Michigan offense - "inexplicable"
Many here are wondering why Michigan is running this "inexplicable" offense while not running something more "modern." Perhaps this will answer some questions:
2021 COLLEGE FOOTBALL OFFENSIVE FEI RATINGS | Football Outsiders
Follow the link, and you will see Michigan is ranked 60th in offensive efficiency. Huh, I guess I get why you guys are upset.
No wait, I misread that. They're ranked 6th. SIXTH. The offense is good, and the stats back that up. Now before you point out that the 2nd half against Rutgers sucked (which it did) I will find you 2 quarters of crappy offensive performance from every other team not named Alabama.
Sure, you can find things to critique, especially in the wake of a couple of bad quarters. However the large picture right now says that what these coaches are doing is emphatically working (on both sides of the ball, by the way).
And before you point out that it's too early to use advanced stats, my rebuttal is that it's still a much better indication of reality than a bunch of keyboard warriors who don't like that we don't have an air raid offense. The only inexplicable thing going on here is why they are this good after being so terrible last year.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:08 PM ^
Take that Mighty Soviets and put it in your pipe and smoke it!!!!
September 27th, 2021 at 11:18 PM ^
LOL. Dude you just tore up a drawing from James Franklin.
September 28th, 2021 at 9:47 PM ^
Bama scored 10 pts total in the last three quarters against Florida.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:11 PM ^
Probably definitely because they have zero turnovers, which kill efficiency, and not because they have the sixth most effective offense.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:17 PM ^
So what you're saying is that if an offense wasn't good at things they're supposed to be good at then they wouldn't be ranked as high?
Truly groundbreaking.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:27 PM ^
They're 116th in plays run per game. This is like Army winning games by limiting possessions.
Limiting possessions does not a great offense make.
(For the record, I'm not implying the offense is bad but this efficiency rank is quite a bit misleading if you if you are equating it to quality of offense.)
September 27th, 2021 at 8:32 PM ^
116th in plays per game has literally nothing to do with efficiency. Plays run per game is completely irrelevant in determining how effective an offense is.
Limiting opponent possessions can actually be VERY effective at winning games, particularly if your offense is more efficient than your opponent. And so far, ours has been incredibly efficient.
September 27th, 2021 at 9:52 PM ^
Yeah, it works fine for a team like Army, but it will likely not produce a B1G champion. We saw the negative side effects when the offense couldn't gain first downs in the second half, and thus Rutgers was able to claw their back into the game because the defense was absolutely gassed. If Michigan gets behind in games, they're going to have a very hard time making up ground.
Again, I'm not saying they are bad, but looking solely at efficiency is not a good indicator, and tricking yourself into believing Michigan has the sixth best offense in the country is probably going to end in some disappointment.
September 27th, 2021 at 10:46 PM ^
I mean, there’s no question we won’t win many more games if the offense plays like the 2nd half against rutgers, but the first drive of the game ate up half the first quarter and put 7 points on the board, and an offense that can do that consistently can be really tough to deal with. It might not make for pretty box scores, but it can be plenty efficient even though total yards and scoring offense may be lower than a more modern offense. Unfortunately, at this point there are real, legitimate doubts that we’ll be able to consistently move the ball against more talented defenses.
September 27th, 2021 at 10:47 PM ^
This is spot on. A shorter game against an inferior opponent only increases the inferior opponent’s chances of pulling off the upset. Think about it like this: if March Madness (or college hockey, for that matter) were played as a series each round instead of single elimination, we would see far fewer upsets because the longer competition allows for the better team to emerge. Same concept applies here.
September 28th, 2021 at 12:05 AM ^
Spot on! The example I like to use is the best chance I have at beating (insert good shooter here) in a 3 pt shooting contest is if the contest consists of 1 shot. Increasing the number of shots in said contest and my probability of winning approaches zero rapidly.
September 28th, 2021 at 12:59 AM ^
Similarly, a shorter game against a superior opponent increases Michigan’s chance of winning. Does anyone know if there is a game in the schedule where such a shorter game might help???
September 28th, 2021 at 8:37 AM ^
Yeah but in order to effectively shorten the game, you have to be able to consistently move the ball against said superior opponent. Kind of puts them in a catch 22 strategy wise.
September 28th, 2021 at 8:53 AM ^
At first i was, "why are random letters bolded" and then "oh, i get it".
September 28th, 2021 at 8:25 PM ^
In this game, it seemed like a longer game against an inferior opponent would have increased Michigan's chances of losing.
September 27th, 2021 at 10:55 PM ^
This whole thing feels like groundhog day, when people would argue whether Rich Rod's offense was actually good or not because he beat up on the beginning of the schedule, but it generally failed to be effective against Wisconsin, MSU, or OSU not to mention his defense sucked so effing bad.
September 27th, 2021 at 11:04 PM ^
Omg, remember how people would go on and on about yards per game and how it was just bad luck that Rich Rods offenses didn’t score that much (but they were secretly super duper awesome!)
September 28th, 2021 at 1:19 AM ^
Ah yes, the days we would claim a September Heisman winner right before crapping the bed.
September 28th, 2021 at 8:55 AM ^
It's 2021 and we are still producing September Heisman's and still crapping the bed in November. Will it continue this season? Remains to be seen, but there were some troubling signs revealed against Rutgers.
September 28th, 2021 at 9:39 AM ^
Seth mentioned on the podcast for the 100th time, but it’s necessary because so many people don’t understand it - if you have the better offense, you increase variance by reducing the number of plays.
If you are the better team, variance is not a good thing.
I’m not dumping on the offense or Cade and I’m not freaking out about one half. But the idea of shortening the game, as the better team, is the wrong idea IMO. You can still win a lot, but you are making it tougher on yourself.
116th in plays-per-game is not a good thing.
September 28th, 2021 at 11:23 AM ^
Is zero turnovers sustainable? I will answer that: no, it is not. Michigan has hardly passed the ball, and thankfully they haven't needed to. They will need to at some point. Cade will throw interceptions, it's just a matter of time. As for fumbles, the backs have done a good job holding onto the ball but at some point it's going to get punched out, and then it's a dice roll. Maybe we'll get another year like 2011.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:31 PM ^
Hmm. You cool if we go and turn it over four times next week in exchange for a couple big downfield passes and an end around?
September 28th, 2021 at 12:06 AM ^
I would take this deal in a heartbeat in any game for the rest of the season (with everything else being equal to what it is now):
two Michigan QB interceptions for 300+ yards of Michigan passing.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:31 PM ^
I'm just taking a wild guess that even if they turned it over an average amount, they'd still be ranked pretty high. I don't think 6th is 100% accurate, but to deny this offense has been very efficient is a dramatic and irrational take.
September 28th, 2021 at 8:26 AM ^
What if......they continued with this very retrograde offense but managed to win almost every game anyway. Would you still think they didn't have the sixth most effective offense?
September 28th, 2021 at 10:27 AM ^
Isn't that an awfully big "What if?"
Let's say they continue to run this offense (and "retrograde" is a very good word for it). Doesn't it stand to reason that every future opponent is going to use the Rutgers game as a blueprint for how to stop it? And I think it's fair to say that most of these opponents are stronger teams than Rutgers, so they'd probably have equal or more success.
Having said that, how is it logical to think that Michigan could win almost every game of the schedule, when they barely survived this one?
September 28th, 2021 at 10:44 AM ^
That's not what she is positing though. Some people just seem to hate on the style of offense we are playing. Which to me is doubly inexplicable.
I don't care what O you play as long as it wins.
Anyone over 30 and/or who enjoys fundamentals should enjoy this style of football. It's what I grew up on. There is a reason why lots of well coached, under talented teams play this style of football. It wins against more of your opponents than not. And sometimes you drop 52 on OSU.
September 28th, 2021 at 11:04 AM ^
What are these teams you speak of that play this style of football?
September 28th, 2021 at 11:04 AM ^
My son is a college pitcher. He pitched in a playoff game last season. Pitched 8 innings. He got the other team to hit into 5 double plays but he got no strike outs. His team won 8-2. I can't recall how the two runs scored or if they were credited to him or the reliever. He thought it was a failure on his part because he didn't strike anyone out. But they won the game. He wasn't happy because he didn't pitch the kind of game he would've liked, overpowering batters, etc...But he pitched well enough to keep the other team, the #3 ranked D3 team at the time, from getting big hits and winning. I see parallels here to that mentality. Winning isn't enough; you have to win in a certain way for it to be legit.
September 28th, 2021 at 11:19 AM ^
I think it depends on the context of the game and where we are in the season. An "ugly" win vs. Wisc, PSU, MSU or OSU will be celebrated for the end result as those are the games we all care about and view as the true test of the team. Only the result matters in those games. An "ugly" win vs. almost anyone else is not celebrated for the end result but scrutinized for how it was accomplished and viewed as a harbinger of things to come in the games we all care about the most. Give us 11 or 12 ugly wins this season and we'll be thrilled; give us an ugly win vs. Rutgers in week 4 and we'll digest it differently.
September 28th, 2021 at 12:20 PM ^
This. Great, we beat Rutgers. Sure, celebrate. The problem is that the WAY we beat Rutgers suggests that we have little chance of beating Wisc, PSU, OSU, and potentially others that remain on the schedule. Do we have to win every game for the season to be a success? I don't think so. BUT... we DO have to be competitive in every game we play. IF 2nd half against Rutgers is a sign of how Michigan's offense will approach the game and execute plays in the future, then we WON'T be competitive against the aforementioned trio. Yes, we won this battle... but the war is looking shakier than it did last week.
September 28th, 2021 at 12:04 PM ^
They’ve scored on more drives this year than in years past, which also lends to effectiveness.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:13 PM ^
Great post, OP.
Despite the 4-0 record and 3.5 halves of dominance - the season is already lost and doom is on its way to many asinine pessimists on this blog. Terrific to read a strong, positive and accurate post.
Been an exciting, surprising and fun season so far - for some of us. Go Blue!!!
September 27th, 2021 at 8:32 PM ^
Nothing short of playing Alabama in the NC game and winning it. We forget lot of people had this year marked as 7 win game, I think we make it without question. The coaches and players have improved compared to last year. And idk enough about college football coaches to have an opinion on who is better that we can reasonably get than what we have right now. The stats are honestly way better than what was expected 3.5 games.
But don't get me wrong I get upset too having to worry every game if we are going to win or not.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:13 PM ^
GD double post...
Let's beat the living shit out of Wisconsin to go to 5-0! Go Blue!!!
September 27th, 2021 at 8:14 PM ^
I think one problem is that it is the 2 most recent quarters they played.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:14 PM ^
And don brown had a great defense by the numbers heading into the horseshoe in 2018. I love the numbers, but you have evaluate what you are seeing what is right in front of you. That second half was abysmal with awful play calls.
September 27th, 2021 at 10:03 PM ^
I still have fond memories of Rich Rod's 4-0 start in 2009. Even better was his 5-0 start in 2010. Whatever happened to that guy?
September 27th, 2021 at 10:27 PM ^
Was thinking the same thing: how can you trust one of the 800 stat compilations online more than you trust what’s actually happening right in front of you? How many 3-and-outs in a row vs. Rutgers does it take?
September 27th, 2021 at 11:18 PM ^
We could play and destroy 4 random high school football teams for our first 4 games of the season and some people would still think we have accomplished something. Listen, 4 wins is great, but let’s not overstate the quality of those wins. Save the first half of western, the rest of our competition was abysmal. You can say “well, but that team beat this team” etc but just watch the product they put out against us. IW looked awful, NIU looked even worse. We have proven that we can beat 3 bad teams at home. Last week a semi competent Rutgers showed us that. Maybe JH and co underestimated Rutgers and we’re just doing the bare minimum to win our first 4 games. We shall soon find out if the JH apologists or the pessimists are correct.
September 28th, 2021 at 12:51 AM ^
Conversely, we could play 4 really solid teams for 3 1/2 games, fire off a few blanks for a half and some will call for Harbaugh's head, right before they jump off a bridge and impale themselves on the jagged rebar below.
September 28th, 2021 at 9:41 AM ^
Are you in a psilocybin research trial while typing this? When have seven straight good halves against four solid opponents happened in the Harbaugh era?
September 27th, 2021 at 11:27 PM ^
Simple. We trust in the stats because football is a game played on paper.
September 28th, 2021 at 1:46 AM ^
One, a two, a three...It takes three Rutgers 3-and-outs in a row.
September 27th, 2021 at 10:52 PM ^
One completion for seven yards in the second half against ... Alabama. No, no, against Georgia. No, no ... against Rutgers. Seven yards. Seven yards.
Man, hard to believe that's the 6th most effective offense in the US.
September 28th, 2021 at 4:03 AM ^
Because it's not.
September 28th, 2021 at 11:40 AM ^
This. I'll never understand people that base their opinions purely on stats and rankings. Michigan is the poster child for padding stats against lesser opponents only to be revealed as frauds once they play anyone with a pulse. We haven't played anyone. Western, Washington, and N. Illinois are not good teams. Rutgers has a HC that whether you like it or not is pretty good and made adjustments. It's not being pessimistic, it's having eyeballs and being a realist. This offense has Harbaugh's stubborn, scared, play to not lose stamp written all over it. Also how do you expect your QB to make throws for you in critical moments when he's spent 3/4 of the game handing it off? No rhythm, no timing. We don't know what McNamara can do. Harbaugh is shell shocked and doesn't know what to do anymore so the game plan is as vanilla and safe as you can get. I want Michigan to finally justify the preseason hype they get every year. It truly pains me to say it but their frauds. Again. You guys can have your rankings and rose colored glasses. Neg away.
September 27th, 2021 at 8:16 PM ^
I think the bigger issue is that we’ve seen this before, whoop up on the cream puffs and then can’t do anything against a good team. Maybe the 2nd half was an aberration and the offense is really good, maybe they’re not…We’ll find out in the coming weeks
September 27th, 2021 at 8:18 PM ^
Michigan's schedule has been much less creampuffy than most thus far, and these efficiency rankings account for that anyway.
Next question.