Team Stats comparison, 2021: Minnesota vs. Michigan

[RememberMurray]

Michigan: the bluest of blue-bloods. The Wolverines are the winningest program in college football history. They just completed a remarkable year in 2021, dominating the B1G. They won the B1G Championship for the first time in 18 long years. They handled their main rivals, the Buckeyes, in convincing fashion and then stomped Iowa in Indianapolis. They are preparing for a well-deserved trip the to the college football playoff.
Their roster, as always, is littered with coveted recruits and future NFL players. They are coached by a revered Michigan alum who was a star quarterback for them, and who has an amazing track record as a coach both in college and in the NFL

In an attempt to analyze where the Minnesota program is today as objectively as possible, I thought it would be useful to compare the Gophers with the very best in the conference. Here's how the Gophers stack up with the newly-crowned B1G Champions statistically.

--------

Scoring Offense: Minnesota #8, Michigan #2.
Scoring Defense: Minnesota #4, Michigan #1.

Total Offense (yards per game): Minnesota #9, Michigan #2.
Total Defense (yards per game) Minnesota #2, Michigan #3.

Rushing Offense (yards per game): Minnesota #3, Michigan #1.
Rushing Defense (yards per game) Minnesota #2, Michigan #6.

Passing Offense (yards per game): Minnesota #12, Michigan #7.
Passing Defense (yards per game) Minnesota #2, Michigan #4.

-----

CONCLUSION:

Minnesota is right there with them in almost every category. A tweaking or tune-up in Minnesota's passing game (paging Kirk Ciarrocca!) would pull us even with Mighty Michigan statistically. Wow. We've come a long way, folks.

It's especially interesting to note that Michigan's formula on offense is in fact rather run-heavy. Sound familiar?

 

[MaxyJR1]

Minnesota would have definitely put up a better game than Iowa did. I also wonder what tOSU would have looked like with Autman-Bell and Howden and Mo not getting hurt. This year could have been very special. I expect us to compete at a high level again next season.

 

[Otis]

If Mo had not gotten hurt and Potts not gotten injured, chances are we would have been closer in the OSU game. Like a 7 point loss.
Mo would have totally change RUTM for the games we lost. Probably would have won at least two of them.
Sanford would probably still be employed.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

These are conference rankings, not national. The raw differences are more stark, ie ~12 pts per game and 92 yards per game (offensive output) but 2019 Minnesota approached those numbers. Getting Kirk back is a huge deal and theoretically a Ciarrocca offense combined with an improved (and really good) defense could set up a season that shocks the world in 2022…just need some guys to replace departing players. Will Mo be same player, etc. Optimism running high.

 

[matt]

Scoring Offense: Minnesota #8, Michigan #2.
Scoring Defense: Minnesota #4, Michigan #1.
-----

CONCLUSION:

Minnesota is right there with them

Is it a surprise that the team that went #2/#1 in offense and defense won the conference while the team that finished #8/#4 in offense and defense is in a group as the 5th-7th best team?

The data does not support your conclusion that Minnesota is “right there with them.”

 

[RememberMurray]

Is it a surprise that the team that went #2/#1 in offense and defense won the conference while the team that finished #8/#4 in offense and defense is in a group as the 5th-7th best team?

The data does not support your conclusion that Minnesota is “right there with them.”

Huh? Not following your "#8/#4 in offense and defense" line. You must be going strictly by scoring.

In total defense, Minnesota is #2, Michigan is #3. That is, by definition, "right there with them'.

In rushing defense, Minnesota is #2, Michigan is #6. That is, by definition, "right there with them'.

In passing defense, Minnesota is #2, Michigan is #4. That is, by definition, "right there with them'.

In rushing offense, Minnesota is #3, Michigan is #1. That is, by definition, "right there with them'.

The only slightly sizable gaps favoring Michigan are total offense: Michigan #2, Minnesota #9; and passing offense: Michigan #7, Minnesota #12 (which of course heavily influences the total offense numbers). Counterbalancing that to some extent is Minnesota's four position edge over the Wolverines in rushing defense.

---------------

I really hope that clarifies things for you, Matt.

 

[forever a gopher]

Is this some weird joke?

Michigan scoring offense: 37.7 ppg (13th nationally)
Minnesota scoring offense: 26.1 ppg (84th nationally)

Michigan scoring defense: 16.01 ppg (4th nationally)
Minnesota scoring defense: 18.25 ppg (9th nationally)

So...Michigan's point differential per game is +21.69 ppg and Minnesota's is +7.85 ppg. Michigan is beating their opponents by an average of TWO TOUCHDOWNS more than the Gophers. But yeah, the stats are similar.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

the thing is, for a number of years, the rallying cry for Gopher fans - including here in the Hole - has been:

"Let's get the MN program on the same level as IA and WI."

The Gophers have closed the gap somewhat in recent years. But by more objective standards, including placement in the division, games won and head-to-head, the Gophers are still trying to reach the same level as IA and WI. when they get to that level, then you can talk about MI and OSU.

 

[RememberMurray]

the thing is, for a number of years, the rallying cry for Gopher fans - including here in the Hole - has been:

"Let's get the MN program on the same level as IA and WI."

The Gophers have closed the gap somewhat in recent years. But by more objective standards, including placement in the division, games won and head-to-head, the Gophers are still trying to reach the same level as IA and WI. when they get to that level, then you can talk about MI and OSU.

Ah, but I want to talk about it right now. That's one of the reasons I used stats to make a point; the numbers are objective.

Here are some more numbers to consider: The Gophers just beat Wisconsin — again. That makes us 2-2 against Wisconsin in the last four seasons. How many seasons will this dynamic have to play out in order to justify a claim of parity? 10 years (5-5)? 20 (10-10)?

Would 100 seasons of splitting games with them, head-to-head, qualify?

This is where this program stands today. Over the course of the last four years, we have stood even with Wisconsin. That's simply a fact. If you want to go back all the way to the beginning of the rivalry, we can certainly do that as well.

Right now — today — the Gopher football team is every bit as good as the Badgers. Maybe even a wee bit better. We just saw evidence of that: Minnesota 23, Wisconsin 13.

 

[RememberMurray]

Is this some weird joke?

Michigan scoring offense: 37.7 ppg (13th nationally)
Minnesota scoring offense: 26.1 ppg (84th nationally)

Michigan scoring defense: 16.01 ppg (4th nationally)
Minnesota scoring defense: 18.25 ppg (9th nationally)

So...Michigan's point differential per game is +21.69 ppg and Minnesota's is +7.85 ppg. Michigan is beating their opponents by an average of TWO TOUCHDOWNS more than the Gophers. But yeah, the stats are similar.

You've chosen to ignore a lot of the data, but... you be you. I'm not sure why you'd consider my posting of raw stats as a "weird joke". That's seems like an odd take.

Example: According to your own post, Michigan allowed 16.01 PPG; Minnesota 18.25. Would you say that qualifies as a huge difference, or a minor one?

For a guy who styles himself "forever a gopher", you sure had a strongly negative reaction to my post — a post in which I was merely pointing out progress in the Gopher football program. You were really quick to dismiss it, and you were quite vehement. What's up with that?

 

[short ornery norwegian]

Some of this is stylistic. because of the style MN plays, they rarely blow any teams out, even in non-conference games, so that impacts overall scoring.

But, numbers aside, I'm an "eye-test" guy.

Watch the Gophers game against Iowa and watch the Michigan game against Iowa.

which team looked better? I would say Michigan, and by a fairly significant amount.

Michigan - as of right now - has more athletes and better athletes.

The Gophers can be successful, but with their system, they have a narrower margin of success.
given a choice, I'll take the team with the better athletes.

that is always going to be the biggest challenge for MN - narrowing the "athlete gap" between MN and the top programs in the conference. They have made some progress, but they're not there yet.

 

[RememberMurray]

Some of this is stylistic. because of the style MN plays, they rarely blow any teams out, even in non-conference games, so that impacts overall scoring.

But, numbers aside, I'm an "eye-test" guy.

Watch the Gophers game against Iowa and watch the Michigan game against Iowa.

which team looked better? I would say Michigan, and by a fairly significant amount.

Michigan - as of right now - has more athletes and better athletes.

The Gophers can be successful, but with their system, they have a narrower margin of success.
given a choice, I'll take the team with the better athletes.

that is always going to be the biggest challenge for MN - narrowing the "athlete gap" between MN and the top programs in the conference. They have made some progress, but they're not there yet.

I agree with everything above. In my original post I wrote at length about how good Michigan is, and I pointed out that they are stocked with blue chip players and future NFL stars.

The purpose of my comparison with Michigan was never to argue that Minnesota is as good as Michigan. Clearly the Gophers are not.

My purpose was to point out that Minnesota stacks up very, very well against Michigan in a surprising number of statistical categories. And I deliberately chose Michigan for my comparison because they are clearly the very best team in the B1G in 2021. The fact that the Gophers hold their own against the Wolverines in many statistical categories — especially on defense — shows how far Minnesota has come as a program.

But you're right; Minnesota was not as good as Michigan in 2021.

 

[1983]

Ah, but I want to talk about it right now. That's one of the reasons I used stats to make a point; the numbers are objective.

Here are some more numbers to consider: The Gophers just beat Wisconsin — again. That makes us 2-2 against Wisconsin in the last four seasons. How many seasons will this dynamic have to play out in order to justify a claim of parity? 10 years (5-5)? 20 (10-10)?

Would 100 seasons of splitting games with them, head-to-head, qualify?

This is where this program stands today. Over the course of the last four years, we have stood even with Wisconsin. That's simply a fact. If you want to go back all the way to the beginning of the rivalry, we can certainly do that as well.

Right now — today — the Gopher football team is every bit as good as the Badgers. Maybe even a wee bit better. We just saw evidence of that: Minnesota 23, Wisconsin 13.

Sorry to say, we are not better than Wisconsin or Iowa. When we are, we will beat them consistently. Yes, the goal and only goal is to do so. You can put the stats up and say we compare the the Michigan numbers but we could not beat them this year or most years for that matter. Sure we beat the Badgers this year but in no way does that make it a trend. 3 in a row starts a trend. Beat Iowa this century 3 times in a row, its a trend. At that point we can fantasize about competing with the best in the BIG.

 

[RememberMurray]

Sorry to say, we are not better than Wisconsin or Iowa. When we are, we will beat them consistently. Yes, the goal and only goal is to do so. You can put the stats up and say we compare the the Michigan numbers but we could not beat them this year or most years for that matter. Sure we beat the Badgers this year but in no way does that make it a trend. 3 in a row starts a trend. Beat Iowa this century 3 times in a row, its a trend. At that point we can fantasize about competing with the best in the BIG.

I never said we were better than Iowa or Michigan.

I pointed out that we are 2-2 against Wisconsin in our last 4 meeting with them, and to me that says we are now at their level. Maybe even a wee bit better, based on the fact that we beat them by 10 points quite recently.

I never said anything about being better than Michigan. I pointed out that we stack up pretty well with them in quite a few statistical categories.

 

[Dakota2]

You've chosen to ignore a lot of the data, but... you be you. I'm not sure why you'd consider my posting of raw stats as a "weird joke". That's seems like an odd take.

Example: According to your own post, Michigan allowed 16.01 PPG; Minnesota 18.25. Would you say that qualifies as a huge difference, or a minor one?

For a guy who styles himself "forever a gopher", you sure had a strongly negative reaction to my post — a post in which I was merely pointing out progress in the Gopher football program. You were really quick to dismiss it, and you were quite vehement. What's up with that?

Murr, your original post was a good one and gives an objective comparison. Kudos. But why revert to the old familiar slash and burn anybody who might have a different take on those numbers? And ruin your own initiated discussion? That is weird.

 

[RememberMurray]

Murr, your original post was a good one and gives an objective comparison. Kudos. But why revert to the old familiar slash and burn anybody who might have a different take on those numbers? And ruin your own initiated discussion? That is weird.

Thanks for your compliment on my OP, Dak.

If someone tries to distort what I write here, or pretends or infers that I made certain claims when I never claimed anything of the kind, I'm going to point it out that they're wrong.

I have no idea what you mean by "slash and burn", but whatever you mean I'm pretty sure I haven't slashed or burned anyone or anything at all. That being said, if someone asks if my post 'is some kind of joke', I'm certainly going to reply to that type of comment, and in kind.

Copy and paste an example of me 'slashing and burning' in this discussion and I'll give you my thoughts on it.