Turnover Stats for PSU Game

Turnover Stats for PSU Game

Submitted by PeterKlima on October 16th, 2017 at 5:15 PM

Maybe not a surprise, but the PSU game will come down to one thing IMO = turnovers.  The turnover battle is so important for this game because:

1.  Penn State is SECOND in the country in turnover margin. That may "over-inflate" their score margin in victories.

2.  Michigan is 95TH and very close to the bottom. Of course, the QBs interceptions have made our games look much worse in final score.

3.  Penn State needed a real miracle to beat Iowa.  It was the only game in which they had a negative turnover margin all year.

4.  Michigan lost one game -- by 4 points -- this year and it was a -5 turnover game.

While fumbles may be somewhat random, interceptions are not IMO.  As long as we can keep it on the ground and force PSU to air it out, our chances of a positive turnover margin improves.

In Michigan's favor, the Wolverine running game is improving and its reliance on the passing game might be able to go down.  And, the weather should be dry/good on Saturday.  If O'Korn doesn't throw a pick, we win.  That's a big IF.

 

 

2013 Turnover Analysis–Updated thru ohio

2013 Turnover Analysis–Updated thru ohio

Submitted by Enjoy Life on December 2nd, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Blerg: A game that didn't go as expected with a turnover that was very unusual. When Countess intercepted the pass in the second quarter on the Michigan 9 yard line and everyone was cheering, I was saying just knock it down. It was 3rd and 17 on the ohio 31 yard line. After a 7 yard return M had the ball on the Michigan 16 yard line. Ohio would have punted on 4th down and the interception resulted in the same field position as a punt that was a net 53 yards. For the game, ohio had a net of just 38 yards per punt. Michigan had a net negative for that turnover of –0.57 EP. (Of course, a good return was possible which would have resulted in positive EP.)

The interception on the extra point try is not counted in the official stats as a turnover and, obviously, was not any more significant than a pass breakup.

Synopsis: Michigan's TOM for the game was +1.0 and for the year is now +5.0 (+ 0.42 per game) which improved to #33. Turnovers were not a primary factor in determining which team won the game. In fact, turnovers were not a primary factor in determining the winning team in any games that Michigan played this year year.

Countess picked up his sixth interception and this ranks him #4 nationally. Blake is also ranked #3 nationally with 169 interception return yards. Thomas Gordon forced a fumble that was recovered by Desmond Morgan and resulted in Michigan's drive to tie the game at 35-35.

Gardner had his sixth lost fumble of the year in the third quarter. Devin has 11 fumbles and 6 lost fumbles for the year both of which are the worst in the FBS. His 11 interceptions are ranked #20. But his QB rating is still an excellent 146.1 and ranked #33. Just imagine, this year without those turnovers!

Michigan finishes the year at +10.0 in TOM for B1G conference games which is second only to MSU at +12.0. And yet, M ends the year with a dismal 3-5 in conference play.

imagePlayer Details: Here is the overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game).

imageNational Rankings: All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. imageThe four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).

image_thumb1_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb[1]Turnovers And Winning: This chart shows turnover margin (TOM) at the end of the season versus the percentage of teams with a +4 WLM (8-4 record) or better. [WLM = Win/Loss Margin = Wins – Losses]

Expected Points: The impact of each turnover depends upon the down, the spot the turnover is lost, and the spot the turnover is gained. image

This chart shows Expected Points for various yard lines.

image_thumb8_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb[2]

This chart shows the basis of EP calculations for each turnover.

image_thumb4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Iowa

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Iowa

Submitted by Enjoy Life on November 25th, 2013 at 5:47 PM

Ifs, Buts, and Meh: For the third game this year, Michigan has figured out how to dramatically win the TO battle and lose the game. Penn State was +6.9 EP for turnovers, Nebraska was +6.8 EP for turnovers, and Iowa was +10.3 EP for turnovers. That TO margin should have resulted in 2-3 more wins – If the offense hadn't imploded (but it did). Michigan's offense has averaged just 10.5 points in regulation for the past 4 games and that would be ranked #123 nationally. Meh

Synopsis: Michigan's TOM for the game was +3.0 and for the year is now +4.0 (+ 0.36 per game) which improved dramatically to #35. Turnovers were not a primary factor in determining which team won the game.

Countess picked up his fifth interception and this ranks him #8 nationally. Blake is also ranked #4 nationally with 162 interception return yards. Taylor is ranked #25 nationally after his fourth interception for the year and Beyer racked up his first interception. The game ended with Gardner's 10th fumble and fifth lost fumble of the year.

Michigan is now +9.0 in TOM for B1G conference games which is second only to MSU at +11.0. And yet, M is a mediocre 3-4 in conference play.

Versus ohio: I figure it will take a TOM of +6 for M to win this one. Ohio does not commit giveaways with just 1.2 per game ranked #19. For takeaways they average 1.8 per game ranked #39 nationally. For B1G conference games, ohio's TOM is +4.0 and is ranked #4. May god have mercy on our souls.

imagePlayer Details: Here is the overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game).

imageNational Rankings: All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. imageThe four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).

image_thumb1_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbTurnovers And Winning: This chart shows turnover margin (TOM) at the end of the season versus the percentage of teams with a +4 WLM (8-4 record) or better. [WLM = Win/Loss Margin = Wins – Losses]

Expected Points: The impact of each turnover depends upon the down, the spot the turnover is lost, and the spot the turnover is gained. image

This chart shows Expected Points for various yard lines.

image_thumb8_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb[2]

This chart shows the basis of EP calculations for each turnover.

image_thumb4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb[2]

2013 Turnover Analysis–Updated Thru NW

2013 Turnover Analysis–Updated Thru NW

Submitted by Enjoy Life on November 19th, 2013 at 2:04 PM

No Turnovers?: It is extremely rare in football when neither team has a turnover. The last time this happened to Michigan was three years ago in the Penn State game in 2010. The official stats for the game will document there was a turnover and will be misleading. It was fourth and 23 in OT and the game would have ended on that play with merely an incomplete pass rather than the interception in the end zone. But, Thomas Gordon will be happy and it does help Michigan's turnover stats.

Synopsis: Michigan's TOM for the game was +1.0 and for the year is now +1.0 (+ 0.10 per game) which improved slightly to #55. Turnovers were not a primary factor in determining which team won the game. In fact, turnovers have not been a factor in determining which team has won the game in any of Michigan's games this year.

Funchess had the one fumble in OT but recovered it himself. Thomas Gordon ended the game with his interception (his third of the season).

Michigan is +6.0 in TOM for B1G conference games which is second only to MSU at +8.0. And yet, M is a mediocre 3-3 in conference play. Perhaps the 2.3 YPA for rushing in B1G conference games has something to do with that (ranked #11 in B1G and 34% less than the next worse – Illinois at 3.5 YPA).

Versus Iowa: For the year, Michigan and Iowa are virtually identical for turnovers. Iowa has 1.6 giveaways per game ranked #57 and 1.60 takeaways per game ranked #75 with a 0.00 TOM per game ranked #61. But, Iowa is –0.20 TOM for home games. Michigan has a +0.3 TOM for home games and has a -0.2 TOM for away 3 games. For B1G conference games, Iowa's TOM is –1.0 and is ranked #7.

imagePlayer Details: Here is the overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game).

imageNational Rankings: All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. imageThe four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).

image_thumb1_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbTurnovers And Winning: This chart shows turnover margin (TOM) at the end of the season versus the percentage of teams with a +4 WLM (8-4 record) or better. [WLM = Win/Loss Margin = Wins – Losses]

Expected Points: The impact of each turnover depends upon the down, the spot the turnover is lost, and the spot the turnover is gained. image

This chart shows Expected Points for various yard lines.

image_thumb8_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb[2]

This chart shows the basis of EP calculations for each turnover.

image_thumb4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Nebraska

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Nebraska

Submitted by Enjoy Life on November 11th, 2013 at 12:51 PM

What The Hell Is Going On Out Here!: In unison, the entire Michigan fan base was quoting Vince Lombardi on Saturday. Gardner has just one giveaway in the last 2 games and the offense has NEVER looked worse. If this is what ball security looks like --- fagetta bout it! Devin looks tentative on just about every throw and every run. I'm not buying the "lack of talent on the O line" either. This is just horrible, horrible play calling/coaching. Unless something changes drastically, M is looking at 6-6 (and how does 10-2, 8-4, 6-6 look for the first 3 years).

Synopsis: Michigan's TOM for the game was +2.0 and that should have been enough for a victory. The first takeaway resulted in 2 yards in 3 plays and a missed 52 yard FG. The second takeaway was run, run, run for a massive total of 3 yards and a 40 yard FG. You don't win very many football games when scoring only 13 points.

For the year M is now dead even at 0.0 TOM and improved to #62. Turnovers were not a primary factor in determining which team won the game. Tam Gordon forced a fumble that was recovered by Wormley and Norfleet recovered the muffed punt and ran it in for the touchdown. Stupid rule if you ask me.

Next Week: For the year, Northwestern is somewhat better than Michigan for turnovers. NW has 1.8 giveaways per game ranked #70 and 2.4 takeaways per game ranked #17 with a +0.60 TOM per game ranked #25. Oddly, NW has a worse TOM at home (+0.2/game) versus on the road (+1.0/game). NW is ranked #3 for interception takeaways with 2.0 per game. Michigan has a TOM of –0.7 for road games.

imagePlayer Details: Here is the overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game).

imageNational Rankings: All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. imageThe four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).

image_thumb1_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb[2]Turnovers And Winning: This chart shows turnover margin (TOM) at the end of the season versus the percentage of teams with a +4 WLM (8-4 record) or better. [WLM = Win/Loss Margin = Wins – Losses]

Expected Points: The impact of each turnover depends upon the down, the spot the turnover is lost, and the spot the turnover is gained. image

This chart shows Expected Points for various yard lines.

image_thumb8_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb

This chart shows the basis of EP calculations for each turnover.

image_thumb4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru MSU

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru MSU

Submitted by Enjoy Life on November 5th, 2013 at 7:19 PM

Synopsis: Michigan's TOM for the game was 0.0 for the second game in a row and for the year remains at – 2  (– 0.25 per game) which improved slightly to #75. Turnovers were not a primary factor in determining which team won the game but the interception by Ramon Taylor with 2:18 left in the third quarter with the score just 16-6 presented a golden opportunity. I was freezing my butt off in Spartan Stadium with the rain/sleet pelting me and was shocked that Dantonio was still throwing the ball so much. I figured the only way Michigan had a chance to come back would be through turnovers. I thought with the two score lead, Sparty would just run the ball and punt. But, Michigan could not do anything with the turnover and the Spartans dodged a bullet (16-13 would have been mighty interesting).

Gardner did throw an interception but, under the weather conditions, I expected more turnovers. Gardner, Gallon, and the Team (that horrible snap) all had fumbles but all were recovered by Michigan. The Spartans did not have a fumble.

Michigan had 12 giveaways in the first 4 games and has cut that in half in the last 4 games with just 6 giveaways.

For the year, Michigan and Nebraska are virtually identical for turnovers. Nebraska has 2.0 giveaways per game ranked #82 and 1.70 takeaways per game ranked #55 with a –0.30 TOM per game ranked #81. But, Nebraska is –2.0 TOM for the last 3 games and is –1.5 TOM for away games. Michigan has a 0.0 TOM for home games and has a +0.3 TOM for the last 3 games.

imagePlayer Details: Here is the overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game).

imageNational Rankings: All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. imageThe four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).

image_thumb1_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbTurnovers And Winning: This chart shows turnover margin (TOM) at the end of the season versus the percentage of teams with a +4 WLM (8-4 record) or better. [WLM = Win/Loss Margin = Wins – Losses]

Expected Points: The impact of each turnover depends upon the down, the spot the turnover is lost, and the spot the turnover is gained. image

This chart shows Expected Points for various yard lines.

image_thumb8_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb

This chart shows the basis of EP calculations for each turnover.

image_thumb4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb

2013 Turnover Analysis – MSU Preview

2013 Turnover Analysis – MSU Preview

Submitted by Enjoy Life on October 28th, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Turnover Comparison: MSU is just not turning the ball over this year. With 1.1 giveaways per game, they are ranked #16 in the nation. That would be a lot better if MSU did not have an almost unbelievably poor 17% recovery rate (ranked #121) on their own fumbles. Sparty is not doing as good on takeaways with 1.9 takeaways per game – ranked #43. Overall, their turnover margin of +0.7 is excellent and ranked #18. At home, MSU is +1.0 in TOM and away they are +0.3

On paper, Michigan's giveaways are 2.43 per game and ranked #103. However, M dug itself into a huge hole with 12 giveaways in the first 4 games (an average of 3.0 per game). Over the last 3 games, Michigan has 5 giveaways (an average of 1.67 per game which would be ranked #58 ). Michigan is doing very good in takeaways with 2.14 per game and is ranked #28. At home, M is 0.0 for TOM and away we are –1.0.

Gardner threw 8 interceptions in the first 4 games (an average of 2.0 per game) but has thrown just 2 in the last 3 games (0.67 per game which would be ranked #22). Since it will be very difficult for Michigan to run the ball against MSU, Gardner will be tossing the ball around a lot.

Obviously, going into the game, MSU has the statistical advantage for turnovers. However, TOs are highly variable from game to game and are not very predictable. Almost all teams that end the year with very good TOMs have one or more games with negative TOMs during the year.

Keep your fingers crossed.

National Rankings: The chart shows Michigan's detailed turnover numbers (top 3 rows) compared to MSU's. All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. imageThe four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Indiana

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Indiana

Submitted by Enjoy Life on October 21st, 2013 at 4:57 PM

Saved By The DBs: All this year Michigan has been plagued by giveaways (6 fumbles and 11 interceptions) and the defense has only 4 fumble recoveries. But, the defense has saved the day with 11 interception takeaways. Michigan has 1.6 interception takeaways per game this year as compared to just 0.5 per game in 2012, and 0.7 in 2011.

Keep Throwing The Damn Ball!: Knowing they would need to score points to beat Indiana, M opened up the offense with a record setting day passing the ball. But, with Indiana ranked #98 in defense rushing yards per attempt coming into the game, it was no surprise that Manball continued with a 63.5% run play percentage for the game and 61.28% for the year (ranked #17). Yards per rush for M is ranked #64. Michigan did open up on first down by passing the ball 36% of the time as opposed to passing just 22% on first downs previously.

MSU is ranked #1 in opponent rushing yards per attempt, #3 in opponent rushing play percentage (41.5%), and #1 in opponent rushing yards per game (at 59.8 YPG with the #2 team – Louisville – allowing 40% more YPG at 83.7). If Michigan is able to run the ball against MSU, I will be shocked!

With 63 points, Michigan improved to #8 in scoring offense but with 47 points allowed plummeted to #57 in scoring defense.

Synopsis: Thanks to the 2 fourth quarter interceptions by Gordon, Michigan's TOM for the game was 0.0 and for the year remains at – 2  (– 0.29 per game) which improved slightly to #81. Turnovers were not a primary factor in determining which team won the game. Prior to the two interceptions, Michigan had a disadvantage of 10.13 expected points and the score was just 49-47. The TOs had obviously kept Indiana in the game and they definitely had a chance to win. With those last two interceptions, M ended the game with a disadvantage of just 1.95 EP.

Gardner did not throw an interception but did fumble the snap from center on 2 yard line. Toussaint fumbled the pitch for his first lost fumble. imagePlayer Details: Here is the overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game).

imageNational Rankings: All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. imageThe four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).

image_thumb1_thumb_thumb_thumbTurnovers And Winning: This chart shows turnover margin (TOM) at the end of the season versus the percentage of teams with a +4 WLM (8-4 record) or better. [WLM = Win/Loss Margin = Wins – Losses]

Expected Points: The impact of each turnover depends upon the down, the spot the turnover is lost, and the spot the turnover is gained. image

This chart shows Expected Points for various yard lines.

image_thumb8_thumb_thumb_thumb

This chart shows the basis of EP calculations for each turnover.

image_thumb4_thumb_thumb_thumb

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Penn State

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Penn State

Submitted by Enjoy Life on October 14th, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Throw The Damn Ball!: That may sound crazy with M ranked #124 for interceptions thrown percentage. Even with all those TOs, Gardner is ranked #51 in QBR with a 143.5 rating. It is completely ridiculous to believe Michigan can run against opponents that are stacking the box with 8 or more defenders and selling out on the run. Do the math. When the quarterback hands off, the defense has 2 more defenders than the offense has blockers. Unless you force the defense to take some of those defenders out of the box to cover receivers, running the ball will not work. Penn State is ranked #20 in rushing yards allowed per game and M still ran the ball 63% of the time for a paltry 2.8 yards per attempt (Toussaint only averaged 1.0 YPA). M is ranked #9 in rushing defense yards per attempt. So, what do you think the opponents are doing?? Yeah, passing the ball – Opponent rushing play percentage is just 43.7% (ranked #10)! BTW, Indiana is ranked #98 in rushing yards per attempt so don't get all excited if M can run against them. After that MSU #2, ohio #5, Iowa #12, Nebraska #48, NW #83. Throw the damn ball!

Michigan improved to #14 in scoring offense but slipped to #34 in scoring defense. Manball unfortunately continues with a 63% run play percentage for the game and 60.8% for the year (ranked #16). Yards per rush is ranked #69.

Synopsis: Michigan's TOM for the game was +1 and for the year it is now – 2  (– 0.33per game) which improved slightly to #82. Turnovers were not a primary factor in determining which team won the game (but should have been). Michigan had an advantage of 3.34 expected points at the end of regulation even though total turnovers were the same for both teams. Without turnovers, M would have lost in regulation. In OT, the turnover by PSU should have resulted in a Michigan win – it didn't.

Clark got his first 2 fumble recoveries and Ross III had his first forced fumble. Taylor and Wilson both added their second interceptions. Gardner threw two interceptions, had two fumbles, and lost one fumble.

imagePlayer Details: Here is the overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game).

imageNational Rankings: All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. imageThe four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).

image_thumb1_thumb_thumbTurnovers And Winning: This chart shows turnover margin (TOM) at the end of the season versus the percentage of teams with a +4 WLM (8-4 record) or better. [WLM = Win/Loss Margin = Wins – Losses]

Expected Points: The impact of each turnover depends upon the down, the spot the turnover is lost, and the spot the turnover is gained. image

This chart shows Expected Points for various yard lines.

image_thumb8_thumb_thumb

This chart shows the basis of EP calculations for each turnover.

image_thumb4_thumb_thumb

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Minnesota

2013 Turnover Analysis – Updated Thru Minnesota

Submitted by Enjoy Life on October 8th, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Zip, Zero, Nada, None, Null: For the first time in 2 years (!) Michigan did not have a giveaway. Coincidently, the last time was also against Minnesota in 2011. However, giveaways usually come in bunches so it is still too early to say the problem is solved. Let's hope good Devin is here to stay. Michigan improved to #20 in scoring offense and #21 in scoring defense. Manball continues with a 66% run play percentage for the game and 60.3% for the year (ranked #20).

Synopsis: Michigan's TOM for the game was +2 and for the year it is now – 3  (– 0.60 per game) which is ranked #95. Illinois, Indiana, and Penn State are the only other B1G teams with negative TOM for the year. Turnovers were not a primary factor in determining which team won the game but Michigan had an advantage of 10.5 expected points for the two takeaways. Countess had his fourth interception of the year and is tied for #1 in the nation. Blake also has 149 interception return yards and leads the nation. Black had a forced fumble which was recovered by Ross III.

imagePlayer Details: Here is the overall summary for all games by player (data in yellow was affected by this week's game). .

imageNational Rankings: All rankings include games between two FBS teams ONLY and are from TeamRankings except for forced fumbles which is from CFBStats. imageThe four columns with *** show the best correlation to offense and defense (per Advanced NFL stats).

image_thumb1_thumbTurnovers And Winning: This chart shows turnover margin (TOM) at the end of the season versus the percentage of teams with a +4 WLM (8-4 record) or better. [WLM = Win/Loss Margin = Wins – Losses]

Expected Points: The impact of each turnover depends upon the down, the spot the turnover is lost, and the spot the turnover is gained. image

This chart shows Expected Points for various yard lines.

image_thumb8_thumb

This chart shows the basis of EP calculations for each turnover.

image_thumb4_thumb