Football Outsiders Says M Offense Has NOT Declined In Big10 Play
I posted a question @ FO (Brain Fremeau - FEI) about Ms Offense in OOC games versus Conference games. Fremeau's reply:
From best to worst, here are Michigan's game-by-game OFEI results (opponent-adjusted offensive efficiency), including national rank and "relevance" category for each data point:
1.766 (5) vs. Iowa (Med)
1.383 (18) vs. Bowling Green (Low)
1.229 (38) vs. Michigan State (Med)
1.223 (39) vs. Connecticut (Med)
0.679 (176) at Indiana (Low)
0.342 (305) at Notre Dame (High)I think the data supports your conclusion that Michigan's offensive efficiency hasn't dropped off in conference vs. non-conference play.
More info here: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/fei-ratings/2010/fei-building-resume
October 23rd, 2010 at 11:44 AM ^
I take it the stat doesn't take crippling turnovers into account.
October 23rd, 2010 at 11:57 AM ^
Yeah, this is like saying, "Oh my word, this sniper is just as good in high-pressure situations as he is on the shooting range. (Except for when he turns the gun on himself.)"
October 23rd, 2010 at 12:29 PM ^
You stole my thought exactly. Experts agree M's offense hasn't regressed in Big 10 play. Experts equally agree that M's ability to hold on the god-damn ball and not turn it over like it's a nuclear tipped, red-hot sphere of burning battery acid hasn't gone as well.
October 23rd, 2010 at 11:53 AM ^
Just doesn't compute
October 23rd, 2010 at 12:03 PM ^
I have become a "born again strenth of schedule" advocate. Just looking at yards without considering the opponent is usually misleading. The FEI has a strong (and relatively unique) SoS adjustment. That is the reason for the differences from the raw data.
FEI does not simply average the opponent SoS (as many systems do) but calculates SoS based on the probability an elite team would be undefeated against the specific teams played.
Details here: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/fei-ratings/2008/fei-week-6-ratings
October 23rd, 2010 at 1:01 PM ^
in the history of college football?
October 23rd, 2010 at 12:01 PM ^
...we've had pretty decent weather up 'til now. Where I begin to question the offense is when the weather gets wet and cold and the precision the offense requires breaks down a bit. Wait 'til the first 48-degree rainy day and I think you'll see our production drop off, unfortunately.
October 23rd, 2010 at 12:03 PM ^
it wasn't cold and rainy against ND huh?
October 23rd, 2010 at 12:11 PM ^
May be cool for early september but is not cold for overall football weather. It was not cold.
October 23rd, 2010 at 1:20 PM ^
Nope.
October 23rd, 2010 at 3:35 PM ^
I was at the game. It was a bit rainy/drizzly before the game, but by kickoff it was really pretty nice out. I sat on my poncho and was plenty warm sitting in the bleachers with just a t-shirt and sweatshirt.
October 23rd, 2010 at 4:40 PM ^
I'm surprised they let you in without pants on.
October 23rd, 2010 at 12:22 PM ^
That sounds a little too much like "SPREAD WON'T WORK IN COLD WEATHER!!!" to me.
Even SMASHMOUTH football requires precision.
Seriously, how cold/wet/both would it have to be for the spread to be much worse than "traditional" Big Ten football? I'd like some numbers.
October 23rd, 2010 at 1:00 PM ^
To answer your question: It would have to be 33 with a monsoon for the spread to be worse than "smashmouth" footbal
October 23rd, 2010 at 1:58 PM ^
questioning the Xs and Oxs or are you questioning execution, or coaching?
The Xs and Os are sound. Look at the goal of the offense. More blockers to the playside than defenders, place players with quickness and speed one on one against the defender in space.
Coaching, correct mistakes through drills and film work. I'm sure they work on that in breakdowns and on the field. and the players probably do individual work also.
One element that is missing is experience against more mature teams. Experience cannot be coached (thanks capt obvious).
October 23rd, 2010 at 3:49 PM ^
You do realize our offense is better for playing in poor weather than any we've run since Bo, right? You also realize that the offense was very succesful in West Virginia, where weather patterns are very similar to Michigan?
October 23rd, 2010 at 5:00 PM ^
that is shot from the hip, but this offense was pretty decent in WVU and it gets a little chilly there. Coaches run I-formation, speads with TE's involved, I think we'll make adjustments for any issues the weather causes.
October 23rd, 2010 at 12:14 PM ^
Yeah, but imagine what it would be like if we copied Oregon's offense!
October 23rd, 2010 at 1:25 PM ^
Don't have to copy their ridiculous uniforms <shudders>.
October 23rd, 2010 at 1:24 PM ^
...that any opinions that vary from the "RR is God, Blue Sky, Rosey Scenario" dogma invariably get negged. It appears political correctness has infected MGoBlog.
Too funny. Oh, and... neg away M-bots!
October 23rd, 2010 at 1:55 PM ^
because of the block M with "ediocre" you posted after the MSU game, with your calls for RR to be fired.
You desecrate the block M, you get negged for all eternity from me.
October 23rd, 2010 at 2:11 PM ^
do not neg anti RR posts or replys. But, I really think that others may see it as lacking in real insight. Coaches generally do not throw passes late. They don't fumble in their own territory, and they usually don't kick the ball out of bounds twice in a row. Those are mistakes and poor execution and turnovers that carry a bigger influence on losing games than a coaching philosphy or Xs and Os. Those turnovers are usually youth and inexperience. To those that say that Michigan lost those games because RR is the wrong coach or cannot is also an insult to the opponent, Michigan lost their last two games to teams that are highly ranked and highly regarded.
October 23rd, 2010 at 3:30 PM ^
please don't mis-use the term "politically correct"
October 23rd, 2010 at 3:55 PM ^
People are negging you because your opinion is illogical and myopic. Not because your opinion varies from the norm.
October 23rd, 2010 at 5:04 PM ^
I don't know about you, but I get more defensive about our Wolverines under some influence. BTW, I didn't neg you. Here.
I keed, I keed! I'm a happy drunk...
October 23rd, 2010 at 1:51 PM ^
i think the efficiency in the red zone is the probably the problem in the last two games.
October 23rd, 2010 at 2:55 PM ^
I don't believe there is any evidence that a spread offense (run dominated or pass dominated) performs worse than "smashmouth" offense in cold weather. The NFL has proven that you can pass and pass often in just about any weather.
Otherwise, teams like the Patriots, Packers, Giants, etc. (who all play outdoors in DECEMBER and JANUARY!) could not possibly win in those months.
October 23rd, 2010 at 3:15 PM ^
maybe this will convince the voters to send us to the National Championship Game.
October 23rd, 2010 at 8:59 PM ^
BTW, Wisconsin finished today with 347 yards (205 passing, 142 rushing) against Iowa today. We gained 522 (335 passing, 187 rushing) against them last week. But UW had only one turnover and did not miss a FG. When we cease to stop ourselves with mistakes, we'll be a machine.
October 23rd, 2010 at 9:49 PM ^
Here some reality........
UM offense is good when they are playing POOR defensive opponents......first 5 games....or when good teams get ahead so much, they start sitting back on D........the second half vs Iowa after they scored what....34?
Also, your offense has proven to turn the ball over AGAINST good defenses.
Face it, it is a lot easier to look incredible against the likes of uConn, Indiana, Bowling Green and UMass.