Rushing stats key to UM-MSU outcome, or so history tells us
So i went back to look at stats between these 2 teams as far back as i could find to see what stood out as difference makers and one stat seems most relevant:
- Rushing yards
- So as you can see, only in 1995, 2004, and 2007 did the losing team gain more rushing yards than the winning team.
- In fact the opposite holds true, though not as consistent - the losing team usually ends up gaining the most receiving yards.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
September 28th, 2009 at 8:06 PM ^
Your score in the 1990 game is incorrect. Michigan lost that game 28-27, although 29-28 sounds a heck of a lot better.
September 28th, 2009 at 8:09 PM ^
I stand corrected on that one. That makes it only 3 years in which the loser outgained the winner in rushing yards.
September 28th, 2009 at 8:15 PM ^
Well put together analysis...I've been watching a replay of the MSU-Wisc game, and I'm not finding a whole lot of indications that we should be worried about moving the ball on Saturday...unless Wisconsin has a super-stud O-Line, there seems to be less than stellar penetration from the MSU defense...for some reason, the offense reminds me of a much-less potent version of ND's offense, which we contained in the second half without too much problem...
September 28th, 2009 at 8:25 PM ^
I hope it holds true this year, as we are 8th in country in rushing - http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/stats/2009/divia/team/in…
September 28th, 2009 at 10:26 PM ^
Forcier has the 4th highest punting average in the nation at 50.0.
And as we all know, it's only 50.0 because that's all he needed.
September 28th, 2009 at 8:19 PM ^
This really shouldn't be surprising. The team that has the lead in the 4th quarter is likely to run the ball and use clock, while the team that's behind is likely to air it out in an effort to catch up (and may get sacked a few times in the process, lowering the rushing total).
September 28th, 2009 at 8:33 PM ^
The underlying question for me is - does Michigan go in as the favorite considering their running prowess thus far? Putting together our current rushing attack and the historical trend outlined here, it seems our chances bode quite well for a W on Oct 3rd.
September 28th, 2009 at 10:48 PM ^
Nah, I don't believe historical trends like this make a difference in football games. I think that these numbers point more toward the style of offense of both of these teams over the years (an emphasis on running the ball). The team that was better at what they were both trying to do had a better chance of winning... usually, thankfully, ending in Michigan's favor.
September 28th, 2009 at 8:33 PM ^
In addition the losing team (more receiving yards)is more likely to try more things throughout the game. Meaning that the losing team could potentially need to attempt more passing schemes throughout the entire game, and not just the 4th quarter.
But the 4th quarter, i would imagine, would be the primary reason for the additional rushing yards.
September 28th, 2009 at 8:34 PM ^
BROWN MINOR DENARD TATE MATTHEWS STONUM GRAHAM MOUTON WARREN cissko need to play 110% to win
GO BLUE
September 28th, 2009 at 9:01 PM ^
Honestly, after watching the EMU and Indiana power offenses against UM, if MSU has any problems rushing and passing against Michigan Saturday, then nothing Dantonio does or says will help MSU. They should be titled officially hopeless and forfeit the remaining 7 games.
Fortunately for MSU, all evidence suggests that the Spartans will torch Michigan through the air on Saturday, while some obscure Spartan tailback, probably Edwin Baker, will get over 100 yards on the ground and 2 touchdowns.
Michigan too, is going to have it's way with this Spartan defense, particularly through the air because the MSU secondary is a lost cause.
I fear another dramatic, high-scoring Notre Dame-ish ending, only this time there's a Spartan partisan with his mitts on the game clock. It's going to be ugly for both teams.
September 28th, 2009 at 9:26 PM ^
with a his mitts on the clock reminds me of the 2001 game. Smoker spikes the ball on the Michigan 1 yard line with 1 second left on the clock, even though that one second was really about 2.5 (even the commentators were baffled). As we all know, smoker finds duckett in the end zone and the rest is history.
September 28th, 2009 at 9:56 PM ^
We are likely to be in for a long day on Saturday..as one MSU blog has noted, you have to do a lot of things wrong to be 1-3 and still post these stats.
TOTAL OFFENSE G Rush Pass Plays Yards Avg/P TD Yds/G
----------------------------------------------------------------
1. Michigan State...... 4 471 1283 264 1754 6.6 16 438.5
2. Wisconsin........... 4 791 921 274 1712 6.2 18 428.0
3. Michigan............ 4 961 728 279 1689 6.1 19 422.2
4. Purdue.............. 4 706 978 273 1684 6.2 17 421.0
5. Northwestern........ 4 522 1145 295 1667 5.7 16 416.8
6. Indiana............. 4 637 956 277 1593 5.8 11 398.2
7. Penn State.......... 4 509 990 270 1499 5.6 13 374.8
8. Ohio State.......... 4 724 744 256 1468 5.7 12 367.0
9. Iowa................ 4 574 817 274 1391 5.1 11 347.8
10.Illinois............ 3 576 467 198 1043 5.3 7 347.7
11.Minnesota........... 4 423 886 250 1309 5.2 11 327.2
September 28th, 2009 at 10:42 PM ^
While I agree to an extent that their offense isn't too blame, those stats also point out how one dimensional the MSU offense is. Also, State put a lot of those numbers up against the Montana St. School of the Blind or whoever they played.
September 28th, 2009 at 11:27 PM ^
they are all hot AIR...
September 28th, 2009 at 10:58 PM ^
I think that Michigan will be more effective on the ground than in the air this weekend (MSU's shaky CB's not withstanding). If Forcier's arm is still sore, Michigan is more likely to keep it on the ground with a complementing air game to keep MSU on its heels a bit. If Robinson is the QB for any length of time, Michigan will definitely keep it on the ground more.
We'll probably see more three and outs by Michigan than we'd like to. Conversely, the home run threat is always there and it's been pretty hard to stop Brown and Minor on their cutback runs. Expect them to hit a big play here and there.
It might not be pretty, but it's a game that we have to expect Michigan to win based on what we've seen from both teams this season.
September 28th, 2009 at 10:43 PM ^
Rushing yards could be the defining stat but how UM or MSU attacked the other team since 1984 isn't going to influence either team's game plan on saturday. You attack your opponent's weaknesses if thats up front then you run if thats in the secondary you throw.
September 28th, 2009 at 11:02 PM ^
you wait for the opposing team to call a time out for you.
September 28th, 2009 at 11:19 PM ^
I preferred the running it down their throats part of the game myself though that last drive was impressive I mean QB comes in off the bench injured in constant pain on every throw, without the his #1 WR, without our #1 RB but you can view it how ever you want. :)
September 29th, 2009 at 12:30 AM ^
Honestly, I think ND should've won that game by more than three points even though Sparty missed a TD at the end. ND had a clear TD catch called back earlier that seemed to wipe the momentum out, and you're right about your implied statement: ND is a far worse team without Clausen OR Floyd, just like we'd be far worse with no Tate or Hemingway.
September 29th, 2009 at 7:24 AM ^
I think they might have been talking about the ND-Purdue game, not the ND-MSU game.
September 29th, 2009 at 12:02 PM ^
Yeah I was but it does apply well for both games
September 28th, 2009 at 11:01 PM ^
Michigan in the running game, obviously. The key is our pass defense and adjustments up front to prevent big running plays. Bottom line, play well defensively (or at least better than we did against IU) and we win this game by at least 7 points.
September 29th, 2009 at 12:28 AM ^
If Michigan was a historically passing-oriented team, we'd point to that statistic as the one that typically decides who wins the Mich-MSU game. It's meaningless...Michigan's historically far better than State, thus whatever style offense we've had historically should reflect in the "winning statistic" against those we play each year.
September 29th, 2009 at 10:44 AM ^
it predicts outcomes. Also, the same stat holds true for State. The winner runs more (or ran), so I don't think its just about Michigan offensive schemes, its also about the Big Ten approach to winning games.
September 29th, 2009 at 7:27 AM ^
I hear this every year during this game. I have 2 problems with it.
1. I would bet that this "stat" holds up in most games, not just the UM-MSU game. Whoever rushes more, probably wins more historically.
2. Both of these teams (especially Michigan) are very different than they have been in the past.
September 29th, 2009 at 10:40 AM ^
the last 5 years, as all-in-for-Michigan has pointed out, that trend has become a bit more shaky. Just wondering if we are going to see different stats (and which ones) becoming relevant as the spread offense cements its way into the Big Ten. We are already seeing that TOP could become quite irrelevant even though rushing yards remain high, which in the past those 2 went hand-in-hand. Anyway, just a thought.
September 29th, 2009 at 9:23 AM ^
If you look from 2004 onward, the rushing leader only wins 60% of the time (2005, 2006, and 2008) with losses in 2004 and 2007. Just trying to point out that if you slice the data differently it can have drastically different results.
September 29th, 2009 at 10:36 AM ^
part of big ten play or should we expect this stat to dwindle in importance under a spread offense system?
Comments