Maizenbrew's inside the numbers: halftime adjustments

Submitted by dnak438 on

OOF:

Michigan's Third-Quarter Point Differential vs. Power 5 Schools (Last 8 Games)
Date Michigan U-M 3Q Points Opponent Opp. 3Q Points
Nov. 16, 2013 Michigan 0 Northwestern 3
Nov. 23, 2013 Michigan 0 Iowa 7
Nov. 30, 2013 Michigan 0 Ohio State 14
Dec. 28, 2013 Michigan 0 Kansas State 0
Sept. 6, 2014 Michigan 0 Notre Dame 7
Sept. 20, 2014 Michigan 0 Utah 7
Sept. 27, 2014 Michigan 0 Minnesota 17
Oct. 4, 2014 Michigan 0 Rutgers 0
Total Michigan 0 Opponent 55

and

Michigan's Quarter-by-Quarter Point Differential vs. Power 5 Schools (Last 8 Games)
Team 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q/OT Total
Michigan 33 52 0 66 151
Opponent 54 64 55 56 229
Margin -21 -12 -55 +10 -78

Here's the LINK.

Huntington Wolverine

October 9th, 2014 at 4:47 PM ^

I do think it's a bit selective to limit the data set to the last 8 Power 5 teams instead of taking Hoke's entire tenure into account (even if still removing tomato cans).

I'd be interested in seeing the full tenure's results and knowing why Drew opted to only do the past 8 games.

aplatypus

October 9th, 2014 at 4:53 PM ^

the game before charted was Nebraska when Michigan did get a TD in the 3rd. ff

The game before that was MSU when we put up a 3rd quarter goose-egg but only had 6 for the whole miserable game. Before that were almost competent games against IU, PSU and Minnesota. 

 

I would wager he saw that Northwestern game as the one where things completely fell apart. 

aplatypus

October 9th, 2014 at 4:47 PM ^

it said 8 games right? That works out nicely to being an average of 11 points back after three quarters. #Victors

We were on average within 4 points going into the half and then bombed every third quarter. This has to be really indicative of just how bad our coaching as been, especially at making in game adjustments. 

westwardwolverine

October 9th, 2014 at 4:50 PM ^

Psh, when you put teams away at half time like Michigan does, who cares about the third quarter? 

Vengeful Barbarian

October 9th, 2014 at 5:06 PM ^

Interesting breakdown of stats, but why look at just last 8 games vs power 5? Lets look at all games last year vs this year, ie Borges vs Nuss on offense.
 
2013:
1: 21-0,
2: 7-7,
3: 14-7,
4: 7-7,
5:14-3,
6: 17-3,
7:14-23,
8: 0-3,
9:7-0,
10: 0-3,
11: 0-7,
12: 0-14,
13: 0-0.
 
2013 totals 101-77
 
2014:
 
1:14-7,
2: 0-7,
3: 7-0,
4: 0-7,
5: 0-17,
6: 0-0.
 
2014 total through 6 games: 21-38
 
We seem to have really fallen off on offense since late last year. Everyone blamed Borges, but Nuss hasn't done any better. Where is the outrage over how Nuss has handled the offense?

CoverZero

October 9th, 2014 at 4:58 PM ^

That graphic pretty much speaks for itself.  Everyone gets Orange Sherbet at Halftime apparently.

The 4th Q scoring advantage is skewed, because when Michigan is always down they score garbage time points late when opposing defenses are in Prevent D.

Space Coyote

October 9th, 2014 at 5:26 PM ^

Opp Year 1st 2nd 3rd 4th/OT Diff 3rd Q D vs Avg
ND 2011 -14 4 -7 21 4 0.75
Minn 2011 14 24 10 10 58 0
NU 2011 -7 -3 14 14 18 6
MSU 2011 0 0 -10 0 -10 -7
Purdue 2011 0 15 7 0 22 3.5
Iowa 2011 -1 -10 3 0 -8 6
Illinois 2011 7 7 -4 7 17 -3.5
Neb 2011 3 4 7 14 28 -2.75
OSU 2011 9 -10 7 0 6 8.5
VT 2012 -3 7 -4 3 3 -6
2011 Season 8 38 23 69 138 5.5
Alabama 2012 -21 -3 4 -7 -27 7.25
ND 2012 0 -10 0 3 -7 3.25
Purdue 2012 7 11 3 10 31 3.25
Illinois 2012 10 7 21 7 45 0
MSU 2012 0 6 -7 3 2 -4.5
Neb 2012 0 -1 -6 -7 -14 -3.25
Minn 2012 0 7 7 8 22 3.25
NU 2012 0 0 -3 10 7 -2.25
Iowa 2012 0 18 14 -7 25 4.25
OSU 2012 -3 4 -3 -3 -5 3.5
S. Car 2013 -11 3 9 -6 -5 8.25
2012 Season -18 42 39 11 74 23
ND 2013 3 11 0 -3 11 0.5
Minn 2013 0 7 11 11 29 0.25
PSU 2013 3 -14 14 -3 0 7.75
Indiana 2013 7 4 -9 14 16 -11.25
MSU 2013 0 -7 -3 -13 -23 4.25
Neb 2013 -10 3 7 -4 -4 4.25
NU 2013 0 -3 -3 14 8 1.75
Iowa 2013 0 14 -7 -10 -3 -1
OSU 2013 0 0 -14 13 -1 -3.5
KSU 2013 -11 -4 0 -2 -17 7.75
2013 Season -8 11 -4 17 16 10.75
ND 2014 -7 -14 -7 -3 -31 0.75
Utah 2014 0 -3 -7 -6 -16 -0.5
Minn 2014 0 -3 -17 4 -16 -9.5
Rutgers 2014 -3 1 0 0 -2 6.5
2014 To Date -10 -19 -31 -5 -65 -2.75
    -28 72 27 92 163 36.5

 

Space Coyote

October 9th, 2014 at 5:37 PM ^

First, the discussion here isn't in-game adjustments, it's half-time adjustments. While that is where most of the in-game adjustments happen, it isn't where all of them happen. You can't simply throw out the 2nd quarter data or the 4th quarter data.

Second, over the course of Hoke's tenure, the 3rd quarter hasn't been as strong as the 2nd or 4th quarter. But it's the 1st quarter (initial game plan) that suffers the worst. A lot of this, honestly, is a big ole -21 against Bama.

Third, in 2011 thru the first half of 2013, Michigan was very strong with third quarter adjustments. It wasn't until their weaknesses were exposed that they struggled to "adjust". What this indicates to me isn't that this staff isn't capable of half-time adjustments, but more that the team simply wasn't that good, particularly on offense. You saw a similar trend during portions of the Rich Rod era, where he would have success with his knew wrinkle, the opponent would adjust, and then the 3rd quarter numbers would be bad (remember Minor Rage). A team that isn't very good will have fewer things to adjust to and won't be as good at those adjustments.

Fourth, you cannot deny Michigan's ability to finish games. This year is a bit of an anomoly because teams have been mostly coasting to a victory, but before this year Michigan was +87 in the 4th quarter. They were +91 in the 2nd quarter. That means they are likely making the appropriate changes once they see what the opponent is doing. The issue likely stems from anticipating what the opponent is going to try to do, but in-game they can make changes.

Lastly, the defense has clearly made half-time adjustments. Most of the "no half-time changes" comes in the 2nd half of 2013 and 2014, when the offense was really bad. A lot of this is the OL. When your OL isn't very good you can't make the small adjustments to get better, because hell, your just trying to do the first things decently.

So, in conclusion, what I believe this shows isn't that the coaches can't make in-game adjustments or changes. Rather, it shows that the team in the 2nd half of 2013 and now in 2014 simply isn't that good. Obviously that still falls on the coaches, but it's a different look at it.

gbdub

October 9th, 2014 at 5:47 PM ^

Yeah, the -21 against Bama skews the bottom line number, but look at how many scoreless first quarters we had in 2012. Yeesh.

Seems like it takes awhile for these teams to get into te flow, both at kickoff and after the half. Does that mean they're just lousy and getting up for the game? Maybe our "adjustments" are actually making the players overthink and play tight? Something else?

Space Coyote

October 9th, 2014 at 6:14 PM ^

That's delta scoring. So it means the opponent scored the same amount as Michigan in those instances.

It's much lower than the other quarters, so some of it is initial gameplan. Some of it may be the players not knowing how to adjust on the fly and needing coaching to make the correct adjustments (thus you see the 1st the 2nd quarter difference). Or it could be guys not fired up to play.

LSAClassOf2000

October 9th, 2014 at 6:20 PM ^

The average differentials from 2013 MSU onwards in this table are interesting, because it seems like it is showing where the slide in performance seemed to accelerate a bit and then carry into this year. Actually, in that time frame - quarter-by-quarter - you would get -3.1, -1.6, -5.1 and -0.7 in order by quarter. I do agree though, this seems like it is more a problem attributable to the struggles of the offense.