Synopsis for Turnovers: For the second game this year, M had no turnovers (WMU was the other game). Michigan did have one fumble by Gardner but it was recovered by Smith. Minnesota had the only turnovers and Michigan ended the game with a +2 turnover margin. For the year, Michigan has lost 8 TOs (ranked #59) but gained 15 TOs (ranked #6) for a turnover margin of +7 or 1.40 per game (ranked #11).
For the third time this year, M returned a turnover for a touchdown. Three more players added their names to the takeaway list with Countess forcing a fumble, Johnson recovering a fumble, and Avery getting the scoop and score. Amazingly, there are now 15 different defensive players that have either forced a fumble, recovered a fumble, or intercepted a pass.
Synopsis for Expected Point (EP) Analysis: Obviously, turnovers did not impact which team won the game. I've added this table that summarizes expected points lost by TO's, expected points gained by opponent's TOs, the net EP due to TOs, and the adjusted score without turnovers.
(See the Section on Gory Details below for how the adjustment for Expected Points (EP) is calculated.)
National Rankings: Remember the table below includes the WMU game and will NOT be the same as the (incorrect) NCAA Rankings.
The Gory Details
Details for Turnovers: Here is overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game).
Expected Point (EP) Analysis: Basically, the probability of scoring depends on the line of scrimmage for the offense. Therefore, the impact of a TO also depends on the yard line where the TO is lost and the yard line where the TO is gained. Each turnover may result in an immediate lost opportunity for the team committing the TO and a potential gain in field position by the opponent. Both of these components can vary dramatically based upon the down when the TO occurred, the yards the TO is returned, and whether the TO was a fumble or an interception.
Here are the details for the game.
The analysis is a bit tricky because: (A) the TO may directly result in lost EP for the offense but (B) only modifies the EP for the team gaining the TO because the team gaining the TO would have gotten another possession even without the TO (due to a punt, KO after a TD, KO after a field goal, etc.). The Net EP Gain must take into account the potential EP gain without the TO. The EP gain without the turnover is based on where the field position would have been for the next possession if the TO had not occurred.
The expected point calculations are based on data from Brian Fremeau at BCFToys (he also posts at Football Outsiders). Fremeau's data reflects all offensive possessions played in 2007-2010 FBS vs. FBS games. I "smoothed" the actual data.
Here is a summary of the smoothed expected points.