S&P+ Five Factors Matchup: UM vs. Maryland

Here's the next installation of Bill Connelly's Five Factors metrics matchup between UM & Maryland.

The "M Offense vs. MD Defense" column gauges the performance of the UM offense against the MSU defense by either taking the product (if inversely proportional) or the ratio (if not inversely related) between those two metrics. The results are then re-scaled to the national average by dividing by or multiplying by the national average, respectively. Likewise, the "MD Offense vs. M Defense" computes the other two metrics to gauge the performance of the Maryland Offense.

From there, the column with the greater aggregate number has the competitive advantage...EXCEPT, in the three categories with asterisks: "Stuff Rate", "SD Sack Rate" and "PD Sack Rate", which are contra-metrics that gauge the offense's ability to avoid the given categorical description.

Anyway, the numbers showing the advantage are in bold, and as such it appears the matchups tilt in M's favor in four of the Five Factors, including Turnovers. Breaking it down further, UM has the advantage in all but two sub-categories, as follows:

1. Rushing IsoPPP (rushing explosiveness, measured as pts. scored per successful rushing plays). Maryland is showing a significant advantage here, largely due to the rating of its offense (well above average) compared to the M defense (below average). Keep in mind that since this metric considers successful plays only, it can be a bit deceiving. The net Rushing Success Rate for the MD offense is about 50% lower than UM (this is even worse than what LOLRutgerz was by comparison). 
2. SD IsoPPP (standard down explosiveness, measured as pts. per successful standard down). The same as against Colorado, PSU, Wisconsin, RU, MSU... Again, keep in mind that IsoPPP consider successful plays only, of which there are not a great number against the stout UM defense. Again, the success rate for UM is about 70% greater than Maryland.

The IsoPPP advantages of Maryland in standard downs and rushing plays will mean UM must be on the lookout defensively in order to contain explosive plays, particularly on Standard Downs. This is not necessarily a weakness so much as a condition of the UM Defense under Don Brown's aggressive schemes. These comparative results have been consisent since the Colorado game. As we know, the explosive plays don't occur as often as with other teams simply because the defense just isn't on the field for as many plays. It just seems that when they are on the field, UM's secondary will need to continue to be on its toes in blitz situations. PFF numbers I've seen regarding QB ratings vs. Stribling and Lewis, however, QB's would do better by just throwing the ball out of bounds than anywhere near the U-M CB's. However, the handling run fits is a different thing.