November 9th, 2009 at 12:47 AM ^
So, this proves RichRod's offense works right? And depending on the size of the epic defensive fail, we might be below projections when looking at PF vs. PA. In other words...why does god hate us?
November 9th, 2009 at 12:50 AM ^
Aren't they the reason Jeopardy exists in the first place?
November 9th, 2009 at 12:52 AM ^
Incidentally, "University of Michigan Football" was once a category on Jeopardy!
My dad and I were annoyed because the contestants kept picking other categories. And because the questions were too easy.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:51 AM ^
also probably turns the ball over more times per game, on average, than any team in the Big10.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:56 AM ^
You created an account to post this comment? Go away troll.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:23 AM ^
I just started an account this evening after following mgoblog for awhile (I suppose everyone with an account has had a first post as some point -- without any ceremony, you just witnessed mine). I took the original post as seeking to reconcile our lack of winning in light of our offensive production vis. points scored. The answer, as I see it, is offensive turnovers (well that, and defense).
On a positive note, when we turn the ball over less frequently (with experience, extra weight from offseason workouts etc), I think its worth at least a couple of games. If some of those turnovers are addressed, and we shore up a few things on D mentally next year, even if we're not good, it should lead to at least 6 wins.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:43 AM ^
Fair enough. I happily retract what I said. Welcome to the board. Don't talk about mgopoints and try to keep posts to high-ish quality and you'll go far.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:19 AM ^
Purdue with 6 more total turnovers on the season.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:20 AM ^
A little more interesting to me is we are one of the highest scoring offense in the B10 and we only have one win in conference.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:38 AM ^
Is that the fact that we have a good O and no D leads to higher scoring games generally. I bet if you looked at the average number of points our opponents have scored against us on the year per game, that would be good to hypothetically be most in the Big10 if it were a single team's numbers. For example, Iowa put up a lot of points against us. So did Purdue. So did Indiana. When our opponents play eachother, its inevitably less of a shootout so they score less frequently.
On the plus side, when our D improves, our O will likely become even more proficient than it already is, which is a good thing.
November 9th, 2009 at 2:20 AM ^
When you look at Big-Ten-only stats:
http://www.bigten.org/sports/m-footbl/stats/2009-2010/confonly.html
In other words, take out our offense against the shitty defenses of WMU, ND, EMU, and DSU, and it's not that great (even though it's getting better, actually looked good Saturday; good weather related perhaps?).
In fact, if you look at in-conference stats and compare ours to Wisconsin's, I don't think this Saturday's going to be pretty, especially when you consider our road performances and our bad-weather performances. This Saturday's forecast: Rain, 56F.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:25 AM ^
everyone plays patsies. I think the number of patsies per team is about even, for the most part