Michigan

Profile vs. FBS, 2023

Farther out is better on every spoke. Dashed ring: the FBS median.

• EPA per play

  Expected points added on an average snap: how much each play moved the scoring odds.
  Offense+0.3196th
  Defense−0.1399th
• Success rate

  Share of snaps that stayed on schedule: half the yards needed on 1st down, 70% on 2nd, all of them on 3rd or 4th.
  Offense48.2%92nd
  Defense32.7%99th
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2546th
  Defense+1.1487th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.1986th
  Defense−0.1498th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.5097th
  Defense−0.0497th
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense53.5%92nd
  Defense37.4%98th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense34.7%81st
  Defense24.3%94th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.2265th
  Defense2.6293rd
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense12.6%92nd
  Defense20.1%80th
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense11.0%97th
  Defense21.5%95th

Percentiles among the 133 FBS teams this season, where higher is better for the offense and the defense alike (a defense's numbers are what it allowed). The line in each bar is the FBS median. Garbage time excluded. Source: CollegeFootballData.

Drives vs. expectation, 2023

Every snap has an expected-points value: what a drive from that spot, down and distance is worth on average. A drive over expected beat its starting spot; defense counts what Michigan allowed, so lower is better. The adjusted number fits every team against the opponents it actually played, so it leans toward average early in a season. Ranks are among FBS teams.

Game by game

1. W
   ECU
2. W
   UNLV
3. W
   BGSU
4. W
   RUTG
5. W
   NEB
6. W
   MINN
7. W
   IU
8. W
   MSU
9. W
   PUR
10. W
    PSU
11. W
    MD
12. W
    OSU
13. W
    IOWA
14. W
    ALA
15. W
    WASH

Bars above the line: better than expected for Michigan.

Players, 2023

1. J.J. McCarthyQB223 plays · +0.376 pts/play · 44th of 250 QBs
   1.57WAR1.07 to 2.03
2. Blake CorumRB164 plays · +0.160 pts/play · 18th of 383 RBs
   0.49WAR0.34 to 0.64
3. Donovan EdwardsRB85 plays · +0.117 pts/play · 151st of 383 RBs
   0.19WAR0.11 to 0.26
4. Roman WilsonWR27 plays · +0.243 pts/play · 145th of 457 WRs
   0.12WAR0.05 to 0.19
5. Cornelius JohnsonWR36 plays · +0.149 pts/play · 186th of 457 WRs
   0.10WAR0.02 to 0.19
6. Colston LovelandTE32 plays · +0.166 pts/play · 52nd of 212 TEs
   0.10WAR0.03 to 0.17
7. James TurnerPK10 plays · +0.343 pts/play · 84th of 113 kickers
   0.06WAR0.04 to 0.09
8. AJ BarnerTE17 plays · +0.148 pts/play · 127th of 212 TEs
   0.05WAR0.02 to 0.08

By position group, against FBS

Linemen and defenders are valued as units, in points per game against the median FBS unit, because play-by-play doesn't say who was on the field. Players are valued against a replacement-level backup, so the two aren't added together.

Wins above replacement credits each play's expected points to the players involved, adjusted for the opponent, and compares Michigan's players with a typical backup; 53 points make a win. Only snaps while the game was in doubt count, so a starter on a team that blows opponents out plays fewer of them: read value per play beside WAR. The line under each player (or the range on a phone) is the 90% interval. Ranks are among FBS teams and players. How this works

What it had and what it did, 2023

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  85085014th of 130Roster talent: 850, 14th of 130 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  25825813th of 130Recruiting: 258, 13th of 130 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  78%78%19th of 128Returning production: 78%, 19th of 128 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +31.3+31.31st of 130SP+ rating: +31.3, 1st of 130 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 130 FBS teams with a talent rating this season, best first; the line in each bar is the FBS median.

Talent conversion

Conversion by season

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2023

Each real fourth down is valued three ways (go for it, kick, punt) from the score, clock and field position before the snap, using league-wide odds rather than Michigan's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 6 clear-cut ones account for 0.11 of the 0.16 expected wins. The model sees the situation, not the injury report, so a call it disagrees with can still be right. Ranks are among FBS teams; 1st gave up the least.

Costliest calls against the numbers

1. at MDQ4 7:05 4th & 3 at MD 43, up 5Punted; the numbers favored going for it−4.0 pts
2. at PSUQ4 13:17 4th & 1 at MICH 12, up 8Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.0 pts
3. at MDQ4 11:57 4th & 2 at MICH 44, up 5Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.9 pts
4. at MDQ3 8:28 4th & 1 at MICH 34, up 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
5. at PSUQ3 3:36 4th & 4 at PSU 4, up 5Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.2 pts
6. at PSUQ4 4:53 4th & 2 at MICH 39, up 8Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
7. at IOWAQ4 12:13 4th & 1 at MICH 44, up 20Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts
8. vs ALAQ2 14:13 4th & 1 at MICH 39, tiedPunted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.6 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2023

17th of 133 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

Expected wins adds up Michigan's chance of winning each game as the model saw it at kickoff - a 70% favorite counts 0.7.

1. W

   ECU
2. W

   UNLV
3. W

   BGSU
4. W

   RUTG
5. W

   NEB
6. W

   MINN
7. W

   IU
8. W

   MSU
9. W

   PUR
10. W

    PSU
11. W

    MD
12. W

    OSU
13. W

    IOWA
14. W

    ALA
15. W

    WASH

What moved it, 2023

Every game starts at Michigan's pregame chance; everything after that is the field. The model's own breakdown of each game's final play splits the on-field part by what drove it, and the parts add up exactly. How it works →

• Scoreboard+2.37
• Possession & field position+0.02
• Clock+0.19
• Timeouts−0.16
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.53

Game by game

• ECUW 30-3 vs ECU98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +3
• UNLVW 35-7 vs UNLV99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• BGSUW 31-6 vs BGSU99% → 100%Before kickoff +49 · On the field +1: Scoreboard +2
• RUTGW 31-7 vs RUTG95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +9
• NEBW 45-7 at NEB90% → 100%Before kickoff +40 · On the field +10: Scoreboard +15
• MINNW 52-10 at MINN91% → 100%Before kickoff +41 · On the field +9: Scoreboard +14
• IUW 52-7 vs IU98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +3
• MSUW 49-0 at MSU95% → 100%Before kickoff +45 · On the field +5: Scoreboard +8
• PURW 41-13 vs PUR98% → 100%Before kickoff +48 · On the field +2: Scoreboard +4
• PSUW 24-15 at PSU65% → 97%Before kickoff +15 · On the field +32: Scoreboard +42, Clock +2
• MDW 31-24 at MD89% → 96%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +8: Scoreboard +22, Clock +1
• OSUW 30-24 vs OSU58% → 96%Before kickoff +8 · On the field +38: Scoreboard +34, Timeouts +3
• IOWAW 26-0 at IOWA93% → 100%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +7: Scoreboard +12
• ALAW 27-20 vs ALA56% → 89%Before kickoff +6 · On the field +32: Scoreboard +30, Timeouts −18
• WASHW 34-13 vs WASH64% → 100%Before kickoff +14 · On the field +36: Scoreboard +37

Points of win probability, from Michigan's side.

Closest call

WMU 12-13 MICH (2026) - Michigan dropped to a 3.0% win probability before pulling it out.