Top 5 Plays
|
|
Play Number |
Offense |
Down |
Distance |
Spot |
Quarter |
Play Description |
Home Team Win Probability |
Home Team Win Probability Added |
|
1 |
230 |
Indiana |
4 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
Nate Sudfeld Pass to Mitchell Paige for 0 |
0.541 |
-0.541 |
|
2 |
209 |
Michigan |
4 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
Jake Rudock Pass to Jehu Chesson for 5, TOUCHDOWN |
0.828 |
-0.288 |
|
3 |
218 |
Indiana |
5 |
0 |
3 |
5 |
ATTEMPT |
0.663 |
-0.243 |
|
4 |
223 |
Michigan |
5 |
0 |
3 |
5 |
ATTEMPT |
0.320 |
0.241 |
|
5 |
197 |
Indiana |
1 |
10 |
24 |
4 |
Jordan Howard Rush for 24, TOUCHDOWN |
0.672 |
0.227 |
Michigan 48, Indiana 41
Confused? Visit the Advanced Stats glossary here.
| Basics | Indiana | Michigan | Nat'l Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Plays | 89 | 74 | |
| Close Rate (non-garbage time) | 100.0% | ||
| Avg Starting FP | 33.5 | 34.6 | 29.7 |
| Possessions | 11 | 13 | |
| Scoring Opportunities* |
7 | 10 | |
| Points Per Opportunity | 4.86 | 4.80 | 4.73 |
| Leverage Rate** | 77.5% | 68.9% | 68.1% |
| Close S&P*** | 0.599 | 0.703 | 0.586 |
|
* A scoring opportunity occurs when an offense gets a first down inside the opponent's 40 (or scores from outside the 40). ** Leverage Rate = Standard Downs / (Standard Downs + Passing Downs) *** When using IsoPPP, the S&P formula is (0.8*Success Rate) + (0.2*IsoPPP) |
|||
| EqPts (what's this?) | Indiana | Michigan | |
| Total | 48.9 | 56.9 | |
| Rushing | 30.2 | 13.4 | |
| Passing | 18.7 | 43.5 | |
| Success Rate (what's this?) | Indiana | Michigan | Nat'l Avg |
| All (close) | 42.7% | 47.3% | 41.7% |
| Rushing (close) | 48.2% | 37.0% | 42.7% |
| Passing (close) | 34.3% | 53.2% | 40.7% |
| Standard Downs | 47.8% | 41.2% | 46.9% |
| Passing Downs | 25.0% | 60.9% | 30.5% |
| IsoPPP (what's this?) | Indiana | Michigan | Nat'l Avg |
| All (close) | 1.29 | 1.62 | 1.26 |
| Rushing (close) | 1.16 | 1.34 | 1.07 |
| Passing (close) | 1.56 | 1.74 | 1.48 |
| Standard Downs | 1.14 | 1.64 | 1.11 |
| Passing Downs | 2.24 | 1.61 | 1.77 |
| Line Stats | Indiana | Michigan | Nat'l Avg |
| Line Yards/Carry (what's this?) | 3.78 | 3.26 | 2.88 |
| Std. Downs Sack Rt. | 0.0% | 0.0% | 4.9% |
| Pass. Downs Sack Rt. | 7.7% | 5.9% | 7.6% |
| Turnovers | Indiana | Michigan |
|---|---|---|
| Turnovers | 0 | 1 |
| Turnover Points (what's this?) | 0.0 | 3.7 |
| Turnover Margin | Indiana +1 | |
| Exp. TO Margin | Michigan +0.07 | |
| TO Luck (Margin vs. Exp. Margin) | Indiana +1.07 | |
| TO Points Margin | Indiana +3.7 points | |
| Situational | Indiana | Michigan |
| Q1 S&P | 0.518 | 0.745 |
| Q2 S&P | 0.677 | 0.840 |
| Q3 S&P | 0.668 | 0.520 |
| Q4 S&P | 0.640 | 0.673 |
| 1st Down S&P | 0.635 | 0.738 |
| 2nd Down S&P | 0.677 | 0.640 |
| 3rd Down S&P | 0.595 | 0.776 |
| Projected Scoring Margin: Michigan by 4.2 | ||
| Actual Scoring Margin: Michigan by 7 | ||
Indiana held Michigan to three points in five possessions in the middle of the game, got a punt return score, picked off a pass to kill a scoring chance with six minutes left, went down and scored the go-ahead touchdown with three minutes left, forced a fourth-and-goal in the final seconds ... and lost.
One of these days, Hoosiers. In theory.
— Bill Connelly (@SBN_BillC) November 15, 2025
Meanwhile ... man oh man, is the shine coming off of Michigan's defense. The early run of almost impossibly good D turned out to be impossible to maintain. The Wolverines' Def. S&P+ rating (shared in the form of adjusted PPG) has gone from the 5s to the 12s in little time, and that Ohio State game has quickly shifted toward the Buckeyes.