Rodriguez's 2010 Scoring Offense = 3rd best in his career thus far
I know. I know. Nobody cares about offense, and "It's all about defense GODAMMIT!"
Alright already. I get it. Sheesh!
As many fellow UM fans are surely sharpening their pitchforks and drenching torches in kerosene this weekend, I just thought it was interesting to note that Rodriguez's 3rd team at Michigan racked up 412 points this year. That's his 3rd best scoring offense since he became a head coach in 2001 at West Virginia. The previous bests:
1st - 2007: West Virginia 11-2 (515 points)
2nd - 2006: West Virginia 11-2 (505 points)
3rd - 2010: Michigan 7-5 (412 points)
4th - 2005: West Virginia 11-1 (385 points)
On the other hand, Michigan's defense surrendered 406 points to the opposition. This is RR's worst ever scoring defense as a head coach by a wide margin (104 points).
Rodriguez's worst scoring defense at WVU was his 2nd team (2002, 9-4 record) when the Mountaineers gave up 302 points (13 games). Rodriguez's defenses at Michigan have surrendered 347 (2008), 330 (2009) and 406 (2010). Pretty damning, Godammit.
November 29th, 2010 at 12:59 AM ^
I'm sick of points. I'm also sick of yards.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:32 AM ^
November 29th, 2010 at 8:42 AM ^
Wins and losses.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:07 AM ^
for as good as this offense is, it only scored 6 more points than the defense. wow.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:17 AM ^
I'm pretty sure the offense has outscored the defense by more than 6 points given the fact that the defense has only scored, what, 8 points?
[/douchemode]
And yes, I am proud of myself.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:50 AM ^
NICE.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:48 AM ^
and I thought I would put you over the edge.
Also I don't think you are last. Just second, third and so on...
November 29th, 2010 at 2:03 AM ^
I believe a kind gesture such as this warrants a shot. Oh bartender, may I have 2 shots of his choice.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:14 AM ^
UM still has one more chance to put up 104 in their bowl game.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:14 AM ^
This is RR's worst ever scoring defense as a head coach by a wide margin (104 points).I think you mean 59 points.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:19 AM ^
November 29th, 2010 at 10:28 AM ^
"You keep you using this word but I do not think you know what it means"
/fake spanish accent
November 29th, 2010 at 1:25 AM ^
Wow, that's comforting.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:33 AM ^
Another way to look at it: we're approaching the ceiling and there's not much room to go up. I'd take less points for less turnovers any day.
November 29th, 2010 at 1:58 AM ^
You're right. Averaging over 500 ypg and over 34 ppg is near the ceiling and there's not much room to go up. You know, 'cause those averages are a-dime-a-dozen and shit. Someone hide all of the sharp objects up in this virtual joint... I'm feeling stabby.
Yardage-wise, M is definitely near the ceiling; 500 ypg is nothing to be scoffed at. It's top-10 dude...what else do you want?
Points-wise, M (as currently configured) can do better. Which means it can go from top-25 in ppg to top-10. Improving on turnovers (QB play) and Field Goals (PK Play) will increase our scoring. If two positions get better, M increases it's ppg by no less than 6.
November 29th, 2010 at 3:04 AM ^
November 29th, 2010 at 11:00 AM ^
and we have a more experienced offense including a QB who isn't a first year starter and we don't have so many drive crippling penalties and turnovers.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:38 AM ^
if they didn't turn the ball over 4 times a game.
November 29th, 2010 at 2:59 AM ^
Here's the thing I don't understand. Michigan led the B10 in "total offense." That's always the first thing RR fans say when arguing that M has one of the best offenses in the country. But the more important O stats belie the hype.
We cleaned up against the bad/meh teams. No question. But, frankly, who gives a shit that we ran wild on Indiana. We played five "quality" teams, losing to each.
MSU DEFENSE: On average, gave up 20 PPG. We scored 21. So we were average.
IOWA D: Gave up 16.5 PPG. We scored 28. Great, right? Not exactly. Through the first three quarters, we scored only 7 points. The rest came only after Iowa had taken a 21-point lead, then eased up.
PSU D: Gave up 24.5 PPG. We scored 31. Better, right? Not exactly. Our offense didn't start clicking until the second half, after we'd fallen behind 31-10. Iowa scenario, redux.
WISC D: Gave up 20.5 PPG. We scored 28! Alas. We scored zero points in the first-half. Didn't doing anything till Wisky was up 24-0. See Iowa, PSU.
OSU: Gave up 13.5 PPG. We scored 7. Period.
Scoring-wise, we averaged a point or two more than Illinois and MSU. We were nearly last in red-zone scoring. Tops in turnovers. We owned the middle of the field.
Sure, the young offense could well become great. Certainly showed exciting flashes. But so far, against quality defenses, the offense has been more sizzle than steak. And mostly a one-man band. Let's not get carried away.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:03 AM ^
November 29th, 2010 at 11:02 AM ^
People always dismiss second half points since the defenses weren't playing as aggressive as before, which may be partly true but part of the spread offense is that the fast pace grinds on the defense and they get tired by the end of the game, allowing the offense to explode late in the game.
November 29th, 2010 at 11:33 AM ^
...And Iowa was terrible in 2009.
November 29th, 2010 at 3:25 AM ^
Another way to look at it:
The Sophomore Denard led offense is ONE (1) touchdown per game better than the Freshman Tate led offense.
Don't believe me?
This year, Michigan scored 30.9 points/game. But 22 of those points came in overtime. So they scored 28.2 points/game in regulation.
Last year, Michigan scored 22.1 points/game.
So for all the hype, we saw one extra touchdown a game against conference brethren.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:09 AM ^
Since when does overtime not count? Freshman Tate had a chance to score points in OT but didn't - this seems relevant.
I think a 39.8% improvement in scoring (27.6% if you ignore OT, but you shouldn't) is pretty significant. Also, the link you provide shows that this years' point total would make us #1 or #2 in the Big Ten every year since 2006, except this year (where Wisconsin's ridiculous average really skews things). More importantly, "one touchdown per game" is typically a big chunk of the difference between the top and bottom teams in the league.
Also "Sophomore" Denard and "Freshman" Tate is misleading, since both were first-year starters and Tate was an early enrollee. If wins are what matters, we won 2 more games with a worse defense and a god-awful kicking game - seems to me the offense must have improved in a signifcant way. There are plenty of reasons to be ticked at Rich Rod if that's your thing, but that doesn't mean you need to disingenuously disparage the offense.
November 29th, 2010 at 4:07 AM ^
November 29th, 2010 at 9:32 AM ^
TD Drives Team 85+ Yards +------------------+-----------+ Michigan 10 Nevada 9 Stanford 9 TCU 8 Boise St. 7 Michigan St. 6 Mississippi St. 6 Ohio St. 6 Penn St. 6 San Diego St. 6 Utah 6
http://www.cfbstats.com/blog/2010/11/22/driving-for-distance/
November 29th, 2010 at 10:10 AM ^
Has four teams up there....and two of the others are ex Michigan guys?
November 29th, 2010 at 10:31 AM ^
Imagine if kicking field goals was a reliable option this year.