"This is really important to be here," Lewan said. "I'm here to give back and help out my teammate."
[Ed: MGoWife got this in the inbox and forwarded it along to me for obvious reasons. A good cause and a good way to get your recipes in the lore of Michigan tailgating.]
Hi, everyone --
Just received this email from Alpha House, which helps the homeless in Washtenaw County, and thought some of you might like to submit recipes to them.
" ... we would love to include you in a tailgate project to raise money to support Alpha House, a local shelter for homeless children and families in Washtenaw County (www.alphahouse-ihn.org). Over the next three weeks we will be collecting your favorite tailgate recipes, memories, and photos to be published in a cookbook celebrating the long tradition of Michigan tailgating.
Please consider sharing your favorite recipes, the history of your tailgate and/or any tailgate photos. Any and all recipes from appetizers to bbq to dessert are welcome and desired. We will compile the recipes, stories, and photos into a beautiful (and delicious) tribute to UM tailgating. If you would like to share with us please email recipes (you can use the attached
form or another format that works for you), pictures and/or tailgate remembrances to Helen Starman (email@example.com) or Kelly Pearson (firstname.lastname@example.org). If you have any questions at all please feel free to email or call Helen or Kelly (734.822.0220).
A shelter in East Lansing very similar to Alpha House has had a lot of success with a similar project the last two football seasons. We of course expect to show them who reigns supreme in all football matters in the state of Michigan.
Intern, IHN @ Alpha House
MSW Candidate, 2012
University of Michigan School of Social Work
So we close the books on the 2010 season and get ready for 2011, leaving behind the weirdest season many of us have ever seen for any sports team ever. With just a few days away from the season opener against the university of ontario, I thought I would give my take on the 2011 team and how the roster is shaping up so far. (To avoid confusion, Everyone listed on the offensive line chart as “Wing” is because they are all listed as left wings and I don't know where they will end up)
Departures (Rating 1-5 based on impact of loss)
Carl Hagelin (F) 2010 stats: GP-44, G-18, A-31, Pts-49, PPG Average-1.1, PIM-39, +21
Obviously losing the captain hurts. He was a balanced scorer, a great defensive player, maybe the fastest player in college hockey and the heart of the team. Impact of loss 5/5
Matt Rust (F) 2010 stats: GP-44, G-5, A-21, Pts-26, PPG Average-0.59, PIM-41, +14
Losing the captain hurts and so does losing the alternate captain. Rust was a tough gritty player who played above average defense and was a presence in front of the net. I was tempted to rank his loss impact lower because of penalty minutes and posting a career low in goals, but he was a great player and an even better teammate. Impact of loss 5/5
Louie caporusso (F) 2010 stats: GP-41, G-11, A-20, PTS-31, PPG Average-0.76, PIM-22, +17
One of my favorite players on the team, also one of the most dynamic and frustrating players we might ever see when he wasn't busy being the love expert. Louie put up good numbers and could skate really, really fast, but always left fans wondering when he was going to wake up and actually start scoring. If it didn't take him a quarter of the season to find the scoring touch every year he could have put up numbers like chad kolarik or kevin porter, instead 60 point seasons became 40 point seasons. Impact of loss 4/5
Chad langlais (D) 2010 stats: GP-44, G-2, A-15, PTS-17, PPG Average-0.39, PIM-24, +16
A mainstay on the blueline for four years langlais started every game of his career for the wolverines and was a solid defensive player and an assist machine. His offensive production can be replaced but his duribility and leadership can not. Impact of loss 3/5
Brandon burlon (D) GP-38, G-5, A-13, PTS-18, PPG Average-0.47, PIM-28, +14
Solid defensive player who provided a spark on offense but spent a little to much time in the box. His departure is softened with the return of jon merrill, and his stats are almost identical to moffie with more penalty minutes. Impact of loss 2/5
Scooter vaughn (F) 2010 stats: GP-44, G-14, A-10, PTS-24, PPG Average-0.55, PIM-45, +15
Not a player who was expected to do anything except kill penalties, but getting 20+ points from unknown players is a trend red has become know for and I don't expect it to stop now. Impact of loss 2/5
Ben winnett (F) 2010 stats: GP-40, G-5, A-7, PTS-12, PPG Average-0.30, PIM-24, +5
Ben never achieved the success at the collegiate level that he had playing junior hockey but came through for us when we needed it most, scoring the first goal against north dakota and the first goal agaisnt UMD. Impact of loss 1/5
The rest of the departures include fallon, llewllyn, and hogan who's loss will not impact the team. I would like to give hogan a 1 but injuries kept him from finishing a promising career.
Chris Brown JR, (LW) 2010 stats: GP-42, G-9, A-14, PTS-23, PPG Average-0.55, PIM-59, +16
Solid player who can put up better numbers if he stays out of the box, needs to step up and take a bigger role this season. Spent time with the US national team during the GLI last year.
David Wohlberg SR (c) 2010 stats: GP-37, G-15, A-6, PTS-21, PPG Average-0.57, PIM-42, +3
Offensively a good player but the +3 is a little worrying. If he can cut penalties down 30 points is not out of the question. Named second team All-CCHA
Luke Glendening SR (RW) 2010 stats: GP-44, G-8, A-10, PTS-18, PPG Average-0.41, PIM-26, +15
Named captain for the 2011 season, solid offensive player who walked on to the team. May be the player who steps up and provides leadership left by the departed hagelin and rust.
Luke Moffit SO (LW) 2010 stats: GP-36, G-5, A-8, PTS-13, PPG Average-0.36, PIMS-12, +7
Good season for a freshman, defensively needs some work. Needs to step up production or else one of the many freshman left wings will take his place.
Kevin Lynch JR (c) GP-44, G-11, A-5, PTS-16, PPG Average-0.36, PIMS-36, +3
As of right now the only center listed on the roster (unless im missing something). Very talented offensively but the +3 indicates defense is a question mark. Since lynch may be the only viable option at center besides wohlberg, staying out of the box is key for this offense and 36 penalty minutes is to much.
AJ Treais JR (RW) 2010 stats: GP-42, G-9, A-13, PTS-22, PPG Average-0.52, PIM-12, +4
Another solid offensive player who improved from freshman to sophomore year, but the growing trend with the offensive players so far is the low +/- number. With a young group of forwards this team is going to need to lean on defense and the upperclassman need to step up.
Alex Guptill FR (Wing)
Drafted 77th overall by the dallas stars. He finished his 09 season with 64 points, but slipped in the following years finishing the 2011 season with 25 points and a -13 rating which can be attributed to playing with a poor team. The high draft pick shows that scouts still think that he is a promising player who can contribute at the next level, which is great for us.
Derek Deblois SO, (C?) 2010 stats: GP-27, G-1, A-6, PTS-7, PPG Average-0.26, PIMS-20, +8
Getting this far down the roster it starts to get a little murky. Deblois is one of many wingers listed on the roster, but since the incoming freshman are higher rated recruits and no true centers are left I would imagine he would shift to the middle. As for his talents his scoring output is pretty low but the +/- is surprisingly higher than expected. The problem for derek is the penalties which is the same for every player on last years team, and what made me and every other fan bang our heads against the wall. (Seriously seven penalties vs ferris?)
Lindsay Sparks JR (Wing) 2010 stats: GP-17, G-4, A-2, PTS-6, PPG Average-0.35, PIM-8, +4
The great unknown for the 2011 season. Lindsay sparks wowed us with his great speed and offensive skills, and than wowed the coaching staff with his terrible defense and rode the bench. I would assume he gets the nod over one of the billion freshman left wings, but if he is going to keep this spot he needs to work hard or ride the bench with rohrkempher (Who could start the season in sparks spot, I don't know).
Zach Hyman FR (Wing)
Incoming freshman who comes in with some hype, drafted 123rd overall and considered a steal for for michigans 2011 class. Should contribute early on this line, but since the first two lines seem to be solid he would have to light the lamp for any chance to move up this season.
Travis Lynch FR (C?)
Another incoming player who is listed as a left wing. Just like deblois I would expect him to move over for a high ranked freshman (unless im just completely wrong), but if lynch give us a good 40 seconds on the ice a shift and get off it's a win.
Jeff rorhkempher FR (Wing) 2010 stats: GP-13, G-3, A-0, PTS-3, PPG Average-0.23, PIMS-2, +4
Not too bad for a walk-on freshman last season, took over after the the defensive nightmare that was lindsay sparks. Should provide stability for the 4th line and might qualify for the annual travis turnbull memorial breakout player of the year, but not likely.
Jon Merrill SO, 2010 stats: GP-42, G-7, A-18, PTS-25, PPG Average-0.60, PIM-16, +11
The second coming of jack johnson without the penalties, always in the right place and rarely gets caught out of position. Should be one of the nations top blueliners, named Pre-season CCHA first team defensman.
Greg pateryn SR, 2010 stats: GP-40, G-3, A-14, PTS-17, PPG Average- 0.43, PIM-28, +15
Solid player with decent offensive output, will have to hold off lee moffie for 1st line spot.
Lee Moffie JR, 2010 stats: GP-32, G-8, A-9, PTS-17, PPG Average-0.53, PIMS-16, +9
Solid offensive player who is lacking on the defensive side, needs to cut down on mistakes to make a push for 1st pair.
Mac bennett JR, 2010 stats: GP-32, G-2, A-10, PTS-12, PPG Average- 0.38, PIMS-21, +12
I think mac gets the nod for 2nd pair to start off, but I see him more as a mark hugye type player. His offense is nothing special and his +/- equaling the exact same number of points he scored indicates his defense isn't either. I see him starting off on the second pair until brennan serville is ready for a bigger role.
Kevin clare SO, 2010 stats: GP-18, G-0, A-2, PPG Average-0.11, PIM-6, +12
Straight to the point kevin clare's offense is terrible, the only player who registered less points on the roster last year was hunwick by 1. That being said a player who finishes with a +12 and never scores is either really good at defense or is on the ice when the 1st line forwards score. Either way the 3rd pair is his home, in part because of his limited skill and the players above him.
Brennan serville FR, 2010 stats: None
The 78th overall pick in the NHL draft, serville comes in highly ranked and should move up fast. Third pair is only temporary for him, and could potentially move up to first pair next year if he develops.
Shawn hunwick RS SR 2010 stats: GP-35, W-22, L-9, T-4, SH-4, GAA-2.21, SV%-.925
Thank god he got another year from the NCAA, otherwise this teams season outlook would look very bad. Good numbers thought the season but what you can't see from the stat sheet was how good he was in big games. For example: the north dakota fighting souix had the best offense in D-1 hockey, their top scorers finished the season with 511 points and we shut them out. I expected a regression last year but it never came, he always preformed, and this season he needs to do the same because with hogan departing he is the only goalie left except walk-on adam janecyk. Red pulled the kirk ferentz by turning a tiny white walk on into one of the leagues top players, but I hope this season he doesn't have to try again.
I decided I don't hate myself enough to listen to Chris Martin and Eric Collins talk for six hours, so I deleted the audio and continued my tradition of using "comically ill-suited" music. In this case, we have the music from the second level of Donkey Kong 64 called Angry Aztecs and the (probably too dramatic) theme and end credit music from X-Men Origins: Wolverine. That said, you should probably have the volume turned down unless you're trying to watch film like Greg Robinson.
I'm not going to give a conference-by-conference breakdown this week, as I am pressed for time. A few notes:
-What is worse than having a team in your conference lose to an FCS school? Being the Mountain West this week, who fell four spots due to two crushing FCS losses. The Big Ten also lost a spot due to Minnesota's apparent lack of skillz. Once Jerry Kill has led a long an fulfilling life, I can revisit this loss and say that Minnesota has taken on the character of their coach. Their entire game against NDSU looked like one prolonged seizure. But I won't make that joke now, as it would be crude and inappropriate.
-The Denard WHHHHATTT of the week finds the Pac-12 gaining a spot in our standing after going 0-1 in this weeks OOC schedule. This is more due to the collapse of the Mountain West and the ACC than it is about a silver lining for the Pac-12.
-The Big 12 has all but wrapped up the Cy-Hawk Trophy Memorial Award this year after posting a perfect 3-0 record in Week 4 which included wins against Miami and two other FBS schools.
-Half of the Big Ten's 12 OOC losses stem from Indiana and Minnesota. Michigan is one of four teams to hand the conference a perfect 4-0 OOC record. Of those four, Michigan gained the most points for the Big Ten, scoring 1.966 non-adjusted points. Wisconsin was second (1.690), Nebraska third (1.540), and Illinois fourth (1.383). A large part of that is due to Michigan not playing an FCS school this year. In a follow up diary, I intend to go into more depth about the state of the Big Ten after OOC play. Look for that at some point in the next couple of days.
CPR - Week 4
|Conf.||Wk 1||Wk 2||Wk 3||Wk 4||Season||CPR||Rank + / -||CPR +/-|
The (Little) Brown Jug. For fans it’s the oldest rivalry trophy in all of college sports. To Michigan alums, it’s a fine establishment on South U. Regardless, its time to kickoff the conference schedule in the Big Ten, starting with a home game, before hitting the road to Evanston.
As typical with the Watch, we’ll review the picks from last week, noting the bad picks, and point out a few games to give the underdog some credit in, even if it is only in Vegas. We’ll also look at a sure-fire favorite and attempt to preview the Michigan game.
Bowling Green (3-1) +6.0 @ Miami Ohio (0-3). Result: Bowling Green 37 Miami Ohio 23. [Props to BrewCityBlue]
@ Pittsburgh (2-2) +7.0 Notre Dame (2-2). Result: Notre Dame 15 Pittsburgh 12.
Southern Miss (3-1) +3.0 @ Virginia (2-2). Result: Southern Miss 30 Virginia 24.
New Mexico State (1-3) +10.5 @ San Jose State (1-3). Result: San Jose State 34 New Mexico State 24.
Missouri (2-2) +21.5 @ Oklahoma (3-0). Result: Oklahoma 38 Missouri 28. [Props to Picktown GoBlue, Gulo Gulo Luscus, althegreat23]
Army (1-3) -4.0 @ Ball State (3-1). Result: Ball State 48 Army 21.
San Diego State (3-1) +10.0 @ Michigan (4-0). Result: Michigan 28 San Diego State 7. [Props to M-Glow-Blue, snoopblue and for correctly predicting Michigan would cover].
Note on the Toledo game, the extra point that put Syracuse up by 3 (went up 30-27) should have been ruled as a miss. Therefore, props are in order for those selecting Toledo, namely M-Glow-Blue and Gulo Gulo Luscus.
Penn State (-28.5) failed to cover against Eastern, allowing a late field goal (34-6), and preserving a spread win for M-Glow-Blue, Trebor, and mfan_in_ohio.
Oklahoma State (+4) snuck by Texas A&M late, despite the Aggies leading most of the game (30-29). Props to preed1 and Number7 for calling this one.
Props to BrewCityBlue for correctly predicting that Nebraska would cover the 23.5 against Wyoming (38-14).
Temple’s 38-7 blow out of the Terps in College Park made Gulo Gulo Luscus’s prediction a winner.
New poster YoungArnold correctly called Arizona State’s cover against USC, winning 43-22.
Clemson upset the higher ranked Florida State, 35-30, but Trebor was sure excited about the correct pick.
Week 5 kicks off with an early elimination game in the Big East, with South Florida visiting Pittsburgh on Thursday (8:00 PM EST/ESPN).
Saturday football kicks off with an old Southwest Conference rivalry, Texas A&M (#14) and Arkansas (#18), both off conference losses, meeting at Jerryworld (12:00 PM EST/ESPN). Perfect records are on the line when upstart Clemson (#13) visits Blacksburg to take on perennial power Virginia Tech (#11) (6:00 PM/ESPN2). Alabama (#3) meets Florida (#12) for the fourth time in as many seasons (2008 and 2009 were conference title games) (8:00 PM EST/CBS). Big Ten country, and much of the country in general, will have their eyes on Nebraska (#8) at Wisconsin (#7) (8:00 PM/ABC), with the two teams last meeting in the 1970s.
Hawaii (2-2) +3.5 @ Louisiana Tech (1-3). Hawaii has the 56th ranked offense (104th rushing, but 12th in passing). Louisiana Tech has the 107th ranked pass defense (89th overall, 47th rushing defense). Look for Bryant Moniz to improve on his 7 TD first half performance from last week. The home team is 7-2 in this series, since 2000, including three straight wins, but Hawaii is 6-3 against the spread against the Bulldogs. Under Coach Greg McMackin, the Warriors are 16-8 against the spread in WAC play (8-4 against the spread on the road in the WAC and 7-5 against the spread as an underdog in the WAC). Take Hawaii to cover, and win, in Ruston.
Arizona (1-3) +13.5 @ USC (3-1).Despite being 1-3, Arizona has the 39th ranked offense (4th passing, but 119th rushing); USC has the 40th ranked defense (71st passing, but 35th rushing). Coach Lane Kiffin is 5-7-1 against the spread as a favorite (6-5 against the spread in the PAC 12). Arizona is 3-8 against USC since 1999; however, Arizona is 7-4 against the spread over the same time period, (6-3 as an underdog). The last four meetings between the Wildcats and the Trojans have been decided by no more than seven points. Arizona’s losses have been to Oklahoma State (#5/#6), Stanford (#6/#4) and Oregon (#9/#11). While Arizona has failed to cover the points in each of their losses, USC’s offense is nowhere as explosive as the previously mentioned teams. The Wildcats should cover the points, but likely won’t win the game.
SMU (2-1) +11.5 @ TCU (2-0). TCU has the 85th ranked defense (69th rushing, 87th passing); SMU the 9th ranked defense (9th rushing, 31th passing). TCU the 38th ranked offense (25th rushing, 68th passing); SMU the 31st ranked offense (88th rushing, 15th passing). I realize that SMU has feasted on UTEP, Northwestern State and Memphis, laying an egg against Texas A&M. With that said, TCU was exposed against Baylor and has played Portland State. Old Southwest Conference members, these teams have met 13 times since 1997, with TCU holding an 11-2 advantage (3-0 against Coach June Jones). SMU holds a 7-6 advantage against the spread (2-1 under Coach June Jones with the only spread loss being in 2008, when SMU went 1-11 straight up). Coach June Jones is 14-20-8 against the spread at SMU, and 8-10-5 as an underdog (11-14-6 against the spread since 2009 and 5-5-3 against the spread as an underdog since 2009). JJ McDermott (1133 passing 59.7% completion and 4 TD, but 3 INT) has taken over at QB for the Mustangs, leading the impressive offense, in addition to RB Zach Line (463 rushing 5.9/carry and 11 TD). TCU got involved in a shootout against Baylor earlier in the year. Expect this game to be closer; TCU should win, but take SMU on the spread.
@ Indiana (1-3) +17.0 Penn State (3-1).Indiana has never beaten Penn State since the Nittany Lions joined the conference (0-14), with the average margin of defeat by 17. Indiana is 3-1 against the spread against Penn State since 2007 (average spread is 19 since 2007). Since 2007, Indiana is 15-17 against the spread in Big Ten play; Penn State is 16-16 against the spread in the Big Ten over the same stretch (14-12 against the spread as a favorite). The Penn State offense is 89th in the country (75th passing, 75th rushing). The QB situation has yet to be settled in State College, and the Nittany Lions are 0-4 against the spread this season (0-3 as a favorite). Indiana has been bad, but look for them to cover the points, due to the ineptness of the Penn State offense, minus Silas Redd (303 rushing 4.9/carry and 4 TD).
Western Michigan (2-2) +3.0 @ Connecticut (2-2).Coach Paul Pasqualoni is no stranger to the Big East, having coached Syracuse during the Donovan McNabb heyday, prior to being fired. Coach Pasqualoni is no Randy Edsall. Coach Edsall built the Connecticut program, from 2007 to 2010 going 33-19, 16-12 in conference and a BCS berth in 2010. More impressive were his stats against the spread: 32-18-1, 13-8-1 as a favorite against the spread, and 14-7 against the spread in non-conference. The Huskies are 1-3 against the spread this year; sure, they are 5-3 against the spread, against MAC opponents since 2007, but 3 of those wins against the spread have come against Buffalo (2008, 2010, and 2011). Western Michigan comes into Storrs having throttled Central Michigan and almost knocking off Illinois. Iowa State threw for 240 yards against Connecticut in week 3 in Storrs. Expect Alex Carder’s (987 passing 68.7% completion and 8 total TD) numbers to be similar to Steele Jantz’s. Take the Broncos to cover, if not win, against the Huskies.
Cincinnati (3-1) -13.5 @ Miami (OH) (0-3).For readers of the “Upset Watch: Week 3”, you’ll notice this is Cincinnati’s second appearance. I’m not a Bearcats fan, to be honest, I don’t like the team at all, but boy do they find a way to run up the scores on inferior non-conference opponents (since 2007, they have outscored non-conference opponents in the regular season by an average of 44-14, with the average spread being the Bearcats by 21.0). Since 1997, Cincinnati is 9-5 straight up against Miami (OH) in the Battle for the Victory Bell. More importantly Cincinnati is 9-4 against the spread against Miami (OH) (5-3 against the spread as a favorite). Miami (OH) is Minnesota’s only win. Take the Bearcats and rest easy.
First of all, thoughts and prayers go out to Coach Kill and his family. Here’s to hoping his health improves and he is able to make his way back onto the gridiron soon.
Jerry Kill is 1-3 straight up at Minnesota (23-16 at Northern Illinois, from 2008-2010). Coach Kill is 9-11 on the road, 2-7 against BCS teams, and 0-2 against the top 25. Since 2008, Coach Kill is 23-19-1 against the spread and 7-5 as an underdog against the spread.
Brady Hoke is 51-50 straight up (13-12 at San Diego State, 34-38 at Ball State). Coach Hoke is 26-15-2 against the spread as a favorite and 41-23-2 overall since 2006.
Coach Hoke and Coach Kill met once, in 2008, with #16 Ball State beating Northern Illinois 45-14, and easily covering the 9-point spread.
Minnesota’s defense is ranked 76th (108th passing [278.50 yards/game], 33rd rushing [104.75 yards/game]). Michigan’s offense is ranked 33rd (110th passing [156.0 yards/game], 9th rushing [270.0 yards/game])
Minnesota’s offense is ranked 87th (97th passing [179.3 yards/game], 44th rushing [173.75 yards/game]). Michigan’s defense is ranked 71st (41st passing [199.0 yards/game], 86th rushing [176.0 yards/game]).
Since 1997, Michigan is 9-1 straight up against Minnesota (6-4 against the spread; Michigan has been a favorite in all but the 2008 game). Michigan has averaged 435 offensive yards, with 246.3 of those yards being passing.
Historically, Michigan has been known for strong QB play, as evidenced by the number of Michigan QBs who made it to the NFL. As much as Michigan has been synonymous with good QB play, Minnesota has been synonymous with a sieve for a secondary. The Gophers averaged giving up 226 yards per game through the air last year.
Da’Jon McKnight (260 yards 13.7/catch and 1 TD) and Donnell Kirkwood (125 yards 5.4/carry and 3 TD) have been the lone bright spots on an otherwise awful offense. The Gophers right now are in the midst of a QB controversy between starter, and once WR, Marqueis Gray (521 passing, 351 rushing 50.6% completion and 3 TD, but 3 INT) and backup, 3-star recruit, Max Shortell (196 yards passing 46.4% completion and 2 TD, but 2 INT). Minnesota was torched by USC’s WR Robert Woods, in week 1, for 177 receiving yards and 3 TDs; 8 USC players caught at least 1 pass. In the home opener against New Mexico State, the Aggies had 288 yards through the air, including WR Taveon Rogers having 88 yards receiving and 2 TD, in a 28-21 loss, despite being a 22.5-point favorite. In a win over Miami (OH), the Gophers gave up 325 yards through the air, including 162 yards receiving to WR Nick Harwell. The North Dakota State Bison passing game accounted for 197 yards through the air, but did their real damage on the ground.
Michigan MUST get passing game going and expose an absolutely awful secondary. WRs Roy Roundtree and Junior Hemingway should each have a TD and at least 75 yards receiving apiece. Denard should still be able to run the ball, though it should be tougher than it was last week.
@ Michigan -19.5 @ Minnesota.
Michigan 38 Minnesota 10
Who ya got?
[ED: PGB - I took the liberty of adding each of these courses to the MGoHallofFame: http://mgoblog.com/content/user-curated-mgohalloffame. ED: bump.]
FF210: Screen Package
Whatchya know, I still exist. That’s right, I’m like either Santa Clause or the red M&M in that commercial. If you haven’t been here for more than a year, or worse yet, if you have a life outside of here, then you either don’t know or don’t remember about the series above. I’m formerly [name redacted] and am now a Space Coyote (deal with it, mostly because a Space Coyote from Space is awesome), and I’m going to do a slight continuation of the previous series. Heck, let’s call it FF210: Football Packages. Rather than talk about what the title suggests (wrong website), I’ll add this little section about screen packages. Other classes could include: blitz packages, coverage packages, bunch formation packages, etc. The fun could be never ending.
(Aside: If you’re wondering why the previous series seems a bit incomplete, like “where’s the defense?” it’s because it is incomplete. If you’re wondering why I didn’t finish it…yes. Also, I’ve been a bit busy.)
Lately there has been much confusion about screen type substances around these parts and I figured I would be a bit of a guest professor for a second and teach a few things. If you are looking for how to install a screen door, this is not the place for you, so I’ll just let Menard’s do that for you.
Not all screens are created equal. And as they are not all created equal, they are also not all designed to take advantage of the same things. There is a lot in common with many screen passes, but there are also key differences. There are lots of different types of screen passes, and I’m not going to cover them all. What I will cover today is probably the more fundamental screens. The discussion below will consist of what these screens are attempting to constrain (“constrain play” has become a favorite word around here), what the keys are to the type of screen, and how to successfully run the screen. Note, as I said above, there are many, many more screens out there that I won’t cover. There are also many variations of these screens that I won’t begin to touch. This is only meant to be an introduction to these basic concepts. The types of screens included are:
1. The ones where you throw to the WR, we’ll call those WR screens
- Bubble Screen
- Tunnel/ Jailbreak Screen
2. The ones where you screen to the RB, we’ll call those RB screens
- Slow Screen
- Crack Screen
Screens not covered: middle screen, TE screen, throwback screen, transcontinental (even though it’s a crowd favorite), etc.
Screens in College Football
In college football linemen can block down field at the snap as long as the pass play is completed behind the line of scrimmage. This is not the same in the NFL, but is a big reason why screens are so successful at the college level.
Wide Receiver Screen
Just because you’re throwing a screen pass to a wide receiver doesn’t mean it is in an attempt to do the same thing. There are two main types of WR screens that I will discuss, and each have very different keys and are constraints of different things. They are the bubble screen and the tunnel/jailbreak screen.
Better image with some play action
mgoblog bubble screen picture paged
This is essentially a run play constraint. The bubble screen is intended to strength the defense horizontally. It is an easy way to reach the edge without a clumsy pitch out of the shotgun. It is typically run to get defenders out of the box. It takes advantage of defenders peaking into the back field and reacting quickly and out of control to flow. Gap sound teams with safeties in the box with responsibilities in gaps will have trouble on bubble screens because they are not stretched horizontally and are focused on the play in the backfield.
Running the bubble screen will:
Running the bubble screen will open up lanes in the middle of the field as defenders must flex from sideline to sideline. This will give gaps for RBs/QBs on Zone Reads, RB power, and QB draws. This also opens up the deep middle of the field by often forcing safeties to play off the edge of the line rather than in the box as linebackers or OLBs out of the box to respect the sideline threat more. This makes it much more difficult for defenders to play both the run and the pass. If run correctly it will leave a WR one on one on a corner in space, or better yet, with both corner taken out of the play and a score up the sideline.
When to run it:
Typically you run it when corners aren’t pressing. If corners are pressing the pass can become very dangerous. More importantly, you run it when safeties and LBs are shaded too far inside in an attempt to play both run and pass. The danger: make sure the corners respect routes enough to not quickly jump the bubble.
How to run it:
It’s not as simple as just taking a snap and winging it out there. As I have been told before, a QB throwing a bubble screen is kind of like a short stop turning a double play as far as the importance of footwork, body position, grip, and not rushing.
Most of the time in the backfield there is some sort of zone read action. This means that the play looks like a zone read it terms of what the running back is doing. The process of the QB adjusting the ball and throwing means that an actual playaction is really necessary. What is so different about the bubble screen is that it doesn’t typically require linemen to block for a “screen”. The linemen also carry out the zone read play. This causes LBs and Ss to flow down to play the zone read, leaving the WR open on the edge.
The blocking WRs come off on the snap as if they are running routes. His job is to take the nearest threat, which is mostly the man covering him. As they converge on the man covering them, they square their bodies and force and get their backs to the sideline, blocking those covering them to the inside and leaving a lane down the sideline. If the defender does manage to get outside, continue to drive him to the sideline (this isn’t O-line blocking, there is a lot of space and the ball carrier will run off the blockers butt to the hole in the defense regardless). In most cases the WR blocks the man head up on him (or the man that appears to be covering him). In some cases the WR will crack down on the defender covering the screen receiver. It all depends on how the defense plays it at the snap. The reason that the WR usually blocks the man covering him is because it causes traffic for the inside cover guy to have to get through. You can, in essence, block two guys with one blocker, leaving a seal down the sideline. Some people crack the inside guy and hope the outside cover man follows inside, but you run the risk of the outside guy reading the play and blowing it up. All these decisions must be made based on the defenses alignment.
Oregon. The first one suffices (some of the others aren't really bubble screens). Note that they double the near man to the second corner. The second corner jumps outside and the WR kind of just blocks him straight up, making this play a first down rather than TD. This can be done with 3 or 2 WRs.
[Ed: others after the jump.]