are?
Overall, these numbers definitely reinforce the perception that we're in general overmatched in this game. Howeva, I think we have more untapped weapons (DENARD!) than SCAR does, and attacking the perimeter could definitely be successful and neutralize the D-line of SC if Borges Lizard Brain goes into hibernation.
"The straightest line from A to B is straight: From A to B"
"When you have Denard Robinson, you can have everything"
~George Walden