Steve and Nick for the win
I guy on rivals put this up yesterday and I assumed it could be correct. Borton has referenced it in one of his front page stories so maybe it is.
I am not making any point with this post besides the fact that I would have bet large sums of money that the hypothesis regarding scoring was false, as in no f*cking way this would be true. Maybe my memory is failing me. However, you can slice data any number of ways and I have to give the two guys credit for what they did with an offensive line held together with baling wire and band-aids. Tip of the hat guys.
The flip side of this is that this means the 2010 defense is for the loss by a huge margin, thanks for keeping it close. Anyhow, here is the fancy chart I created with data from "the ner"
Comparison of B10 First Half Game Statistics
|
Year |
Points Scored |
Turnovers |
Points Allowed |
|
2008 |
110 |
11 |
106 |
|
2009 |
108 |
9 |
110 |
|
2010 |
100 |
12 |
179 |
November 30th, 2010 at 12:50 PM ^
I'm pretty sick of hearing about the 'meaningless' second half points. Remember in 2008 and 2009 when we'd come out strong, only to be bottled up in the second half? Everyone criticized us by saying that we had nothing in the playbook, and by the time defenses figured us out, we had no response. We also made no adjustments at the half.
Now, when something hasn't been working, we do adjust, and suddenly that's evidence of scoring when it doesn't matter. Brian made the comment a while back that using stats like that was backfilling reasons to say the offense doesn't work. That's exactly what this is.
November 30th, 2010 at 1:01 PM ^
It was not their fault they did not have anything left in the bag after half time nor do I give a damn. That wasn't the point.
Christ, maybe GERG needs to rub a teddy bear on this board.
November 30th, 2010 at 12:50 PM ^
This was a diary yesterday here. And I still think it's stupid today.
November 30th, 2010 at 1:13 PM ^
Also, it falls under my new "Neg Every Coaching Change Discussion" (NECCD) Policy as tending to promote a discussion about Rodriguez's alleged failures. As such, -1 to the OP.
November 30th, 2010 at 2:13 PM ^
consider that we used to have a "Sheridan dammit" chart. A few props for the guys that had little to work with and kept up with a record setting quarterback. I don't know either one of them personally, but I bet they would puff their chest out a bit to that fact considering how maligned they were.
Secondly, find any post of mine regarding a change in HC or OC (DC is another issue).
Third, I love Denard. Considering his personality and that he knows Nick, would he say, "eff you Nick, there are two halves in a game, we killed your full game totals" or give him some credit?
November 30th, 2010 at 4:06 PM ^
This is going to require more points.
November 30th, 2010 at 12:51 PM ^
Too bad that they play two halfs.
November 30th, 2010 at 12:54 PM ^
only the first one counts. Jeez, how many people have to point out this basic fact of football?
November 30th, 2010 at 12:55 PM ^
I'm so glad we have had the 2nd half to make all those amazing comeback wins.
/s
November 30th, 2010 at 12:53 PM ^
That is the most disheartening part for me. I realize we have young players, but in my opinion turnovers reflect on a coach as well.
November 30th, 2010 at 5:40 PM ^
Maybe RichRod forgot to tell the players, "Carry the ball high on the rib cage to the outside and hold it in tightly, putting two hands on it when you get into traffic," but I don't think he did. I know that much just as a spectator. I have to believe someone imparted this knowledge to the Michigan backs at every level.
Assuming he told them this, and assuming that they do stripping drills in practice, how is fumbling a coaching issue? Causing fumbles is a coaching issue, but I still don't get how losing fumbles is. It still seems to be experience that teaches, not the coaches.
Interceptions are much more a coaching issue, but I would bet our math and stats whizzes could back up the proposition that experienced quarterbacks throw fewer picks than inexperienced quarterbacks. Stanzi comes to mind.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:01 PM ^
Yeah, that damn Fred Jackson...
November 30th, 2010 at 12:53 PM ^
That's why Boise is playing in the National Championship game this year instead of Auburn.
...oh, wait
November 30th, 2010 at 1:15 PM ^
Could the reason for the second half surge be that we have limited talent that causes us to fall behind...then we have good coaches that make sound and effective adjustments. I mean this seems like a more plausible reason for second half point increases.