[terry]

I previously posted some statistics regarding Michigan State's schedule and MSU's offense. Links --

MSU schedule: http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php/...160.0.html
MSU offense: http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php/...184.0.html

Below are some statistics for Michigan State's defense, along with Stanford's stats included for comparison. I've also included some turnover stats. Numbers in parentheses are the rank among the 123 FBS teams.

Total Defense:
                                          MSU              Stanford 
Opp. Yards per game          248.2 (1st)      339.0 (14th)
Opp. Yards per play              3.94 (1st)        4.81 (12th)
Opp. Points per game            12.7 (4th)        18.6 (10th)
Opp. 3rd down conv. rate    27.7% (1st)      32.4% (12th)

MSU's defensive stats are excellent. Stanford's stats are very, very good, but MSU's numbers are better across the board.

The obvious question is: what about strength of schedule? MSU faced a weaker schedule than Stanford did. Various strength of schedule calculations agree on that. To what extent do MSU's excellent stats result from weak competition?

Steve Durrett's Relative Performance Ratios provide a partial answer. The RPRs compare MSU's stats in each category to the average performance of MSU's opponents. For example, a total defense RPR of 0.95 means that the defense held its opponents to 95% of their average yardage. For defenses, lower numbers are better. Some defensive RPRs:

                                              MSU              Stanford 
Opp. Yards per game RPR      0.62 (1st)        0.74 (8th)
Opp. Yards per play RPR        0.68 (1st)        0.79 (6th)
Opp. Points per game RPR      0.43 (3rd)        0.54 (7th)

When we look at RPRs, Stanford closes the gap somewhat, but MSU still looks like the top defense in the nation. Bear in mind, though, that RPRs are not a complete adjustment for strength of schedule, for reasons Steve D. can explain.

Advanced metrics show that the two defenses are comparable. In Football Outsiders' Defensive F/+, Michigan State ranks 3rd and Stanford ranks 4th. In Defensive FEI, MSU ranks 3rd and Stanford ranks 2nd.

The bottom line is that Michigan State's defense is excellent, no matter how you look at it. Stanford's defense is in the same elite tier as MSU's.

Rushing Defense:
                                                      MSU            Stanford
Opp. Rushing Yds per Game          80.8 (1st)        91.2 (3rd)
Opp. Rushing Yds per Attempt      2.70 (1st)        2.98 (4th)

Opp. Rushing Yds per Game RPR  0.46 (1st)        0.50 (2nd)
Opp. Rushing Yds per Att. RPR      0.59 (2nd)        0.65 (4th)

Statistically, MSU's rushing defense is excellent. So is Stanford's. Both of them have been shutting down the run this year.

Two teams ran the ball well against Michigan State this year. Nebraska ran for 182 yards and a 5.7 average. Ohio State ran for 273 yards and a 6.8 average. Those were the two best running games that MSU faced this year -- Ohio St. is #3 in the nation in yards/game, Nebraska is #19. Those were the only top 30 rushing teams that MSU played. Stanford's rushing offense is #23. Stanford's hope going into this game will be to run the ball as well as Nebraska and Ohio State did against MSU.

Stanford's defense allowed two teams to run the ball well. Army (#6 in rushing) ran for 284 yards and a 4.7 average. Utah (#72) unaccountably ran for 181 yards and a 4.6 average. Stanford shut down the running game of Oregon (#9) and held Washington (#14) reasonably well in check. Michigan State (#51) will be about the 7th best rushing offense Stanford has faced this year.

Passing Defense:
                                                        MSU          Stanford
Opp. Passing Yards per Game        167.4 (6th)    247.8 (90th)
Opp. Yards per Attempt                      5.1 (2nd)      6.2 (16th)
Opp. Yards per Completion            10.72 (17th)    10.0 (5th)
Opp. Pass Efficiency Rating              91.5 (2nd)    122.5 (48th)
Sacks per Game                              2.38 (38th)    3.08 (7th)                                         

Opp. Passing Yds per Game RPR        0.74 (7th)      0.89 (30th)
Opp. Yards per Attempt RPR              0.70 (2nd)      0.80 (7th)
Opp. Yards per Completion RPR          0.85 (8th)      0.79 (4th)
Opp. Pass Eff. Rating RPR                0.69 (2nd)      0.87 (26th)

MSU's pass defense has excellent stats. Stanford does not have elite pass defense stats. This is partly because of the number of good passing teams Stanford has faced. The RPRs show that Stanford's pass defense is better than the raw stats suggest.

No team has passed the ball very well against Michigan State. Only Michigan exceeded 7 yards per attempt (7.2), and only Nebraska exceeded a pass efficiency rating of 120 (133.0). That's good defense.

MSU has not faced many good passing attacks. MSU faced only 2 of the top 30 teams in passing yards per game. MSU has faced only 1 of the top 30 QBs in pass efficiency, Braxton Miller (#14) of Ohio State. Kevin Hogan is #19 nationally in pass efficiency, which makes him the second highest rated QB MSU has seen this year.

Stanford has faced better passing teams. Stanford has played 8 games against teams in the top 30 in passing yards per game. Stanford has faced 5 of the top 30 QBs in pass efficiency. Stanford has played 9 games against QBs with higher pass efficiency ratings than MSU's Connor Cook.

Turnovers:

                            MSU      Stanford
Turnovers lost      13 (7th)    18 (43rd)
    Fumbles            7 (29th)    9 (63rd)
    Interceptions      6 (10th)    9 (29th)

Takeaways          27 (15th)  17 (98th)
    Fumble Rec.    11 (22nd)    5 (113th)
    Interceptions    16 (19th)    12 (59th)

Margin              +14 (7th)    -1 (67th)

MSU has been good at taking care of the ball and good at taking the ball away from the other team, resulting in an excellent turnover margin. Stanford has been above average in taking care of the ball and below average in taking the ball away, resulting in a mediocre turnover margin.

I don't believe past results necessarily predict turnovers in any given game, so I don't think these stats have much predictive value. As always, it will be very important for both teams to avoid turnovers.

Conclusion:

MSU has the statistical edge on defense. But that edge is not large. Both teams have very good defenses. Neither team has allowed more than 28 points in over a year -- Stanford has gone 22 games and MSU has gone 26 games without allowing more than 28 points.

[terry]

I previously posted some statistics regarding Michigan State's schedule and MSU's offense. Links --

MSU schedule: http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php/...160.0.html
MSU offense: http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php/...184.0.html

Below are some statistics for Michigan State's defense, along with Stanford's stats included for comparison. I've also included some turnover stats. Numbers in parentheses are the rank among the 123 FBS teams.

Total Defense:
                                          MSU              Stanford 
Opp. Yards per game          248.2 (1st)      339.0 (14th)
Opp. Yards per play              3.94 (1st)        4.81 (12th)
Opp. Points per game            12.7 (4th)        18.6 (10th)
Opp. 3rd down conv. rate    27.7% (1st)      32.4% (12th)

MSU's defensive stats are excellent. Stanford's stats are very, very good, but MSU's numbers are better across the board.

The obvious question is: what about strength of schedule? MSU faced a weaker schedule than Stanford did. Various strength of schedule calculations agree on that. To what extent do MSU's excellent stats result from weak competition?

Steve Durrett's Relative Performance Ratios provide a partial answer. The RPRs compare MSU's stats in each category to the average performance of MSU's opponents. For example, a total defense RPR of 0.95 means that the defense held its opponents to 95% of their average yardage. For defenses, lower numbers are better. Some defensive RPRs:

                                              MSU              Stanford 
Opp. Yards per game RPR      0.62 (1st)        0.74 (8th)
Opp. Yards per play RPR        0.68 (1st)        0.79 (6th)
Opp. Points per game RPR      0.43 (3rd)        0.54 (7th)

When we look at RPRs, Stanford closes the gap somewhat, but MSU still looks like the top defense in the nation. Bear in mind, though, that RPRs are not a complete adjustment for strength of schedule, for reasons Steve D. can explain.

Advanced metrics show that the two defenses are comparable. In Football Outsiders' Defensive F/+, Michigan State ranks 3rd and Stanford ranks 4th. In Defensive FEI, MSU ranks 3rd and Stanford ranks 2nd.

The bottom line is that Michigan State's defense is excellent, no matter how you look at it. Stanford's defense is in the same elite tier as MSU's.

Rushing Defense:
                                                      MSU            Stanford
Opp. Rushing Yds per Game          80.8 (1st)        91.2 (3rd)
Opp. Rushing Yds per Attempt      2.70 (1st)        2.98 (4th)

Opp. Rushing Yds per Game RPR  0.46 (1st)        0.50 (2nd)
Opp. Rushing Yds per Att. RPR      0.59 (2nd)        0.65 (4th)

Statistically, MSU's rushing defense is excellent. So is Stanford's. Both of them have been shutting down the run this year.

Two teams ran the ball well against Michigan State this year. Nebraska ran for 182 yards and a 5.7 average. Ohio State ran for 273 yards and a 6.8 average. Those were the two best running games that MSU faced this year -- Ohio St. is #3 in the nation in yards/game, Nebraska is #19. Those were the only top 30 rushing teams that MSU played. Stanford's rushing offense is #23. Stanford's hope going into this game will be to run the ball as well as Nebraska and Ohio State did against MSU.

Stanford's defense allowed two teams to run the ball well. Army (#6 in rushing) ran for 284 yards and a 4.7 average. Utah (#72) unaccountably ran for 181 yards and a 4.6 average. Stanford shut down the running game of Oregon (#9) and held Washington (#14) reasonably well in check. Michigan State (#51) will be about the 7th best rushing offense Stanford has faced this year.

Passing Defense:
                                                        MSU          Stanford
Opp. Passing Yards per Game        167.4 (6th)    247.8 (90th)
Opp. Yards per Attempt                      5.1 (2nd)      6.2 (16th)
Opp. Yards per Completion            10.72 (17th)    10.0 (5th)
Opp. Pass Efficiency Rating              91.5 (2nd)    122.5 (48th)
Sacks per Game                              2.38 (38th)    3.08 (7th)                                         

Opp. Passing Yds per Game RPR        0.74 (7th)      0.89 (30th)
Opp. Yards per Attempt RPR              0.70 (2nd)      0.80 (7th)
Opp. Yards per Completion RPR          0.85 (8th)      0.79 (4th)
Opp. Pass Eff. Rating RPR                0.69 (2nd)      0.87 (26th)

MSU's pass defense has excellent stats. Stanford does not have elite pass defense stats. This is partly because of the number of good passing teams Stanford has faced. The RPRs show that Stanford's pass defense is better than the raw stats suggest.

No team has passed the ball very well against Michigan State. Only Michigan exceeded 7 yards per attempt (7.2), and only Nebraska exceeded a pass efficiency rating of 120 (133.0). That's good defense.

MSU has not faced many good passing attacks. MSU faced only 2 of the top 30 teams in passing yards per game. MSU has faced only 1 of the top 30 QBs in pass efficiency, Braxton Miller (#14) of Ohio State. Kevin Hogan is #19 nationally in pass efficiency, which makes him the second highest rated QB MSU has seen this year.

Stanford has faced better passing teams. Stanford has played 8 games against teams in the top 30 in passing yards per game. Stanford has faced 5 of the top 30 QBs in pass efficiency. Stanford has played 9 games against QBs with higher pass efficiency ratings than MSU's Connor Cook.

Turnovers:

                            MSU      Stanford
Turnovers lost      13 (7th)    18 (43rd)
    Fumbles            7 (29th)    9 (63rd)
    Interceptions      6 (10th)    9 (29th)

Takeaways          27 (15th)  17 (98th)
    Fumble Rec.    11 (22nd)    5 (113th)
    Interceptions    16 (19th)    12 (59th)

Margin              +14 (7th)    -1 (67th)

MSU has been good at taking care of the ball and good at taking the ball away from the other team, resulting in an excellent turnover margin. Stanford has been above average in taking care of the ball and below average in taking the ball away, resulting in a mediocre turnover margin.

I don't believe past results necessarily predict turnovers in any given game, so I don't think these stats have much predictive value. As always, it will be very important for both teams to avoid turnovers.

Conclusion:

MSU has the statistical edge on defense. But that edge is not large. Both teams have very good defenses. Neither team has allowed more than 28 points in over a year -- Stanford has gone 22 games and MSU has gone 26 games without allowing more than 28 points.

[terry]

I'm adding a couple more defensive stats that I should have included earlier.

Red Zone Defense:
                                                    MSU                Stanford
Opp. RZ Scoring Percentage    77.8% (27th)    74.4% (19th)
Opp. RZ TD Percentage            48.2% (8th)      48.7% (11th)
Opp. Points Per RZ Possession      4.3 (16th)          4.2 (11th)

Tackles for Loss:
                                                    MSU                Stanford
Tackles for Loss per Game          6.2 (50th)        7.5 (12th)

[terry]

I'm adding a couple more defensive stats that I should have included earlier.

Red Zone Defense:
                                                    MSU                Stanford
Opp. RZ Scoring Percentage    77.8% (27th)    74.4% (19th)
Opp. RZ TD Percentage            48.2% (8th)      48.7% (11th)
Opp. Points Per RZ Possession      4.3 (16th)          4.2 (11th)

Tackles for Loss:
                                                    MSU                Stanford
Tackles for Loss per Game          6.2 (50th)        7.5 (12th)

[Spiny_Norman]

Terry, it appears to me that USC had the best defense statistically among Stanford's opponents this year.  Would you say that the Trojans had the closest approximation to MSU's defense?  Pendergast's defensive philosophy seems to be similar to that of Narduzzi too. 

[Spiny_Norman]

Terry, it appears to me that USC had the best defense statistically among Stanford's opponents this year.  Would you say that the Trojans had the closest approximation to MSU's defense?  Pendergast's defensive philosophy seems to be similar to that of Narduzzi too. 

[terry]

Terry, it appears to me that University of Spoiled Children had the best defense statistically among Stanford's opponents this year.  Would you say that the Literature's Most Famous Losers had the closest approximation to MSU's defense?  Pendergast's defensive philosophy seems to be similar to that of Narduzzi too.

Yes, U,S,C's defense is probably the closest defense we've seen to Michigan State's.

That suggests that we might take a look at how Stanford did against U,S,C's defense. Stanford's top-line numbers against U,S,C were bad -- 17 points and 337 yards. But the story was more complicated. Stanford ran the ball well, gaining 210 yards and averaging 6.0 yards per carry. Stanford's passing game was plagued by mistakes. There were several dropped passes, two of which should have been TDs. At the end, Hogan threw two bad interceptions, probably his worst mistakes of the season. And our back-up kicker had a field goal attempt blocked, when those points could have made the difference in the game.

If Stanford plays like that against MSU, we're in trouble. But I don't think a comedy of errors like that one will happen again.

[terry]

Terry, it appears to me that University of Spoiled Children had the best defense statistically among Stanford's opponents this year.  Would you say that the Literature's Most Famous Losers had the closest approximation to MSU's defense?  Pendergast's defensive philosophy seems to be similar to that of Narduzzi too.

Yes, U,S,C's defense is probably the closest defense we've seen to Michigan State's.

That suggests that we might take a look at how Stanford did against U,S,C's defense. Stanford's top-line numbers against U,S,C were bad -- 17 points and 337 yards. But the story was more complicated. Stanford ran the ball well, gaining 210 yards and averaging 6.0 yards per carry. Stanford's passing game was plagued by mistakes. There were several dropped passes, two of which should have been TDs. At the end, Hogan threw two bad interceptions, probably his worst mistakes of the season. And our back-up kicker had a field goal attempt blocked, when those points could have made the difference in the game.

If Stanford plays like that against MSU, we're in trouble. But I don't think a comedy of errors like that one will happen again.