Most ridiculous stat of the game

Submitted by Fuzzy Dunlop on October 3rd, 2010 at 12:58 AM

We had six possessions in which we received the ball down or tied.  Those possessions resulted in six touchdowns.

We had six possessions in which we received the ball up 7, with a chance to pad the lead. Those possessions resulted in zero points. 



October 3rd, 2010 at 1:04 AM ^

I kept begging to be up two scores and we just couldn't make it happen. The D is obviously an issue, so when the come up with a stop, the offense needs to do a better job capitalizing on it. Especially against a terrible defense like Indiana's.

Hard to bitch too hard about the offense though.

willis j

October 3rd, 2010 at 10:37 AM ^

for sure. Denard missed some throws in the 2nd half which would have been huge gains if not TDs, and he looked just slightly off for the most part on his throws. Maybe it was the injury, maybe not. I mean he is going to be off some and won't hit every throw. 

Unfortunately he missed those 3-4 throws in a row which really hurt the offense.  But you know they came back strong when they had to and made plays. Kudos to them. 

Magnum P.I.

October 3rd, 2010 at 11:14 AM ^

Very interesting stat.

Our guys on defense must have fragile self-confidence out there. I think the fact that the offense didn't reward any of their stops with points made things worse. There's definitely a compound affect on the play of the defense when the offense scores after a big stop.

I think if we'd scored on just one of those possessions that followed a defensive stop, the game would have ceased to be competitive for the duration.


October 3rd, 2010 at 1:35 AM ^

Hard to argue with the amount of points and yardage. My following comment will be a result of being spoiled by the offense...

M played a few series awfully conservative during a stretch in the 2nd half where M had a chance to put the game on ice. The offense didn't look the same for that stretch and that was a bit disconcerting.

However, Great Win!


October 3rd, 2010 at 11:20 AM ^

Evidence that Lloyd is still pulling the strings at UM? Ah... feeling nostalgic for old times...

But seriously, I don't think it was for lack of effort. I didn't see many zone lefts or lateral screens on 3rd and long. Maybe Denard being slightly banged up had a bit to do with his misses on the deep balls, or maybe he just missed a few. He/we'll work out the kinks as the season progresses.


October 3rd, 2010 at 1:48 AM ^

Ypp on drives where we were tied or down: 17.6!!

When up, 6.2. But if you take the huge Roundtree play out that drops to 2.5.

Edit: Just curious and not whining: what's with the negs? It looks at the OP's point in a different relevant way.


October 3rd, 2010 at 1:03 PM ^

It was really nice to see the ball throw down field much more this year.  We have receivers that can be deep threat guys and yesterday was an off day for Denard and the long ball.  I hope that does not stop us from going deep in the future


October 3rd, 2010 at 1:59 AM ^

Yeah, this was frustrating.  I don't know if the weather was a factor, or if RR/Magee just didn't want to ask Denard to win the game through the air when we were on the road, but I thought we went away from the passing game a little too much in the second half.  We attempted a few bombs that fell incomplete, but not much intermediate stuff. 

It's incredible to me how efficient a passer Denard is.  Against UMass he threw for 241 yards on 14 attempts.  Against BGSU, 60 on four attempts.  Today, 277 yards on 16 attempts.  I know some of these have to be set up by the running game, but I want to see him get in the 20-30 attempt range.   


October 3rd, 2010 at 2:32 AM ^

I think Denard got rattled there for a while. It was after he was injured, and I think that had something to do with it. Whether he was in pain and couldn't physically do it, or if it was psychological. I think it was mostly psychology because he looked just fine on the game winning drive.


October 3rd, 2010 at 9:39 AM ^

It is no secret that our D is less than fantastic.  However, when you take into account that they were on the field 3/4 of the game, they played as well as we needed them to in the second half.  When they got the O the ball back, the O needed to capitalize to take some of the pressure off.


October 4th, 2010 at 1:56 AM ^

Its good that the Offense can score fast, but at the same time the D needs more then 2-3 minutes of rest.

Well, our D had better pray for a few more TV commercials after our TDs, cuz I don't see us slowing our offense down any time soon.

I don't care how "big bad and ugly" any opposing Big Ten defense looks this year ... we're gonna' be gunnin' for ya'.


October 3rd, 2010 at 3:54 AM ^

Our team wins games.  We have nothing to compain about.  I love this team.  This team is the future of Michigan football.  They win games.  We need to support the team.  A win is a win.  A win is a win.  This team needs our support; RR needs our support; GERG needs our support.  Just watch RR and GERG exchange at end of game.  This team NEEDS our support.  If you don't support this team, you aren't a Michigan fan.  GO BLUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


October 3rd, 2010 at 8:47 AM ^

We need to take better notes on how to be and maintain the empire.  Retaliation is not enough, we need to drop the bombs and level the enemy whenever we have the chance!  Hey, in all seriousness, the kids are young but play with heart and emotion.  How lucky are we to watch and root for such a great group of guys.


October 3rd, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^

Brother McGee might have gotten a little conservative when we were up to try to burn some clock and give our D a rest.

Yeah Dilithium overthrew those two which could have been big gainers.  He hit Junior when it counted though, then finished the scoring off with a nice run.

I love good defense and I've got to remember to be patient with our young secondary.

But while at times it's pretty frustrating, it doesn't come close to the conservative offensive playcalling of past coaching staffs.  We would have to be 2-3 scores down in the 4th quarter before we'd open up the playbook.  When Chad and company torched Florida over the top as a 14 point dog, I wondered what we had been doing all year.

This offense is a blast to watch.

Thank you RichRod.


October 3rd, 2010 at 10:04 AM ^

We had 1 drive of more than 5 plays.


The offense had a lot of opportunities to put the game away and they didn't do the job.  42 points is great, but we could have put up 70 if we would have executed better.


October 3rd, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^

i noticed that at some point in the 3rd. we couldn't score unless indiana had just scored. every time IU scored, we scored. every time we stopped IU, our offense couldn't do anything.