Rushing Offense was good but...

Submitted by goody on
Brian just posted the rushing numbers from the past years to show that this years rushing numbers were actually above average for a Michigan team in the last eight years. But the real problem this year was the passing. So here we go: 2001: 6.49 ypa 2002: 6.41 ypa 2003: 7.40 ypa (WTF Navarre) 2004: 6.74 ypa 2005: 6.53 ypa 2006: 7.67 ypa (WOO Henne) 2007: 6.77 ypa 2008: 5.08 ypa (wa wa wa wa) This has to improve for the offense to take any steps forward.

MichFan1997

November 25th, 2008 at 12:18 PM ^

that was a problem...you know, cuz Sheridan was our QB at the end of the year. Threet wasn't much better throwing either. But that was actually one of the points Brian was making. The running game was still decent with a make-shift Oline and no downfield passing threat--which puts more people in the box to stop the run.

goody

November 25th, 2008 at 12:30 PM ^

I just wanted to put it into statistical(word?) terms, a la Brian, to show just how bad they were this year. Also, how suprisingly good they were in 2003 with Navarre.

caup

November 25th, 2008 at 1:13 PM ^

Navarre's 2003 offense was the highest scoring offense (460 pts) since Yost's Point-A-Minute teams of 1901-05. Navarre graduated as Michigan's career leader in passing yards. If you gave him time to throw he would carve up a defense. There's virtually no difference between Henne.2006 and Navarre.2003.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

November 25th, 2008 at 2:25 PM ^

I don't think YPA is the problem. It's just a symptom of a poor completion percentage. Rushing YPC is more important than YPA. YPA only comes into play when you have a high completion percentage and low YPA, which means you should probably worry about your playcalling. 2002: 54.9 2003: 59.7 2004: 59.8 2005: 58.2 2006: 62.2 2007: 53.2 2008: 48.8 So yeah. This doesn't really say anything we didn't already know, but I think it's more telling than the YPA. Of note, Threet was 51.0, which is still worse than either Henne or Navarre but closer to the bottom end of both, while Sheridan was 46.0, which is Brutal.

WolvinLA

November 25th, 2008 at 3:54 PM ^

Yards per attempt is the better number. Like yards per rush measures the average gain per running play, yards per attempt measures the average gain per passing play, thus incompletions need to be factored in. Are you a good passing team if you throw 2 complete passes for 50 yards and 8 incomplete passes? Your yards per completion is 25 making it seem like you are a good passing team, but that is clearly misleading. An incomplete pass is analogous to a rush for no gain, and both need to be figured in to a teams passing and rushing performance, respectively.

Hannibal.

November 25th, 2008 at 3:59 PM ^

Completion % and YPA are both pretty good to use. In theory, YPA should be better because it is an all-encompassing figure, but football strategy seems to favor consistency as much as yardage. I think that this is ultimately why a lot of teams still favor the running game even though 5 ypc is good but 5 ypa is terrible.

Hannibal.

November 25th, 2008 at 3:33 PM ^

Navarre had an excellent senior year although it took him a few games to get started. Up until the Rose Bowl, the team scored at least 27 points every game.

Huss

November 25th, 2008 at 3:47 PM ^

that we regularly hovered around an extremely average YPA of 6.5 when we had oodles of talent on offense is a testament to how stagnant we had become. Of course we sucked passing this season. When this offense clicks, though, 7.5 YPA should be about the norm.