Okay, so I’ve watched the Michigan/Notre Dame game 4 times now (3 times too many on offense). I will admit that the first two were for enjoyment…obviously; the last two were to really get a feel for what exactly happen. Also, I wanted to try to figure out where we go from here. So here it goes…

QB: C-/B+ (obviously it was a tale of two games for Denard, so he's got to have two grades. Now, before you rip them apart, I'll just say that I don't think he was so "hot/cold" or opposite ends of the spectrum as many think...OR like the stats show (those 4^th quarter numbers are silly). Denard didn't fail the first 3 quarters, the playcalling failed him. Even with that said, he didn't always make the best reads, he forced some throws...and he missed on a few more. He should've completed his first two passes of the 2nd quarter.

His 4th quarter wasn't Tom Brady MNF amazing either; it was a lot of soft defense or blown coverage. The best thing he did was use his legs more to buy time, but he wasn't reading coverage and slicing and dicing the defense by any means (his best read/react/throw may have been one that got called back deep in Michigan territory in the 4^th quarter). He was just chucking the ball up half the time. It was more freshman Henne/Braylon vs. MSU than anything else. Denard's passes could've easily been knocked away, dropped or picked...luckily most of the time, they weren't.

With that said, wasn't as bad or as good as people thought. We have to get him out of the pocket more and we have to throw quick passes more.

As for running the ball, I thought he ran the ball very well.)

RB: D+ (Shaw is soft, but fast, but has no balance and gets knocked over easily. Hopkins is tough, but slow and has no vision or ball security. Smith is tougher, has amazing vision, but isn't fast.

We NEED Fitz to stay healthy, he has the power to run the ball with force and enough vision and balance to stay on his feet and hit the right hole. Speed is good enough.

Smith might be my short yardage back, no joke. He's runs so hard and he has awesome vision and ball security. He's like Mike Hart at 70%, which isn't bad, but isn't going to take over or win a ton of games by himself.

Shaw needs to be a spread back only. I watched every play, Shaw can't run in the I-formation, he can't run power type plays unless it’s out of the shotgun. He's fast though; I'd use him like Reggie Bush and split him out wide more or throw him some screen plays.

Hopkins is just Hopkins. What you see is what you get. For better, or sometimes for worse.

All in all, after watching every snap over again, Fitz is the starter, Shaw should get playing time in the spread (assuming he's not supposed to have a key block, because he can't block for shit), Smith in short yardage situations or when you need a blocking RB...such a smart football player.)

FB: B+ (McColgan's catch and run was very impressive. He looks like a FB for sure. Blocking was average to above average.)

WR: A- (Denard has to get more accurate, even some of the drops we had weren't the WRs fault. However as a whole they had one hell of a game! Great catches all over. They get a minus because of the blocking. It was "meh" at times.

Hemingway's body control is ridiculous...why did we throw a fade to Gallon and not him? He's got tremendous strength too. If he was fast he'd be a definite NFL player. As of now, he's 75-80% Marquise Walker/Jason Avant. If that second fade to Gallon that got picked off was at Hemingway, I think he comes down with it.

Gallon CAN catch?! Wow, he used to drop everything, good to see him hold onto the ball. He's not as fast as I thought though, however he's tougher AND has better hops and body control than I thought (and that's not just referring to one play).

Grady is faster than I thought, but he can't block.

Roundtree, like Hemingway is just "slow." (I put quotes because both of them would dust 99.9% of this board if not all of us). But Roundtree didn't get much faster after his Illinois mishap a couple years ago. In fact Te'o outran him to force Gallon out of bounds and he didn't really have the angle over Roundtree. I said Shaw should be used like Reggie Bush...well, Roundtree to me should be used like Wes Welker/Steve Breaston, but that's just me. Put him in the slot, get him the ball, let him pick up the first down for you. Send him on slants on 3^rd and medium.

Where are Jackson and J-Rob? We need outside WRs with some height! We also need better blocking!)

TE: A- (Koger is, wow. You can tell he just wants it. He had an edge to him when he blocks. He focuses and makes the hard catch. IMO he'll have the 2nd longest NFL career of anyone on offense. #1? Taylor Lewan (notes on him in a few). Koger is a very modest type player that every team needs. Above average pass blocker and receiver. He can also lead block very well. Koger had a very solid game; he and Kovacs may be the two smartest guys on the team when it comes to “football smarts.”

The other TE's are just "meh." Moore did have a couple good blocks.)

OL: B- (This could've been a B, but I'm a tough grader and nitpicky when it comes to the lines because a lot of what they're graded on has to do with the opposing OL/DL...for example, if you pancake a LB, so what? He's a LB...otherwise Omameh is all world in 2010 after what he did to Te'o, or if an OT misses a block and you get a sack, that doesn't tell me much other than the other guy f’d up.

Anyway, I mentioned Lewan. The kid is a beast. He completely screwed up (twice) on the V. Smith screen for a TD, but other than that, he pretty much had a lights out game. I'll take him 1v1 against anyone in the country. ANYONE. Now when you send two, or blitz on his side, or stunt/twist...then he can improve. But man on man? Lewan is going to own you. It was boring watching him, he seriously wouldn't let DEs by him in pass pro and he just ran them over a lot of the time when he was run blocking. He’s gotten better because he’s gotten consistent.

Interior line struggles in the power situations. They're definitely a spread interior line, they need space to operate, they can't line up and knock DTs off the ball and back 3 yards to save their lives. (And THIS is why I see the problem with our run game...we have no interior OL push, it's just a stalemate and LBs fill any holes and we rush for 1-2 yards. It happened over and over…and over).

Huyge is Huyge --- a typical Lloyd Carr 5th year senior type OL. Not going to really help or hurt you. Won't get drafted. The kinda guy that you'll see on the Lions roster as a practice squad player for like 5 years or something. After that, he’ll be playing in the flag football game as a TE before the spring game. I’m calling it now, watch.)

Offense: B- (you can't be mad at 35 points...however you can be at 90 yards and 7 points in the first half. You can be mad at your WRs having to make crazy catches to move the ball. You can be mad that the other team's DBs tried to play the entire game with their backs to the ball. So despite the 28 points and gaudy 4^th quarter numbers, I wasn't that impressed. We had no flow.

Also we couldn't re-establish the line of scrimmage. Our QB had to buy time by running around (which he's actually good at --- no sarcasm, his pocket presence is better than people give him credit for).

The run game was horrible from the RBs and the interior line couldn't open up a hole all game. The black line for the line of scrimmage was like a magnet, the lines would smash into each other and then the RBs would slam into the lines, it was stupid to watch.

Lastly, we HAVE to get Denard out of the pocket. Yes, sprint outs shrink the field in half, but he can actually see. We need to do it more, sprint him out and throw a quick out or hitch. Or stop and throw it back for the screen like we did. Maybe send a WR on a reverse? The first TD play ND scored with, why can't we run that with Denard?

Also, where was the quick pass? The snap the ball and fire it out to the WR and let him run? Borges did a TERRIBLE job of getting Denard in rhythm. We need to nickel and dime and dink and dunk more. MUCH more. Then again our WRs have to be bigger than 5'2 and they gotta block better. This is why we need more Jackson and J-Rob, or split Koger and/or Moore out. So they can block for a quick snap'n'fire play to Roundtree or Shaw outside. This takes away the inability of the interior line, but brings up the safeties as if you were running the ball.)

As anyone who has ever moderated a liveblog can tell you, the psychology of fans is a curious thing. Here are some submissions that seemed sane enough to publish in the first quarter (no usernames, that would be cruel):

• So what if we get pounded, we're still 2-0 against them the past 2 years
• our offense has been downgraded from AAA to "Greece".
• If Denard don't get his shit together next series, I would entertain the thought of putting Gardner in.
• How come ND bounced back from a couple sucky seasons so much faster than us?
• I would suggest Michigan drop ND from the schedule until the team gets better
• Good thing we didn't pay $300 a ticket for this, eh?
• Enough is enough. Denard needs to consider calling his own plays in open rebellion if that's what it takes to win.
• now we have a bad defense AND a bad offense
• ...we are completely overmatched. No getting around that.

Small samples. We jump in it. The feelings fans get in their guts is so strong they can’t help but make bold public proclamations after less than a quarter when they know it’s dangerous to read too much into the result of an entire game. Sometimes USC loses as a 41 point favorite and goes on to win everything else. Sometimes James Madison beats that season’s ACC champ. Sometimes The Horror, then Tebow Smash. Everyone knows this. It’s at least partially why Brian felt compelled to protest the strictures and conventions of sportswriting when making his prediction Friday.

As you might be able to tell from the title, this diary is a reaction to Denard After Dentist. The title choice is apt, at least in some ways. My buzz didn’t wear off until Sunday evening. Brian’s as big a Michigan fan as there is, and between the muppets and the “that happened” post, I’m sure he got a great glow himself. But Denard After Dentist came from a guy whose trip took him some places he’d rather not go. Don’t take my word for it:

But I hope I'm not the only one who felt a sense of foreboding in the midst of the joy and relief. We've seen this script the last two years, and never has it been as rickety.

Rodriguez was hired on the promise of bringing our offense into the space age. Zone left, run, run, pass on third and long: gone. Dreadlocks, speed, Barwisbeasts, fuse blowing scoreboards, modernity: in. That’s what we were promised. One of Bo’s players came back to lead the program and pretty soon Rodriguez was gone. Dan Mullen was quickly ruled out, and when Hoke was introduced at that press conference he conflated Michigan football primarily with toughness and that seemed like the day Dilithium died. 

Perhaps the most surprising element of Denard After Dentist wasn’t anything Brian wrote, but that no one in the comments challenged the central premise: that Dilithium is dying. Certainly, it feels that way, it has since January. But that’s not enough. Not on MGoBlog. This is a data driven place. Where’s the evidence? WHERE ARE THE CHARTS?

**

Again, this is silly. Drawing conclusions from one game is a fool’s errand. But last year’s offensive performance against Notre Dame sure doesn’t look as good as you remember it, does it? If Brian wants us to accept that our offense is worse than it was, it’s inconvenient that our offensive performance this year was actually much better. 

This is an aside, but here’s what Brian had to say about last year’s win:

I was going to let my skepticism overwhelm, to wait until it was obvious that 2010 was not going to be 2009, but I lasted two games. I'm in the tank again...

I've got an answer for the Courant now: Michigan is receivers blocking like tiny mountain goats 40 yards downfield because it matters, because if you set Denard free he'll go "AHHHH" at you afterwards. He'll smile and it will seem like the sun is poking through dark clouds, scattering colors in a circle all around you.

It’s a jarring contrast to the quote about the script never having been as rickety. And this:

All the reasons it left you with your finger between your teeth are reasons to wonder about the smoothness of this transition (not very), the repeatability of such miracles (even less).

Another aside: what a strange turn of phrase. Reasons to wonder? If Brian were wondering those parentheticals wouldn’t be there.

The smoothness of the transition is still an open question. As I showed above the statistics of the only real test so far this year don’t indicate anything is amiss. 

Turning to how repeatable our road to victory was***

I think any reasonable observer would answer that we got at least fairly lucky. But I don’t think we were as lucky as Brian seems to think or nearly lucky as last year. We had two big factors going for us last year that were not replicable with any sort of consistency.

First, if your recall, Notre Dame’s starting quarterback was knocked out of most of the first half (his backups and Brian Kelly’s ethics were of such quality that he returned and played for the second half with what was almost certainly a concussion).

Secondly, while this year we were the beneficiaries of two gift fumbles (certainly quite lucky), that’s outweighed by the fact last year we were +3 in turnover margin with a defense that was absolutely abysmal at creating turnovers and an offense and special teams that gave gifts freely.

Possible items that one might argue are not replicable from this year’s game:

• Denard completed a couple jump balls to Junior Hemingway, who has a knack for catching those sorts of things . I guess that’s kind of lucky, but not particularly when you consider he missed a couple long shots downfield too.
• Denard also threw a couple jump balls to Gallon. Both got completed in the end zone, but one to the other team. Tell me if I’m being cavalier in counting that as a wash.
• The Denard fumble recovery score- How lucky is something when it mainly cancels out catastrophic unluckiness? I guess it depends on your perspective, but, of course, it registers.
• Gallon being invisible isn’t any more lucky than the blown coverage we had that allowed the go-ahead score two plays before. 

Conclusions:

1. Making bold conclusions from a single quarter or game is silly (remind yourself)

2. We should be conscious that even minor failures in this year’s offense feed into our confirmation bias that a MANBALL head coach won’t hire someone who can handle Dilithium nearly as well as Rodriguez
3. Michigan’s offense performed significantly better against Notre Dame statistically than it did last year
4. (remind yourself of the first thing)
5. We were at least fairly lucky to win this year
6. We were luckier last year
7. BONUS: The luck we had last year didn’t suppress our optimism. Maybe it should have a little, but the idea that there’s a script and if we let optimism creep in we’re doomed to follow it is silly.

Footnotes

*It should be noted that the yardage numbers don’t include the net yardage changes incurred by penalties for/against the offense. Last year’s game featured a lot of drive killing penalties and Notre Dame’s defense incurred none. Whereas last year our offense had a net of 54 yards of penalties against it, this year the offense gained a net of 11 yards from penalties. Again these aren’t reflected in any other yardage numbers.

**Caveats: ND has 8 defensive starters back, it’s fair to assume they’re better defensively this year… Last year’s game featured two missed Brendan Gibbons field goals from 39 and 40 yards, take your wild guess as to what the chances are of either going in this year and adjust your assessment of the offense’s performance accordingly.

***Given that Brian’s preceding sentences gave examples from both sides of the ball, I’m fairly certain I’m on safe ground including defensive play in my response.

 .
SOARING:
yet another week, yet another demonstration of the accuracy and achievements of THE KNOWLEDGE
.
as ND scored to go up 24-7 in the 3rd quarter, the doubters of THE KNOWLEDGE again started making noise, hoping that they may somehow, some way "expose" THE KNOWLEDGE
.
the result, of course, was the same as always. every single pointer THE KNOWLEDGE provided was proven to be true
.
THE KNOWLEDGE soars again, leaving every doubter in a trail of dust
.
yes
.
many was the number of people who had assumed a Michigan loss after ND went up 24-7, then again 31-28 with 30 secs remaining
.
but these people did not heed the words of THE KNOWLEDGE, who had clearly pointed that "Michigan wins" and "Notre Dame loses" in a close contest
.
those that follow THE KNOWLEDGE shall be worry free
.
yes
.
POPULARITY OF THE KNOWLEDGE:
.
for those that still dont understand the greatness of THE KNOWLEDGE, all they need to do is look at the previous two posts of THE KNOWLEDGE
.
the last two posts of THE KNOWLEDGE have surpassed all the other posters
.

the post on Recruiting was #1 most popular, whereas the post on THE CHALLENGE was #1 "Hot"

.
THE KNOWLEDGE soars everywhere
.
yes
.

 
POTW:
congratulations to the inaugural Protege of the week for this year
.
Mrohblue and los
.
this is the second greatest honor on this blog, following only the TOP FRIEND OF THE KNOWLEDGE AWARD
.
hence, cherish this award
.
yes
.
THE CHALLENGE:
.
the game against EMU may be a letdown after the one against the fiends from south bend, but it is the same for the contestants of THE CHALLENGE - all games are equally important
.
simple pointers
Michigan wins big
The game is not very interesting
.
yes
.

MGoBlog user the fume suggested in the comments of my last diary that Kovacs' interception in the 2nd quarter came from the same defensive play call that led to Notre Dame's final score, so I thought that I'd satisfy my own curiosity and look at that play too.

It's 3rd and 9 at the 36 yard line, ND 14-UM 0. Michigan brings all of its defensive personnel to within 3 yards of the line of scrimmage, with three down linemen (Black, MM, RVB), three linebackers (Hawthorne, Demens, Ryan) and five defensive backs (Avery, Gordon, Robinson?, Kovacs, Floyd). Here's the look:

Rees checks into a new play. This is the play he checks into:

He's focused in on Floyd at the bottom of the screen. Michigan, however, is going to rush 3 and drop 8 into coverage. It's a 3-deep zone coverage with five players in the short zones:

The pressure on the defense will come at the bottom of the screen, since the slot receiver will run a seam route straight up the hash marks, and Floyd is running a 12 yard curl route. Although the seam route is open, Rees apparently expects man coverage, as he seems to have decided already to throw it to Floyd.

The seam route is open. If Rees sees it, it's probably a touchdown. Note that the safety playing the center of the field is at the 44 yard, on the other hash marks, running like crazy up field. He's the only defender who has a chance at preventing a touchdown if Rees sees the seam. 

But Rees is staring at Floyd, and Kovacs is watching Rees' eyes. Here's what it looks like when Rees starts to throw, with Black breathing down his neck. Note how open the slot receiver still is.

Rees compounds his error by making a poor throw too far inside. I suppose he thinks that Kovacs is running with the slot receiver and that Floyd will be wide open.

The result: Kovacs makes the pick.

It's a great play by Kovacs. This defense clearly has a problem, however. The player who plays the center deep third of the field needs to turn at the snap and get deep. He doesn't have time to survey the field and adjust his position. Here it's even worse than on the touchdown in the fourth quarter, as the deep center defender is on the opposite side of the formation from the receiver he needs to cover.

As several people commented, Mattison is not adverse to taking risks with his defensive play-calling to generate turnovers and uncertainty. Sometimes, as here, it works. Sometimes it doesn't. But I think all of us are happier with this approach than the very passive approach taken by the past coaching regime.

Here's the video (1:00 mark):

[Ed: Bump. I am not entirely sure I want to ride again. A nice, relaxing weekend against Eastern sounds pretty good right about now.]

I wanna ride again!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XQzQYFYfy8

Words can't describe it

So here's a graph:

This is a graph of what I thought our chances of winning were throughout the game. That really erratic part at the end is the reason why my neighbors knew I was watching a sporting event. 

I don't really know what to say that hasn't already been said, and I don't know where to start.  All I know is that it was amazing, and horrifying, and awesome, and I wish I had been there.  So I guess I'll just start at the beginning.

Buckle in kids, this is going to be a long ride (warning some NSFW language).

Pregame 51%

Maybe? I don't know.  Home field, under the lights, Brady Hoke's Magical Golden Poop. So what if they got higher rated recruits and have had an extra year of experience in that system. We got Denard and Mattison, so the defense CAN'T POSSIBLY be as bad as last year. With so many unknowns, it might as well be a coin toss, but vegas favored ND.  Vegas is almost always wrong in this series. 

1st Quarter

13:02 49%

Three and out on the opening drive, no reason to panic yet.

Desmond Morgan didn't look very good early.  He started the game with 2 missed tackles in 2 plays

I posted the diary I Feel Sorry For Those NOT Passionate About Sports on September 13, 2009 after Michigan beat ND 38-34 with just 0:11 seconds left on the clock.

After Saturday's game, it is definitely time for a reprise.

After our final touchdown Saturday as I jumped up and down yelling like a crazy man and giving high fives to everyone in sight, I was overcome by a feeling of complete euphoria (an intense, transcendent happiness combined with an overwhelming sense of well-being).

This, of course, was not the first time I have felt this or the most pervasive feeling of euphoria I have had. It has happened dozens and dozens of times. But, I realize that virtually all of the times I have felt this way, it was because of my passion for sports (primarily U/M sports).

I have friends who question my sanity because I am so passionate about Michigan football. When I tell them every fall I will be gone most weekends for the next 3 months, they look at me in a very strange way. When I explain that I can’t go biking or kayaking or whatever because the M away game is on TV, they roll their eyes.

On Sunday morning as I prepared to drive the 250 miles north to our home in Boyne City, a thought snuck into my mind. How do all the people who are NOT passionate about sports experience life?

I have experienced many moments of joy and euphoria – my wedding(s), the birth of my children, my children's weddings, birth of grandchildren, a beautiful sunset, etc. But, almost every other human being has also experienced those very same things in their own lives.

There are less than 114,000 human beings on the planet that will ever completely lose their minds in happiness and experience the euphoria I felt on Saturday.

Are there really 100’s of millions of Americans (and literally billions in other countries) who have never experienced the overwhelming euphoria that I (and many others) had experienced less than 12 hours ago? Is that really possible? Do they actually go through life without ever totally losing their minds in happiness and joy? How do they survive?
Really, I mean that: How do they survive?