[Hulk01]

Terry pointed out late last week that Michigan State appears to have a slightly above average running game in absolute terms.  In relative terms, however-their performance relative to other Big Ten teams--they do not.

In only two games have the Spartans averaged more yards per carry than their conference opponents have allowed in their average conference game.  In all their other conference games and against Notre Dame, the Spartans averaged fewer yards per carry than their opponents allowed on average:

Michigan State rushing against:
Notre Dame: -0.85 ypc
Iowa: -0.15
Indiana: -0.65
Purdue: -1.25
Illinois: -1.1
Michigan: -0.4
Nebraska: -0.8
Northwestern: -0.1

By contrast, only one team--UCLA--held Stanford to fewer yards per carry than that team allowed to its average conference game.  And Stanford averaged more than a half-yard more per carry against ASU (twice), Washington State, Utah, USC, and Notre Dame than those teams allowed.  Over its last four games, Stanford went +0.73 (USC), +0.06 (Cal),+0.88 (Notre Dame) and +1.10 (ASU).

The final total?  Stanford has averaged 0.55 yards more per carry than its conference opponents have allowed, while Michigan State has averaged 0.35 fewer yards per carry.  Using relative performance numbers. Stanford has been almost a yard per carry (+0.90 yard per carry) more effective than the Spartans.

Executive summary:  Michigan State has been a below-average running team this season, but did post above average ypd numbers in its last two games.  So it may have improved.  Regardless, Stanford has been more effective running the ball all season, and even more effective in its last four games.


Thus begins the debate, of course, as to whether averaging more yards per running play is good or bad. :D

[Hulk01]

Terry pointed out late last week that Michigan State appears to have a slightly above average running game in absolute terms.  In relative terms, however-their performance relative to other Big Ten teams--they do not.

In only two games have the Spartans averaged more yards per carry than their conference opponents have allowed in their average conference game.  In all their other conference games and against Notre Dame, the Spartans averaged fewer yards per carry than their opponents allowed on average:

Michigan State rushing against:
Notre Dame: -0.85 ypc
Iowa: -0.15
Indiana: -0.65
Purdue: -1.25
Illinois: -1.1
Michigan: -0.4
Nebraska: -0.8
Northwestern: -0.1

By contrast, only one team--UCLA--held Stanford to fewer yards per carry than that team allowed to its average conference game.  And Stanford averaged more than a half-yard more per carry against ASU (twice), Washington State, Utah, USC, and Notre Dame than those teams allowed.  Over its last four games, Stanford went +0.73 (USC), +0.06 (Cal),+0.88 (Notre Dame) and +1.10 (ASU).

The final total?  Stanford has averaged 0.55 yards more per carry than its conference opponents have allowed, while Michigan State has averaged 0.35 fewer yards per carry.  Using relative performance numbers. Stanford has been almost a yard per carry (+0.90 yard per carry) more effective than the Spartans.

Executive summary:  Michigan State has been a below-average running team this season, but did post above average ypd numbers in its last two games.  So it may have improved.  Regardless, Stanford has been more effective running the ball all season, and even more effective in its last four games.


Thus begins the debate, of course, as to whether averaging more yards per running play is good or bad. :D

[oman]

My brother went to State.

We talk about this game about every day.  All the strange "D" names on their defense confuse and frighten me.  I have a slight feeling of dread.  (May be due to my failure to have accomplished any Christmas shopping to date.)

Discuss.

[oman]

My brother went to State.

We talk about this game about every day.  All the strange "D" names on their defense confuse and frighten me.  I have a slight feeling of dread.  (May be due to my failure to have accomplished any Christmas shopping to date.)

Discuss.

[FarmBoy]

I have a slight feeling of dread.

It's funny, but I don't. I felt more dread about the ASU game. Not because I'm more confident, but having won the Rose Bowl last year and achieved repeat Pac12 champ status, another RB win would be the cherry on top for my psyche. I'm hoping the players aren't feeling this way...

[FarmBoy]

I have a slight feeling of dread.

It's funny, but I don't. I felt more dread about the ASU game. Not because I'm more confident, but having won the Rose Bowl last year and achieved repeat Pac12 champ status, another RB win would be the cherry on top for my psyche. I'm hoping the players aren't feeling this way...

[Trevmiesterj]

I have a slight feeling of dread.

It's funny, but I don't. I felt more dread about the ASU game. Not because I'm more confident, but having won the Rose Bowl last year and achieved repeat Pac12 champ status, another RB win would be the cherry on top for my psyche. I'm hoping the players aren't feeling this way...

I'm with Farmie on this one. 

I have about the biggest dread meter of anyone I know.  My wife gives me the business all the time because the week long worry and opponent build up I create when the game is a concern.  After watching this year unfold I feel this Stanford team is chock full of high character seniors whose confidence, leadership and focus in accomplishing the game plan is unshakeable.  For better or worse, I haven't been as nervous about this game as I probably should be (notwithstanding a sudden surge of anxiety as kickoff draws near).

Besides, it's time to get revenge on a Michigan team for the 0-49 debacle in the Tournament East-West football game 112 years ago.

[Trevmiesterj]

I have a slight feeling of dread.

It's funny, but I don't. I felt more dread about the ASU game. Not because I'm more confident, but having won the Rose Bowl last year and achieved repeat Pac12 champ status, another RB win would be the cherry on top for my psyche. I'm hoping the players aren't feeling this way...

I'm with Farmie on this one. 

I have about the biggest dread meter of anyone I know.  My wife gives me the business all the time because the week long worry and opponent build up I create when the game is a concern.  After watching this year unfold I feel this Stanford team is chock full of high character seniors whose confidence, leadership and focus in accomplishing the game plan is unshakeable.  For better or worse, I haven't been as nervous about this game as I probably should be (notwithstanding a sudden surge of anxiety as kickoff draws near).

Besides, it's time to get revenge on a Michigan team for the 0-49 debacle in the Tournament East-West football game 112 years ago.

[stupac2]

Football Outsider's numbers corroborate this

MSU Offense total: #66; rushing: #77; passing: #85.

By contrast, Stanford Offense total: #18; rushing: #36; passing: #11.

[stupac2]

Football Outsider's numbers corroborate this

MSU Offense total: #66; rushing: #77; passing: #85.

By contrast, Stanford Offense total: #18; rushing: #36; passing: #11.

[Nan3cy]

Just to confirm, Stupac - these are per play, right?

[Nan3cy]

Just to confirm, Stupac - these are per play, right?

[stupac2]

Just to confirm, Stupac - these are per play, right?

Those are their S&P+ numbers, which are charted per play. They also have per-drive numbers, but that's obviously not useful for separating out running and passing. I'm not sure exactly how it works, but it's basically a look at opponent-adjusted performance based on getting certain goals. The page itself has a fairly imprecise methodology breakdown.

[stupac2]

Just to confirm, Stupac - these are per play, right?

Those are their S&P+ numbers, which are charted per play. They also have per-drive numbers, but that's obviously not useful for separating out running and passing. I'm not sure exactly how it works, but it's basically a look at opponent-adjusted performance based on getting certain goals. The page itself has a fairly imprecise methodology breakdown.

[washingtonismoney]

Just to confirm, Stupac - these are per play, right?

Stupac's linking to Football Outsider's S&P+ which ranks teams play-by-play and adjusts for schedule (and throws out garbage time plays.)

However, they also have their F/+ data, which combines their S&P+ metric with their FEI metric, which judges teams drive-by-drive (and adjusts for schedule, garbage time, etc.)

Here's how the two teams rank in F/+:
Offense -- Stanford 15/MSU 51
Defense: Stanford 5/MSU 3
Special Teams: Stanford 2/ MSU 26

[washingtonismoney]

Just to confirm, Stupac - these are per play, right?

Stupac's linking to Football Outsider's S&P+ which ranks teams play-by-play and adjusts for schedule (and throws out garbage time plays.)

However, they also have their F/+ data, which combines their S&P+ metric with their FEI metric, which judges teams drive-by-drive (and adjusts for schedule, garbage time, etc.)

Here's how the two teams rank in F/+:
Offense -- Stanford 15/MSU 51
Defense: Stanford 5/MSU 3
Special Teams: Stanford 2/ MSU 26

[stupac2]

Stupac's linking to Football Outsider's S&P+ which ranks teams play-by-play and adjusts for schedule (and throws out garbage time plays.)

However, they also have their F/+ data, which combines their S&P+ metric with their FEI metric, which judges teams drive-by-drive (and adjusts for schedule, garbage time, etc.)

Here's how the two teams rank in F/+:
Offense -- Stanford 15/MSU 51
Defense: Stanford 5/MSU 3
Special Teams: Stanford 2/ MSU 26

I was linking to S&P+ because it breaks out rushing/passing, which is more pertinent to this thread. I do agree that F+ is the better one holistically, since it looks at per-play and per-drive results, but that means it has no bearing on this particular question.

As an aside, I'm fairly amused that Alabama has the #1 Special Teams after the Auburn game. I know one game doesn't erase the totality of the season, but dear jeebus that was a horrendous game for their special teams.

[stupac2]

Stupac's linking to Football Outsider's S&P+ which ranks teams play-by-play and adjusts for schedule (and throws out garbage time plays.)

However, they also have their F/+ data, which combines their S&P+ metric with their FEI metric, which judges teams drive-by-drive (and adjusts for schedule, garbage time, etc.)

Here's how the two teams rank in F/+:
Offense -- Stanford 15/MSU 51
Defense: Stanford 5/MSU 3
Special Teams: Stanford 2/ MSU 26

I was linking to S&P+ because it breaks out rushing/passing, which is more pertinent to this thread. I do agree that F+ is the better one holistically, since it looks at per-play and per-drive results, but that means it has no bearing on this particular question.

As an aside, I'm fairly amused that Alabama has the #1 Special Teams after the Auburn game. I know one game doesn't erase the totality of the season, but dear jeebus that was a horrendous game for their special teams.

[FarmBoy]

So...has anyone checked if the 247 MSU site posted a thread complaining about the use of our darned "facts" in discussing the upcoming game.

I'm feeling really good about our chances right now. Even before these stats, I felt like our defense had a much better chance of shutting down their rush than theirs has of shutting down ours. Add into that the passing game has great momentum. It may be competitive, but if our guys bring their A game, the win should be definitive.

[FarmBoy]

So...has anyone checked if the 247 MSU site posted a thread complaining about the use of our darned "facts" in discussing the upcoming game.

I'm feeling really good about our chances right now. Even before these stats, I felt like our defense had a much better chance of shutting down their rush than theirs has of shutting down ours. Add into that the passing game has great momentum. It may be competitive, but if our guys bring their A game, the win should be definitive.

[stupac2]

I'm feeling really good about our chances right now. Even before these stats, I felt like our defense had a much better chance of shutting down their rush than theirs has of shutting down ours. Add into that the passing game has great momentum. It may be competitive, but if our guys bring their A game, the win should be definitive.

That's how I feel about us playing anyone but Alabama or FSU. Those games would require our absolute best effort to have a good chance in. But if we play well, we should beat anyone else by more than a score. It's just a matter of whether or not we play well.

[stupac2]

I'm feeling really good about our chances right now. Even before these stats, I felt like our defense had a much better chance of shutting down their rush than theirs has of shutting down ours. Add into that the passing game has great momentum. It may be competitive, but if our guys bring their A game, the win should be definitive.

That's how I feel about us playing anyone but Alabama or FSU. Those games would require our absolute best effort to have a good chance in. But if we play well, we should beat anyone else by more than a score. It's just a matter of whether or not we play well.

[76lsjumb]

So...has anyone checked if the 247 MSU site posted a thread complaining about the use of our darned "facts" in discussing the upcoming game.

I'm feeling really good about our chances right now. Even before these stats, I felt like our defense had a much better chance of shutting down their rush than theirs has of shutting down ours. Add into that the passing game has great momentum. It may be competitive, but if our guys bring their A game, the win should be definitive.

All fine and dandy.  But, when the woofing gods have finished their Christmas shopping and begin to pay attention again, we all need to be on our best behavior...  :)

[76lsjumb]

So...has anyone checked if the 247 MSU site posted a thread complaining about the use of our darned "facts" in discussing the upcoming game.

I'm feeling really good about our chances right now. Even before these stats, I felt like our defense had a much better chance of shutting down their rush than theirs has of shutting down ours. Add into that the passing game has great momentum. It may be competitive, but if our guys bring their A game, the win should be definitive.

All fine and dandy.  But, when the woofing gods have finished their Christmas shopping and begin to pay attention again, we all need to be on our best behavior...  :)

[washingtonismoney]

MSU has a dominant defense, and it could very well dominate our offense. It's not as if we've never seen it prove punchless. It's hard to have a definitive win if you're only scoring 20-24 points (we'll say.)

Two things comfort me in this matchup: one, special teams, where we should have a nicely sized advantage (particularly if Williamson is healthy enough to handle kickoffs effectively); and two, while our deep passing game has a lot of volatility, it's also what the MSU defense encourages opponents to throw. That suggests there's a particularly fat tail.

[washingtonismoney]

MSU has a dominant defense, and it could very well dominate our offense. It's not as if we've never seen it prove punchless. It's hard to have a definitive win if you're only scoring 20-24 points (we'll say.)

Two things comfort me in this matchup: one, special teams, where we should have a nicely sized advantage (particularly if Williamson is healthy enough to handle kickoffs effectively); and two, while our deep passing game has a lot of volatility, it's also what the MSU defense encourages opponents to throw. That suggests there's a particularly fat tail.

[Extra Point]

I have a slight feeling of dread.

It's funny, but I don't. I felt more dread about the ASU game. Not because I'm more confident, but having won the Rose Bowl last year and achieved repeat Pac12 champ status, another RB win would be the cherry on top for my psyche. I'm hoping the players aren't feeling this way...

I suspect that a lot of Stanford fans feel this way. I suspect the reason for this is that for the better part of a year, the primary objective is to reach the Rose Bowl. During this period there are a lot obstacles to overcome, and there is much uncertainty about the team and the opposition. Between the conference championship and the Rose bowl there is only three weeks to get psyched up. There is only one obstacle, and there is little unknown about the team and the opposition.

[Extra Point]

I have a slight feeling of dread.

It's funny, but I don't. I felt more dread about the ASU game. Not because I'm more confident, but having won the Rose Bowl last year and achieved repeat Pac12 champ status, another RB win would be the cherry on top for my psyche. I'm hoping the players aren't feeling this way...

I suspect that a lot of Stanford fans feel this way. I suspect the reason for this is that for the better part of a year, the primary objective is to reach the Rose Bowl. During this period there are a lot obstacles to overcome, and there is much uncertainty about the team and the opposition. Between the conference championship and the Rose bowl there is only three weeks to get psyched up. There is only one obstacle, and there is little unknown about the team and the opposition.

[pefloresjr]

So...has anyone checked if the 247 MSU site posted a thread complaining about the use of our darned "facts" in discussing the upcoming game.

I'm feeling really good about our chances right now. Even before these stats, I felt like our defense had a much better chance of shutting down their rush than theirs has of shutting down ours. Add into that the passing game has great momentum. It may be competitive, but if our guys bring their A game, the win should be definitive.

Their standard response other than the "We'll kick their asses" type has been the "If only there was some way to settle this on the field" response.  It's not unreasonable.  For me the three weeks to focus on this game increases my nerves.  I get a little tired of the back and forth with our visitors and just want to get on with the game already. 

I think Stanford is probably the better team, but I'm nervous about this game primarily because I think this is the best defense that Stanford will face all year.  That creates an x factor that plays into my fears about our uneven road offense.  All the great statistical analysis gives me some comfort that if Stanford plays an above average or even average game while MSU does the same, Stanford should win. 

The other unknown for me is based on the three to four week prep time each team gets.  MSU's coach seems to be known for using trick plays and we could get burned.  Of course, Shaw has done the same so we could also benefit from the time.  Also, I don't think this is a major factor in this game, but having time to prepare for an unusual system makes it easier to respond.  I think Oregon has suffered from this in prior bowl games.  Here, Stanford's use of jumbo packages is an unusual system even though it is based on old-school strategies.  MSU will have plenty of time to understand and practice their reads and keys to our base offense.  So, I will remain nervous for the rest of you and keep the woofing gods off our backs.

Cheers,
Pete F. 

[pefloresjr]

So...has anyone checked if the 247 MSU site posted a thread complaining about the use of our darned "facts" in discussing the upcoming game.

I'm feeling really good about our chances right now. Even before these stats, I felt like our defense had a much better chance of shutting down their rush than theirs has of shutting down ours. Add into that the passing game has great momentum. It may be competitive, but if our guys bring their A game, the win should be definitive.

Their standard response other than the "We'll kick their asses" type has been the "If only there was some way to settle this on the field" response.  It's not unreasonable.  For me the three weeks to focus on this game increases my nerves.  I get a little tired of the back and forth with our visitors and just want to get on with the game already. 

I think Stanford is probably the better team, but I'm nervous about this game primarily because I think this is the best defense that Stanford will face all year.  That creates an x factor that plays into my fears about our uneven road offense.  All the great statistical analysis gives me some comfort that if Stanford plays an above average or even average game while MSU does the same, Stanford should win. 

The other unknown for me is based on the three to four week prep time each team gets.  MSU's coach seems to be known for using trick plays and we could get burned.  Of course, Shaw has done the same so we could also benefit from the time.  Also, I don't think this is a major factor in this game, but having time to prepare for an unusual system makes it easier to respond.  I think Oregon has suffered from this in prior bowl games.  Here, Stanford's use of jumbo packages is an unusual system even though it is based on old-school strategies.  MSU will have plenty of time to understand and practice their reads and keys to our base offense.  So, I will remain nervous for the rest of you and keep the woofing gods off our backs.

Cheers,
Pete F. 

[Hulk01]

A reasonable view on MSU's defense is that it the Spartans have shown that they can dominate Big Ten offenses.  It's not clear what that means.  Having seen Minnesota play twice and listening to the scout's assessments of Big Ten offenses and their players, I'm not persuaded that the Spartan's performance against Big Ten teams shows that the Spartans have a top five defense.

[Hulk01]

A reasonable view on MSU's defense is that it the Spartans have shown that they can dominate Big Ten offenses.  It's not clear what that means.  Having seen Minnesota play twice and listening to the scout's assessments of Big Ten offenses and their players, I'm not persuaded that the Spartan's performance against Big Ten teams shows that the Spartans have a top five defense.

[fullmetal]

I think Stanford has a slight edge in all three phases of the game...but I won't discount what a month of focused preparation can do for a team practicing with a chip on its collective shoulder.  It should be a slugfest.

[fullmetal]

I think Stanford has a slight edge in all three phases of the game...but I won't discount what a month of focused preparation can do for a team practicing with a chip on its collective shoulder.  It should be a slugfest.

[terry]

After having gone through the stats, I think MSU has an excellent defense. Nobody has been able to pass the ball effectively against them, though they haven't faced many good passing teams. The possible vulnerability that the MSU defense has displayed is that the best running teams (Ohio State, Nebraska) were able to run well against MSU. But still, I think we are going to have our hands full against the MSU defense. They are very good.

Here's my summary of the MSU defensive statistics --

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php/...212.0.html

[terry]

After having gone through the stats, I think MSU has an excellent defense. Nobody has been able to pass the ball effectively against them, though they haven't faced many good passing teams. The possible vulnerability that the MSU defense has displayed is that the best running teams (Ohio State, Nebraska) were able to run well against MSU. But still, I think we are going to have our hands full against the MSU defense. They are very good.

Here's my summary of the MSU defensive statistics --

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php/...212.0.html

[washingtonismoney]

A reasonable view on MSU's defense is that it has shown that it can dominate Big Ten offenses.  It's not clear what that means. 

The funny thing is that for the conference's well-earned reputation for staid offenses, all the vaguely good/interesting ones are spread. Maybe the only good pro-style offense was Wisconsin's (which, of course, MSU didn't play.)

[washingtonismoney]

A reasonable view on MSU's defense is that it has shown that it can dominate Big Ten offenses.  It's not clear what that means. 

The funny thing is that for the conference's well-earned reputation for staid offenses, all the vaguely good/interesting ones are spread. Maybe the only good pro-style offense was Wisconsin's (which, of course, MSU didn't play.)

[CowboyIndian]

I'm guessing the woofing gods are Druids rather than Christians, so probably not overly occupied with Christmas shopping.

They're kicking back after Solstice....no worries.

[CowboyIndian]

I'm guessing the woofing gods are Druids rather than Christians, so probably not overly occupied with Christmas shopping.

They're kicking back after Solstice....no worries.