Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Events Cause Mariners To Lose To Rangers

Mythbusters: MSU 2010 = Iowa 2009

(Bump for a preemptive strike on the haters. -- Pete)

 

When faced with something unexpected, people often want to find an example from the past that shows that the new thing they just saw can be closely compared to something they already know about. To reassure themselves this new occurrence is still basically something familiar. And if the example allows them to make a comfortable prediction about the future that further reassures them, then all the better. This reaction is particularly widespread in sports.Everyone or everything is the Next _______ , even when they aren't.

So, as we head into the 2011 season, there seems to be a comparison that popped up during the 2010 MSU football season and hasn't gone away in the months since the games ended. Michigan State's rivals, doubters, and prognosticators all seem to fall back into the same easy comparison: the 2010 Spartans are an awful lot like the 2009 Hawkeyes and (this is sometimes stated outright and sometimes implied) the 2011 Spartans will be as disappointing as the 2010 Hawkeyes.

The narrative goes a little like this: A Big Ten team starts out with long, school record, winning streak against all popular expectations. In a season of close games, memorable comebacks, and painful interceptions returned for touchdowns, the team beats the odds to finish with an 11-2 record and ends the year with high hopes for the following season.

Those sentences could describe either team at first glance, but ultimately the two are more different than they are similar. Yes, Michigan State needed a few impressive 4th quarter comebacks to beat some wannabe spoilers, a situation most teams who win championships find themselves in at one point or another. But it was nothing compared to the concentrated American Cuckoo Juice that kept the Iowa machine rumbling through 2009. The teams just aren't that similar.

MSU could follow the 2010 Hawkeyes and be a disappointment this next year, but it won't be because they were carbon copies of the 2009 Hawkeyes. It'll be some other, awful reason. Because, in case you forgot, the 2009 Iowa Hawkeyes were ****ing. CRAZY.

Star-divide

Now let me prove it.

Data:

First, let's look at how the teams performed in their 11 victories. Let's see how they stacked up at halftime, how they compare when entering the 4th quarter, and how many points they ultimately won by.

2010 Michigan State in Victories

MSU v. WMU MSU v. FAU MSU v. ND MSU v. No. Co. MSU v. WIS MSU v. UM MSU v. ILL MSU v. NU MSU v. Minn MSU v. PUR MSU v. PSU Averages
At halftime 28-7 20-7 7 – 7 35-0 20-10 17-10 3 – 6 7 – 17 21-0 13-21 14-3
Halftime point differential 21 13 0 35 10 7 -3 -10 21 -8 11 8.82
After 3rd Q 35-14 27-14 21-21 42-0 27-17 31-10 16-6 14-24 24-0 13-28 21-3
3rd Q point differential 21 13 0 42 10 21 10 -10 24 -15 18 12.18
Final Score 38-14 30-17 34-31 45-7 34-24 34-17 26-6 35-27 31-8 35-31 28-22
Final point differential 24 13 3 38 10 17 20 8 23 4 6 15.09













2009 Iowa in Victories

IOWA v. No. IOWA IOWA v. ISU IOWA v. UA IOWA v. Ark. St. Iowa v. PSU IOWA v. UM IOWA v. WIS IOWA v. MSU IOWA v. UI IOWA v. Minn IOWA v. GT Averages
At halftime 3 – 10 14-3 14-10 14-7 5 – 10 20-14 3 – 10 3 – 3 7 – 21 9 – 0 14-7
Halftime point differential -7 11 4 7 -5 6 -7 0 -14 9 7 1.00
After 3rd Q 10 – 13 28-3 17-10 21-7 5 – 10 23-21 10 – 10 3 – 6 14-24 12 – 0 17-7
3rd Q point differential -3 25 7 14 -5 2 0 -3 -10 12 10 4.45
Final Score 17-16 35-3 27-17 24-21 21-10 30-28 20-10 15-13 42-24 12 – 0 24-14
Final point differential 1 32 10 3 11 2 10 2 18 12 10 10.09

 

What do we see here? MSU ultimately was much more comfortable in its victories than Iowa was. At halftime the Spartans could count on being about 8 points up by average, by the 4th quarter they were up by an average of two scores at a little over 12 points, and by the end of the game, opposing teams were put away by an average of over two touchdowns (about 15 points).

On the other hand Iowa entered its 11 wins with only an average of a 1 point lead (!), and entering the final quarter their opponents still trailed by only an average of 4.5 points, before the Hawkeyes were able to use strong 4th quarters to put teams away to the tune of an average of about 10 points.

Now let's look at how often the teams found themselves in 'risky' situations that require 'luck' to bail them out.

MSU trailed at the half 3
IOWA trailed at the half 4


MSU up by single digits or tied at the half 2
IOWA up by single digits or tied at the half 5


MSU trailed entering 4th Q 2
IOWA trailed entering 4th Q 4


MSU up by single digits or tied entering the 4th Q 1
IOWA up by single digits or tied entering the 4th Q 3


MSU wins by 3 or less 1
Iowa wins by 3 or less 4


MSU wins by 8 or less 4
Iowa wins by 8 or less 4

 

What's the conclusion? MSU trailed, was tied, or lead by single digits entering the 4th quarter in 3 out of their 11 victories. By comparison, Iowa was in the same situation in 7 out of their 11 wins. That's a sizable difference, right?


Losses:

The two team's losses are even more different from each other, as the data shows:

 

Michigan State in Defeats

MSU v. IOWA MSU v. Ala In Losses
At halftime 0-30 0-28
Halftime point differential -30 -28 -29
After 3rd Q 0-37 0-42
3rd Q point differential -37 -42 -39.5
Final Score 6 – 37 7 – 49
Final point differential -31 -42 -36.5




Iowa in Defeats

IOWA v. NU IOWA v. OSU In Losses
At halftime 10 – 14 3 – 10
Halftime point differential -4 -7 -5.5
After 3rd Q 10 – 14 10 – 10
3rd Q point differential -4 0 -2
Final Score 10 – 17 24-27
Final point differential -7 -3 -5

 

Iowa kept their losses very close, making sure that even their defeats were nailbiters. Michigan State, uh... didn't do that so much.

Let's look at the difference in the losses:

 

 

MSU trailed at the half 2
IOWA trailed at the half 2


MSU down by single digits or tied at the half 0
IOWA down by single digits or tied at the half 2


MSU trailed entering 4th Q 2
IOWA trailed entering 4th Q 1


MSU down by single digits or tied entering the 4th Q 0
IOWA down by single digits or tied entering the 4th Q 2


MSU lost by single digits 0
Iowa lost by single digits 2

 

With MSU, (with a few memorable exceptions) you knew that if they were going to win, they were going to win pretty comfortably and if they lost they were going to get destroyed. Only 4/13 games were within one touchdown when the clock hit zeros, only 1 of those games was by 3 points or less, and one of those games would have required a 2-pt conversion by MSU's opponent  to tie the game up.

 

With Iowa, you were flipping a coin that read 'WTF?!' on both sides almost every game, resulting in a team that could lead you to say 'they could have been 13-0 just as easily as they could have been 7-6' and actually have that be true for once. An astounding six games were decided by a touchdown or less, an even more astounding five games out of those six were decided by 3 points or less.

 

Both teams had good seasons and both required at least a few comebacks against inferior teams to have those good seasons. But whether it was Michigan State winning most of the games they were 'the better team' in comfortably, or in their 'how the hell did THAT happen' defeats, it would be disrespectful to compare them to the special roller coaster ride that was the 2009 Iowa Hawkeyes. We had a wild season, but it wasn't THAT wild.

 

MYTH: BUSTED.


In Conclusion:

Expect to hear the phrase, 'MSU might be a better team this year and still lose more games than they did last year' A LOT during this off-season. And that statement isn't grossly wrong, after all winning 11 games is really tough. I wouldn't put money on us winning 11 games for the second year in a row. But in expecting a drop off, it seems more likely to me to expect 9 or 10 wins, not 7 or 8. And I don't see Iowa as a very apt comparison or predictor of our upcoming season.

 

So don't let this become the theme of the offseason. While there is, of course, a chance that Michigan State will slide back to say, a 7-5 season, it is highly unlikely given how they performed last season and who they return this year. Contrary to popular belief Michigan State's 2010 year was not held together with luck, paperclips, bubble gum, and pixie dust. Such a decline would require a greater change in fortunes than that seen by the 2010 Iowa team, a season we can all agree took a massive underachievement. More 'regression to the mean', more 'Angry Michigan State Football Hating God', more 'unlucky bounces' or 'bad breaks'. Simply put, I wouldn't count on it.

 

Furthermore, this MSU team still looks hungry after their success. They won a big ten title but, unlike 2009 Iowa, were unfairly shut out of a BCS game due to a combination of cheats and computer rankings. Coach D gets to keep the focus on the Rose Bowl targets in Skandalaris Football Center, but this time he gets to point with a finger wearing a Big Ten Title Ring. I think this team is in the top tier of the big ten and could be here to stay for a while. A significant regression in 2011 would shock me much more than our backslide in 2009. We'll see if I'm wrong.

This is a FanPost, written by a member of the TOC community. It does not represent the official positions of The Only Colors, Inc.--largely because we have no official positions.

Comment 21 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I wouldn't mind a follow up with position breakdowns

But, I think the main point here is that 2009 Iowa was really crazy. Perhaps the reason 2010 Iowa looked so bad was that 2009 Iowa looked way better than they really were?

Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude

by Seer on Jun 13, 2011 11:57 PM CDT reply actions  

2010 Iowa's record wasn't great but they were still a very good team.

They were ahead against both Wisconsin and Ohio St with about 2 min left in both games.

The breaks went against them more in 2010. Both years though they managed to win bowl games against good to very good opponents.

by HawkeyeRecon on Jun 15, 2011 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions  

PU/NU

Good breakdown. However, you could say that the PU/NU wins last year were very Iowa-2009-esque. Fake punts, blocked punts, fumble recoveries at the 1, horrible decisions by the opposing QB, and double digit deficits heading into the 4th. The 15-point 4th quarter deficit against PU was also 5 points bigger than any 4th quarter deficit Iowa overcame in 2009. I’m still not sure how we won that game.

"You can look at the dinosaur that weighs you down or you can look at the big pot of gold (and) try to say, 'You know what? I'm going to try to live up to expectations.' " -Tom Izzo, Iron Mountain Philosopher

by Ducking Delvon on Jun 14, 2011 8:11 AM CDT reply actions  

Iowa scored 28

in the fourth during interceptionfest 2009 (also known as Indiana @ Iowa).

I’m still not sure how we won that game.

by fastfred on Jun 14, 2011 8:15 AM CDT up reply actions  

...and I realize

that wasn’t the deficit. Just wanted to be an ass with the “not sure how we won that game” thing.

by fastfred on Jun 14, 2011 8:27 AM CDT up reply actions  

Just good writing.

“With Iowa, you were flipping a coin that read ‘WTF?!’ on both sides almost every game.”

Thanks for this post. Sports blogging either tends to be rabid foam-drooling or empirically sound stats-based analysis. I am thankful this site is the latter. This post will be nice to reference when the fan-bros and the echo-chamber pundits start yelling.

by Chitown Spartan on Jun 14, 2011 9:12 AM CDT reply actions  

Great piece, but one question...

I could very well just be misinterpreting your point, but it seems like you refer to the losses at IOWA and Ala as almost a good thing because it was obvious we were going to lose and we didn’t keep it close? It’s pretty hard to paint those situations in a positive light no matter how rosie your glasses. I’ll take a good game with a close loss over an embarassing blowout anyday, but maybe that’s just me?

by StickyGreen on Jun 14, 2011 10:52 AM CDT reply actions  

On the other hand...

You could look at Jeff Sagarin’s numbers, which (in an unbiased fashion) evaluate team quality based on results:

Iowa 2009: #9 rating, #17 predictor, #41 strength of schedule
Michigan State 2010: #31 rating, #46 predictor, #57 strength of schedule.

Without looking into what pieces each respective team lost (and who they play the following year, etc.), saying “Michigan State 2010 is better positioned to continue success going forward than was Iowa 2009” on the basis of how good those teams were on the field seems to be a red herring.

by sullivti on Jun 14, 2011 11:22 AM CDT reply actions  

Sure...

and you’ve come to the same conclusion: “MSU 2010 = Iowa 2009” is false.

I’ll use a third method. MSU 2010 won a championship; Iowa 2009 did not. Same conclusion.

by Stuka on Jun 14, 2011 6:39 PM CDT up reply actions  

I hope they are pissed off from the Alabama debacle.

The OL is still a concern, we should know early if they take a step back, albeit a small one. Personally, I like our depth and am thinking 9/10 wins. Especially, our first big ten game against O$U.

by MSU1978 on Jun 14, 2011 2:12 PM CDT reply actions  

Disagree

“Now let’s look at how often the teams found themselves in ‘risky’ situations that require ‘luck’ to bail them out.”

I wouldn’t say winning requires being baled out by “luck” as you suggest in your analysis. Sure, luck doesn’t hurt, but couldn’t you just as easily chalk up 4th quarter success to things like superior conditioning, or good in-game coaching adjustments? This is much like something mgoblog seems to love to tout, which is the concept that “turnovers are just a random luck event”, which is so insane it almost makes my head hurt.

At its base in your argument, you are saying that the two teams are totally different due to an average halftime score differential in wins, and an average total score differential of 5 points. I guess I don’t buy the reasoning; who cares what the halftime score is? The final score is the one that counts, and I don’t think that a 5 point differential in wins (which would be totally negated if you averaged in the average total point differential in losses) is enough to “prove” anything here.

I think that we as fans need to be on guard for over the top optimism with a small sample size, and I think that this Iowa scenario is a perfect example of that. Are the teams “equal”? Of course not, but I don’t think you can simply throw the comparison out the window either.

"It's a trap!"

by AdmiralAkbar on Jun 14, 2011 6:50 PM CDT reply actions  

Turnovers

I agree with the idea that turnovers are not entirely luck. Pressure up front and/or good DB’s create interceptions and defensive players coached to pry/punch the ball loose during a tackle create fumbles, some percent of the time.

However, the elements and mistakes by the other team are out of your control and their timing and degree of impact can be called luck. Whether it’s that the wind blows in just the right way during their passing play, or it rains just a bit harder when they have the ball. Yeah one could argue that they should be coached to play in the weather, but weather is unpredictable and therefor there is some luck involved. Concurrently, as humans we make mistakes, and the reciever curling a route off too early or in the wrong direction because he misheard or wasn’t thinking straight happens to even very well coached, very smart players and you’re lucky if it happens when they are playing you.

I didn’t apply this theory to the comparison above, I think I could spend hours watching film and never have a difinitive ‘luck’ v. ‘skill’ determination on each turnover, but it’s logical that there was at least some luck involved.

We’ve all see a football get fumbled and bounce right back up into Mike Harts hands…luck. If that ball goes any other direction that game might have had a different outcome.

by CJC1992 on Jun 15, 2011 8:37 AM CDT up reply actions  

misleading

numbers were very skewed by a couple blow outs by state, while i do think the 2 teams are different and we wont be as dissapointing i dont think the table did a good job explaining. Also the table does not show how crazy the nd game was. One thing that is completely different is how much weaker the big ten is and the fact that our schedule is not very difficult. Just my opinion, may be wrong. Iowa did get very lucky I remember blocking 2 consecutive fgs vs no iowa.

by spartyon6 on Jun 14, 2011 7:39 PM CDT reply actions  

Interesting, but blow-outs matter.

I’m sure there’s a strength of schedule ranking out their somewhere, but if it takes you 3 quarters to start blowing out the non-conference punching bags, maybe you’re not that good.

Sure, one could break down the minutes played by the starters or the play calling, but is Norther Colorado that much worse that Northern Iowa or Arkansas State? They pasted Big 12 Iowa State, but squeeked by these teams.

And I think in order to be statistically fair, if you’re going to throw out NC, you have to throw out the outlier at the other end, either Iowa or Alabama.

by CJC1992 on Jun 15, 2011 8:47 AM CDT up reply actions  

luck expanded with more math

via bhgp

I've been in love (truly) with five women, the Spanish Republic and the 4th Infantry Division.

by sailorjerry on Jun 15, 2011 10:03 AM CDT reply actions  

Great read, good stats

but the one thing that can’t be accounted for is the catastrophic loss of the key player (QB Ricky Stanzi) for Iowa’s two losses. If Cousins goes out in game 10 how does the season end for MSU?

Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.

by Kyle McCann't on Jun 15, 2011 5:07 PM CDT reply actions  

I tend...

….to think we’d have lost that Purdue game, but beat Penn State with Andrew Maxwell at QB. Just a complete guess.

by witless chum on Jun 15, 2011 5:28 PM CDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A Michigan State basketball and football blog community

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Help the Big 10 represent and beat the SEC!
Small
Boise State 2012 Preview
Dawson-michigan-state-600x370_small
The Double Standard in SI's Power Rankings
Dawson-michigan-state-600x370_small
Adreian not Bringing the Payne?
Delvonduck_small
MSU Spring Game Fantasy Contest!
Small
Thank Goodness Adreian Payne is OK
200_small
You're a mean one, Mr. Ryan
Small
Snapper Signing Hits the Double Bonus
Small
Derrick Nix arrested and suspended
Sparty_statue2_small
You Better Believe I'll Take It

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Petenewpic_small Pete Rossman

Spiritofd_small LVS

Contributors

Square_sun_small Steve Hendershot

Marvin_small SpartanDan

State_small Con-T

Adorno5_small intrpdtrvlr

Ph2_small patrick_hayes

Spartan_troll_face_2_small HeckDorland

Mug_vanini_chris__2__small ChrisVannini