Georgia-Michigan preview (Part 3)

by Dec 27, 20212 comments

Our Orange Bowl preview continues with an in-depth look at two great defenses. In case you missed it, we’ve already looked at the offenses and analyzed the quarterbacks.

In the six weeks leading up to Georgia locking horns with Alabama, the Bulldogs had faced just one opponent that would finish above 0.500, and it showed. The inability to run the football – 30 rushes for 109 yards (3.6 per carry) – forced Kirby Smart to make the SEC title game a battle of quarterbacks, pitting eventual Heisman Trophy winner Bryce Young against his walk-on Stetson Bennett. The results were predictable. Bennett’s 340 yards on 29 of 48 passing rang hollow, primarily due to two picks, one returned for a touchdown, and the Dawgs lost to Bama by the exact score they did last year, 41-24.

Bennett has attempted 30 or more passes just five times in his career. Three of those came at Jones, the junior college he transferred to in 2018 after taking a redshirt at Georgia the year prior. Bennett lost all but one of those, completing just 56 percent of his passes, with 11 touchdowns against eight interceptions. It’s worth noting Alabama is the only FBS team to force Bennett and company into doing what they don’t want to do.

It would behoove Michigan to join the club and the fact is Michigan is prepared to. In 13 tries, the Wolverines have made the opposition throw 30-plus passes nine times. Against Michigan, opponents have an average passing line of 18 for 32, or a completion rate of, oddly enough, 56 percent. Bennett’s teams lost those four aforementioned games by an average of 10 points each.

Michigan has a knack for making the opposition throw it 30-plus times.

To beat Michigan, Georgia has to run it effectively and, believe it or not, it starts with Bennett. He’s 14-0 when he gains at least 2.3 yards per carry, all the more incentive for him to tuck it and run it when the situation presents. Michigan’s rush defense is no. 19 in yards per game given up (121). Against Power-5 opponents that finished above 0.500, it gave up even less (104). It also ranks no. 17 in yards per carry given up (3.5). Against P5+.500, it’s better still (3.0). This spells a tall task for the Bulldog tailback by committee, but it seems a better option than letting Bennett fire at will.

On the other side of the ball, the good news for Georgia is Cade McNamara is not Bryce Young. The bad news is he doesn’t have to be. If you look back at games against Clemson, Arkansas, Auburn, Kentucky, and Tennessee, the inability to run the football against Georgia was the common theme. Alabama didn’t have to run the football and hasn’t been inclined to try all season.

Michigan, however, brings a rushing attack into Miami unlike any the Bulldog defense has seen all season. If Michigan can average between 4.5 and 5.0 yards per carry, it’ll be right where it wants to be. The Wolverines are averaging 4.7 YPC on 39 carries per game against P5+.500. That kind of productivity will control the clock, limit Georgia’s possessions, and the only question then becomes whether Michigan can score touchdowns, not field goals. As of late, Michigan has dramatically improved in that area. Not sure if offensive coordinator Josh Gattis realized how ridiculous his original answer was to the last question during his pre-Maryland presser and, as a result, decided to place more emphasis on scoring touchdowns in the red zone. In any event, Michigan has attempted just one field goal since.

These red zone offense results include only games versus FBS opponents.

However, in Georgia’s four wins against P5+.500, the run defense was stupid good, holding Clemson (-164), Arkansas (-137), Kentucky (-164.5), and Tennessee (-157.5) drastically below what their rushing yards per game would be by season’s end. Even in the loss to Alabama, the Tide (-31.2) were well off their rush yard average. So while the recipe for success for the Wolverines is simple, it’s anything but easy. They’re about to enter the eye of the storm.

Once again, on paper, Georgia has more talent and has performed better, but this time only slightly. Michigan has the advantage on the edge, led by Heisman-runner-up Aidan Hutchinson. Freshman Chaz Chambliss is talented and played some against the Tide, but he’s averaging less than eight snaps per game, so it’s hard to see him having a huge impact in this one. Five-star Nolan Smith keeps this position from being a complete runaway, primarily because he’s much better at stopping the run (86.8) than is David Ojabo (70.3).

What Georgia lacks on the edge, though, it makes up for in spades up the middle. The Wolverines are going to try to run the football; it’s who they are. But just as the Georgia defense hasn’t seen a rushing attack like Michigan’s, Michigan hasn’t seen an interior and bevy of linebackers like Georgia’s. Much has been made of 6-foot-6, 340-pound Jordan Davis having to take plays off, but if that’s the case, he’s doing so at select times on the field. Davis is averaging just three fewer snaps per game than leading interior defender Devonte Wyatt. If Michigan gets denied up the middle, it can still use its pin and pull, but it has to do so with an eye toward attacking the edge and mix in some zone reads for the same purpose. The only problem with that, though, is Georgia’s stacked at linebacker and showcases them proudly in that 3-4.

Third down

There’s been a lot of talk about Michigan’s big-play capabilities, but it’s hard to see Georgia’s defense allowing many. As a result, third-down conversions will be key. Michigan enters this game no 15 in the nation in third-down conversion percentage (Georgia is 31st).

Adjusted third-down conversion percentage combines third-down and fourth-down conversions into one metric.

Broyles Award

Michigan’s Gattis was recognized as the top assistant in the nation about three weeks ago. Every Broyles recipient in the playoff era has received the award while on staff for a team in the CFP. The team with the Broyles Award winner has won its semi-final the last three years. Only once in the playoff era has a defensive assistant won the award. The six CFP-era offensive assistants to win the award are 4-2 in the semi-final, in which their offenses averaged 34 points.

Joe Moore Award

The Michigan offensive line was recently awarded the Joe Moore Award, a 350-pound trophy loaned to the most outstanding offensive line unit in the country. The last two teams whose units received the award went on to win the national title. The only offensive line to win the award before going out to the Orange Bowl lost (Oklahoma, 2018).

CORRECTIONS: There were two errors of fact when this post was originally published. I stated Georgia had not faced a team above .500 in seven weeks before facing Bama. No. 1, Georgia had beaten Tennessee and, no. 2, time timespan was six weeks, not seven. Both have been corrected and my apologies for the oversights.

Comments

2 Comments

  1. Keith, yet another fascinating, in-depth angle of the intriguing matchup between UM & GA. Your analysis of the number-crunching of a variety of statistics is extremely interesting and informative. I’ve always been a numbers man myself, but yours is so enlightening — best I’ve ever seen. No doubt this is due to two things: modern day technology and your skills at compare and contrast — and your obvious passion for the game of college football. Good job.

    What initially could come to mind for your readers (erroneously) is this guy can’t make up his mind who he thinks is going to win. But what I see is, (for the good of college football I might add), this huge semifinal contest between two great programs could swing solely on one of several things: a lucky bounce or break at a critical time, a tremendous play or game by one of these great athletes on either team, or perhaps an inspiring performance by a group of impressionable young men, such as Michigan’s offensive line, or Georgia’s interior defense, who knows?

    Personally, I think the point spread is a little high; although, admittedly, I’ve never totally understood how Vegas makes money on the betting schemes. But that’s ok; I don’t really want to know because I have no desire to try make a profit against people who are experts at taking money away from other people.

    Here wishing you a Happy New Year, Keith. Here’s hoping you make my New Year a little bit happier by writing and comparing about Michigan’s chances in the National Championship game. Here’s an interesting thought: if — if — Michigan beats Georgia, then the strength of schedule difference is going to narrow greatly between UM and Bama because Michigan will have beaten a tougher team (assuming the Tide roll).

    P.S. I really like the way you narrow down comparisons between opponents’ results against legit, tough competition and throw out the meaningless 60-point drubbings of the little sisters of the poor. The latter games are meaningless.

    GO BLUE!!

    • Really appreciate the kind words. It was fun putting this one together. Difficult, but fun. I do have a great resource in Pro Football Focus. They offer stats I simply can’t get anywhere else that are quite meaningful. I pay for it, but they offer a 50 percent discount for those who’ve served in the military, so, after conferring with my loving, supportive wife, it was a no-brainer. I must be a nerd because it was one of the happiest days of my life. And you read right; it is a passion.

      What you say is so true; one of the many reasons I hate making predictions. Props to those people who make money regularly off sports wagering — my boss is one of them, and I know of others. Kind of like explaining poker to someone who neither understands nor appreciates the game: the guys who make a living at poker and consistently make their way to the final table and, thus, receive huge payouts don’t do so because they’re the luckiest guys in Las Vegas. It’s a skill game. They’ve got skill and guts. That’s how you win at poker and I suspect the same is true in sports betting. Anyway, yeah, one fluke play or any of the unpredictable things you listed could spoil great analysis. It’s a percentage thing, though. If you can surmise what’s likely to happen based on what has, you’re that much closer to what’s probable. I would rather study to understand 90 percent of what I see manifest itself on a football Saturday than go in blind.

      As far as Bama’s SOS, you might be right, but I’m not sure. I know how I currently rank/rate schedules, but I’m not sure how others might. You’ve piqued my curiosity, though. According to Jeff Sagarin, the strengths of schedule are as follows: Alabama (7), Michigan (28), Georgia (33), Cincinnati (78). Let’s see how those fluctuate after the deck gets shuffled Friday.

      Comparing opponents that way just makes sense to me. Again, I’m most interested in something that’s going to help me come that much closer to understanding Saturdays in real-time. Takes a little bit longer to do it this way, but, to me, it’s worth it. And I’m happy to do it. As a matter of fact, I’m happiest when I’m doing it. A happy new year to you! May God bless this nation. It needs it.

Submit a Comment

Author

Keith Eichholz

Lead writer for the Voice of College Football. Thorough, evidence-based, critical thinker. Husband to a beautiful wife, father to a terrific kid, always looking forward to football Saturday.

Recent Articles

National title game preview

National title game preview

For the better part of 30 years, people jokingly referred to the Big Ten as the Big 2 Little 8. Now, it appears college football is the Big 2 Little 128. Alabama and Georgia have so clearly distinguished themselves as the head of the class; it’s only fitting they meet again for the title.

Georgia-Michigan preview (Part 2)

Georgia-Michigan preview (Part 2)

We’re six days away from Georgia meeting Michigan for the first time in over 56 years and for just the third time ever. The stakes couldn’t be much higher in this the rubber match. Last week, we looked at the quarterbacks. Today, we examine the talent disparity on offense as a whole.

Georgia-Michigan preview (Part 1)

Georgia-Michigan preview (Part 1)

The ways you could dissect this year’s Orange Bowl compose a veritable plethora, and we will try to cover as many of them as possible between now and New Year’s Eve. In part one of an as-many-parts-as-it-takes series, we look at the quarterback situation for both sides. While the circumstances are different for Georgia and Michigan, similarities exist that are fairly intriguing.

Final four reveal

Final four reveal

If you caught the Selection Show Sunday, you learned all is well: no need for playoff expansion, it played itself out, and we got the right four. When Cincinnati was revealed as the no. 4, Kirk Herbstreit waxed sarcastic, questioning why people ever doubted the committee would include a Group of 5. Pay no attention to the fact it took eight years. And while the clouds parted from the playoff picture Saturday night, it was also clear the field is indeed too small.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This