Advanced stats and Michigan, 2007-2015
A very quick look at FEI's advanced stats demonstrates palpably how much improvement Harbaugh has brought to Michigan (click to embiggen):
Quick explanation:
- Y axis is rank, X axis is year.
- Blue is GE = game efficiency, FEI's measure of net success on non-garbage possessions, and opponent adjustments are calculated with special emphasis placed on quality performances against good teams, win or lose
- Orange is OFEI = Opponent-adjusted Offensive Efficiency, or value generated per possession
- Gray is DFEI = Opponent-adjusted Defensive Efficiency, or value generated per opponent possession
- Yellow is STE = Special Teams Efficiency, or value generated per game possession
Some quick observations:
- Harbaugh and his staff have improved our rankings in every category. Offensive improvement is meh, but defensive and special teams improvements are off the chart (figuratively).
- Michigan's special teams are the best they have been, by a significant margin, since FEI has been keeping track.
- HARBAUGH
October 27th, 2015 at 5:57 PM ^
It's funny how most people before the season would have predicted the most improvement on offense. Maybe the Harbaugh effect for offense takes longer to make itself noticeable and we will see a greater jump in the long term.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 27th, 2015 at 6:25 PM ^
sorry to pick on one guy, but it is hard for the offense to be efficient when you have QB issues.
October 27th, 2015 at 6:41 PM ^
Rudock really only has one "issue:" his inability to throw the long pass. He is really quite good at everything else. So far, not being able to throw the long ball bit Michigan in the ass once. That''s not really all that bad. For a coach who originally walked into a team with no serious option at QB, Harbaugh has done very well.
Besides, think of how great it will be when Michigan finally has a QB who can do everything Harbaugh asks of him. In the meantime, I will always be grateful that Rudock was here this year.
October 27th, 2015 at 6:48 PM ^
its more than that. He's been inaccurate all season long, not hitting guys in stride frequently enough. Completely missing wide-open receivers because he only sees half the field. Slow to go through his progressions. His arm strength is way off from last year, perhaps an injury. That said its not all on Rudock.
I think I'd sum Michigan's offensive woe's this way. Weak but improving offensive line, average at best running backs, young and slow WR's and a QB who is just barely maybe average. Harbaugh doesn't have a lot of A+ talent to work with on offense.
October 27th, 2015 at 11:02 PM ^
Can someone screenshot the graphic for me? I can't get it to show up. I updated flash player, tried a different browser, nothing. Help plz
October 28th, 2015 at 7:49 AM ^
Nice picture of WDR by the way. Former MMB member?
October 28th, 2015 at 7:49 PM ^
In-Accurate all season long, Not hitting guys in stride, Only seeing half the field, Slow through progressions,Arm strength way off, throw in broken plays and wrong position and you have yourself Denard Robinson
October 27th, 2015 at 7:39 PM ^
can adjust and make everything else more difficult. The effect has been more than a few missed opportunities.
October 27th, 2015 at 8:31 PM ^
If Rudock could hit Chesson deep we are at 7-0 right now
October 27th, 2015 at 6:29 PM ^
I think part of it is that our offense had so far to go. I also think that our ridiculous defense has actually stunted the offenses growth a little. There have been multiple games this year where Harbaugh basically put the offense in neutral once we went up three scores. Of course, not having a great quarterback is probably the most obvious reason.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 27th, 2015 at 6:38 PM ^
If he had a stable of QBs ready that most top 15 programs do to work with I think the offense would have taken a better jump up.
Same for RBs and WRs. We dont have a single skill player (unless you want to call TE a skill player) that would be ranked top 5-7 in his position in the conf.
Look at the talent on these top offenses - TCU (Heisman QB, sick hell WR) Baylor (plug and play starting QB, doesnt miss a beat) OSU (top 3 RB in nation, scary as hell QB sitting on bench most of year) Notre Dame (lose QB, dont miss a beat) Stanford (McCafferty is #1 in nation in all purposes yards, plus Hogan taking a step) We have nothing equivalent to these teams - not a WR, RB, or QB of this ilk.
He is making do with a lot of guys that on a normal UM team would be 3rd or 4th in the depth chart.
The OL is also not "typical Michigan". Its probably above average now but still not like the old days.
I think almost all of us were excited with Baxter would bring and he has delivered in spades. Durkin was a question mark (i.e. was it due to him or his head coach at Florida) and has delivered in spades.
And let's not forget the position coaches which IMO are the biggest diff between winning and losing. We have a hell of a group now - like Urban, Harbaugh has a great eye for talent...the coaching type of talent.
October 27th, 2015 at 7:17 PM ^
When you put it that way, I am not very encouraged about next year either on offense. We are breaking in a new QB, but potentially someone who has played two years and two years under Harbaugh. WRs are pretty much the same, unless Drake or Cole clicks. Same on RBs, but we lose on FB. So, I don't know if we are going to be that much better. OL will not be elite either. So, two years before we get there on offense? But Defense has to reload by then.
October 27th, 2015 at 7:44 PM ^
Differences are 1) whoever wins the job next year will have spent at least a year learning the system, and 2) said winner will have won a competition between multiple guys. I have a lot more confidence that whoever wins the job next year will turn out to be pretty good than this year, where it was pretty much "help us Jake Rudock you're our only hope" and he didn't even have spring practice with the team to help in learning system, getting reps with his receivers, etc.
October 27th, 2015 at 7:52 PM ^
A great QB hides the weaknesses in the offense. Look at Tom Brady. So, in that sense, I see what you are saying. I hope we find one. I am not sure if we are going to be able to find too many high skill players who make a difference in the offense in 2016. It is quite possible we do that in 2017. But, I am rooting for some stars to emerge from the players we have now.
October 27th, 2015 at 7:58 PM ^
(sorry, just saying)
October 27th, 2015 at 8:46 PM ^
Can't argue with that.
October 27th, 2015 at 9:59 PM ^
What's amazing is that all this team needed to be currently undefeated and top 5 was not some star qb but merely what Jake Rudock was at Iowa last year - Just hitting enough long passes to keep defenses honest jumpstarting the virtuous cycle which in turn helps the running game (which has been decent at times despite that). He's had time to throw, receivers have been open..
October 27th, 2015 at 6:41 PM ^
I will say, however, that there were perhaps just as many who held the opinion - and rightly so, in my view - that the offense was the less complete picture when it comes to personnel versus what we assumed Harbaugh would want to do, and it seems to have been the case. In other words, I think a lot of people though this side of the ball would be the bigger project.
The talent on defense was much closer to "being there", if you will, and it has been amazing to see Durkin and company basically do what they sort of wanted to do last year but simply couldn't as a staff. That side of the ball is a good example of what simply changing leadership and keeping most of the personnel can do sometimes.
October 28th, 2015 at 12:30 AM ^
defense is talent, development and experience. It wasn't dormant under Hoke. The offense, on the other hand, apparently was. I really expected it to be better than it is...the OL in particular.
October 27th, 2015 at 6:41 PM ^
I think a lot of it is that we don't have a great QB.
October 27th, 2015 at 6:50 PM ^
to learn a new offense for the last 3 years. Once there is some consistancy with blocking schemes, terminology and so forth this offense will be a well oiled machine. Much like the Stanford "O" is now.
October 27th, 2015 at 8:10 PM ^
and I liked Brian's response to the MSU result: We closed the phyisical and coaching gap with MSU in six games, and once we "flip" the QB matchup in the coming years, that will help tip the scales. Meaning, MSU has had Cousins and Cook while we've struggled with three fish-out-of-water starters during the Hoke years and Harbaugh's first year.
The only nitpick I have is Brian's confidence that we'll flip that battle. Sure, we have Peters and possibly McCaffrey coming in, but why would we assume that Dantonio's success with unheralded guys like Cousins and Cook isn't going to continue? Sure, O'Connor might end up being another Maxwell, but Cousins and Cook were not five-star blue-chips. All I"m saying is that we don't simply have the QB matchup automatically in our favor in the next few years. History has shown that MSU will get strong quarterback play and if they don't (as in the case of Maxwell) they'll plug someone else in.
Overall, I believe we'll pull away from MSU because they no longer have the coaching advantage and they'll slide back a bit in recruiting — but they'll still develop players. For the Bo-Mo-Carr years, MSU had decent talent but bad coaching and usually a meh QB. Going forward they'll have decent talent getting good coaching, including the QB position. They'll fall behind us and OSU, but not as far as in the past.
October 27th, 2015 at 8:46 PM ^
Except it takes them years to develop some players, but we have a chance (a good chance at that) to bring in some players who perform admirably right away. If OSU can do that consistently, I think we can do that to a certain degree.
October 29th, 2015 at 10:57 AM ^
The bottom line is it's going to be a tough game for both sides every year. Mich should have a slight talent edge going forward, but not nearly enough that they can play so-so and win.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 27th, 2015 at 9:49 PM ^
I think that is a result of Hokes recruiting bringing better overall talent on the defensive side of the ball. Hoke and Mattison have proven adept at identifying DL and linebacker talent, brought in play makers like Peppers and the other talented secondary players. Hole and Borges on the other hand failed to find a QB, busted on RBs largely and have mostly meh receivers outside of Darboh and Chesson, but no difference makers. Butt is a pleasant exception. Oline seemed elite at the time but many guys are now gone and those remaining are good not great with Cole being a bright spot. Bottom line I think the Harbaugh effect on offense is limited by the pieces he has. the defensive talent Hoke brought in already has performed well under Mattison but now has truly flourished with development and coaching (Durkin) and the addition of Peppers.
October 28th, 2015 at 7:05 AM ^
Have never been prolific. He has always had a old school run heavy O that averages around 21-28 points a game. He has made his mark with great defense and special teams play. I wouldn't expect Crazy Jim to ever have UM's offense looking like Baylor. That's just not what he knows how to do. So far he has been getting the most out of what he has, but it will get better when UM gets a QB that is a threat with his arm. That's when it should open up a bit, but it will never be a wide open offense.
October 27th, 2015 at 6:01 PM ^
The Hoke slide is pretty remarkable.
October 27th, 2015 at 6:15 PM ^
I wish that were the name of a dance, not, you know, the results on the field . . .
October 27th, 2015 at 6:36 PM ^
Do the Hoke slide:
October 27th, 2015 at 7:57 PM ^
Always the perfect visual summation
October 27th, 2015 at 10:42 PM ^
Speed it up a little and sync that Benny Hill music for the soundtrack. Call it The Hoke Years...
October 28th, 2015 at 7:08 AM ^
Taking the UM head coaching job ruined him. Some football programs just do that. Carr, RR, Hoke, UM has ruined all of them.
October 28th, 2015 at 7:23 AM ^
Carr got a national title, multiple awards for coaching, and a HOF nod. He seemed to emerge okay for the job.
October 27th, 2015 at 6:12 PM ^
The Denard effect is amazing, but so is the decline in his effect over time. And the defense in 2011 under Mattison?!
October 27th, 2015 at 6:15 PM ^
Smartest thread in weeks.
October 27th, 2015 at 6:16 PM ^
...our OFEI in 2010 was so good, we were negative ranked!
October 27th, 2015 at 6:26 PM ^
Just from looking at this chart you can tell Zoltan was drafted in '10.
October 27th, 2015 at 6:44 PM ^
The defensive chart from 2007 to 2011 is unreal. I wonder if that's some kind of record for variance in a five-year window.
October 27th, 2015 at 7:02 PM ^
Link broken?
October 27th, 2015 at 11:42 PM ^
but on my phone the link is broken. I don't know why or how to fix it.
EDIT: it should show up now. It shows up on my phone, tablet, and laptop.
October 27th, 2015 at 7:56 PM ^
This was obviously the result of Hoke's "Program Building" rather than better coaching.
October 27th, 2015 at 8:38 PM ^
Shoot me an email - I run an analytics company. Impressed w/ your visualzation work.
October 28th, 2015 at 7:56 AM ^
No, work for me! Take whatever salary you're offered by this bozo, split it in half and DOUBLE IT!