Friday, October 24, 2008

Guarantee Games

[ed. - I was writing this in an airport, and hit the post button right as the last of my flight was boarding. As such, "guarantee" was misspelled in the title. Thanks for letting me know, jerks.]

All bets are off if Nick Sheridan sees significant playing time. What is significant? Let's say...2 drives worth. If Nick Sheridan plays 2 drives worth of football, then all bets are off.

What an odd way to start a post

Agreed. But when you're going out on an already shaky limb, it's best to be sure that the precious little support you do have is firmly entrenched. If the limb is broken to begin with, you can't be at fault when it collapses.

Still not getting it - despite aid of cliche metaphor

Ok, fine. Here we go: Michigan is going to beat Michigan State tomorrow. I'm saying it, I'm putting it on record, and I'm putting it in print. I'll say it again in italics, for emphasis: Michigan is going to beat Michigan State tomorrow.

Any particular reason?

I thought that despite the 2nd half implosion, there were several things that Michigan could take away from that Penn State game that were positive. First, you had the unveiling of Minor at tailback, who (as Champ pointed out) had Anthony Scirrotto firmly on his ass being dragged downfield at several points during the game. McGuffie's done a lot of great things with the ball this season, but gaining those crucial extra 3 yards after contact hasn't been one of them. Forget all the BS "Minor runs with anger!" and "Minor runs with purpose!" type exclamations - Minor gets yards after contact, and when your offense struggles with things like "positive yardage" this is a huge, huge asset.

Ok, so you've got a guy who can run the ball. Still not seeing it.

In baseball, it's often the sign of a pitcher's command and "stuff" when he starts throwing first pitch strikes. If a pitcher, especially a young pitcher, can gain an 0-1 count, it allows him to do things with the following pitches that he couldn't do if he had thrown a first pitch ball. Alternatively, a first pitch strike puts the batter on his heels, so to speak, and in instant "protect the plate" mode, lest he go down 0-2.

I hate baseball

None withstanding, when Michigan's offense gains positive yards on first down, it's like throwing that first pitch strike. Go back and look at some of Mgoblog's UFR's. When Michigan picks up positive yardage on first down, the result is a more opened playbook. The defense can't key off on one or two plays that they know are coming in a 2nd and long situation. Just like a young pitcher, this young offense is borderline effective (gasp!) when they gain yards on first down. Now, typically, this wouldn't be something worth following, as good offenses usually get positive yards on first down, but, uh, this isn't a good offense. To wit: in the first half against Penn State, the UFR shows only 3 plays that went for negative yardage. Only one of those plays was on first down. In the 2nd half when Michigan was totally shut-down? There were a total of 6 plays that went for negative yardage, 3 of which were on 1st down. Oh - and Brian stopped charting with 13 minutes to go in the 4th quarter. First half: limited loss of yardage, especially on first down. Result: 17 points. Second half: Lots of negative yardage, more on first down. Result: 0 points. Positive yards, especially on first down, is the lifeblood of this team.

What makes you think that "first half Michigan" will come out all game? Seems to me that there is a good chance that "second half Michigan" is just as plausible.

The short anwer to this is that yes, there is a chance that second half Michigan will rear its ugly head. However, given the data that I've looked at, I think there are several very good factors that will allow first half Michigan to rule the day.

First, Michigan State is allowing just over 6 yards per carry on the season. Combine this with the fact that Michigan has, apparently, just "found" a running game with Minor, and you've got a combination that, in my opinion, leads to positive yards, especially on first down when Rodriguez is presumably going to run the ball with the zone-read-stretch business. Michigan won't score on every drive, but I think that negative plays will be extremely limited given MSU's relative weakness on run-defense.

Ok, so maybe you'll score points, but last time I checked, Michigan's defense wasn't exactly shut down.

True. But look at how Michigan State gets their yards: Javon Ringer runs into the line for about 3 yards, and Brandon Hoyer gets lucky throwing into double coverage. That may be an exaggeration, but Brain Hoyer isn't really that good. He is just shy of 50% completion percentage, and has thrown 4 INT's. Ringer will probably get his yards by carrying the ball 40+ times for 3 yards a pop, and that will probably lead to some long scoring drives. If Michigan's linebackers continue to arm tackle the air surrounding ball carriers, this could be more, but this is the exact offense that Michigan's defense is good at stopping. With Ringer doing his thing, the MSU offense is capable of moving the ball, but when the offense gets into situations in which Ringer doesn't factor as being a threat, they suck. Michigan should be able to put them in those situations, especially early.

One thing I am scared of is the screen game. Michigan has been susceptible to screens going for long TD's all season, and I somehow doubt that D'Antonio has missed that in film...

You still haven't really convinced me

That's because I think this thing is going to be close. Brian at Mgo put into print a feeling that you get sometimes when you're looking at data. It's a "wow, I guess I really have to think this, don't I?" The answer is that, if the data points that way, yes, you do.

Of course, the problem is that data relies on past performance, and that predicting on data alone relies on those past performances manifesting themselves in the current game. This is not always the case.

The bottom line is that I believe that Michigan has a good shot at winning this football game. Given the data I've looked at, I believe Michigan will win this football game.

Whatever dude. You're crazy

Probably.

1 comments:

Anonymous said...

Wow. Quite possibly the worst prediction ever.

Statistics don't mean jack. Did you watch any of Michigan's games in 2008? Or any MSU games for that matter?

Enjoy the comparisons to Notre Dame 2007 and the debate over which is worse: a loss to Toledo or App State.
Comedy maize.