Note: "player" has never been deployed for the defense; I tried it this week and the results are kinda weird. It's the player most responsible for the result of the play, if that makes any sense.

Also Note: if you want the swanky video popups, you’ll have to click through to the post page itself. Click the title of the post. Update: hey, it works. Nevermind.

I’m going to try to come up with a better solution for this next week.

So what changed at halftime?

My initial theory was they junked the 4-3 zone that Johnson was shredding in the first half in favor of more 3-3-5 and more man, but as you can see above, not really. Any increased prevalence of three-man lines has more to do with the preposterous down and distance situations Utah found themselves in than any schematic adjustment. When it was first and ten in the second half, Michigan was in a 3-3-5 twice and a 4-3 all other times.

My new theory: the second half performance is close to baseline unless someone on Michigan makes a huge error. First half drives in capsule form:

• Jamison draws a holding penalty and Utah finds itself in third and nineteen; Brown screws up badly, allowing a 55 yards pass and first and goal. (TD)
• Johnson makes two NFL-quality throws that pick up 40-some yards; Ezeh busts a coverage and allows a second and sixteen to become a first down. (FG)
• Evans blows a simple flare route in every way you can and turns a checkoff into a 40 yard play. (FG)
• Utah completes a pass against Ezeh in zone and pounds down the field, exploiting freshman Mike Martin and getting some poor play from Evans and Ezeh. (FG)
• Three-and-out.
• Short field touchdown helped by poor coverage. (TD)

On each of the first three drives, simple errors from Michigan players turn long yardage down and distance situations into enormous plays; on the last Sheridan’s interception reduces the margin for error.

None of this happened in the second half, and while Utah managed the occasional first down with a number of runs up the middle or pass against the linebackers, their offensive line couldn’t handle the Michigan DL consistently enough to keep Utah out of third and long.

This is kind of the opposite of what’s going on with the offense. The offense has severe physical limitations and execution issues, so it can get better but will always have a low ceiling. The defense looks like a physically dominant monster with occasional execution issues.

Execution issues don’t just go away, of course, but they do go down as the weeks progress.

Chart?

Wow, like. Wow, man. I don’t know if I want to show you this thing.

For newcomers: the defense chart attempts to quantify positive and negative contributions from defensive players. Routine things like being the guy to clean up and tackle after someone else disrupted the play don’t show up. This does a pretty decent job in the run game but is inadequate for the pass game, so there are two metrics—“pressure” and “coverage”—devoted to that. In general, DL get the highest scores, LBs are in between, and DBs try to stay around zero.

Usually, this thing aligns pretty closely with the opinions I had watching the game live and on tape. This one is weird.

Anyway, chart.

Okay, my issues with my own damn chart:

• I thought Graham had a disappointing day, as he only got to the quarterback every once in a while. All the mentions above are from nice plays in run defense.
• Jamison and Johnson were great, IMO, and I have no problems with their numbers. Taylor checks out, too.
• The linebackers were obviously a problem, and the outside linebackers especially.
• Ezeh… well. Something like –6 was on pass coverage, where I think you’ll agree Michigan linebackers had serious issues. There were another couple plays in the run game where he just flipped out and went completely the wrong direction, and that’s how you get to –5.

I still don’t agree with the Ezeh thing, but when Johnson is tearing up the linebackers underneath and Utah racks up a billion yards in the first half because of it, someone has to suffer.

Barwis SMASH?

Well, he couldn’t do much with the patchwork offensive line but holy crap this DL looks like it’s from another planet this year. Tim Jamison was crushing a guy who was second-team All Mountain West last year; this is not conclusive but it's certainly encouraging. Will Johnson turned in more plays in that game than he did in half of last year. And Johnson got run down from behind more than once on plays we’ve all seen end in tragedy before.

All hail.

What’s with the linebackers and the suck?

They’re clearly scrambling for answers here, with Evans and Panter scheduled to sit for Mouton and Thompson next week. This should not be particularly surprising. Panter became Michigan’s first JUCO recruit in ten years for a reason, and it wasn’t “boy we’re so deep at linebacker.”

Thompson, of course, had that wowza Iowa game in 2005, then disappeared to the bench until the early stages of last year, when he started for a bit then lost his job to injuries and Ezeh. Maybe he’s not good against the pass, but if he turns out to be good against the run he’s got something on Panter. Mouton made a play or two last game, but he’s been AWOL behind players who are bad for the duration of his career. I’m not expecting miracles.

As for Ezeh, live I thought he was awesome; on tape I thought he was pretty good; in the harsh number-thing above he checked in about as ugly as it gets. He’s clearly still working towards the lofty standard set by David Harris. He’s obviously much closer this year and I think he might approach it as a junior. There will still be growing pains this fall.

Heroes?

Defensive line, Barwis, Warren.

Goats?

Linebackers, somewhat Steve Brown.

What does it mean for next week and the season?

I was more encouraged by the defense after review, since a lot of the plays Johnson made had little margin for error—little holes in a zone or a defensive lineman just about to put a facemask in his chest—and some others seemed first game jitters from young players. Iron out the n00bs to the point where they’re the defensive equivalent of Wisconsin quarterbacks—just don’t lose the game for us, kid—and let the defensive line go to work and this defense should just about live up to its hype.

Watch out for: veteran quarterbacks who operate out of a spread or have excellent underneath options. Tight ends could be problematic all year.

Hello! If you’re new here, UFR is a play by play breakdown of each Michigan game. I try to grade out players, give an overall impression of their performance, and tell you just what happened on that play or that other play. As always, this is the work of a dedicated amateur, may occasionally be flat wrong, and does not constitute legal advice.

Video added gradually.

Update: Sigh. Video erratic. I know how the team feels: you try to do something cool-looking and it just blows up in your face. Suggest you click the title and go directly the post page if you want the cool doohickeys.

Well, how did that go?

Not. well. Let’s do a rundown of position groups relative to preseason expectations:

Quarterback: no one expected they’d be good but the performance was close to the lower bound of the feasible.

Running back: I’m tempted to give them an incomplete because they had so little opportunity to do anything. McGuffie did okay; so did Shaw; Minor was Minor.

Receivers: possibly a bit better than we expected if Hemingway can continue his impressive performance. He got behind a Utah defensive back who was bailing out into a cover three for the touchdown, caught a tough slant, and generally looked big, fast, and good. Everyone else was okay; Mathews is always going to be a step or two slow on the deep balls. Odoms didn’t get much of a chance.

Offensive line: their overall suck was obviously part of the gameplan in a huge way; I expect that will seriously impinge on Michigan’s attempts to forge an offense all year. Like 2005 except worse.

Can you make up a word to describe the Sheridan interception?

Putreficent. It was putrescent but sort of magnificently so. There are two rushers. Neither of them is anywhere near me. I know! I’ll throw off my back foot. I will aim it such that the ball comes down amongst no fewer than three Utah players. It is in this way we will achieve victory.

In away, You have to respect that sort of spectacular failure. If you’re going to screw up, go for the gusto, son.

Shouldn’t we have Lloydballed it there?

Well, maybe. Before the play I thought the most logical thing was to hurl it down the sideline in the hopes of picking up 30 or so yards but mostly just resigning yourself to a punt. Throwing a fly route is a safe thing you can ask your n00b quarterback to do without much risk, as we saw a half-dozen other times during the game.

With Michigan in max protect and two guys running fly routes and the third on a post, this is what they called, only to see the quarterback do that putreficent thing. You’re weighing the chances of that happening against the chances of something good happening… eh, it may have been a better idea to run a draw and punt. But I think Carr would have made the same call; I’ve seen him do it.

Charts?

Are you sure?

I can take it, it’s Thursday, I hardly remember what happened.

Fine. Charts, jerkwad.

If you’re new, the following chart—dubbed the “Hennechart” for the duration of this blog’s existence—is explained here. It is now the Threetsheridammit chart, and here it is in all its non-glory:

This is ugly, as it should be.

In general, a positive-negative ratio (DO + CA / IN + BR + TA + BA+ PR) of 50% was just above Mallett performances last year, and that was in an offense that did a lot more than throw a wide variety of screens and the occasional downfield hurl.

Threet’s advantage over Sheridan was simple: when things went to hell he trundled about for a bit and took a sack instead of throwing the ball directly to players wearing Utah colors. These are the TAs—throwaways—you see above. Threet has some; Sheridan went with BRs—bad reads, the worst, worst thing on the chart—instead.

Unstable protection metric?

This is also not good:

PROTECTION: 21/32. Schilling –1, Moosman –3, Ortmann –3, McGuffie –1, Team -3

In general you’re looking for 75%. This did not happen. Note also the tiny total number here: 32 is less than half a typical Carr score. This is partially just the Rodriguez offense with all the screens and whatnot.

But IMO it’s mostly an extreme lack of faith in the line. Max protect was a common occurrence, at times leaving as many as nine(!) Utah players covering three Michigan receivers.

And the receivers:

(a brief legend:

• 0: totally uncatchable, just here to indicate targeting
• 1: extremely difficult catch.
• 2: moderately difficult catch.
• 3: routine catch.

)

When they were called on they were good, with the Mathews drop being the only one of the day. Two 1s got hauled in, too.

I don’t do run grading, but Genuinely Sarcastic does: here’s the no-longer “Hart Chart.” I think they should have been a bit harsher on the OL on various plays, particularly the McGuffie field-reversal forced by the presence of Molk’s butt mere inches from the handoff, but it’s their chart so they can do what they want.

We should play Minor more!

Not seeing it. He did have Michigan’s one nice run of the day, upon which he had to run directly upfield into a gaping hole. Hey, great, that’s completely adequate. He then fumbled on his next carry. (-Ish.) He may be a better pass blocker, but McGuffie had all of one whiff job on the day and was completely adequate outside of that.

He should play, he should get carries, but shoving him on the field more wasn’t going to change Michigan’s run game.

What does it mean for Miami and the rest of the season?

It means we’re in for a long year. We knew the offensive line and quarterbacks would be bad. We didn’t know how bad. In the Utah game the answer appeared to be at or near the bottom of the scale of realistic possibilities. You can get away with either your OL or your quarterback sucking, but not both.

There were some positives. You could see the outline of a rudimentarily effective offense in the guys running open underneath and sometimes past the secondary. The execution issues that plagued Michigan can and should get fixed over time; when (if?) that happens the offense will be ugly but functional.

There are some problems that will not go away: the offensive line is bad for reasons other than execution. It is bad because the players on it are small or underpowered or just plain bad. The quarterbacks can’t make the zone read fake worth defending. Also they cannot find open receivers. Also sometimes their brains asplode.

My Question: How many kids in the 2009 class could enroll early in January? I have read stories on a number of recruits (i.e. Shavodrick Beaver, Brandin Hawthorne, Vincent Smith, even Newsome before the decommit) claiming an intention to graduate early and head up to UM in January. Is there some limit on the number allowed?

Wouldn't it make sense for the coaches to pick and choose who should enroll early (QB, DE) based on needs? Thanks again and Go Blue!

BlueDrew

Teams are only allowed to sign 25 players per recruiting class, but January enrollees are allowed to count in either the preceding class or the upcoming one. Beaver, for example, could count as a part of either the 2008 or 2009 recruiting classes should he choose to enroll early.

These days schools use this to dodge the limit when they have more than 25 to offer; there’s no real limit on the number of early enrollees permitted and no need to ration out spots. If the NCAA was strict about it, Michigan would have only one slot to offer for a January recruit because they signed 24 in last year’s class—25 if you count Morales, who probably would have grayshirted to get one of the QBs on campus ASAP if the rule was different. They are not strict.

As far as who plans to show early: Beaver, Forcier, Hawthorne, and Smith have all announced plans to do so. I don’t think anyone else has; commenters will no doubt correct me if I’m wrong.

Brian,

As a Michigan fan that grew up in WV with a memory of Rodriguez going 3-8 his first season and people wanting him R-U-N-N-O-F-T, I have to say I thought I was prepared for the worst this season. But after that first game…YIKES.

Having said that, I wanted to get your thoughts in regards to recruiting under Rodriguez these first few years. This train of thought was prompted Forcier's on the spot commitment after watching UM lose to Utah. I have no doubt that he already feels competitive based on what he saw. There is a lot of talent on the field for Michigan (albeit raw) and RR seems to have a pretty decent 2009 class coming together.

My question is this: with the cupboard seemingly bare and so many young guys seeing action already (12 freshman in the first game) do you think it's possible that Michigan can still recruit the skill positions being played by FR/SO and be 2-3 deep within a year or two?

I am sure I'm taking this season in better stride compared to most UM fans only because I've seen RR stumble out of the gate before. However, I have every bit of faith in Rodriguez, too; because I have also seen him resurrect a hopelessly mediocre program as well. Still, I simply can't believe it will take him too long to stop the bleeding in the Big House.

Thanks, Lance (Richmond, VA)

There are some issues in recruiting, but not at the offensive skill positions. Last year they brought in three running backs and four receivers, plus two tight ends. This year has two quarterbacks, three running backs, and three receivers so far; five and a half of those guys are highly rated (Forcier, Beaver, Toussaint, McNeal, Gallon, and Teric Jones is the half). If anything, people have been looking at Rodriguez’s recruiting of little half-pint guys and wondering if he’s always wanted to adopt a little African kid—or a dozen of them—but for the paperwork.

Plus, next year Michigan gets lucky. There are two highly touted instate dual-threat quarterbacks, one at traditional Michigan feeder OLSM. Fred Jackson’s kid is a monster WR prospect with offers from Texas and Florida (and Michigan), and there’s another guy in Florida named Ricardo Miller who has some impressive early offers that most are writing off to Michigan. This puts them well ahead of the curve.

The concerns are more at OL (somewhat), DE (major), and a slight lack of big time kids on D. There will be skill guys galore as soon as next year.

Oh, and Lance also notes:

Just one more thing you might know that I stumbled across recently: USC lost to Utah during Pete Carroll's first season.

Lance
(Richmond, VA)

Sweet.

Brian,

I know we are in the midst of football season, but I came across this article and am curious why eeeeeeeeBarwis will not be working with the basketball team.  I played small time D1 athletics and even our S&C coaches split up the teams, so I understand even Barwis cannot work with each team, but I was just curious as to why Beilein won’t use Barwis. 

On another note – I’d like to formally request that Blessed Be His Name become an official mgoblog acronym attached to Michigan players (or even John Cooper) that have stood the test of time and to this day are still heroes in your mind (Charles Woodson BBHN).  The list could turn into the opposite of the ‘On Notice’ board if an official list is developed.

Matt

Suggestion noted and may or may not go anywhere. As far as Barwis and the basketball team: as you note, S&C is a job that’s often too big for one guy or one set of guys. I’m sure Beilein has the utmost respect for Barwis but given the choice between Barwis when he’s not working on football and a full time guy, you go with the full time guy.

You do so especially when you can hire someone directly off the Memphis Grizzlies staff. When kids come in and you can point to a guy who’s worked in the same capacity in the NBA, that has to help recruiting.

Via Sam Webb on WTKA this morning: Cox has decided to stay, but freshman LB Taylor Hill has decided to go. This latter news can also be creepily stalked out of Facebook if you like.

Hill’s departure is a negative. He was a fringe 4-star guy, top 250 to Rivals but three-star-ish to Scout, and played a position (OLB) at which Michigan isn’t particularly deep.

It’s also kind of weird, because, like, seriously, they’ve played one game. Maybe Hill just changes his mind a lot: he was originally committed to Oklahoma, then West Virginia—though that decommit is understandable—before picking Michigan. Or maybe he just wasn’t going to hack it. Some guys, like Cobrani Mixon, are clear non-contributors as soon as they show up. If he ends up at a MAC school or something that may be it.