upon further review

So how did we do?

Um... okay I guess. Here's the chart...

Woods

I thought you said to lay off Massey.

Uh, yeah, I did, but there's no denying that when MSU had success up the middle it was because Massey was getting hurled to the side like Jennifer Aniston when Angelina came calling (OH SNAP!!!). He he had a couple nice plays in pursuit but the word "liability" is getting close to legitimate when it is applied to Massey re: run defense. He's too tall to hold at the point of attack consistently. When someone gets underneath his pads, he's done. When was the last time he penetrated into the backfield? I can't remember an instance this year.

I think he'll do all right against Minnesota because their line relies much less on the brute force Massey is ill-equipped to deal with, but big, tough interior linemen will continue to crumple him the rest of the year.

Aren't you concerned about 455 yards?

Yes, but I think if a few obvious penalties are called we greatly reduce that number. I swear that on the long third down conversion I kvetched about above that Branch was in a figure-four. I also believe that MSU has the best offense we'll see all year by a long shot. They have a very good offensive line, a trio of running backs who are all pretty decent, and Stanton, who is fantastic. Their wide receivers are distictly mediocre, but they're incredibly hard to stop with the rolling pockets and the run game from nowhere and the vast diversity of the screens, draws, counters, and option plays they run. We shan't see their ability to run and pass again.

So next year...

Hope their defense remains as bad. Senior Stanton winless against Michigan is going to be pissed off.

This game tells us what about Minnesota?

Nothing. You couldn't have two philosophies more diametrically opposed.

Well then.

Well then indeed.

You're skimping on the analysis here.

It's Friday at 5:45. I've got a hockey game to go to. Screw you.

That's not very professional.

Some clarification on the pass designations, which now accompany every throw:

• DO: Dead On; reserved for downfield throws that are perfectly placed and are either fit into a tough place or require a lot of leading and provide a good opportunity to run after the catch. Generally should be reserved for fairly badass plays. (Note this is a major change. Expect far fewer DOs than I've been charting previously.)
• CA: Catchable; Standard downfield completions that are a little off--behind or tall or in front--that still don't pose a huge difficulty to the receiver or bombs that are reasonably well thrown even if slighly off. All successful screen and very short throws max out at this level.
• IN: Inaccurate; balls that are misthrown and give the receiver little or no chance of catching without a spectacular play or massive adjustment. Some completions are "inaccurate" if the catch made involves some eye-popping. Completed screens that are delayed by a poorly thrown ball and therefore stopped also go here.
• TA: Throwaways; balls that are not intended to be caught.
• BR: Bad Reads; Balls that are thrown into coverage or thrown away when there are open recievers.
• BA: Batted; Balls batted at the line or inaccurate because the quarterback was hit while throwing.

THE OFFENSE IS BACK BABY!

Unfortunately, I have to break this out: not so fast, my friend. Nearly 500 yards and 34 (should have been 40) points is something to get excited about, certainly, but there are a lot of parallels between this game and the Eastern game, save for the fact that the opposing offense was sweet instead of nonexistent. Henne's accuracy radically improved but we ran that long handoff play a lot. It was something that we relied on to keep our drives chugging down the field and it's something that the OSUs and PSUs of the world will take away.

More concerning is the run blocking, which was awful. Yes, awful. It was possibly the worst run blocking coupled with a 200 yard day from the accused team's running back in the history of NCAA football. Hart's first 45 yard scamper saw him literally hop through a nearly nonexistent hole and was aided by SirDarean Adams (I think) pulling a Shazor on his attack angle and badly missing. The 64 yard run was a really strange draw that MSU was completely incapable of defending from the start. There was no one within two yards of the RT when the play started and all Riley had to do to leave the massive hole open was casually step to his right and wall off the Spartan DE. While Michigan did well to take advantage of the situation, rest assured that said situation will not repeat itself against Ohio State. If we are being wholly honest with ourselves (and we are), Michigan State gave us those 109 yards almost in full.

But... but...

All right, yes, you're looking for good news: Hart really is that damn good, a complete back who gives like 300% effort on every play and has the incredible ability to make three yards he shouldn't on almost rush. I had forgotten what an amazing player he is in his absence. If we can get halfway competent blocking, look out.

The second piece of good news is the Hennechart:

I meant to bring the "DO" numbers down but not that much--I'll have to work on it. Obviously the big 25 and the leetle 1 jump out at you. That is at least partially due to the incompetence of the Spartan DBs, since a lot of those CAs are little stop routes against the zone or long handoffs, but when you try to pass 37 times and get four execution errors from your quarterback, you are in the business, as they say.

Michigan only went deep twice and neither throw was perfect, but one was a 45 yard touchdown and the other was placed so that Avant had a chance but no one else did. The 15 yard outs and little zone stops were all thrown accurately. There were a couple instances of miscommunication on option routes, but, man... 36 throws. One inaccurate. That's night and day.

So what does it mean in the larger scheme of things?

I don't think we're going to be able to run against teams that can deal with our OL effectively and have the linebackers to back it up. This appears to be PSU and OSU. Hart doesn't have the pure speed to beat guys like Connor or Hawk and the UM running game is sadly dependent on him making guys miss. Tom, you were right: the offensive line was way overrated in the offseason. Mea culpa. (Though I wonder if we'd be saying the same thing with Jake Long at RT. We'll never know.)

Pics please.

However, the pieces for an effective passing game complemented by a finesse running game are certainly in place. When Manningham figures out what the hell he's supposed to be doing on a regular basis he is going to be #1 in spirit if not in jersey; he's spec-QEDMFer-tacular, like a Steve Breaston born to be a wide receiver. The route he ran on his touchdown was thing of subtle beauty, all Scarlett Johansson curves from him and all my grandmother's busted hip from Jaren Hayes. Avant's shown that he is mortal when it comes to dropping the occasional ball but he's also shown that he's not merely a possession option with a number of nice episodes of YAC and an awful lot of being open (being hit has oftentimes been another matter). He is very, very good. The Chad Henne panic should also be subsiding somewhat.

In my opinion, they k ey to this offense is going to be establishing Manningham as a guy you have to bracket with a safety. The combination of Hart, Michigan's run blocking issues, and their draw-adeptness means that the running game will suffer extensively with eight in the box but will be somewhere between adequate and great if the opposing safeties have to play off. Note that Hart's huge game against Purdue last year was against a very good run defense coupled with an awful pass D that could not afford to put their corners in one-on-one coverage with Edwards, et al.

So you're telling me...

We can conclusively say at this point that the preseason expectations for the offense (propagated by me, yes, but not just me) were excessively optimistic. We have a good pass-blocking line but not a great one. Our run blocking is good only in a finesse sense, which is to say that it is not good. Breaston has been invisible but largely replaced by Manningham. Henne's accuracy has been erratic, though it's trending to the good.

So what does this mean for the Gophers?

Probably not much, despite the fact that I've been relentlessly negative considering we just racked up 500 yards. The Gopher D is about as bad as the MSU D, especially without Brandon Owens and his backup. They're going to have a tough time stopping Michigan's offense--I mean, they gave up 44 points to a team that completed about a third of its passes. They'll have a tough time stopping anyone.

Watch out for Penn State, though. They have the cornerbacks and (evidently given 48 for Maroney) the run defense to put a serious damper on our offensive forays and, even though I still hold to my belief that Michael Robinson is a better ninja space admiral than quarterback, the game is going to be a tight, ugly one.

General opinions on the performance?

We are this close to having a really good defense. The line did a great, great job in this game, getting constant pressure on Stocco and jamming up the interior of the line very well. Mason played out of his mind and the secondary actually looks above average. However, the persistent inability of the linebackers to keep outside containment on running plays has burned us in every game when we weren't playing a glorified high school team. Almost all the rushing yards the defense has given up this year stem directly from one of two situations:

• Michigan is spread in an obvious zone against a three-wide formation. There are only six men in the box.
• A running back feints into an interior hole or just plain heads outside and there is no one to stop him.

Shawn Crable was the worst offender on Saturday, but David Harris, Brandent Engelmon, and Chris Graham were all culpable at some point or another. Graham did almost nothing all day, though it appears that Wisconsin ran to the strong side almost exclusively.

Other than that glaring problem which Calhoun was extremely well suited to exploiting, they did very well.

What about designated Internets whipping boy Pat Massey?

Still mostly neutral. Batted one pass down and got a -1 for a goal line run play that gained six (Wisconsin still went three and out). That was partially because Watson played a lot more. That was partially because Wisconsin was bouncing outside with regularity and rarely tested us with runs up the middle. And that was partially Massey just doing a decent job. He held up. Leave him alone, whydontcha?

Goats?

Pick a linebacker other than Harris, who at least balanced out his bad plays with good ones. Burgess and Crable were both highly culpable for the defense's late collapse, and Graham was mostly invisible.

Ungoats?

Jesus, Alan Branch was a monster, blowing up run plays, getting held twice, and getting a superior pass rush with regularity. He could be our best defensive player right now. And that's despite the fact that Woodley turned in another very good game and is one of the best defensive linemen in recent Michigan history.

Also singled out for special commendation is Grant Mason, who had one bad play on a third down screen but was otherwise great. Mason's interception kept Michigan from going down two scores in the fourth quarter and allowed Michigan to forge into the lead. He was constantly harrassing the Badger passing game and outplayed Leon Hall.

David Harris is tenously here as well, as he made a great number of good plays, but part of me believes that he's at least partially responsible for the containment issues, though I can't be entirely sure.

Roll that beautiful bean table.

OMG DREW STANTON.

Well, yeah. The good news is that I think Michigan actually has three solid cornerbacks in Hall, Mason, and Trent and the safeties have at least been competent in pass coverage so far this year. If Branch can even do half of what he did against UW it will help a lot and Michigan's been preparing for the spread all year. He will get his yards and he will put points on the board--he's really that damn good--but I think the major danger for the Michigan defense is freshman running back Javon Ringer, who had almost 200 yards on 13 carries against Illinois. Ringer is a lot like Calhoun, a juky scatback with slashing ability and the speed to get to the corner. If he hadn't blown out his knee last year he would have been a huge recruit and I've been really impressed with him so far this year. Unless we can slow him down or JLS gets loopy and decides that The Pedestrian Jason Teague is the answer for UM, we are going to have to split our attention between Ringer and Stanton and the prospect is too horrible to contemplate.

So...

Don't get your hopes up.

Goddammit.

Seriously.

Update: Commenters point out that the deflection at the end of the game was Watson's, not Massey's.

Also: I totally forgot the strategic blunder. Soy muy estupido. Here:

So how about that strategic blunder?

Michigan allowed the worst possible thing to happen to them on Wisconsin's final drive: a touchdown with vanishingly little time on the clock. When the Badgers got the ball back Michigan should gone nuts with aggressive man to man and blitzing to prevent the 8-10 yard plays that Wisconsin got with frequency. They were aggressive up front with eight man fronts but the coverage they played behind it was soft and the corners and safeties were playing far off. When it became clear that Wisconsin was A) going to have more than enough time to do whatev er they want and B) not going to punt, Michigan should have taken its timeouts and told Wisconsin that if they were going to score, they were going to score quickly. First and ten from the 24 was the tipping point, if not sooner. Passively watching Wisconsin drive down the field and getting the ball back with 29 seconds left is a recipe for defeat, and defeat is not Good Eats.

Well? We expect knives re: coaching, buddy.

I just don't see it.

This is what is see:

Of the 17 passes I flagged as accurate or catchable (note that two completions were flagged "inaccurate": the 30 yard Manningham bomb at the end of the first half and the reviewed Avant slant), seven were screens or short dumpoffs (IE, 5 yards or less). That means when Henne dropped back to pass and actually threw downfield you got ten good (or just acceptable on some of the "accurate" throws) events and fourteen bad ones if you eliminate the two batted passes ("OMG Navarre" people: only one was actually batted. Another throw that was inaccurate because Henne was hit as he threw was inserted here). Scheme and playcalling this: Henne flat missed open receivers 11 times.

He was terrible, and Michigan knew it, and Wisconsin knew it. However, this did not stop Michigan from trying to throw. Look at the beginning of the second half: f ive passes on six plays on our two three-and-outs. The only drive we pieced together came when we stopped trying to throw downfield.

There's other blame to go around: the offensive line was consistently stonewalled by Wisconsin's defensive front. Martin's fumble was an absolute killer. Breaston had a big return wiped out by a Charles Stewart penalty. Manningham dropped a TD. Avant dropped a first down. Henige blew a blitz pickup. But these were isolated events that the offense could have survived if the quarterback wasn't forcing the rest of the offense to play perfectly.

THEY KICKED A FIELD GOAL ON THIRD DOWN.

All right, yes, that was dumb and the explanation proffered on Michigan Replay (Carr did not know the clock was going to be reset from six seconds to nine seconds) further highlights the fact that Carr isn't the sharpest tool in the game theory drawer, but third and goal from the eleven is probably going to be a throwaway anyway in that situation and the end result would have either been the same or an LSU-like screwup that cost us the field goal. A smidgen of expectation was given away but it's not a big deal.

There was a major strategic blunder in this game, but it was on the defensive side of the ball.

Goats?

#1, #2, #3: Henne. Simply put, if he makes any one of six to eight relatively easy throws we probably win this game.

Also on my bad list are Lentz, Kraus and Henige, who could not get any push up front all night. Henige also contributed a key sack and a key incompletion by deciding not to block people.

Max Martin's fumble... well, fumbles happen, yes. But that turnover is the difference in the game.

Ungoats?

Avant, despite the one drop. That's a tougher catch than he'll admit--thrown behind him and a rocket--and the rest of the night he was great. He would have had an even bigger night if Henne had hit him more often. Manningham was also very good when called upon, and the tackles didn't allow any pass rush really.

Gutierrez?

All right, yes. Gutierrez has to be an option against State if Henne struggles in the first half. We don't have time to screw around with Drew Stanton and company: we need points and we can't abide missing wide open guys. If Henne turns in another stinker and Gutz does not play white knight, I guarantee you can stop by for some good old fashioned Internets Bitching.

So what does this mean for Michigan State?

It means bad. We can't expect a consistent running game against the Spartans since Domata Peko seems to have emerged as a solid DT and our interior OL is soft like kitten. To move the ball consistently we absolutely require consistent quarterback play that Henne has shown no indication he is capable of this year, but he still has to start given his history and talent. We need him to turn it around right goddamn now or we are D-E-D dead.

Grade: D+.

Same question: does it mean anything?

It means more than the offensive performance, I think. Eastern had a pretty decent offense last year (21st nationally, albeit against the MAC and its matador defenses), had a returning quarterback, and were totally shut down by the Michigan defense. Eastern mounted two drives the entire game, one of which consisted of a good pass and a back-foot prayer. The other didn't even result in a field goal attempt.

The yardage numbers are slightly flattering--that disastrous punt snap ended up a 30-ish yard loss, but the defense held EMU under 200 yards and shut them out--they couldn't have performed any better. It is just Eastern, but it's a start.

Any new faces stand out?

Obviously Tim Jamison had an impressive debut (sort of... he did play a little bit his first couple of games as a freshman), drawing a holding call on what I believe was his first play of the season and notching a QED, MFer-type sack. Also of note was a running play where he drove his man into the backfield a la Watson. His shoulder's clearly still bothering him so he might not see a ton of playing time the next couple weeks, but it seems likely he'll be a contributor by midseason.

Morgan Trent has solidified the nickel spot and made a nice play on the interception. Not amazing, but efficient. Brandon Harrison also closed nicely on an overthrown ball and laid a lick on an Eagle wideout.

Give me that sweet table loving.

Note: the scale increased this week, and that combined with the dominating performance means the numbers got very high relative to last week. Comparisons between the two are probably not valid. Better to note who didn't make an impact.

What does it mean for Wisconsin?

Not sure. I'm very happy to see Branch listed as a starter. He's a star in the making. Burgess and Harris are playing well, the safeties are settling in, and the cornerbacks are at least three deep. I think the best DL for Wisconsin probably looks something like Massey-Branch-Watson-Woodley. Massey played DE in the 3-4 last year when the interior run defense was great, Watson may have motivation issues but is still like 600 pounds, and Branch and Woodley are just plain good. I'm optimistic that Calhoun will find the going tough on Saturday.

So... what does it all mean?

Probably not a whole lot. It was interesting to see the running game completely change with Martin in the game--runs between the tackles were few and far between, zone stretches as far as the eye can see, etc.--but the only thing we really learned is that we really need Kolodziej back as soon as possible, because Riley just isn't a tackle.

New guys who impressed?

Alex Mitchell got extensive playing time and did all right, though he missed a couple blocks, one of which got Henne killed. Manningham and Bass... well, I wish one was redshirting, but it looks like both are the kind of guys that when they say "I want to play as a freshman" you nod and say "yessir," Manningham in particular. It might be next year when they come to the forefront--both had some freshman issues with their routes (mostly Bass, though)--but the kids are all right.

Max Martin also counts as new, since I'd never really seen him with an opportunity for extensive playing time. You can see why the coaching staff likes him. He does have a very high top speed and has good vision when it comes to picking a hole at the line of scrimmage. He's big enough that he can deliver a whack at the end of the play, too. But he's not much for making guys miss and Michigan didn't even attempt a pass to him--either they're k eeping it under wraps (certainly possible) or the whole Martin's-like-Reggie-Bush thing was just a private joke the coaches were playing on us.

And Henne?

Impossible to tell. Eastern rarely got pressure and what they did get was all due to Riley or Mitchell. The results were a sack, an incompletion, and a 26 yard touchdown to Avant. A lot of his completions were long handoffs to receivers and he badly missed a couple passes. The chart looks good, though:

The competition was so soft it's meaningless, though, and a large portion of those throws were very short and easy. He gets an incomplete for the day.

What does it mean for Wisconsin?

We'll probably see Martin start and a lot of Manningham.

Grade: B+.