Points Allowed

Submitted by artds on October 10th, 2011 at 10:33 AM

Here are our points allowed through the first half of the schedule since 2001

2011:   75

2010: 161

2009: 147

2008: 149

2007: 120

2006:   85

2005: 111

2004: 114

2003:   88

2002: 125

2001:   87

A couple of observations:

  • This is our best start since 1997, when we allowed only 50 points through the first 6 games.
  • 2007 was a bit of an anomally.  We gave up 73 points in first 2 games to App State and Oregon, then gave up only 9 points in the next 2 games to Notre Dame and Penn State

Comments

Erik_in_Dayton

October 10th, 2011 at 11:05 AM ^

Minnesota was really bad last week.  EMU and SDSU didn't bring much to the table either.  We keep having this discussion, and the people who point out that this team has benefited from some weak opponents are correct. 

The D is much improved this season.  I'm amazed at how much they've improved, in fact.  But does anyone really think that they're in the league of the 2006 defense? 

jmblue

October 10th, 2011 at 11:34 AM ^

The point of contention is not with the idea that this year's team has played some weak opponents, but with the implication that past years' teams didn't also do so.  For example, we played SDSU in 2004 as well, and EMU in 2005, 2007, and 2009.  Last year we played a Bowling Green team that finished 2-10.  In 2008 we played an awful Miami (Oh) team.  In 2007 we played the ND squad that went 3-9.  And so on. 

Erik_in_Dayton

October 10th, 2011 at 11:45 AM ^

I agree that Michigan's D is remarkably improved...My greater point is that this board is getting pretty North-Korea-ish in terms of its intolerance for any comment that is not 100% flattering to all things Michigan (or rather all things currently Michigan, since the past teams were Michigan teams too).  I don't care about the points, but it's ridiculous when someone's comment is disappeared b/c it doesn't fit into the box of "This Michigan team is the greatest team ever on the face of the earth, so much so that to watch them play is to reach enlightenment and be freed from suffering." 

Tater

October 10th, 2011 at 2:51 PM ^

Negging Block M is really, really funny, because it is an utterly useless and futile gesture by whoever did it.  I mean, Duuuuuuude: you just negged somebody with 25000 points.  If Block M made 10 posts a day, you negged them all, and you were the only person voting, Block M would still be well over 20,000 a year from now.

Besides, I just pos'd it, therefore negating your neg.  So have others, probably just because of your vote, which means you ultimately had the opposite effect from that which you intended.  

Have a great day.

BrickTop

October 10th, 2011 at 12:45 PM ^

I get negged all the time because I express my views that as a fanbase we shouldn't be so underservedly arrogant about certain opponents that we play until we get back to beating them consistantly but nobody wants to hear that either. And for someone to say that "that's the way the board has always been" is a cop out.

SirJack

October 10th, 2011 at 12:23 PM ^

I don't think anyone can minimize the obvious, massive improvements on defense this year. And no, I don't think it has much to do with everyone got a year older. Look at Ryan and Countess: those dudes seem to know what they're doing when they're out there.

Hoke_Floats

October 10th, 2011 at 10:40 AM ^

they certainly reduce the margin of error for the offense vs. past years

the 3 1st half int's would have been the death knell last year

this year we can claw back to win games

Don

October 10th, 2011 at 10:59 AM ^

1971 - 25 pts

1976 - 58 pts

1977 - 42 pts

1978 - 55 pts

1985 - 33 pts

The B10 is vastly more competitive now than back in the 70s, and offenses in general are much more prolific than they were back then. Considering that, our 2011 defense is doing damn well so far in terms of historical comparisions.

Protoman20xx

October 10th, 2011 at 11:01 AM ^

Those are great stats, but after the last 3 years and then the 1 vs.2 game against tsio.  This team wil really be judged on how we finish.  Just think of the 07' team, even with the HORROR finishing beating Florida and Tim Tebow it was considered a solid team.

 

justingoblue

October 10th, 2011 at 12:15 PM ^

2006:

Vandy: 4-6
CMU: 10-4
ND: 10-3
Wisconsin: 10-1
Minnesota: 6-7
MSU: 4-8

2011:

WMU: 4-2
ND: 4-2
EMU: 3-3
SDSU: 3-2
Minnesota: 1-5
NU: 2-3

That's the discrepancy. 2011 has performed better than 2006, but their opposition has been weaker (although I still think this is distorted because SDSU/WMU/EMU/ND all play frontloaded schedules, I'm not going to go back and look up each record through six games). In 2006 we had already played one BCS team (ND) and one other who is a poster child for getting rid of the three teams per conference rule.

DrunkOnHiggins

October 10th, 2011 at 11:47 AM ^

Anyone remember that play (or plays) Illinois ran against us last year? Where the HB is standing in the end zone with not one Wolverine within 10 yards of him?

I haven't seen anything remotely close to that yet this year...

Hoke_Floats

October 10th, 2011 at 12:05 PM ^

we haven't seen a team re-adjust to our adjustment

we shut down the NU option game in the 2nd half, but they could not react and do something else..

I wonder do teams have enough time for 2 wrinkles against UofM or are they limited via practice time and atheletes on scholarship to only prepare 1 trick?

Protoman20xx

October 10th, 2011 at 11:59 AM ^

I think this defense more so than most D's in the last 10 years is able to step up in big situations.  3rd and short, 4th downs, red zone, and goal line.  They looked coached and it looks like 11 guys are always on the same page. 

Gorgeous Borges

October 10th, 2011 at 12:26 PM ^

I think Hoke has changed the tide on the rivalry. Hell people in Ohio are starting to believe him. Never in a million years I would have thought that. Selling Michigan jerseys is a good start.

Eye of the Tiger

October 10th, 2011 at 12:31 PM ^

Of course every year is different, and some of those points allowed totals are more impressive than ours this year (2006, for example),  but we're not arguing that our defense is as good as it was in 2006, are we?  

As I see it, this shows that our defense has returned to the general level of performance we once expected from it.  

I expect the average points allowed/game to decline as we play more difficult teams whose defenses will also stuff our offense more than our initial opponents.  But as I pointed out in my diary, if our defense declines at the same rate it did last year, we'll still average less than 20 points/game allowed.  

Without deluding ourselves into thinking it's 2006 or 1997 again, can we just agree that we've made tremendous strides on defense?

Bid

October 10th, 2011 at 1:05 PM ^

To further break down these 75 points allowed - look at first half points allowed vs second half points allowed. First half is 54 and second half is only 21. That is very encouraging as well. Half time adjustments and a little better depth on defense.

EGD

October 10th, 2011 at 1:07 PM ^

Putting the statistics aside for a moment, it seems to me the main difference between the  great UM defenses of the past (such as 2006, 2001, 1995-97, et al.) and the not-so-great units has been the ability to shut down a quality opponent's passing game.  Until around 2008ish, Michigan could usually always stop the run, but in some years Michigan struggled to generate a pass rush and in other years lacked skilled athletes in the secondary (or, recently, both).  This has often made us vulnerable to skilled passing attacks--especially those run by speedy QBs. 

This 2011 team obviously doesn't have an established shut-down corner comparable to a junior Charles Woodson, or a dominant pass rusher like Lamarr Woodley.  But with the emergence of T. Gordon and Countess and JT Floyd's improvement, we do have a pretty solid secondary.  The pass rush has also gotten better over the course of the season, and hopefully that will continue.  I also have a lot more confidence in Mattison's ability to make in-game adjustments than I ever had in Hermann, English, Schafer, or GERG.  If this defense continues to improve, I think by the end of the year it could wind up being one of the best 4 or 5 units we've had in recent memory.

 

 

 

Eye of the Tiger

October 10th, 2011 at 1:20 PM ^

We were indeed good against the interior and offtackle run, and good on the corners against the pass, but inconsistent when other defensive players had to defend the pass.  Good pro style teams got a lot of yards over the middle to tight ends, and on out routes to slot receivers and TEs.  Option running was a nightmare (Syracuse 1998, e.g.).    

jlcoleman71

October 11th, 2011 at 5:35 PM ^

there will always be weak teams on the schedule..........I like the adjustments the defense is making over the course of the game.......the guys just seem to be kicking it into high gear in the 2nd half every week.