Michigan Rushing Attack After 3 Games - No. 22 in Nation - 242 YPG & 6.3 YPC

Submitted by markusr2007 on

For all of the questions along the OL this fall, things could be considerably worse.

242 YPG and 6.3 YPC.

I'll take it.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/statistics/team/_/stat/rushing/sort/rushingYardsPerGame

Michigan rushing attack is currently ranked in the Top 25, and incidently tied with Oregon and in good company with some other notable offenses in college football:

 

clarkiefromcanada

September 14th, 2014 at 6:39 PM ^

What teams, exactly, have played multiple "real opponents" to date this year? Our rivals certainly are not:

Ohio State: Navy, Virginia Tech, Kent State

Notre Dame: Rice, Michigan, Purdue

Sparty: Jacksonville State, Oregon, Eastern Michigan

Not really buying your argument. If or when Michigan maintains top 30 or 40 stats rushing will you then criticize their diminished passing stats?

/smh

 

alum96

September 14th, 2014 at 8:05 PM ^

I think everyone who has played SOLELY non conf games has similar types of cupcakes...generally by now you've played 2 cupcakes and 1 team with a pulse if you go by the old fashion scheduling.  Some in fact have only played 3 cupcakes.

But increasingly conference games are being played very early.  As for what teams have played real teams - quite a few have.  The entire SEC and Pac12 already have conference games under their belts.  Closer to home, PSU for example has played UCF (a top 10 team last year who admittedly lost Bortles) and Rutgers.   Georgia has already played Clemson and South Carolina. Texas A&M has played S.C. USC has played Stanford, etc. 

It's now how it used to be where everyone starts the season with 3(4) non conf games and 3 baby seals.   The SEC has done the in conf games early for over a decade I believe and I am noticing the Pac 12 started real early this year.

With all that said we have a running attack this year which does not include 40%+ reliance on hero ball QB.  It was not very good vs ND.  It has been very good versus 2 bad teams.  Let us hope we can get to "average" vs the bad Big 10.

CompleteLunacy

September 14th, 2014 at 7:32 PM ^

Rankings at this point are very shaky because not only is the sample size small (3 games for each team), but almost every team in FBS has played at least 2 cupcake. It's not a Michigan-exclusive thing. But go ahead and keep believing that.

 

Drbogue

September 14th, 2014 at 8:42 PM ^

Compare this OL to last years performance against Akron and UConn. Would you say they are improved? The answer is yes. 5.5 YPC against Akron, 3.9 YPC against UConn. If you reserved all judgement until the end of the year, then just ban all MGoBoard discussion.

Picktown GoBlue

September 14th, 2014 at 8:44 PM ^

Sagarin ratings for each of these:

  • Ohio State (18): Navy 63, Virginia Tech 33, Kent State 171
  • Notre Dame (12): Rice 79, Michigan 49, Purdue 118
  • Sparty (8): Jacksonville State 83, Oregon 1
  • Michigan (49): App State 140, ND 12, Miami OH 177

FBS teams between App State and Miami (NTM)

  • Buffalo 143
  • Air Force 145
  • Tulsa 146
  • New Mexico 148
  • UTEP 151
  • So Mississippi 154
  • Troy 156
  • FIU 157
  • Idaho 170
  • Kent Read Kent Write 171

FBS teams worse than Miami (NTM)

  • New Mexico State 187
  • UMass 189
  • Georgia State 196
  • EMU 197

Massey has App State at 121, Miami (NTM) at 127, and EMU last at 128.

Massey Composite has App State 116 and Miami (NTM) last at 128.

Both bad, both bottom 15.  One is not bottom 5 yet.

Small sample size, YMMV, etc.

 

Zone Left

September 14th, 2014 at 6:39 PM ^

That's an apples to apples comparison for most of the country. Very few teams have played more than one halfway decent opponent.

Also, we haven't averaged that kind of yardage without Denard since what, Tim Biakabatuka was around? The improvement relative to last year at this time, against similar opposition, is huge and Gardner isn't having to play hero ball to get there.

MosherJordan

September 14th, 2014 at 6:54 PM ^

True, but it's not like the other teams in the top 25 were all playing great teams. Also, given how we struggled to run against anybody last year, even the bad non-conference teams, this line and our running attack is clearly improved. Is it up to standards of a decade ago? No. Still, if the line play and the run game continue to improve this year, I think Hoke's hot seat will cool down a bit. My confidence in Hoke was definitely shaken by the severity of the ND defeat, but the reality is that barring a Harbro wanting the job, a weak B1G should allow allow this team to improve as the year goes on and put the ND fiasco in the rear view.

Gucci Mane

September 14th, 2014 at 6:25 PM ^

Clearly the improvement on the offensive line has been made in spite of Hoke, Funk. There is no way these guys can actually improve players. /S

name redacted

September 14th, 2014 at 6:46 PM ^

Exactly. With the talent on the team, talent hoke and co recruited but I will give them no credit for doing so, there is no excuse for not being top 25 in the nation. They all should be fired. What was that,#22? Ahem, like I said, no excuses for not being in top 15. Fire everybody.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

bighouse22

September 14th, 2014 at 9:48 PM ^

For the not enough data points crowd, I would suggest the chest beating is held to a minimum until more data points are available.  The line and rushing has looked better than last year.  Keeping the opponents in mind, Michigan has a significant talent gap between Miami and App St.  I would fully expect the #1 RB recruit in the country and a 5 Star 5th Year Senior QB to be able to rack up yards against said cupcakes.  

In fact we don't know how good is good for any of the teams ranked at this point.  Michigan has a positive start and need to keep building on it.  If that happens the season will probably shape up well.  If it is fools gold the season will go poorly.  Next week will tell us a lot in my opinion.

Sac Fly

September 14th, 2014 at 6:42 PM ^

I'm not buying the competition argument right now.

We've played two weak teams so far, but Michigan played weak teams last year and they already have more 100 yard rushing games from their RB's than they had all of last season.

Bleedmaizeblue

September 14th, 2014 at 6:42 PM ^

It doesn't seem like we've ran the ball that well. We still have more negative plays than we can afford, and most of that stat is the 3 long runs against App State, and Greens long run against Miami, OH.....Still impressive we are that high in rushing nationally

Magnus

September 15th, 2014 at 8:00 AM ^

Even if you take out the three long runs equaling roughly 180 yards...

(which I don't know why you would, since every other major team has played at least one patsy so far and has presumably made big plays against inferior opponents)

...Michigan has run the ball 113 times for 546 yards. That's an average of 4.83 yards/carry, which would be good enough for #51 nationally.

So...I guess the moral of the story is...you're wrong.

BlueKoj

September 15th, 2014 at 8:40 AM ^

UM RBs tackled for loss:

2014 ASU=4, ND=2, MOH=2.

2013 CMU=4, ND=5,  Akr=7, UConn=4

Small sample but, that is significant improvement on RB TFLs. The non-QB running game has obviously made a jump. More jumps are needed of course.

(And thank you. My eyes are bleeding from looking 2013 stats up)

turd ferguson

September 14th, 2014 at 6:43 PM ^

I'd imagine that our defense's rushing yards allowed has a loftier ranking, especially if you remove sacks (since we have relatively few).  It doesn't look like ESPN has updated the defensive team stats yet, though.

poseidon7902

September 14th, 2014 at 6:55 PM ^

Wonder where michigan ranks for negative plays?  I saw something about they had 8 of them against ND.  Just curious how we rank compared to the rest of the FBS teams.  

MGoStrength

September 14th, 2014 at 6:56 PM ^

Anyone know what it was after the first 3 games of last season?  That would be a more valuable comparison than where we are in relation to other teams right now IMO.

Blue NY Gold

September 14th, 2014 at 8:30 PM ^

Keep in mind that the first three games running stats for DG:

2013
CMU- 52 yards
ND-82 yards (leading rusher)
Akron- 103 yards (leading rusher)

And now 2014
App State- 9 yards
ND- 5 yards
Miami OH- 25 yards

Regardless of rankings and yardage in general, I would argue that not having our QB as our leading rusher proves the run game is in better shape in 2014...

Just my opinion!!

Go Blue!!

UMaD

September 14th, 2014 at 7:02 PM ^

Smith and Green - 20 carries for 55 yards against ND.  That's the best snapshot we have of where this run game is at.

Purdue's top 2 backs (Hunt & Mostert) had 19 carries for 79 yards against ND.  Rices guys got 20 carries for 62 yards. So, we didn't have any more success than middling Rice and Purdue.

As for Miami, Marshall's backs ran 28 times for 182 yards. 31 for 181 was Smith/Green's numbers yesterday.  So we matched Marshall.

However, using the transitive property, I can confidently say our run game is better than Eastern Kentucky. So - there is indeed some reason to think optimistically.

Another comparison (to ourselves):  Against ND, our RBs had 23 carries for 70 yards last year, this year 22 for 75.

Takeaway:

The run game appears to have improved from last year.  The amateur eye can see that there are holes, sometimes they are even large. But if you think our run game is actually GOOD, you either have to believe ND has an extraordinary defense or also think that Rice and Purdue have good running games. Reading too much into Miami or App State seems foolish.

There's a long way to go from how awful the run game was last year to being an actual area of strength.

name redacted

September 14th, 2014 at 9:14 PM ^

I think you are forgetting that we got down quick to Notre Dame which made us change the game plan. Had the game been close we would have attempted to run a whole lot more for a lot more yards. As you probably know when you're behind and the clock is against you the tendency is to pass a lot more than you normally would



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

poseidon7902

September 14th, 2014 at 7:01 PM ^

It should also be noted, we are 22 in total rushing yards.  We're 45th in RYPG.

We're 86 in Passing Yards Per Game.  

 

OSU have 25 more sacked yards lost than we do.  That's on 2 more sacks than us. 

MGoRob

September 14th, 2014 at 7:17 PM ^

Total yards is stupid for comparison.  Some teams have had BYES already (MSU) and if you're up a lot, you're going to run it more.  Better to look at YPA.

Now that makes more sense.  We are #14! MSU #82, haha. 


RK TEAM YDS/A
1 Georgia Southern 7.9
2 Arkansas 7.9
3 Nebraska 7.4
4 Arizona State 7.1
5 Georgia 6.9
6 Marshall 6.7
7 Auburn 6.7
8 Navy 6.6
9 Duke 6.5
10 Indiana 6.5
11 Pittsburgh 6.4
12 Boston College 6.3
13 Oregon 6.3
14 Michigan 6.3
15 Texas State 6.3
16 UTEP 6.2
17 Alabama 6.2
18 Arizona 6.2
19 Georgia Tech 6
20 Toledo 6
21 Western Michigan 6
22 Texas Tech 5.9
23 North Carolina State 5.7
24 New Mexico 5.7
25 Oklahoma 5.6
26 Texas A&M 5.6
27 Florida 5.6
28 Wisconsin 5.6
29 East Carolina 5.6
30 Louisiana-Lafayette 5.5
31 Appalachian State 5.4
32 Air Force 5.3
33 Mississippi State 5.3
34 Bowling Green 5.3
35 Baylor 5.1
36 Old Dominion 5.1
37 Colorado State 5.1
38 Kansas State 5.1
39 Syracuse 5.1
40 TCU 5.1
41 Utah 5
42 Tulane 5
43 Memphis 5
44 San Diego State 5
45 Northern Illinois 4.9
46 BYU 4.9
47 Middle Tennessee 4.9
48 Army 4.9
49 Cincinnati 4.9
50 Washington 4.8
51 Maryland 4.8
52 Kentucky 4.8
53 Kansas 4.8
54 Florida State 4.8
55 Missouri 4.7
56 Stanford 4.7
57 Oregon State 4.7
58 South Florida 4.6
59 Louisville 4.5
60 Utah State 4.5
61 Ohio State 4.4
62 Minnesota 4.4
63 Colorado 4.4
64 New Mexico State 4.4
65 Georgia State 4.4
66 Miami (FL) 4.4
67 LSU 4.3
68 UAB 4.3
69 Boise State 4.3
70 Notre Dame 4.3
71 Oklahoma State 4.2
72 North Carolina 4.2
73 South Carolina 4.1
74 Purdue 4.1
75 Louisiana Tech 4.1
76 Buffalo 4
77 Rice 4
78 California 4
79 Ball State 3.9
80 Ole Miss 3.9
81 UNLV 3.9
82 Michigan State 3.9
83 UCLA 3.8
84 Virginia Tech 3.8
85 Rutgers 3.8
86 Ohio 3.8
87 Clemson 3.8
88 Temple 3.8
89 Nevada 3.7
90 Arkansas State 3.7
91 Eastern Michigan 3.7
92 Wyoming 3.7
93 Iowa 3.6
94 Southern Miss 3.6
95 USC 3.5
96 Texas 3.5
97 Western Kentucky 3.5
98 Tulsa 3.5
99 Florida Atlantic 3.5
100 Hawaii 3.4
101 West Virginia 3.4
102 Vanderbilt 3.4
103 Houston 3.4
104 Akron 3.4
105 Virginia 3.3
106 Tennessee 3.3
107 Troy 3.3
108 Louisiana-Monroe 3.3
109 North Texas 3.2
110 Iowa State 3.2
111 South Alabama 3.2
112 Central Michigan 3.1
113 Fresno State 3.1
114 UTSA 2.7
115 Massachusetts 2.7
116 Illinois 2.6
117 Florida International 2.5
118 Penn State 2.5
119 San Jose State 2.5
120 Northwestern 2.5
121 Idaho 2.4
122 Miami (OH) 2.2
123 Connecticut 1.9
124 Kent State 1.9