2009 start vs. 2011 start

Submitted by ssuarez on

Posted for user "stopthewnba" who doesn't have enough points to post.

The first 3 games of 2009 and 2011 were all at home vs. Western, Notre Dame, and Eastern.

- Same margin of victory in each game (2009 vs. 2011) - 21 pts Western, 4 pts Notre Dame, 28 pts Eastern
 
- Scoring about 5 ppg less, but allowing 5 ppg less
 
Offensive breakdown :
1317 total yds in 2009   1228 in 2011
505 passing in 2009       531 in 2011
812 rushing in 2009       680 in 2011

Defense breakdown :
1076 total yds in 2009   1028 in 2011
705 passing in 2009       527 in 2011
371 rushing in 2009       501 in 2011

Individual games breakdown :
Western (defense): 301yds/279 yds
Notre Dame (offense): 430yds/452yds
Notre Dame (defense): 490yds/513yds
Eastern (offense): 448yds/471yds
Eastern (defense): 285yds/236yds
 
What does this mean? Nothing, but it is weird.

Zone Left

September 20th, 2011 at 7:36 PM ^

To be fair, the 2011 version of Notre Dame we miraculously beat would have curb stomped the 2009 version of Notre Dame we miraculously beat--even after turning it over five times.

For about 15 years, I thought Notre Dame looked relatively unathletic, slow, and just plain not good. This Notre Dame team is big, fast, physical, and talented.

joeyb

September 20th, 2011 at 4:42 PM ^

Not really. We threw the same number of interceptions through the 3 games and had 0 fumbles. There were the same number of turnovers from WMU and EMU. The only difference has been ND and I think it's pretty well established that ND shot itself in the foot with turn overs.

JohnnyBlue

September 20th, 2011 at 4:33 PM ^

this year i'm scared. Offence has regressed, Defence looks slightly improved and I think from what I saw has potential to be "average" this year. but unless we can figure out how to get some sort of reliable passing game I don't see who we survive the big ten schedule.

ThWard

September 20th, 2011 at 4:35 PM ^

This post makes me sad.  But thanks to the poster that pointed out EMU/WMU/ND may be improved in 2011 (at the very least EMU prob is, not sure it's clear WMU/ND is just yet).

jmblue

September 20th, 2011 at 7:15 PM ^

WMU just trounced CMU by 30 points.  They could be a MAC contender.

As for ND, they really look like a quality team.  Maybe they'll just keep on being incredibly mistake-prone, but I doubt it.

 

maizenbluenc

September 20th, 2011 at 4:44 PM ^

WMU - no. Didn't they have an awesomer draft-ready QB last time??

ND - they had Clausen last time .... and Charlie.

PS I used "awesomer" as a joke, not because I am an idiot.

AA2Denver

September 20th, 2011 at 5:42 PM ^

One of WMUs wins in '09 was against EMU which could be the worserest (opposite of awesomer) team ever. WMUs offense looks pretty good right now.  I've watched three ND games (not proud of this) and I think their O-line is tremendous, great receivers and they have one the best linebackers in the country. They beat MSU fairly easily and remember MSU was ranked #15. Who knows if these teams are better, but I think it's clear we are, and that makes me feel a bit better going forward.

My preseason predict was 10-2 and I'm sticking with it. I'm probably an idiot but like I've said before someone has to be a homer around here.  

 

LSAClassOf2000

September 20th, 2011 at 4:53 PM ^

The numbers are a little disconcerting, but in all honesty, I think this is the worst team Hoke will ever have here, and it isn't really a bad team at all. There are trends on defense that are positive, particularly the in-game adjustments, and while the offense seems pretty flat at times, I think they are experimenting with Denard and trying to feel out the advantages / disadvantages of using him in various formations. On offense, I think Borges & Co. are still trying to figure out what exactly they have here.

Section 1

September 20th, 2011 at 5:41 PM ^

This OP (whoever gets credit for it) pulled some interesting numbers out that I didn't.  The exact same margin of victory in all three games ?!?  I sort of intuited that, but never put it together.

Anyway, there's no harm, there's no foul and no doubt none was intended by the OP.  I think a lot of people had the same (rather obvious) idea, based on the three opponents and the similar results.

I'm just getting a kick out of how the two original posts were scored by the readers.

WolverineHistorian

September 20th, 2011 at 5:16 PM ^

The margin of victory being the same in all three games is thanks to the rain/lightening against Western.  When that game was called, we had all the momentum, the stadium was incredibly loud and we were just about to score to make it 41-10.  I have no doubt we would have scored a couple more times if the 4th quarter had been played. 

The main difference I like from this year as opposed to 2009 (and 2010) is that we didn't play like crap the week after playing Notre Dame.  The defense played bad in one quarter and then played great the rest of the way.  2009 Eastern and 2010 UMass defense wise was an eye opener which led to the confirmation against Indiana that we were screwed the rest of the way.

I think the majority of fans saw the SDSU game as a trap game or dog fight even before the season started. 

RowoneEndzone

September 21st, 2011 at 8:13 AM ^

The stat that jumped out at me was the rushing total against us.  Perhaps it is b/c teams still thought they could not run it against a michigan defense back in 2009 but now the cats out of the bag so to speak.