Well, that was fun, wasn't it?
Not really? I can't say I blame you.
We definitely had a lot to say about this game across the 2,423 board posts that were generated in the two threads, but what was a little surprising is that in all that, we officially only managed 237 fucks. I am sure tens of thousands more - hundreds of thousands if not millions in fact - were said throughout the stadium and Michigan nation, but on the MGoBoard, we only barely beat the 218 fucks given for the Cincinnati game.
We didn't beat last week's total for basically everything - less shits, fewer damns, and we didn't even really talk about "youth" or "young" or anything like that as much as we did in the first two games.
We did blow one thing out of the water, of course.
Last week, we mentioned the offense or the offensive line (I tag both) only 74 times altogether, but this week, we zeroed right in on the offense to the tune of 262 posts, which while not suprising, it is kind of interesting because that is the only the second time in four seasons that "fuck" has NOT been the main driver for a game in this study. Of course, watching the offense as we were, "offense" - particularly in the red zone - essentially became a profane word unto itself during the game.
As a side note, I informally went back through the data late last night and counted "Speight", and it was a similar rate of mention and came with a high correspondence to "offense", as the two are right now inseperable in the minds of many apparently.
It came tied to a slight uptick in instances of "fire" too actually - many of these being directed at Tim Drevno. So far, no one has suggested that Jim Harbaugh be shown the door, although if you were sitting where I was yesterday, there was at least one person - one stupid person - who was wondering what the Mad Hatter was doing these days. If they are reading this, let me repeat - that is a stupid suggestion and you should feel bad for making it.
So, let's take a look at the informal Stress Chart -
So, again, a quick explanation of how to read it - the vertical axis is total tracked instances by page, the horizontal axis is pages of posts (300 per page, on average covering about 8 minutes of play or about 20 minutes of airtime). On the right, the secondary axis is totals for specific words. The blue line is overall instances, the orange is "fuck", and in this case, gray is "offense".
You can see that the gray line, which is total mentions of the "offense", tracks very closely with overall instance. In face, the R-squared value here is 0.932, so our overall stress was definitely driven by our woes in the red zone as well as by woes about playcalling and a few other things that made our 29 points tougher sledding than it should have been.
"Fuck" roughly spikes with AF's red zone trips and scoring, but overall, the R-squared for "fuck" was only 0.838 this time, which is a drop from last week, but here the explanation is quite clear - we weren't even worried about being profane, we were far more focused on why we seemed allergic to 1st and Goal, 2nd and Goal, and so forth.
The grand total was 949 instances tracked across 2,423 posts, which makes for an overall swearing efficiency rating of 2.47. Historically, most anything under 3.00 has been in the loss column for us, so this was a stressful, underwhelming win that - as you can see - leaves a lot of wondering what Big Ten play will be like.
....and Big Ten play begins next week with Purdue. I am sure this feature will have more to say about the tenor of the season after that game.
Until then, enjoy your Sunday and your week.