Inside the Box Scores - Bonus mid-week edition
The defense is clearly better to my eye this year, but I wanted to see if the box scores back that up. Two big metrics for the defense are how they do on third down, and how many big plays they give up. So I tried comparing the first five games of 2010 to the first five games of this season. I counted all the 20+ yard plays, running and passing.
I think the teams we've played this year are better on average, but we've played 5 games at home versus 3 at home last year, so maybe thats a wash. The opponents third down conversion percentage is just about the same, ~42% last year to ~39% this year. So we're better than last year, but only because of Minnesota.
We gave up more long passes last year, 13 vs. 10, but we gave up fewer long runs, 6 vs. 4. Perhaps that is a reflection of having senior starters at LB last year, and more experienced DBs this year.
Chart? Chart:
| 2011 | 3rd conv | attempts | Pct. | 20+ run | 20+ pass |
| WMU | 6 | 11 | 54.5% | 1 | 1 |
| ND | 8 | 14 | 57.1% | 3 | 5 |
| EMU | 4 | 12 | 33.3% | 0 | 0 |
| SDSU | 8 | 18 | 44.4% | 1 | 3 |
| Minn | 0 | 11 | 0.0% | 1 | 1 |
| Total | 26 | 66 | 39.4% | 6 | 10 |
| 2010 | 3rd conv | attempts | 20+ run | 20+ pass | |
| Conn | 4 | 15 | 26.7% | 1 | 3 |
| ND | 4 | 14 | 28.6% | 1 | 4 |
| Umass | 6 | 12 | 50.0% | 0 | 0 |
| BG | 6 | 14 | 42.9% | 0 | 3 |
| Ind | 11 | 19 | 57.9% | 2 | 3 |
| Total | 31 | 74 | 41.9% | 4 |
13 |
October 5th, 2011 at 10:07 PM ^
Tell me something I don't know. Please, like the JP thread, start something with CONTENT.
October 5th, 2011 at 10:19 PM ^
What jumps out at me there is the trends: our opponents became increasingly successful at converting 3rd downs in '10 as the weeks went on, whereas this year they've become less successful. (I may be wrong, but I think SDSU's figures are a bit inflated by their last two drives, when they gained a lot of yards through the air after the game was effectively over.)
October 5th, 2011 at 10:17 PM ^
"So we're better than last year, but only because of Minnesota."
I can't stand this line of reasoning. It's not like we only counted the games against OSU and MSU in our stats last year, we played plenty of bad teams. This defense has improved an incredible amount, not only over last year but over where it was in the beginning of this year.
October 5th, 2011 at 10:24 PM ^
I only meant that the 3rd down conversion is better than last year's. Looking at the game 5s, we destroyed Minnesota this year. Last year, we made Indiana look like a competent offense. IIRC, the week after we allowed them 35 points, Ohio State shut them down completely. That's when I really started getting nervous about last year's defense.
A couple things that don't show up in this chart. Last year's big plays were REALLY BIG plays. They went for 71 yards (who remembers Tyrone Pronty), 95 yards to ND's TE, you get the picture. This year, the 20+ plays are mostly in the 20-30 yard range. The other thing that doesn't show up is the turnovers. If you can play more aggressive and yield the same number of big plays, but you get more big plays on your side (sacks, turnovers, etc.) that's a net win. GERG didn't get that, apparently.
October 6th, 2011 at 10:01 AM ^
than last year, that it is due mostly to the Minnesota game, but empirically, one can see why they are more improved: Execution. The team tackles better, are out of position less, play more focused and consistently. Coaching and experience have improved execution, an improvement that continues as the season progresses. Who in their right mind would have forseen that the Michigan "D" may be the best in the Big Ten?
October 5th, 2011 at 10:23 PM ^
YOU DIDNT. Ezeh was a senior LB... and Mouton was either a Star Destroyer or a ewok depending on whether he ate his wheaties.
October 5th, 2011 at 10:24 PM ^
poor comparison...
Not only are we playing different teams, other than ND... but ND is a hell of a lot better than last year.
Your stats say we are "barely" better than last year at this point, yet we are allowing 10.2 pts per game compared to 25.1 a game last year...
Id would be better if you had 40+ yard plays teams had against us at this time last year
October 5th, 2011 at 10:32 PM ^
The comparison is what it is. Since we're similar in terms of third down conversions and 20+ yardage plays, there must be something else that explains the 25.1 vs. 10.2 ppg you mention. I think it's the length of the big plays (more 50+ yard plays last year) and more turnovers forced this year. I wonder if some of it is related to better starting field position for the defense.
October 6th, 2011 at 10:16 AM ^
Whether we scored or not, the defense was back on the field at a greater frequency last year then this year.
Actually, I supply no data to back this up, I'm doing the empiric thing again.
October 5th, 2011 at 10:42 PM ^
Perhaps as interesting as comparing the 2010 and 2011 3rd down conversion percentages is comparing the number of 3rd down conversion attempts in each of these seasons. In 2011, the Michigan defense is allowing 1.6 fewer 3rd down conversion attempts per game compared to 2010 (66 vs. 74).
The Michigan defense is not allowing opponents to sustain drives like they did last season (so far anyway). Possible causes: an increase in turnovers forced + an increase in sustained drives by the Michigan offense.
October 6th, 2011 at 7:29 AM ^
add to this: "Possible causes: an increase in turnovers forced + an increase in sustained drives by the Michigan offense"
This: Fewer total plays.
Through 5 games, there has been about 225 fewer snaps total in 2011 than 2010 first 5 games.
That breaks down as follows:
2010 D snaps 378 and 2010 O snaps 347 for a total of 725
2011 D snaps 248 and 2011 O snaps 248 for a total of 501.
WMU rain out had something to do with those, but no going no huddle on O means games are much shorter and the D is facing many fewer snaps.
October 5th, 2011 at 10:56 PM ^
Minnesota is the only thing that makes us better claim you make, and to expand on it using more than JUST 3rd downs and plays over 20, let's look at a per down yard gained stat:
UConn: 68 plays, 343 yards, 5.0 per play, 1 TO
ND: 76 plays, 535 yards, 7.0 per play, 3 TO's
UMass: 78 plays, 439 yards, 5.6 per play, 2 TO's
BGSU: 58 plays, 283 yards, 4.9 per play, 2 TO's
Indiana: 98 plays, 568 yards, 5.8 per play, 1 TO
TOTAL: 378 plays, 2168 yards, 5.74 per play, 9 TO's
WMU: 56 plays, 279 yards, 5.0 per play, 3 TO's
ND: 72 plays, 513 yards, 7.1 per play, 5 TO's
EMU: 52 plays, 236 yards, 4.5 per play, 2 TO's
SDSU: 77 plays, 376 yards, 4.9 per play, 3 TO's
Minny: 47 plays, 177 yards, 3.8 per play, 2 TO's
TOTAL: 304 plays, 1581 yards, 5.2 per play, 15 TO's
Just on the surface, the defense is saving a half a yard per play. Using last years per play totals, the defense has saved approximatelly 162.57 total yards. Another key component of this seaso so far is that they have done a better job staying off the field. Obviously missing a full quarter against WMU factors in a little bit, but even another 20 plays still is well short of the amount of plays defended last year up to this point. Turnovers are likely a huge factor in that. Any other thoughts here?
October 6th, 2011 at 12:51 AM ^
For the past couple years and now this year, all you hear the announcers talk about is how UofM's offense having longer sustained drives is helping the defense. (note: I would include turnovers on your own side of the 50 also). It would be interesting to see how the time of possession numbers and turnovers on your own side of the 50 compare between the two years.
October 6th, 2011 at 10:27 AM ^
Last year the defense couldn't get off the field until they ran out of it, while the offense was rarely on the field (so it appeared) for long, time consuming drives, which means the defense was back out on the field again--->more plays for the opponent's offense.
October 6th, 2011 at 9:42 AM ^
Im sorry but I dont think those numbers have much to do with anything....take a look at what we have done to teams in the redzone on D this year....thats where the huge change is. Also the one other important thing ...POINTS!!...Im pretty certain that looks way better to my eye this year
October 6th, 2011 at 8:22 PM ^
I agree. We've given up only 51 points through 5 games this year, versus 127 points through 5 games a year ago.