45 Points in 20 Minutes of Possession Time
I was surprised to see Michigan's time of possession vs EMU at only 20 minutes Saturday. EMU held the ball for the remaining 40. Against future ball control teams this year like Wisconsin, MSU and perhaps Ohio State, Michigan's offense will be under considerable pressure to be more effective with its opportunities(score touchdowns, not field goals).
UM finally appears to have some decent offensive weaponry (if they can stay healthy).
After 3 games it's refreshing to see Michigan leading the Big Ten in scoring (1st place with 38 points/game) and yards per game 439 (2nd place to Purdue has 440/game).
September 21st, 2009 at 12:43 AM ^
numbers look nice.... especially vs notre dame... there bad yes but they get a lot of undeserved credit from the reporters...
vs better teams we have to get more tds... instead of field goals but 38 points per game is a great stat and hopefully tate/robinson duo will continue to churn out great games and hopefully robinson 70 yrd run up the middle vs ohio state :P
September 21st, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^
"we have to get more tds... instead of field goals"
What? Are you even watching the games? Let's look at some math here:
-----------------
31 pts = 4 TD (28 pts) + 1 FG (3 pts)
38 pts = 5 TD (35 pts) + 1 FG (3 pts)
45 pts = 6 TD (42 pts) + 1 FG (3 pts)
-----------------
In all, that's a 5:1 TD to FG ratio over the first three games. I think getting more TD's than FG's will not be a problem.
Also, it seems to me the reason our TOP was much lower than EMU's had more to do with the fact that we scored much faster (e.g. Brown's 90 yd TD) and thus did not have "possession" of the ball for very long. We were, however, more efficient with it.
September 21st, 2009 at 12:27 PM ^
Whoa! I hadn't realized the offense was getting better at EXACTLY one TD per game. Does this mean by the time OSU rolls around, we will be putting up 15 TD's?
Final score UM: 108, OSU 3.
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:06 PM ^
I figure by that time Denard will have learned how to fly and just be able to score every 15 seconds. UM 1680 (that's a td every 15 seconds) OSU 0 (because Denard will be on Kickoff duty too and he can just fly and catch the ball after it goes 10 yards).
Plus, this doesn't even include the whole 4th quarter where the officials invent a mercy rule.
September 21st, 2009 at 12:49 AM ^
More evidence that Yost's point-a-minute teams lacked top-end speed. BTW, Michigan is also 3rd in the nation (1st in the Big Ten) in rushing offense.
September 21st, 2009 at 12:54 AM ^
another reason why RR is doing a good job :D rusing offence wise
September 21st, 2009 at 4:05 AM ^
can we call this 2 points a minute?
September 21st, 2009 at 11:26 AM ^
strictly speaking, it's 2.25 points per minute :) (or 9 points per 4 minutes)
September 21st, 2009 at 1:01 AM ^
I dont wanna be a Debbie downer but vs two mac schools(one very bad one) and ND I dont think we should start to count our chickens just yet. The big 10 D's will be better and more stout. I wanna see those kind of numbers vs the Iowa's,MSU and PSU's.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:11 AM ^
Scoring drives of
4 plays 32 yards, 01:09 MICHIGAN FG
9 plays 60 yards, 03:02 MICHIGAN TD
6 plays 69 yards, 01:56 MICHIGAN TD
1 play 90 yards, 00:11 MICHIGAN TD
7 plays 60 yards, 02:41 MICHIGAN TD
3 plays 21 yards, 00:41 MICHIGAN TD
2 plays 46 yards, 00:34 MICHIGAN TD
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/playbyplay?gameId=292620130&period=1
September 21st, 2009 at 9:33 AM ^
I've never understood the whole "time of possession" obsession. What matters is how many points you score per possession, and how many points your opponent scores per possession.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:02 PM ^
Against Eastern, M rushed 39 times for 380 yards with 8 different rushers, each of whom had a long rush of 10 or more yards. That's remarkable.
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=292620130
September 21st, 2009 at 1:26 AM ^
"Michigan is trying to catch them off guard by going to the no huddle!"
September 21st, 2009 at 1:29 AM ^
Easy on the BTN guys. That Rotel money only goes so far...
September 21st, 2009 at 1:37 AM ^
don't get me wrong: i love the fact that we were able to run all over Eastern. that said, I really would have liked to see the passing game open up a bit more. granted, Tate was brilliant against ND, but the passing game, IMO, is what will determine our overall record. And I'm not even so much worried about Tate's continued improvement. I want to see guys like Hemingway, Stonum and/or Mathews gain momentum and consistency as go-to playmakers. I have real doubts as to the hands of these guys under the gun (other than, i think, Mathews).
big ten teams will definitely catch up to the run game, if we start to rely too much on it. if I'm a B-ten head coach, I'm stacking the LOS to stop the run until we prove that we can burn them in the passing game. I'm just not convinced we have developed a stud WR for whom a defense must gameplan around.
i just have this bad feeling we're going to start seeing more long yardage 2nd and 3rd down situations once we get into the meat of our schedule.
this upcoming Indiana game will be very interesting.
I'd really like to see some Texas Tech-like pass plays implemented. Quick hitters (slants/slip screens). I love tate's pocket-moxie, but that scrambling around isn't going to work as time goes on. They need plays where the ball's out of there immediately.
just a little pessimistic. oh well.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:42 AM ^
not gonna lie but the running game is way more important than a passing game.... a good running game allows you to control the game... id rather be a florida than a texas tech
September 21st, 2009 at 9:59 AM ^
I second that. If our running game is firing on all cylinders, and tate can throw enough 10 yard passes to keep defenses honest, we have the best chance of beating good teams.
With a passing dependent offense, one off day from a QB (or an injury)==a loss. As does one ill timed interception, we have a number of good RB options and our Forcier really is a freshman. If it ain't broke, don't fix it and such.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:41 AM ^
Maybe being overly optimistic here but is it possible that when we play some better defenses our time of possession will go up because we will not get as many big plays and will have to put together longer drives?
Of course the other possibility is that we get stuffed and don't score. Trying to be glass full here though.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:49 AM ^
No, I feel this is a good, valid point. 90 yard carlos brown touchdown runs have a way of hurting your T.O.P.
Generally speaking, the stat of T.O.P. is overrated anyways. Important, yes, but still overrated. There is no direct correlation to controlling the clock and scoring more points. Example: Eastern this past week.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:54 AM ^
Things look great so far but UM has played one of the weakest schedules in the country, the 118th best according to Sagarin:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt09.htm
Indiana won't provide us with much more info either. Until they go on the road and face a decent Sparty defense, we won't know much about the offense. I'm curious to see whether Tate can maintain his preternatural poise on the road.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:03 AM ^
I don't care how weak our schedule has been. Last year, we lost to weak teams. This year we pounded the weak teams. We're playing with house money for the rest of the season. Enjoy more, worry less.
September 21st, 2009 at 5:08 AM ^
I wouldn't put too much weight on that 118 to gauge our team's performance so far. That number represents the overall season and not the strength up to this point. It's really Delaware State dragging that number down.. The teams we've played up to this point are fairly comparable to the ones the rest of the B10 have played.. (Except for Minnie and OSU who have played top 10 teams..)
September 21st, 2009 at 9:27 AM ^
Compare these Big 10 teams schedules/SOS to UM:
Iowa: N. Iowa, @Iowa St. and Arizona==30th toughest
Purdue: Toledo, @Oregon and N. Illinois==39th toughest
Wisconsin: N. Illinois, Fresno St. and Wofford==66th toughest
MSU: Montana St., CMU and @ND==77th toughest
UM: WMU, ND and EMU==118th toughest
Personally, I don't see that much difference between UM's first three games and those of the 4 teams listed above, yet our schedule is determined to only be 118th? I don't buy it. Do you think Wisconsin would have wanted to switch schedules with us?
September 21st, 2009 at 10:23 AM ^
again.. SOS is determined by the full season schedule.. not just the first 3 games..
It's Delaware State dragging our ranking down...
September 21st, 2009 at 8:48 AM ^
I dont know if you can call Wisco or MSU ball control teams anymore. Have you watched them play this season?
Especially MSU. They are passing the ball more than they are running the football. This is not Javon Ringer's offense anymore.
September 21st, 2009 at 8:52 AM ^
Unless your offense is strictly a ball control offense (ala Tressel OSU esp. in 2001-2003) the TOP is not as critical as putting points on the board. Having a quick strike offense is not only fun but necessary when your D is embryonic. Frankly, I think we might have scored another ten points or so on Eastern if not for D-Rob's INTs. I agree that I'm keen on watching how we do against better defenses but I think ND is a good barometer with respect to what we can do.
Defense is our achilles', EMU was destroying us. So did ND. Against Western we did fine against but wha'happened? Not to mention pass D, but I think ND is a special case and would submit that if our D-Line gets more effective we should be fine. I will say that I've been happy with our second half adjustments in each game so that calms my angst a bit.
September 21st, 2009 at 9:57 AM ^
I wouldn't worry about the TOP. Michigan runs a high tempo offense--rushing to the line and snapping with lots of time left on the play clock. They do this on purpose. If they wanted to take more time off the clock they could just slow things down.
The disconnect here is teams generally work the clock by running. Michigan runs a lot. Ergo, if Michigan wants to run clock they can.
Finally, you can't beat Wisconsin when you're playing EMU.
September 21st, 2009 at 10:21 AM ^
The only thing that concerns me is that quick drives like these don't give the defensive players much time to gather themselves on the sideline, especially if they the opponent put together a sustained drive.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:59 AM ^
Our high/quick scoring offense now puts a lot more focus on 4 quarters of defensive conditioning.
This was discussed in another thread at length, but I don't think it's possible to have a "Shut down" D when it is being asked to be on the field for so long.
It won't matter if our opponents get 20-30 pts a game if we can score 40-50. If the offense is forced to slow down in some games, hopefully a well rested D will compensate with bigger/better stops.
September 21st, 2009 at 12:34 PM ^
That's another reason we need more defensive depth. The coaches want a full 22 players who can start so they can rotate in to keep everyone fresh.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:16 PM ^
the strategy is designed to tire out the opponent's defenders, force them to go to their depth to create mismatches, rely on our superior conditioning.
This strategy does challenge our own defense to not count on a minimum of 4 plays (@45sec each), about 3 minutes off between series. Part of last years defensive weakness was the *large* number of three and outs by the offense. Conditioning + depth are very important on both sides of the ball when the fast tempo is employed by the offense.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:35 PM ^
With our superior conditioning, this will be less of a problem than your run-of-the-mill team. And I agree that the more depth we have, the less of an effect this will have on the defense. More quality defensive players who have seen playing time will yield greater results.
September 21st, 2009 at 3:11 PM ^
I was just reading the drive chart for this game. We only ran 9 plays in the fourth quarter.
September 22nd, 2009 at 11:01 PM ^
I would be more worried about TOP and shoddy D if I thought this was a championship calibur team, at this point I'm just enjoying the ride.
This D does not appear to be very good. The offense and the defense are young, this is not the year for expectations, this is a year for substantial growth and improvement.
Many people including myself think 8-4 would be a great year for this team. If we beat Indiana and Delaware State that gives us 5 wins, so out of our other 7 games we would win 3.
Road games: MSU Iowa Wisconsin and Illinois
Home games: Penn State Purdue and OSU
Looking at those 7 games 3 wins is not going to be easy, Purdue is probably the only game we will be favored. Really once we get to 6 wins the season is an unqualified success, so I suggest less hand wringing about, and more hand clapping for the Men in Blue.