The wholly mediocre defense...

Submitted by pescadero on

Ever since the pre-season we've been hearing how the defense is great.

Even after the results of the season up to this point - folks still hold out the defense as being very good and having the potential to approach the elite.

 

Problem is - the results just don't show anything of the sort. The defense is mediocre.

 

In Defensive FEI (adjusted for opponent strength) Michigan is #50/128.

 

We're 11th in the B1G  behind:

Penn St. (#5)

Iowa (#17)

Nebraska (#20)

Rutgers (#23)

Minnesota (#26)

Ohio State (#38)

Michigan St. (#39)

Wisconsin (#44)

Maryland (#45)

Northwestern (#49)

 

This is a defense starting:

Beyer: SR - 4 star recruit

Clark: SR - 3 star

Glasgow: RS SO - 1 star

Henry: RS SO - 3 star

Ross: JR - 4 star

Ryan: RS SR - 3 star

Bolden: JR - 4 star

Lewis: SO - 4 star

Taylor: SR - 4 star

Wilson: JR - 4 star

Clark: RS SO - 3 star

Countess: RS JR - 4 star

 

Their backups include: 5 star: Ondre Pipkins, Jabrill Peppers 4 star: RJS, Ben Gedeon, Terry Richardson, Delano Hill, Tom Strobel,Mike Mcray, Taco Charlton, Henry Poggi, Ross Douglas, Dymonte Thomas, Michael Ferns.

 

They aren't young - Only ONE starter who has been on campus less than 3 years (Lewis). They aren't lacking raw talent- only one starter who was less than a 3 star (Glasgow), and a total roster that includes 21 4 or 5 star recruits. ...but they are a mmediocre B1G defense.

 

So what is the story here????

 

...and why in the world do people keep talking about our "good" defense?
 

I dumped the Dope

October 16th, 2014 at 6:08 PM ^

But I thought this thread was about the "mediocre defense".

Using your logic that we go three to four and out a LOT and turn the ball over on offense a LOT then this would likely put even more pressure on the defense by giving opponents more possessions in a fixed game time window and forcing them to play more minutes of that time window.

ifis

October 16th, 2014 at 4:22 PM ^

The defense just had their best game and it is one of the things I most look forward to watching the rest of the year.  Granted, the "it was Penn State" qualification is pretty important but the defense dominated in all phases.  As for star quality vs. performance, Peppers and Pipkins are injured (i.e. they are not 'backups' on the depth chart).  Arguably, Peppers is a backup but my opinion is he would be starting and his loss is particularly painful to press coverage.  The achilles heels on defense are busted press coverage, especially by Countess, and safety play. 

Personally, I look forward to seeing the defense progress over the rest of the year.  If we get Lewis and Peppers in press coverage, Pipkins gets healthy or the other interior d-line continue to improve (in my opinion, this will help Frank Clark out), and safety play doesn't implode, this defense could be great by the end of the year.   

BlueGoM

October 16th, 2014 at 7:19 PM ^

Getting Peppers back would be huge.  I hope to see him ready for MSU. If he still isn't ready for MSU after a few weeks off then the rumors of a bone chip may be true.

RE: Pessimism. Recently someone in another thread said the 2002 team wasn't any good.  The squad that went 10-3 and finished ranked #9 in the country.  Seems like what John Bacon says is true - Michigan fans aren't happy unless they're complaining about something.

 

Perkis-Size Me

October 16th, 2014 at 4:25 PM ^

The defense isn't bad, per se. But given its talent level (on paper anyway), to say its underachieving would be putting it lightly. It's just average. Very, very average. Which, given the talent level, as well as having a supposedly proven commodity like Greg Mattison overseeing it, is unacceptable.

I remember seeing somewhere recently that Josh Furman is doing extremely well down at Okie State, and has better stats there through one half of a season there than he ever did here through the 3-4 years he was here. And the Big XII doesn't even play defense! If that's not indicative of a severe lack of player development, I don't know what is.


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

BlueGoM

October 16th, 2014 at 4:39 PM ^

21.4 points allowed per game

That's better than Michigan St FYI,  and it's good enough that you should win most of your games if you had even an average offense.

But we don't

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/27/p3

ranked #103 at 21.7 points per game

Honestly I am amazed at how quickly people have forgotten the job Mattison did in turning around the defense on this team.   When from bottom 20 to top 20 in total defense in 1 season.

The defense largely won the PSU game and IIRC outscored the offense in the Utah game.

Go on and tell me the defense is the problem on this squad.

blueblueblue

October 16th, 2014 at 4:41 PM ^

Lots of people seem to be content with a mediocre defense and quickly turn to the offense. It used to be that at Michigan, a mediocre defense = bad defense. My how times change and expectations sink. 

BlueGoM

October 17th, 2014 at 6:19 AM ^

There is nothing to "turn" to.  The offense is clearly the weak spot on this team.  it's not even close. 

#103 in scoring offense

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/27/p3

The biggest problem is the offense turning the ball over where UM is tied for 119th in the country:

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/461/p3

 

 

Uper73

October 16th, 2014 at 4:41 PM ^

The D has been the highlight of an below average team performance. They have played well against a few opponents they should control. I do give them props for holding PSUs passing game in check. To me, that is the real weakness of this group and has been throughout GMs tenure. GM is a blitz guy, when it works we look good, when it does not - uh oh.

Now, the offense has rarely helped them, but, ironically, the games the offense has produced(13-PSU, ISU, Ind), the defense crumbled.

I think the D line is getting better, and the LBs are good against the run( missing Morgan though ).

It's the Passing game and dual threat QBs that befuddle us.

But the D is still the strongest group, if the offense and special teams could produce points, we could be winning much more.

BiSB

October 16th, 2014 at 4:44 PM ^

FEI is always funky this time of year. That's why they weight it against previous years early in the season; it takes most of the year to find its level.

Michigan currently has the #23 defense in Defensive S&P+, which feels a LOT closer to where they are.

pescadero

October 16th, 2014 at 4:56 PM ^

On Defensive S&P+ we're #4 in the B1G (at 113.0) behind:

 

Michigan State (122.1)

Penn. State (120.3)

Minnesota (115.3)

...and just barely ahead of:

Wisconsin (111.8)

Nebraska (111.8)

 

Given the age and talent level - that looks pretty much mediocre to me.

 

alum96

October 16th, 2014 at 5:45 PM ^

You can tell via the eye test which ones are legit - Ole Miss, Texas (except for that BYU game), and similar teams have been playing some nice defense this year.  Stanford remains quite excellent, Bama is not losing due to defense.  PSU has generally done a good job as well - would like to see which version shows these as top 10-15 teams; I'll go with that one.

Ron Utah

October 16th, 2014 at 4:58 PM ^

Our offense is #67 in oFEI and #48 in oS&P.

This would suggest that our offense is actually mediocre, not awful.

It would also suggest that S&P is WAY better than FEI, amirite?

UMaD

October 16th, 2014 at 5:03 PM ^

I kept scrolling down waiting for someone to have rung the SAMPLE SIZE bell. FEI at this stage should be taken with a grain of salt.

FEI after 12 games is A LOT more meaningful than FEI after 6 (especially since it includes all those cupcake game outliers).

I would wager a large amount we finisher higher than 50th.  Still outside the top 20, presumably, but I bet we keep OSU (for example) in check relative to most teams.  This is a case where you have to trust your eyes a little bit.  Rutgers was bad (as Mattison addmitted), ND was bad, everything else seems pretty on par with last year.

Still, the "mediocre" label isn't entirely off base.  It's just an exaggeration.

pescadero

October 16th, 2014 at 5:48 PM ^

Still, the "mediocre" label isn't entirely off base.  It's just an exaggeration.

 

Mediocre: of only moderate quality; not very good.

Synonyms: ordinary, average, middling, middle-of-the-road, uninspired, undistinguished, indifferent, unexceptional, unexciting, unremarkable, run-of-the-mill

BloomingtonBlue

October 16th, 2014 at 5:14 PM ^

Defense is bad. Hasn't been good since 2011. Mattison is lucky he can charm and that the offense has been so bad.


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

bronxblue

October 16th, 2014 at 6:24 PM ^

I'm not disagreeing, but MSU's defense is #39 nationally and I don't think most people would Rutger's or Iowa's defenses over them.  I think the metrics have value, but after 6-7 games I'm not sure how illuminative these metrics are.

Michigan's pass defense has been bad at times, and that was unexpected.  The rush defense outside of Minny has been very good (and really Minny was fine until Cobb started gashing them at the end when the game was lost), and the offensive futility hasn't helped in terms of starting location and time on the field.  This defense has disappointed because it hasn't dominated, but it is a better defense than 50th in the country.

MGoStrength

October 16th, 2014 at 9:00 PM ^

We have 4-stars across the board in junior LBs, but the 4-star talent at DL and DB are either underclassman and/or injured.  Pipkins, Charlton, Peppers, D. Thomas, Poggi, McCray, Gedeon, Ferns, etc. are all still underclassman and/or injured.  I think it would be a great boost if Pipkins was healthy and playing up to his recruiting status.  Also, in my view a true sophomore of Charlton's ability and size should be starting ahead of a guy like Beyer.  That either speaks to Beyers leadership or Charlton's lack of development...not sure which.  Both guys have made plays, but Charlton has done so against better competition IMO.  But, say Charlton was living up to his stature and ability, Pipkins was healthy and doing the same, Peppers was healthy and doing the same, and the same with D. Thomas.  I'd think that would make a huge difference.  Why that hasn't occured is a danged good question.

umchicago

October 16th, 2014 at 9:11 PM ^

The back 7 has been a huge disappointment. I reaaly thought they would make a huge leap this year. That said the D Line has player better than I expected. Its weird that the DLine has been coached up by Hoke this year.

BlueGoM

October 17th, 2014 at 6:48 AM ^

They don't have an 'organic' pass rush with the front four so that puts more pressure on the secondary.   It isn't new they had the same problem last season.

Had the secondary been healthy (Peppers and others) they'd probably be doing a great deal better.