bubble screen

Formation notes: A lot more under center in this game. I've got Michigan with 9 snaps in an ace formation, four in Denard jet, and 14 in I-Form. Michigan had 26 shotgun snaps in hurry-up time and 22 outside of it.

Of Michigan's 49 snaps in their base offense, 22 were from the shotgun, a 45% rate. Big dropoff from before the bye week.

I called this "ace tight":

And this is still "shotgun trips bunch" but note that those are tight ends tight to the strong side, not WRs:

Substitution notes: Nothing you don't know. Hopkins is pretty much the only FB now, Schofield went the whole way, Toussaint and Smith were the only backs, and the WR/TE rotation was basically how it's been all year. Odoms and Grady may have gotten a little more time late for whatever reason.

Show? Show.

asdf

Denard Robinson is a terrible thrower who can't throw anything.

Look, man, I'm just like… I chart—

Chart.

—these things and this is what I got:

[Hover over column headers for explanation of abbreviation. Screens are in parens.]

Gardner had a CA on a screen, an IN, and three TAs, for a DSR of 0.0%.

I got Denard's best performance of the year against a D-I opponent. The things that happened to him that were bad were many dropped passes, Roundtree misjudging a perfectly-thrown deep ball, and plenty of batted passes.

Yeah, I said it, perfectly thrown deep ball:

Roundtree slowed up a moment before this still. If he runs through the ball this is a touchdown the DB can't do anything about. Arggggh.

What's more, I have all seven of Denard's INs and his BR in hurry-up time; most of those were the Rex Grossman deep balls it seemed like he was instructed to throw on first down just in case something worked out. All were way off but historically I've mentioned deep ball INs as less egregious because… like… they are. His BR was an OOB chuck to Roundtree when he had a shorter guy open for a chunk—there was no "WHAT ARE YOU THINKING" throw this week. If his WRs had helped him out we are talking about a different game.

There is a massive caveat: Iowa did not rush the passer. I don't mean they rushed four and didn't get there. I mean that unless Iowa was deploying one of their infrequent blitzes, they literally made no attempt to sack Denard.

That's second and fifteen with less than two minutes left and nobody is even trying. Instead they are containing. This was a near constant throughout the day. It explains many things:

• why Denard did not even look like scrambling once (not that he does much anyway)
• why an unusual number of passes got batted down
• why Denard's DSR is much better

It seems like an incredibly dumb strategy but I guess it worked. Robinson did not handle the pressure well on the last series—third down was good, first and second not—and against opponents that get after you more I expect his passing to revert back to the previous not so good form.

The receivers were bleah, you say?

I say.

[Passes are rated like so: 0 = uncatchable, 1 = very difficult, 2 = moderately difficult, 3 = routine.]

Three flat drops and two coulda-had-thems. Both of the latter were critical. The first was the Roundtree misjudge you see above, the second Smith's endzone drop of a low floater. One of Hemingway's routine drops ended a drive. It wasn't an all-time bad performance but it could have been better, especially when you consider some of the seemingly crappy routes Michigan ran. I have no way to quantify that, but trust me.

And the run game?

This is an ugly chart.

That is Molk, Hopkins, Schofield, and disappointment. Denard is not immune to criticism here. It was on the ground more than in the air that his decision making was problematic. Cut it up, dude:

Glarg. I wonder if the change in emphasis here has made Denard rusty on his zone cuts. Once that guy comes up it's straight upfield until they tackle you.

Meanwhile, Iowa's ends won the day against the tackles—Huyge in particular could not handle Binns, or the cut block on the above play—and the receivers were crappy when called upon. Like on that play, where Grady turns a big gain into zilch. Y U NO ODOMS. Seriously: why he no Odoms? Where did Odoms go?

We can has fullback?

Maybe. Stephen Hopkins was a bright spot. He has nimble feet, especially for a fullback, and brings a load when he meets linebackers at the POA.

That's pretty good right there. Dude is hammering full speed at the LOS and gets turned out. Later he pancaked the same dude.

He's quickly supplanted McColgan and should be a useful piece the next couple years. If he can stop fumbling he could let Michigan add a triple option to their repertoire. 

Why haven't you complained about a bubble yet?

Oh mah gawd, good point. It's not really about the bubble, it's about preventing stuff like this from happening:

Not the 22 yard run part. The part where it takes two guys miraculously falling down to get the 22 yard run. Not bubbling this…

Is pretty much asking for vicious frontside flow because ain't nobody worried about the cutback with the slot LB coming down. This is the wider view from a little earlier:

That is a free first down. Take it. Take it and relieve some pressure from your run game. The only way for them to defend the bubble with that setup is to have the safety roar down at it, which opens them up to Worst Waldo counterpunches.

Can a brother get a run breakdown?

Right. I forgot last week. This week:

ACE (INC DENARD JET)

Total: 6 carries, 2.6 YPC.

I-FORM

Total: 11 carries, 3.4 YPC

SHOTGUN

Total: 15 carries, 6.3 YPC. Should be noted that the power play was fortunate, the zone read that got any yards on the last drive, and the veer that got any yards the Toussaint massive cutback. Not a whole lot went as planned.

Did you have any issues with the last drive?

We talked about this a bit earlier in the week: once you get to the three with 16 seconds left I think taking your TO and throwing is the move, at least until fourth down.

HOWEVA, there's no way it should have come to that.

Is that a freaking huddle as the ref signals the game clock with 31 seconds on the play clock? Yes.

NASCAR? MORE LIKE SLOWCAR ZING

That's Michigan snapping it seventeen seconds later. /head asplode

Two plays earlier they let fifteen seconds run off after the Roundtree conversion on second and eighteen; three plays later they let nine seconds run off after a penalty. If they chop those delays down to an average of five seconds—more than reasonable considering the last one should have been like two—Roundtree is tackled at the three with 42 seconds left, ie forever. They easily keep their time out and prevent Iowa from sending seven on four consecutive plays.

There is a slight mitigating factor on the above since I think they thought Gallon got out of bounds, so they could huddle. Once it was clear the clock was running they'd already slowed down. It's still really frustrating.

I need one more complaint for my bingo card.

Hated the playcall on Denard's fumble. M comes out in a double stack and has the foremost WRs run little out routes as M goes for a double move. Pump fake…

…to a wide open dude at the sticks…

…who is trying a double move. LB roars up; Denard escapes but fumbles as he does. He had nowhere to go with the ball.

Heroes?

Watch Vincent Smith advertise speed option to the entire state of Iowa and Molk still reach the DT:

I am going to miss that brilliant twinkle-toed media-hating bastard.

Also… uh… Hopkins? Yeah, Hopkins. And here's a change of pace: Denard's arm.

Goats?

The rest of the line not named Schofield. The receivers somewhat. Denard's legs. (I knew I put Opposite Day in the podcast for a reason.)

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

The line has to be better against the Illinois DL or it's going to be a long day. Can they? I don't like that Huyge-Mercilus matchup at all. Without Liuget I think they'll be vulnerable on the interior—Molk reached Akeem Spence all day last year—but will Hopkins-based isos be enough? Will Michigan use Molk's super powers or not?

I don't think Denard's passing performance is replicable. Not only does Denard screw up throws when he actually gets pressure, his inability to figure out how pressured he is has caused a lot of bad throws when players are vaguely near him. The comfort zone he was in against Iowa isn't going to be replicated against an Illinois defense that gets a ton of sacks (third nationally at 3.4 per).

I don't have a lot of faith in this offense moving the ball against the #6 D in the country, on the road. Since this is Big Ten football 2011, they will score 40 points.

• 2 inside zone for 0.5 YPC
• 1 jet sweep for 3 YPC
• 1 pitch sweep for 4 YPC
• 2 power plays for 4 YPC
• 6 isos for 4.7 YPC
• 4 power plays for 2 YPC
• 1 sweep for 1 YPC
• 2 pin and pull zone for 16.5 YPC
• 1 power play for 22 YPC
• 1 QB iso for 1 yard
• 1 QB power for 2 yards
• 1 QB stretch for –1 yards
• 1 sweep for 0 YPC
• 3 inverted veers for 5 YPC
• 2 speed option for 5 YPC
• 3 inside zone reads for 4 YPC

With Barnum getting healthy and Schofield playing well any chance we see one of two scenarios: Barnum takes over left guard, Schofield moves to right tackle and slide Huyge down to left guard or Barnum takes over right guard for Omehmeh? I'm partial to the former simply because of two 6' 7" 300 pounders on the edges, yes please.

–Thad

It might be too late to make that change. While Huyge has some experience at guard, that came under Rich Rodriguez, when pulling was not a major part of the offense. Putting him at G seems like an invitation to have the same issues Omameh is having with a different player.

I could see the straight Schofield-for-Huyge swap if the coaches believe Schofield is a much better pass protector. We have no evidence that's the case since he's only played guard, but if I had to bet I'd guess he is. It's tough to take a senior who's only had one bad game out, though.

Dear Brian,

Do you think Borges is leaving our base offense (and by that I mean Denard at QB, lots of RB runs interspersed with a few Denard runs and passes) too early? Against Michigan State and Purdue, our first drives worked to perfection and our run game seemed effective.

Immediately thereafter, we started running a lot of crazy reverses, reverse fakes, and Devin-centric chicanery instead of sticking with what worked. Why? it drives me crazy every week. Also, we seem to love to fake the run before we've even established our running threat. For obvious reasons, this hasn't been effective.

For coaches that talked a lot about man ball and the desire to establish a RB, we seem pretty eager to abandon Toussaint and the run game.

Mark Heid

I addressed this topic in a picture pages yesterday and got a couple inquiries about whether or not I thought Michigan's seeming lack of a base offense was a good or bad thing.

I'm not able to answer that yet. It's a thing. Whether it's good or bad is something we won't be able to tell for a while. I am sure I like it better than DeBord's zone offense, which was predictable and seemed to save every interesting tweak for the Citrus Bowl. I'm not sure if I like it better than the style of offense Michigan was using last year when the omnipresent threat of Denard's running often led to free touchdowns, or at  least long drives before Michigan would turn the ball over. (YAY LAST YEAR.)

But you need opinions, no matter how flimsily justified. So: if I never hear "they did what we expected them to do" again it will be too soon. The only time someone's tried that this year was when Dantonio said something about how Michigan will run tunnel screens when Gallon is in the game as if he's a Calvin-Bell-style designated reverse guy. That is incorrect, so, like, thumbs up. Tentatively.

Why was Borges so terse on the bubble screen question – (btw did you ask it?).  I wonder if it was because he expects the QBs to check into that play and it hasn’t been happening – perhaps he was protecting the players a bit?..

Aveek

The process by which questions about football—as opposed to feelingsball—are asked at press conferences is like so: Heiko goes to the pressers and sometimes asks questions that I've asked him to ask. Sometimes he just reads a bunch of blogs and asks questions the  blogosphere has implied he should ask. The option responsibility Q posed to Mattison after NW was the former. The bubble screen Q was the latter. This is what happened:

Is the bubble screen ever going to be a part of your offense? “I’m not saying one thing about any bubble screens.”

Heiko is in intensive care recovering*. In lieu of flowers you can donate to the EFF.

So… why did the normally accessible Borges fire that off when asked about the lack of a bubble screen? I'm guessing he thinks the bubble screen is stupid. I'd like to find out why he thinks it's stupid since everyone from Dantonio to Rodriguez to Lloyd Carr made it a part of the offense to punish teams that tried to cheat inside or deep. His perspective on the thing would be interesting.

I doubt that it has anything to do with the players not making that check. For one, the alignments that seem to open up the bubble are usually trips formations featuring the #2 WR on the line of scrimmage. The latest BWS bubble complaint:

That makes for an awkward backwards orbit by the potential bubble guy and puts the main blocker in a less advantageous position than he would be if he was on the LOS. It seems clear that the bubble is just not installed.

As to why Borges isn't saying word one about the bubble, there seem to be two possibilities:

1. He is vaguely aware of the fan zeitgeist about this and is sick of these laymen bothering him about a stupid play.
2. He is going to bust it out as part of Michigan's ever-evolving baseless offense.

Meanwhile, between morphine doses I'm trying to get Heiko to ask questions that are less confrontational.

UPDATE: AA.com has a slightly longer version of the quote.

"I'm not saying one thing about any bubble screens," Borges said. "Everyone wants to ask about that play."

Door number one, then.

*[This is actually the second time Heiko's gotten acid in his face asking about something  strategic. He asked Hoke whether he'd ever considered a spread punt and got this answer: "no." End of answer. It's not a surprise that coaches don't take kindly to random people implying heir decisions are not optimal, but it's kind of fun to ask anyway. As long as you're not Heiko.]

Hindsight in re: Three and Out.

Brian:

I know your criticism of the Hoke hiring, and I am not trying to bait you on this.  With the benefit of hindsight, however, I keep asking myself whether a Hoke hire in 2007-08 would have been all that risky given what appears to have transpired (and actually did).  It now seems like it would have been the safe move -- kind of like Bo elevating Gary Moeller, despite Moeller's horrendous record as a head coach at Illinois -- i.e., you don't lose to Northwestern in the late 70s solely because Illinois doesn't recruit well.

Obviously, what's done is done.  But my opinions of Bill Martin and Lloyd Carr have been altered dramatically.

Let's just hope the Notre Dame coaching carousel of fun is not in UM's future. . . .

Daniel

I just don't see how you can hire a guy who is vastly under .500 in the MAC. At that point Hoke hadn't had his 12-1 season or turned around the perpetually moribund San Diego State. He was 22-36 in five years at Ball State.

I mean, envision this situation: the fanbase is even more up in arms about than they were in the brief period between Hoke's hiring and kidnapping Mattison from the Ravens. Martin does not want to shell out for Mattison. Mallett still probably leaves. The team is just as much of a tire fire in 2008. You probably get Threet to stick around the year after, but did he prove himself much better than Tate even given another year to redshirt and learn a system? Eh… not really.

Michigan still turns in a losing season its first year and is 7-5 at best in year two, at which point the coach has had one winning season, period, and has overseen the worst period in Michigan football since the 60s. Can Hoke recruit in that environment? Can anyone?

Unless you believe Hoke turns the tattered roster in 2008 and 2009 into significantly more wins than Rodriguez does—like five or six—he's doomed. I think that's a stretch. You can't cure John Ferrera flipping from DL to start at guard, can't cure the Threet/Sheridan QB combo, can't do much about the disaster zone in the secondary.

Michigan ran a guy with two BCS bowl wins out of town after three years. Were they going to keep a guy whose high water mark was a 7-5 MAC season longer? This is a fascinating hypothetical, actually. They just might have.

Correction.

It has been mentioned on the front page twice that Dungy was a broadcaster in 2007. This is off by a few years. 2009 was his first season out of coaching and in the role of studio analyst.

Er. Sorry about that, Bill Martin. Your coaching desires were crazier but less easy to evaluate than I expected.

Approved by NASA.

Hey Brian

I was on Uni-Watch this morning, and this ad popped up:

Finally, the Elvis Grbac simulator we’ve waited 20 years for!

Shane Styles

I'm all like… is that guy wearing #45? I don't understand.

Formation notes:  Michigan spent the bulk of the first half in their nickel package with Ryan down on the line and Gordon and Johnson at nickel and safety, respectively. In the second half they took Johnson off in favor of using Ryan as a slot LB until Northwestern started their passing hurry-up on their fourth(!) drive.

Substitution notes: The usual defensive line substitutions, with Heininger and Black seeing frequent time, Campbell a little, and Washington maybe a snap or three. Michigan did briefly show Avery as the nickelback, but that only lasted a drive or two. Demens went the whole way; Morgan got a couple series late in the first half. Countess replaced Woolfolk in the second quarter and went the rest of the way.

Demens, Kovacs, Floyd, and Gordon didn't come off the field.

Show? Show.

SECOND HALF DOMINANCE

Er. So. I don't really think so.

A WITCH

Yes, yes, probably, but the things that happened in the second half were:

1. Three and out, one contained speed option, two incompletions thanks to DL pressure.
2. Bubble, easy rollout hitch, bubble, drag route for first down that bounces off receiver's numbers to Hawthorne (sort of).
3. Inside zone, hitch, hitch, Inside zone (defensed!), legit pass interference on deep ball, bubble leads to fumble.
4. Hurry up pass mode w/ Michigan in soft zone, drive ends with Persa IN, five-yard bubble, and two good plays by the D.

So… the move to have Ryan in the slot didn't really slow down the bubbles, which went for 6, 6, 4, and 5 yards. This is better than the 8 they seemed to average in the first half, but it is not a thunderous shutdown of the spread.

There were three drives on which NW was actually running its offense. On one the adjustment got a speed option contained and then Michigan got some pressure. On two NW has just picked up its second easy first down if the WR doesn't bat it into the sky. On three they have second and six after picking up a couple first downs when Gordon yanks the ball loose. What happens if the WR doesn't DROPX the drag? If Ebert's knee is down? What is your confidence level that Michigan is going to stop Persa & Co. if these things don't happen?

VERY HIGH THANK YOU

Wait… are you Joe Paterno?

NO I AM YOUR FILTHY IRISH ALTER-EGO

I see. So… what I am saying is that the vaunted second half adjustments are little data being made big and what we saw in the first half was very frustrating to me. How do you stop a bubble aligned like this?

You don't. On Northwestern's final touchdown drive they ran three straight bubbles for 22 free yards. This is 2011. You should not have to adjust to the staple constraint play of the spread 'n' shred.

BUT MATTISON

Yes, well… I don't want to make too little data big again. I sure as hell don't know 10% of what he does and rushing to judgment about what Michigan's defense will look like once he's had them for three years is stupid. Mattison uber alles.

HOWEVA, it seemed like he was caught off guard by the spread 'n' shred. He's been in the NFL for three years but he was also the DC at Florida and Notre Dame over the increasingly spread-mad last decade of college football, so he should be familiar with it.

Were players not reacting appropriately? Maybe. Late the secondary did get more aggressive and helped hold the bubbles down. But that was the difference between 8 (or even 13) yards and 4-6. As I was UFRing this I was again thinking of Magee describing his philosophy, or rather WVU's defensive philosophy: they run the stack because it's built to stop the spread. Maybe Michigan needs a three-man-line package for games like this?

In any case, Mattison's admittedly hypothetical inability to deal with the spread 'n' shred in year one of his regime is a moot point. The remainder of Michigan's opponents are either pro-style (MSU, Iowa, sort of OSU), triple option (Illinois, Nebraska), or so incompetent it shouldn't matter (Purdue). I'm a bit worried that Fickell is installing a ton of bubbles right now, though.

DO YOU FIND THIS DEEPLY IRONIC

That Michigan can't defend a bubble but won't run a stretch because it's not preparing you for the Big Ten? Kinda. /ducks

I REQUIRE NOTES OF THE HUN

Chart?

So… I ended up thinking that it was crazy that none of the linebackers could contain on the outside and hardly tried. When people keep leverage and force the guy inside, as Johnson did and Kovacs did and Gordon did, and there is no one to clean up from the inside that is a problem with a linebacker, and that linebacker was more often than not Demens. An example from Blue Seoul:

Seoul says Gordon has to do a better job getting off the block but he forces this upfield at the numbers and there is no linebacker to clean up; backside guy Hawthorne is even with Demens.

Seoul also caught my complaint about Demens on one of the option touchdowns:

Okay, Johnson missed. He missed to the inside, at which point a good D rallies to tackle.

Here a slow-reacting Demens gets caught up in an OL and cut to the ground. This is not even a triple option, it's a speed option, so, like… go. I've been taunting other LBs for being too aggressive this year but this is the alternative.

Demens did have a good blitz or two, FWIW.

The rest of the chart is basically as expected. No safety got burned on the pass and the missed tackles from Johnson were not too bad; he is still a clear downgrade from the starters. Van Bergen and Martin are high quality players; Roh is doing better but we still need more pass rush from both defensive ends. The cornerbacks are much improved but still not outstanding. Michigan got about a push in both pressure (four sacks but also a number of plays on which Persa had a ton of time or broke contain) and cover, and Mattison was slayed dead on RPS.

What was with the option success?

If you were suspecting that Heiko was the guy who asked this of Mattison…

Northwestern ran the veer option with a lot of success against this defense, and there seemed to be some confusion with the assignments. For those plays, whose assignment is the quarterback, and who has the pitch man? “That’s why people run the veer option. And again, to play an option team, you have to be very very disciplined. You have to really feel confident in what you’re doing, and it’s happening really fast. There was a number of times where you might have seen Jake go down and hit the dive. Well, our ends had the quarterback all day, so right away you knew, ‘Uh oh,” and sure enough, now you have two guys on the dive and nobody on the quarterback, and that’s why people run that offense. It taxes young guys. It really does. So your next thought is to stunt it a little bit, move it a little bit, to try to make a play, and that quarterback was pretty good. Fortunately we settled down in the second half and the guys said, ‘Okay I got it now.’ Every guy that made a mistake like that during the game, they came out, they looked right at you, and they went, ‘I know.’ I said, ‘I know, too! That’s 20 yards down the field.’ But I was really proud of them.”

If you had to defend them again, who would be assigned to whom? “We do the same thing. The only thing we do differently, if we defended it again, is we would play it more honest like you’re supposed to and not cheat to take away one part of the game and not the other.”

Did Kovacs have the pitch man? “That was his job. When you’re playing the option and you’re playing man coverage, there’s a guy with a blocker on him. A guy who has man coverage and still is supposed to get off and try to make that play. Well if you’re stronger, better, faster, you can throw that guy away and make that play. So we had Jordan going through the alley, meaning he would go dive, quarterback, to pitch, and he made some good plays on it.”

…you are wise in the ways of how MGoBlog differs from other media. I wanted to know how Michigan planned to defend the option so I thought I'd have Heiko ask and Mattison gave a terrific, useful answer*. So now we know that…

…defensive ends were a big problem. QB outside of DE without pitching is a problem. Here Kovacs gets a 2-for-1 by forcing a pitch and still getting out on the RB, but Colter would learn from this and juke Kovacs on his first touchdown run. I don't blame Kovacs much, if at all, because he's on the edge against two guys. Forcing it back inside and getting any tackle attempt at all is better than letting the pitch guy walk in.

It wasn't all bad for Roh:

That is one of the plays of the game and it happens because he beats a block to force a pitch and allows Kovacs to do what Kovacs does best: take a great angle at speed.

Ryan had similar problems, and then there is the Demens complaining. So: better play from the DEs to force the play inside of them or at least force a quick pitch and getting those linebackers to the edge more quickly.

*[How much does everyone love the coordinator pressers? One million points worth, right? I mean, they give it to you straight and give you actual information and reassure you that the guys in charge are really smart.]

PUNTSHENANIGANS

Yes, again this week:

When those guys miss their tackles there is no one within 15 yards. Result: 20 yard return.

Heroes?

Martin, Van Bergen, and Gordon. Gordon's strip was a 100% player-generated turnover that is a reason to believe they are being coached on these things.

Goats?

Demens, and the inability to line up to defend a bubble.

What does it mean for Michigan State and beyond?

Well, I'll be extremely nervous when we come up against Nebraska and Ohio State since their mobile quarterbacks could force us into situations that will exploit the same things. I just watched that game and it doesn't seem like either team spends a lot of time threatening bubbles; both enjoyed themselves some pistol offset stuff with Nebraska having great success running the inverted veer out of that diamond formation becoming all the rage. Either could gameplan for the M game—Ohio State might well start preparing whatever package they think will beat M because it's not like they have anything else to play for.

As for this weekend, Michigan State is the opposite of Northwestern and the 4-3 under will be a much more comfortable fit against State's largely pro-style offense. HOWEVA, we have seen State prepare special packages for M since time immemorial and one of the recent ones was a trips-TE bubble package that exploited M in 2008 like whoah. If that's still on the shelf they might bring it out and force Michigan to line up against it. HOWEVA HOWEVA, that year they could run the ball; this year M might be able to defend it without giving up those pitches that killed them that year.

Other items:

• Michigan continued to prove the secondary is much improved and the safeties are for real, especially the starters.
• Heininger held up pretty well, caveats about limited tests included.

Defense:

The diary on poor tackling got me thinking about Rich Rod's coaching philosophy.  It's obvious that he recruits speed and athletes on offense at not only the skill positions but also the o-line where he likes guys who can get out and block in space.  These are the guys who get all the attention and the playing time.  They are "the game breakers" and the guys who can make a big play at any time.  How can that not transfer over to the defensive side of the ball?  So, in the spring, we heard rumors about Cam Gordon having a great camp because he probably delivered some big hit kill shots to 4th string RBs instead of learning how to play assignment football with fundamentally sound tackling.

Am I way off here?  Every yard after contact I see Michigan allow, I can't help but think how much better a (I can't believe I'm saying this) Jim Herrmann/Ron English defense was at stopping the run.  We can chart how few upperclassmen we have on D until we are blue in the face but you have to concede that something is fundamentally wrong with the program's defensive attitude and philosophy.  I think it just may be the constant search for "big time players" rather than smart football players who can read and react quickly.

What do you think?

Go Blue!

-Jim Dudnick
BBA '01

Well… yeah, I guess, but like everything else on the defense the lack of depth and experience makes it hard to tell whether we're just seeing what would happen if Virginia Tech threw out a secondary full of underclassmen or if there's a long-term talent development problem. Is it a recruiting issue? Don't know. Rodriguez recruits at Michigan are all freshmen or sophomores, and if none of them are very good there's a pretty obvious reason why. Very few can "read and react quickly" as underclassmen.

Something is wrong with the program's defensive philosophy. That much is obvious. To me that problem is an incoherent coaching staff that either forces the coordinator to run a scheme he doesn't understand or forces the position coaches to do the same. Why is it so important for the position coaches to know what the defense is doing instead of getting JT Floyd to exist? I don't know, but those meddling kids have put Michigan in some goofy variant of the 3-3-5 for three years running and it hasn't done anything but implode because the defensive coordinator isn't really on board.

The problem with Michigan's philosophy on D appears to be the lack of one.

Not defense:

Brian-

While i think there are many things wrong with the Michigan football team right now, it seems like either the play calls or the reads have been restrictive in nature.

Last year, it seemed like on the read-option, there was a third option to pass to a receiver at the line of scrimmage that could catch and run for an easy 5 yds. Has this been replaced by the receiver running a skinny post?

Also, it seems a major component of any spread offense is the quick screens/pass to the slot receiver with the outside WR blocking down. The offense featured this last year but hasn't at all this year.

I believe the plays are in the offense's playbook. When Tate is in, there is a more even run/pass distribution. (ie- look at the easy 7 yds michigan could have had at the end of the Penn St game when Denard threw to Junior Hemingway and he dropped the ball)

The main point of all of this... It would seem that passing on the edge would open up the defense to make running in the middle a little bit easier.

Thanks for you coverage of Michigan. It makes my work day more enjoyable.

Brian

Opponents have been taking the bubble away by alignment. Iowa put a linebacker over him and managed to keep two-deep coverage. Penn State moved a safety down. When opponents have gone away from these schemes it hasn't taken Michigan long to hit the bubble for a nice gain, at which point they go back to taking it away. When Iowa started blitzing off the edge in the second quarter Michigan hit a couple bubbles and Iowa reverted to its previous scheme. Smart Football dubbed the bubble a "constraint play" way back in 2008, defining the concept like so:

What if your offense is based only on bubble screens and then you just run the ball or throw the ball as a counter to your bubble screen offense?

The difference is that the bubble screen is a play that really only works when the defense has made a structural choice or is out of position. Most commonly, you'll run when the bubble only when the defense has but two defenders to cover three receivers. You thus block the two defenders and the receiver has free yards. If the defense puts a third defender there they can take the play away, intercept it, or make the tackle.

Conversely, a well designed dropback pass play, a triple option play, or certain base runs will work every time you face a normal defense. The only time the play stops working is when certain defenders cheat on their assignments, either by alignment or aggressiveness.

You're right that the edge passing opens up the interior running, but it's already a reason Michigan's ground game has been so effective, and a reason that things like Kevin Koger 60 yard touchdowns happen.

The bubble option after a zone read keeper is still being run but it's not being thrown. I imagine they've de-emphasized it because when it has been thrown it's not usually getting more than a few yards and if that's your upside you might as well let Denard carry it. The equation changes radically when he's running the ball instead of Forcier.

More defense:

Brian,

Chip Kelly said a week or so ago he has nothing to do with his defense, he just leaves that side of the ball to his defensive coordinator.  GERG has championship rings on multiple levels.  Why can't RR just let him do his thing?  It seems to me that if Rich Rod just worried about the offense and let GERG do the D, Michigan might be better off.

Simon Kay

The other side of the complaint about Rodriguez not being involved enough in the defense. This is an unanswerable question. I'm not sure why there was an insurrection against Scott Shafer in 2008—well, okay, I have some idea since Michigan refused to put Brandon Harrison on the field—or why the 2009 defense spent most of its time in an eight-man front or why Michigan decided to install every front imaginable this year.

It's clear, however, that the position coaches are forcing the coordinators to adapt to them (again, this is exactly what happened in Tommy Tuberville's final year at Auburn) and the results are dismal.

Whether or not turning the defense over to Greg Robinson would help any is debatable. He has never built an effective college defense. After getting fired from the Chiefs he had a single year at Texas during which he turned in the same level of performance the DCs before and after him did. Then he went to Syracuse and could not field a minimally competent unit after his first year—the team went backwards fast and stopped in the triple digits. While he got a rep for being a good position coach last year it's obvious that the linebackers we can actually compare across '09 and '10 did not progress much over the offseason. Ezeh was the same, Mouton is a little better but still prone to the same mistakes he's made throughout his career. No one else has never seen the light of day before this year.

At this point there is no case for keeping him around. There is no reason to expect anything but failure from him; some good NFL defenses with the Broncos are now a decade old. All the reasons the defense should be bad are still valid, but the only way to salvage Rodriguez's job is to bring in a defensive coaching staff with proven recent success that cannot be undermined by whatever the deal is with the current assistants, whichever of them stay around.

Widgetz:

Good Afternoon,

In response to your recent post about the blood drive where you said: “I should put up a ticker that says 1343 DAYS SINCE OHIO STATE BEAT MICHIGAN AT BLEEDING. Ain't got no other tickers to put up” there is indeed a slightly more noteworthy streak that is still intact. Michigan’s Mens rowing team has beaten OSU’s mens rowing team 14 consecutive years at their annual dual race. According to the team’s website this streak is the longest continuous streak for Michigan over OSU in any sport ever (at least where head-to-head meetings are applicable). The matchup takes place right before the annual football game (with the first win coming in November 1996), so in my approximation this streak is at about 5,085 days or so and counting. Thought you might like that nugget of info.

Go Blue!

-Jake

Woo! Also, sincere congratulations to the rowing team.

And at least no one broke this guy's nose:

I dressed up as everyone's favorite defensive coordinator for Halloween this year!

One guy I never met before came up to me and told me how much he hated me and how badly he wanted to punch me in the face.

Rick

Essentials

Run Offense vs State

The brahs are all like "OMG Greg Jones" as if Manti Te'o isn't a faster, better version of him, assuring everyone who will listen and their poor disappointed mothers that sometime in the second quarter Jones will violently disembowel Denard so a funeral can be held at halftime.

Unfortunately for the brahs, the State defense hasn't lived up to those proclamations. Aided by an injury, MSU held Wisconsin's John Clay somewhat in check. He managed 80 yards on 17 carries, 4.7 per. They didn't do so hot against his backup James White, a smaller, speedier guy who averaged almost 10 YPC. Between the two primary tailbacks Wisconsin had 178 yards on 27 carries, 6.6 a pop. (White, a freshman, was also responsible for a couple of terrible blitz pickups.) A couple of those long runs came when MSU sucked inside and got punished by bounce-outs because of irresponsible play; against Denard Robinson getting irresponsible is six points conceded.

Meanwhile, ND's Armando Allen averaged 5.5 YPC on just 13 carries, though MSU did keep ND's other tailbacks down. Overall, ND tailbacks averaged 4.5 YPC, almost exactly what they managed against Michigan. I think we know what happens when Michigan's rushing offense goes against the Michigan defense.

That's it as far as useful comparisons go. Western Michigan is 114th and Florida Atlantic 116th in rush offense, and Northern Colorado is a 2-3 I-AA team.

So that seems encouraging, but Michigan was expecting to run against Michigan State last year and ended up averaging one yard per carry. Brown and Minor combined to for 17 yards on 10 carries. This was the first inkling that Michigan's rushing offense was something of a mirage:

Forcier kept the ball when he should have handed it off, most painfully on Michigan's overtime drive where a veer play absolutely had State for a ton of yards and maybe a touchdown but Forcier kept it and was forced to follow Minor into the hole for only four. Twice Brown burst into the open field with a lead blocker and naught but one player between him and the endzone and both times Brown and the lead blocker failed to beat that one guy. Martavious Odoms took a reverse and had absolutely cavernous space to cut up into but did not realize it until far too late and slipped making his cut. On several plays State had left themselves open for a big cutback run behind the center but the tailbacks did not take it. And, yes, the right side of the line repeatedly failed to crease State's DL or chop the backside DT when plays went away from it. State did a good job—on both of those potential big gainers the State player in question made a huge, touchdown saving tackle—but Michigan left a ton of yards on the field.

The offensive line was blown up, too. On GS's run chart your winner was Mark Ortmann's +1.

There were plenty of reasons for this, foremost David Molk's injury and the shuffling it imposed on the defensive line. David Moosman played center, adding another bad snap to the pair that killed drives in the Indiana game. Huyge played right guard and struggled so badly that journeyman John Ferrara got a drive or two in case he was better; Dorrestein was forced into the lineup at right tackle and struggled.

This year, Molk is back, Patrick Omameh has ascended to the starting right guard job and has performed at an all-conference level after a rough start against UConn, and donkey-hating Taylor Lewan has forced his way into the starting lineup past Huyge. Schilling and Dorrestein return as better players. And Michigan has the most dangerous runner in the country taking snaps.

State, meanwhile, lost Oren Wilson and Trevor Anderson from last year's defensive line. Anderson's been replaced by the clunky 6'7" Tyler Hoover, a redshirt sophomore who is a version of Greg Banks minus some of the veteran savvy. Wilson's replacement is a platoon of Kevin Pickelman and Blake Treadwell. MSU returns DT Jerel Worthy, their best DL by some distance, and meh DE Colin "Cam" Neely. Neely and Pickelman missed the Wisconsin game but will return this weekend. Their linebackers are senior versions of last year's guys.

State's been decent against the run but when BlueSeoul broke down the MSU-ND game in one of his extensive Picture-Pages-on-Steroids diaries a major reason for this was the general derpitude of ND offensive linemen in space:

Michigan linemen are from space. They voted for Zoltan and everything. If you put them in space they and the mountain goat receivers will show you your O-I'm-on-the-ground-and-Denard-is-fast face.

Michigan is going to get yards against this defense, but the torrid pace—7.1 YPC, first nationally and a full yard better than all but six teams—they're on should cool off somewhat. If MSU is intent on leaving the safeties back, this will be a steady drip of five, eight, ten yards. If they go Indiana on things it will be more erratic but prone to bigger plays. One key: will Michigan break out the midline option or the veer that Oregon (and now Nebraska) are slicing defenses apart with? Worthy is a guy who just tears after people; he could be exploitable against the midline. Michigan hasn't had to do anything new except pop out a pulling lineman or two; this is the week to deploy a completely new package.

Key matchup: Schilling, Molk, and Omameh versus Worthy and Pickelman/Treadwell. Last year State owned this matchup. Worthy is a quality player but the other defensive tackle is something of a weak spot; Michigan must win this matchup to get second-level players out on the State linebackers and keep the ground machine operating at full death.

Pass Offense vs State

This was also a source of OL ownage on State's part last year:

PROTECTION METRIC: 37/57, Team –5, Dorrestein –4, Ortmann –4, Ferrara –3, Huyge –2, Minor –2, Moosman –1.

That is terrible, and large parts of it can be blamed on the absence of one David Molk. People who would not have been playing otherwise picked up –7 and one bad Moosman snap was given –1: more than half of the 15 negative points assigned to specific players on the line are attributable in ways direct or indirect to Molk's foot.

Michigan's offensive line gave up five(!) passes (or attempts to pass) that were marked "pressure"; Forcier also added ten more attempts that were IN, BR, or TA, including the fatal super triple BR on the OT interception. Three flat drops did not help matters.  Forcier managed to go 17/32 for 223 yards despite this, but the offense operated in fits and starts and relied on a burst of Stonum athleticism and desperation to get its two touchdowns.

That is not likely to repeat this year. For one, Michigan's tied for first nationally in sacks allowed with one thanks to a combination of Denard running, massive progress on the OL, and opponents being terrified of Denard breaking contain. Meanwhile, after losing Trevor Anderson and Oren Wilson, Michigan State is in the triple digits when it comes to acquiring sacks. They've got five; even Michigan's three-man rush is doing better (yes, yes, against an avalanche of passing spreads). When Michigan drops back to pass they'll have time.

Despite the lack of rush, State's pass defense has been at least decent:

Notre Dame racked up a bunch of yards and touchdowns but took 55 throws to get there and didn't put up a huge YPA; Wisconsin got thunked. A large portion of the latter was Tolzien having a bad day and Nick Toon dropping everything that came his way (and subsequently complained about not getting enough opportunities!). Even so, Michigan State has not been lit up in the same way Michigan has. A large part of that is the return of Johnny Adams from injury. Their okay senior corner (Chris L. Rucker) also managed to not explode his ankle, so they've got that going for them.

Even if the outside guys are kept in check, this could be a big day for slots. It appears that ninja-kicking former walk-on Jon Misch is going to be the weakside linebacker who spends much of his day hovering in the vicinity of the slots; the fact that he's in a true battle with hyped sophomore Chris Norman is probably not so good for State. MSU cornerbacks have also been historically poor at tackling, leaving bubble screens attractive options, and the main reason Notre Dame couldn't exploit MSU's addiction to the 4-3 was this equivalency: Stephen Threet : screen :: Dayne Crist : screen.

Robinson will have to throw more than usual and in some uncomfortable situations; this will depress his remarkable efficiency ratings. He should still have enough opportunities to hit big plays in the passing game to win.

Key matchup: Magee and friends versus hyperactive Michigan State run defense. We've seen it all year: Denard takes a step forward, causing the entire defense to fly downhill at him, then flicks a pass to Roundtree that he runs into or near the endzone no matter how far away from it he is. While State's probably spent time on defending that particular iteration of Denard Automatic Play Action, there will be other opportunities to rack up RPS +3; in this game Michigan is going to have to lean more towards balance on first down to prevent the drive-stalling two yard plays that happen when a team sells out, Tecmo Bowl-style, and gets it right.

Run Defense vs State

Michigan's run defense isn't good but it's probably better than the pass defense; against State they will be severely tested. Edwin Baker, Le'Veon Bell, and Larry Caper are all quality backs in the same mold: big, fast tackle-breakers slightly light on the shimmy. Bell has more RAGE, Baker more breakaway speed. Caper is returning from injury and may have gotten Wally Pipped by Bell, a who-dat recruit out of Columbus who arrived in a chariot of thunder and said "surprise!" They're all OR on the depth chart, but Caper's had six carries in MSU's two actual games. He is OR in name only.

The other guys:

That's… uh… kind of terrifying, actually.

Michigan's most relevant outing was the opener against UConn and their similarly power-heavy stone age offense; in that game Jordan Todman had 20 carries for 105 yards, 5.3 per. That's not awful; Todman is legit. In his two other games against D-I foes he put up 192 on a Temple and 190 on Vandy. While those aren't the greatest opponents UConn returned Todman and four offensive lineman from last year's #39 rush offense and appear to be picking up at or above where they left off.

Oh, wait, right: UMass. Crap. Michigan also got imploded by UMass on a series of counters and power running plays on which the linebackers got lost. While Mouton and Ezeh played much better in the two games since the opponents were Bowling Green and Indiana, two passing spreads with no clue how to run the ball that are allergic to pulling linemen. Any hope derived from those games should be vague and humble.

HOWEVA, after watching the Wisconsin game I'm weirdly optimistic Michigan can not die in a fire. Wisconsin's DL was in the backfield a lot and big chunks of MSU's rushing yards came on a misdirection fourth and one pitch and an instance where Wisconsin was badly misaligned against a full house backfield. When it came to just lining up and running it State didn't open many holes. Their tailbacks did drag tacklers all day. If Michigan's linebackers have their heads on straight I can see something similar going down where Michigan does enough to force a bunch of second and long.

Simple power plays and zone stuff probably won't go very well but State has to run it to set up the rest of their offense of counters and play action; I bet the counters are consistent gashers and the regular stuff pops a run or two but also sees a lot of two-yard gains. Some of these will get up to four or five thanks to the quality tailbacks; by the end of the day numbers similar to the UW game are likely.

Key matchup: Cam Gordon run support versus backbreaking long runs. MSU's rush offense is the usual old-school thing Michigan fans will remember from Lloyd Carr's days: a lot of grinding, a lot of meh results, the occasional long gainer that happens when someone busts an assignment or a tackle. For Michigan to keep MSU's numbers in the Wisconsin-or-below range Gordon is going to have to go 10/10 on opportunities to take down MSU backs breaking past the linebackers.

Pass Defense vs State

HAI GUYS I'M THE MICHIGAN SECONDARY

You know the story on Michigan's side of the ball. When it comes to Michigan State, they still have Kirk Cousins. Cousins is a somewhat mobile pocket passer with good accuracy who makes a lot of excellent decisions… and two or three mind-boggling throws per game.

He usually does the latter bit when he's pressured. He has a tendency to chuck the balls Ben Chappell was tossing into the stands at covered receivers. He threw two interceptions against Wisconsin, one horrible, one a ball deflected at the line that seemed like it was going directly to a double-covered receiver and was going to be picked off anyway. In the second half he got lucky on a back-foot throw that could have been a pick-six if it was more accurate.

State's receivers are analogous to Michigan's—a solid unit without a Braylon/Plaxico superhero. Mark Dell, Keshawn Martin, and BJ Cunningham have split receptions almost right down the middle, and if you squish MSU's two TEs into one body you can say the same thing about Charlie Gantt and Brian Linthicum. There is no one go-to guy. If you're pigeonholing, Martin is the explosive slot guy, Cunningham the big possession guy whose ability downfield comes more from muscle than speed, and Dell a pretty good generic outside receiver. To compare them to Michigan guys: a poor man's Steve Breaston, Junior Hemingway, and… uh… a rich man's Ron Bellamy? There isn't really a good Michigan analogue for Dell. Anyway, it doesn't really matter who they are because they will be open. State's receivers have had a case of the dropsies this season, FWIW.

BlueSeoul picked out a specific thing State does well that Michigan's defense has seen a lot of in practice but still can't defend: the bubble.

Prepare yourself for this. Michigan is going to put either James Rogers or a freshman out on the outside. One will be playing in the parking lot; the other will get blocked into the parking lot. Michigan State is going to eat up yards on bubble screens, and you will be enraged.

This looks like a functional passing game run by something that's not a duck. This means doom so far as it's possible. Will Michigan State abandon its usual gameplan of "run or play action on 80% of first downs" in an effort to attack the Michigan secondary? Probably not since it's not likely anyone will mistake the M run defense for the 2006 unit. Will they have considerably more success on third down than they should? Yes.

Key matchup: Martin and Roh versus the MSU OL. Michigan has the opportunity to pick off some passes of their own if Cousins is dealing. Sometimes this happens when receivers are covered and he just tries to MAKE PLAYS; usually its an artifact of someone getting in on Cousins. The turnover margin will be huge, and Michigan should have an advantage if they get quarterback pressure.

Special Teams

An advantage for Michigan State. Martin returned a punt for a touchdown against Wisconsin and the Spartans have one of those kicker guys. Dan Conroy is 7/7 on the year. They're also averaging 38 net yards on punts, which is around 40th nationally. Michigan can't return punts or kick field goals and freshman punter Will Hagerup is still working through the jitters. Hagerup seems to be coming around, but Michigan hasn't even attempted a field goal since the first half against UMass and seems happy to keep it that way.

Will it matter? Maybe not. Special teams have not played a major role in Michigan's last few games because touchdowns have been plentiful, and both kickoff return units are weak. Michigan's probably going to go for it on fourth and reasonable distance once they crack the MSU 40 until game theory concerns kick in late. MSU is more likely to make their field goals and more likely to get a big punt return; the net effect of that bonus will either be negligible or large with little in-between.

Key matchup: STOP KICKING THE DAMN BALL

Intangibles

Cheap Thrills

Worry if...

• Denard allows his usual backup quarterback cameo, and continue worrying until he returns to the field.
• MSU's line is kicking M's ass again.
• This jumping the snap business happens again.

Cackle with knowing glee if...

• Michigan State's maligned defensive coordinator leaves the safeties back in a Norm Parker-style adherence to old principles in the face of new technology.
• A significant new addition (midline, veer) to the running game leaves MSU's defensive gameplan in shambles.
• Roh rushes the passer lots.

Fear/Paranoia Level: 6 (Baseline 5; –1 for Michigan State's First Road Game Unless You Count Playing In Front Of Sixteen Fans In Detroit, +1 for They Hit Wisconsin Upside The Head With Ten Pounds Of Ham, –1 for Previous Defensive Performances Say Michigan Can Run Lots, +1 for Competent Passing Offense Versus Sack Of Confused Cats, +1 for Oh God What If Field Goals Are Relevant, –1 for Denard!, –1 for Vegas Is In The Tank For M, +1 for Annual Crazy Michigan State Over-Preparation, +1 for No Reason Except The Lump In The Throat.)

Desperate need to win level: 10 (Baseline 5; +1 for Would Be The Definitive 2010 Is Not 2009 Answer, +1 for Would Force Inane Media Narratives To Switch To A Different, Less Annoying Inanity, +1 for Would Cause Uppity State Fans To STFU, +1 for The Alternative About The Annoying State Fans Is Horrible To Contemplate, +1 for Constant Rich Rodriguez Job Rescue Campaign)

Loss will cause me to... get really annoyed at the little Dantonio head growing out of my shoulder. I mean, you think it's annoying now, let me tell you… man.

Win will cause me to... forcibly suppress any ideas Michigan might be playing Ohio State for the Big Ten title at the end of the year.

The strictures and conventions of sportswriting compel me to predict:

Well… dammit. I didn't really know what would happen against UConn. I didn't really know what would happen against Notre Dame. And I don't really know here. Is Wisconsin the top-ten team I was terrified of before the season or was last year a mirage? Is Indiana's passing offense really a high-powered knife cannon aimed directly at the Big Ten's tingly bits? Denard? Greg Jones?

There is a common opponent:

• Michigan beat Notre Dame 28-24, outgaining the Irish by a narrow margin if you discount ND's last drive on which Michigan was happy to cede 40 yards. The game was on the road, but Dayne Crist missed a quarter and a half. Michigan missed two field goals, but why wouldn't they miss two more against MSU?
• Michigan State beat Notre Dame 34-31 in overtime on the trick field goal. Yardage was basically dead even. The game was at home, but Crist went the whole way.

This tells us nothing. At the end of regulation ND had four extra points against State. The home-road flip is worth another six. A reasonable estimate of how many points Crist's absence cost Notre Dame is ten. Flarbity doo, I'm wearing a shoe.

So: I think Michigan's offense is not going to slow down much against what is likely a mediocre Big ten defense. Their drives will be longer because MSU is not a flamingly awful Big Ten defense, but the overall efficacy of them won't be too far off the high level they've established so far this year. I think State will do much the same to M. The home/road flip should be good for a stop or two; Michigan's defense will not be the wasteland it was against Indiana if only because they'll be going up against an offense less suited to torch it; the freshmen defensive backs will have more of a clue; Michigan is likely to end up in the black in TO margin since a somewhat pick-prone Cousins will be putting the ball up more frequently than Denard.

Finally, three opportunities for me to look stupid Sunday:

• MSU safeties combine for more tackles than Greg Jones.
• Denard goes for 150 on the ground.
• Michigan finally looks like they've prepared for this game specifically.
• Michigan, 35-30.

Personnel notes: I don't think I saw Webb or Savoy all game. The offensive line was the same as the Indiana game but at some point in the second half Huyge got pulled for Ferrara, at least briefly.

Dammit.

Yeah. Hamburgers.

Charts?

Yeah. Charts.

(Hennechart legend; MA is "marginal", screen results are in parens.)

TATE FORCIER

DENARD ROBINSON

Goddamn. You wouldn't know it because of all the pressure and the drops killing his stats, but Forcier had a spectacular day. His downfield success rate* was 71%, which is up there with Chad Henne's best game. Chad Henne's best games didn't come with game-killing overtime interceptions, sure. He made three and a half terrible decisions throwing the ball (with the half being the bomb to Koger) and some additional ones in the ground game.

But does anyone remember the "Sheridan Might Start!" meme? Will anyone own up to actually advancing that point of view? No? No.

*((DO + CA) / All Throws Not Marked MA or PR)

There are two man reasons Forcier's numbers didn't live up to the chart above. Reason the first:

That is three flat drops (Brown's "drop" was not looking for the hot route) and three catchable balls that were not brought in. Add the drops and maybe one or two of the tougher catches and Forcier is now at 22/32 for 260-280 yards and his performance looks almost identical to the Notre Dame game where he unleashed his inner Superman.

Reason the second:

PROTECTION METRIC: 37/57, Team –5, Dorrestein –4, Ortmann –4, Ferrara –3, Huyge –2, Minor –2, Moosman –1.

That is terrible, and large parts of it can be blamed on the absence of one David Molk. People who would not have been playing otherwise picked up –7 and one bad Moosman snap was given –1: more than half of the 15 negative points assigned to specific players on the line are attributable in ways direct or indirect to Molk's foot. And that's not even considering his keenly-felt absence from the run game.

Not going out on a limb: if Molk is healthy Michigan wins. When he got injured and Rodriguez called him Michigan's best player on offense he wasn't kidding. He might not be right, but he was serious.

So the right side of the line just can't block?

It appears so. Michigan again went with Huyge and Dorrestein on the right side and got so discontent with this arrangement that Huyge got pulled for Ferrara, who immediately gave up a crushing sack. GS's run chart is up early enough to directly reference it this week, so: both Huyge and Dorrestein ended up –2, with Ferrara picking up a –1. It's not like the rest of the team covered themselves in glory—your winner on the OL is +1 Ortmann—but there were major problems on the right side of the line in both pass protection and against the run.

All this invites one question: where is supposed new mega-star Patrick Omamaeh? Omameh was the projected starter at right tackle in the spring and now can't find the field despite serious issues over yonder. He remains a redshirt freshman and shouldn't be written off but if he was going to be an uber-star he'd find his way onto the field before a journeyman like Dorrestein. As per usual, the preseason hype machine run by mysterious insiders is of questionable validity.

Is that what happened to the ground game?

Partially. It was odd. On the first play of the game Michigan State brought out this crazy slant that came around the stretch blocks from the other side and crushed Michigan's first offensive play.

I've seen a couple other teams try this—the team foremost in my mind was Penn State last year—get gashed doing it, and then quit. Wisconsin and Penn State used to do this against the DeBord stretch all the time and since Michigan had very little in the way of counters, it worked very well. But IIRC this was about the only time State brought that out.

So it didn't seem that schematic. What I saw happen: Michigan got a reduced number of opportunities because of the game situation and on those limited opportunities there was a ton of terrible execution. Forcier kept the ball when he should have handed it off, most painfully on Michigan's overtime drive where a veer play absolutely had State for a ton of yards and maybe a touchdown but Forcier kept it and was forced to follow Minor into the hole for only four. Twice Brown burst into the open field with a lead blocker and naught but one player between him and the endzone and both times Brown and the lead blocker failed to beat that one guy. Martavious Odoms took a reverse and had absolutely cavernous space to cut up into but did not realize it until far too late and slipped making his cut. On several plays State had left themselves open for a big cutback run behind the center but the tailbacks did not take it. And, yes, the right side of the line repeatedly failed to crease State's DL or chop the backside DT when plays went away from it. State did a good job—on both of those potential big gainers the State player in question made a huge, touchdown saving tackle—but Michigan left a ton of yards on the field. Chalk that up to youth, first road game, rain, injury, whatever.

Why can't we throw the bubble? Everyone else can.

This is why:

Opposing safeties are zooming down into the box to handle it as soon as they see the fake there. Michigan needs to counter this, and quickly, but not with the outside receiver, which is a play that works but doesn't put the fear of God into opponents. Michigan broke out the counter screen to this on the 92-yard drive to tie the game:

And that's something that if it catches the right defense and the right safety/LB freakout will bust for a touchdown. Look for it more.

Heroes?

Tate. Tate Tate Tate. Also Stonum.

Goats?

The right side of the line. Also Stonum for fumbling. And Greg Mathews has a remarkable knack for getting Forcier to overthrow him or target him in situations where he absolutely should not be targeted.

What does it mean for Iowa and beyond?

Tate is still working on becoming a pocket passer but he put in another Notre Dame-level performance last weekend and every game we get like that is further evidence that he just plays at that level and will do so in the future. Yes, he remains a freshman too prone to scramble out of the pocket and too ready to chuck it into a mess of opponents. There is almost nothing else to criticize.

The run game had a horrible, largely self-inflicted day in a limited sample size. Adjustments should be lowered a bit, especially for the Iowa game, but going forward Michigan should do much better than they did against State. Getting Molk back is key.

Michigan got some clarity on the wide receiver positions: Savoy was not targeted and Grady took a seat after his initial drop. Odoms, Mathews, Stonum, and Hemingway appear to be the main guys there, with Stonum the man who gad the most looks (6). Could he be emerging into the deep threat he was reputed to be? Let's hope so.