Breaking down the advanced stats for Notre Dame vs. Michigan – how can the Irish come out on top in what figures to be a defensive struggle? What parallels are there for this opener and the UGA game of 2017? And what four toss-up stats will help determine the winner Saturday night? 

When Michigan has the ball


The Wolverines in 2017 have several parallels to 2016 Georgia, a year before they made a significant leap last season to playoff contention. Both struggled offensively despite loads of blue chip talent, had inconsistent play at quarterback (much poorer for Michigan than Georgia), and talented backs returning. They returned offensive lines that woefully underperformed but had virtually nowhere to go but up, and looked to newcomers (for the Dawgs, a forced choice via injury to Jacob Eason) to elevate the passing game.

Last year UGA answered all of those concerns with overwhelming success. Jake Fromm made a competent but unspectacular debut in South Bend, but improved every week thereafter and played well enough to win against Bama in the CFP final. The offensive line and running scheme both took leaps forward, allowing elite running back talent to thrive. There was some regression to the mean expected with the sheer level of talent on the roster plus returning starters – can Michigan and Harbuagh replicate Kirby Smart’s feat?

Michigan Passing vs. ND Pass Defense

Shea Patterson is the easy reason to believe in vast offensive improvement, and that’s as much about his talent as it is the struggles of Wolverine quarterbacks last fall. Michigan managed all of nine passing touchdowns on the season, as three different QBs struggled to produce. No matter who was under center, the guys in maize and blue were inefficient passing, not particularly explosive, and really struggled to keep the quarterback upright.

Patterson will be an instant upgrade – but how will that translate against Notre Dame? The move from Oxford to Ann Arbor surprisingly downgrades his wide receiver support, as the Rebels featured an extremely productive and deep corps of wideouts. Tarik Black’s injury doesn’t help, and leaves Patterson with a group of large, mostly unproven targets. Donovan Peoples-Jones (6’2) is now the guy at receiver, but caught only 42.3% of his team-high 52 targets last year.

Chart: Michigan QB’s were really bad / Shea Patterson is not

QB Passer Rating YPA Completion % Int %
Patterson 151.5 8.7 63.8 3.5
Michigan ’17 QBs 110.3 6.4 53.5 2.89
Wimbush 121.4 6.8 49.5 2.18
Book 119.3 6.1 61.3 5.33

 

Grant Perry will assume an elevated role, but had just 25 catches for 307 yards and a score last year. Giant tight ends Sean McKeon (6’5) and Zach Gentry (6’7) are a little scary, given that the Achilles heel of the Irish secondary was winning jump balls against bigger targets. The Irish were excellent limiting long pass plays, but allowed 5 completions of 19 yards or more against the overgrown Stanford receivers in Palo Alto last year (along with two pass interferences drawn).

Despite the threat of Patterson (who along with being an upgrade as a passer, is a far better athlete than Michigan’s options last year), Notre Dame has reason for optimism. The Wolverines were terrible protecting the quarterback last season, and offensive line is probably the position group keeping Harbaugh up at night. Combine this with a potentially improved Notre Dame pass rush, and a high amount of pressure seems likely.

As noted by lots of places, including the self-shoutout below, Patterson was also not great against good defenses last year. That was with an excellent group of receivers, and the Irish were excellent both in limiting pass efficiency and explosiveness last year, especially on passing downs.

 

Michigan Run Game vs. ND Defense

Despite Michigan’s poor offensive performance, the run game was solid in 2017. The Wolverines offensive line was strongest on the interior, with guard Ben Bredeson (a one-time ND recruiting target) and Cesar Ruiz paving the way. Karan Higdon and Chris Evans both fit in the running back category of “very solid”, averaging 6.1 and 5.1 yards per carry, respectively. Both were pretty efficient, especially in high-leverage situations, and moderately explosive (both with about 7 highlight yards per carry, which is pretty average).

The loss of tackle Mason Cole to the NFL draft hurts, and leaves Michigan without good feelings at either tackle position. Look for the Wolverines to employ lots of bigger personnel, including their tight ends, to provide additional blocking help while maintaining versatility and the ability to split out wide. I have a hard time believing the Wolverines blocking will struggle as much as last year, and Harbaugh brought in a familiar face in Ed Warriner to overhaul the offensive line. Still, UM wasn’t overly impressive running the ball against good run defenses last season:

Opponent S&P+ Run Defense Rank UM Run Success Rate UM Yards Per Carry
Florida 25 36% 5.39
Purdue 6 35% 4.18
Michigan State 4 46% 3.86
Penn State 18 43% 4.34
Wisconsin 12 23% 2.26
Ohio State 2 45% 4.61
South Carolina 17 23% 2.90

 

It’s hard to run the ball when the pass game isn’t a real threat. But the Irish bring back the critical pieces of a front seven that finished 13th in Rushing S&P+ last season, and it will be a challenge for Michigan to find some explosive runs. Shea Patterson may be unleashed as more of a rushing threat given the importance of the game, but you figure Harbaugh also won’t want to expose his starter too much. And despite Desmond Howard’s hot takes, Patterson had only 28 carries for 114 yards (4.1 YPC) excluding sack yardage for Ole Miss last year.

When Notre Dame has the ball

I’ve spilled enough ink (worn out enough keys on my keyboard?) on Michigan’s defense – they will be excellent. The Wolverine defense was excellent last year, ranking first in opponent efficiency, which is probably the most important thing to being a really good defense, since it seems the only way to limit big plays is prevent any successful plays. Giving up some big plays as a result was part trade-off of Don Brown’s aggressive scheme, part unlucky that should be due for some positive regression for the Wolverines.

On the same topic of luck, Michigan is probably also due for some good turnover bounces. The Wolverines 1) forced surprisingly few fumbles for a team with the second best adjusted sack rate in the nation and 2) recovered only 35% of loose fumbles. There’s a season to play to find out, but I think there’s a significant chance this Michigan defense will be as good of a unit as Brian Kelly has faced outside of Alabama in the BCS Championship game (they’re projected 2nd in Defensive S&P+).

Notre Dame Passing vs UM Defense

The Notre Dame passing offense versus Michigan’s defense is probably the single biggest mismatch in this game, which is why the Irish need to avoid long passing downs as much as possible. The Wolverine defense excelled limiting efficiency and creating havoc, and while the Irish were decent on passing downs last year, a lot of that success came from running the ball in situations like 2nd and 10. How the revamped Irish offensive line will hold up against Rashan Gary, Chase Winovich and company is unknown. Michigan has an advantage, but how big will it be?

The biggest area of opportunity is Michigan’s penchant for giving up a long pass play. Some of this, to the earlier point about explosiveness, is a little bit of bad luck. But some is also by design – a trade-off of Don Brown’s pressure heavy defense that frequently puts the secondary in man coverage. But Michigan’s safeties are probably the biggest relative weakness of this defense, and while the Wolverine corners as excellent, they are universally not as big as Miles Boykin, Chase Claypool, Alize Mack, and Cole Kmet.

 

Underthrown deep balls – always a formidable weapon in the Notre Dame-Michigan rivalry

David Long and Lavert Hill are excellent corners, and Don Brown will without a doubt try to confuse Brandon Wimbush with pressure from unexpected angles and mixing coverages. Both because of this and based on Brian Kelly’s comments this week – “this is more about calling the offense for who Brandon Wimbush is than who we want him to be” – I’d expect a fairly conservative passing attack.

Notre Dame Rushing vs. UM Defense

The Notre Dame run game is still in many ways a mystery. The interior offensive line, anchored by Sam Mustipher and Alex Bars, should still be a strength. Wimbush’s rushing ability is outstanding, and his presence should help open things up for backs. Everything else – how new starters will hold up, offensive linemen transition to new positions, how snaps will be split at running back and how effective they’ll be – who knows.

What is known is the Michigan run defense, like the pass, will be stout and disruptive. There will be many negative runs and rushes for no gain. Last year, with an elite offensive line against UGA, the Irish managed just a 24% run success rate. Chip Long will have to be more creative to create opportunities and find some small advantages – there’s no obvious Achilles heel in the Wolverine D up the middle or stretching the field horizontally.

4 Keys to the Game

#1 Explosive Passing Plays

Both offenses feature gigantic tight ends, and both secondaries struggled at times in 2017 with jump balls. In a game where both defenses have clear advantages, these chunk passes seem more likely than long runs, and will have field-flipping consequences. Can Michigan shore up the one real area of weakness from last year against the bigger ND receivers? Will Clark Lea’s potentially more aggressive approach and new safeties still be able to limit long pass plays at the same rate?

 

#2 Average 1st Down Gain / 3rd Down Distance

Both pass rushes should have big opportunities, especially on obvious passing downs and 3rd and long situations. I agree with Pete Sampson’s assessment on this week’s excellent Rakes Report podcast – Michigan’s pass rush is better, but so is Notre Dame’s offensive line. Michigan’s offensive line is the weakest line in this game, and the Irish pass rush is coming along….so the relative advantages for each pass rush appear about equal.

So how do you avoid these situations? It starts with healthy gains on 1st down. The Irish offense will need to keep UM off balance, but Incompletions on first down will be extremely costly. The team with a better average first down gain and shorter third down distance should be able to sustain drives long enough to get on the scoreboard a few times.

#3 Field Position

Average starting field position remains in my view one of the most under-appreciated stats. Teams with an advantage in starting average field position of just 6-10 yards – which could seem small – win 78% of those games with an average scoring margin of +15.7 points. And that makes sense when you do the math – 8ish yards x 12 or so possessions is a hidden almost 100 yards!

As I mentioned in my season preview, Notre Dame was poor in this area last year – 108th in average offensive starting field position, 89th in average opponent starting position. Poor returns and return coverage slowly added up, and a better performance might have helped flip a close game like Georgia (the Bulldogs had a +4 yard advantage in average starting position). Michigan was strong last year in this category, ranking 16th in average starting position for its offense and 29th for its defense. The winner of this battle is particularly important in an expected close contest.

#4 Converting Scoring Opportunities

Remember how successful the Notre Dame offense was last year in the red zone? Well, here’s a chart that maybe you wanted to forget.

Drives Inside 40 PPD Inside 40 Inside RZ RZ PPD
Notre Dame 15 6 3.17 3 4.33
UGA 15 5 4.00 4 5.00

Yes, despite all the struggles on offense and being out-gained, the Irish actually had more scoring opportunities than Georgia, but failed to capitalize on them at quite the same rate. Notre Dame performed at a top-25 level in this category last season on both offense (converting opportunities) and defense (limiting opponents). The Harbaughs, however, were pretty pedestrian, ranking 69th (usually nice, not in this case) on offense and 49th defensively.

Prediction Time

Advanced stats agree with Vegas that this is a close game between teams that are about top-10 quality. Breaking down the matchup more closely, it’s hard to predict a lot of key areas because the team’s strengths are both on defense and there’s talent but significant question marks about both offenses. Which defense will have the bigger edge, who will blink first with a turnover or big play allowed, and which quarterback will perform? Both Wimbush AND Patterson have inconsistent records in big games and against elite defenses.

Both S&P+ and FEI like the Irish in this game, but this is a case where I’ll disagree. Ultimately I’d give Michigan small edges in some key categories:

  • I think the Michigan defensive line “gamewrecks” a bit better than the Irish front seven, despite going against a better offensive line. The Wolverines have more proven strength in creating havoc, and the Irish offensive line will really need to be excellent. It’s a lot to ask for Liam Eichenberg, Hainsey, and Kraemer in particular to win those matchups with regularity.
  • Unless Wimbush really is excellent and Chip Long can create some advantages, I think Michigan will be able to run the ball a bit better than the Irish. Again, the UM defense being the best single unit in this game I think tilts things slightly in their favor. It’s all relative as I don’t think either offense will have success running the ball with any consistency. More experienced backs help as well.
  • I’m probably lower on Shea Patterson than others, but think his average performance is probably a bit better than Brandon Wimbush’s. Both QBs have the talent to make a few plays that tip this thing in their team’s favor, but Wimbush’s “average” performance is probably a little lower than Patterson’s, weighed down by the possibility of another implosion.

I hope to be wrong, and very glad this game is at home, and will be doing my part to make it an extremely hostile environment. Put me down for Michigan 17-16, and please let me be as accurate as I was in 2014.