to have your input again.
"I love it that Ivy League coaches are coming to our camp and Big Ten coaches are coming to our camp. South Florida is coming. We've got about 70 schools that are coming to our camp."
Continued from yesterday's extended look at the offense.
If you ask about the 3-3-5 and pull the string on a Michigan coach, this is what you get:
"Too much has been made out of it, scheme-wise," Rodriguez tells Ryan Terpstra on ESPN 96.1. "I mean, a lot of people are saying we're doing this or that, but basically, what we're doing this spring more than anything else is fundamentally trying to get better – trying to tackle better, trying to be able to react to the ball better so we get more people around the ball."
Greg Robinson said much the same thing to Adam Rittenberg and reiterated that to the folks at the coaches' clinic: "The fundamentals of leverage and angle and how a player uses his eyes and hands is more important than any scheme." I'm sure if you bugged any of Michigan's position coaches they would robotically intone a similar paean to fundamentals.
To this I say: 50% bollocks! It's not that fundamentals aren't important. Anyone who saw the performance of Craig Roh and Stevie Brown relative to expectations last year knows that how you tackle, cover, and read the opponent is a huge part of a football team's suck or lack thereof. You can ask Florida State about that. But I interpret "too much has been made out of it, scheme-wise" as "I would not like to talk about the details here; let's focus on platitudes." Certain defenses have strengths and weaknesses and fit other players better or worse, and while a defense that is robotically efficient is probably going to be decent that will depend on how well the players fit into the scheme.
The line should be the strength of the defense again. Will Campbell is rounding into a load, a true NT who requires a double team and holds up against it most of the time. At other times he gets too high, but they're working on that and by fall they hope he can be an anchor in there. Van Bergen is a redshirt junior who played well in a tough spot as a starter last year and is at a more natural position where he's doing well. No one's 100% sure that Mike Martin is going to be the other DE—the coaches will try him at both spots in fall—but Campbell "needs to be on the field" and Martin is likely to be Michigan's best defensive lineman, so that's the logical spot.
Michigan would like to get Campbell down another 10 pounds or so.
At end, Banks is starting in Martin's absence. Rodriguez mentioned yesterday that they've moved Adam Patterson to the nose, which 1) just about spells the end of Patterson as a potential contributor and 2) hints that Martin is going to start in the spot Banks currently occupies. I can't imagine a 272 pound senior is going to get substantial playing time as a zero-tech NT. He may be a situation substitution in pass-rush situations, but I kind of thought they might move Martin back inside and let Banks or even Roh take a crack at a speed rush when that happened.
The backups here are pretty sketchy without the freshman reinforcements, but Anthony Lalota was a regular entrant into the backfield against the second-string offensive line. He's RVB's backup with Heininger out.
There were some concerns about Craig Roh, who's a great athlete going directly upfield but doesn't have the lateral mobility to shuffle a step or two one way and then re-route his body in time to avoid blocking angles or get a proper zone drop. He'll be blitzing a ton; Michigan will be vulnerable when the opposition is running misdirection and Roh is being asked to execute linebacker responsibilities. Think waggles, counters, reverses, that sort of thing. He has displayed an aptitude in one-on-one coverage, though. He tracked a Michigan State tight end down and raked a ball free last year in a matchup that you'd think heavily favors the receiver; there were a couple other instances where his ability to cover a guy downfield was a surprising bonus.
There didn't seem to be a whole lot of progress with Ezeh and Mouton, though it's hard to tell with the move to the new system. Their responsibilities have changed and there's a learning curve that anyone would have. Moving to the 3-3-5 should allow Mouton to blitz almost as frequently as Roh; this is Mouton's main strength.
A surging Kenny Demens has been held out the last few days.
Observer A is a major believer in Robinson, though, citing that Roh play and a few others as an example of Robinson's ability to coach up players in a short amount of time. He was in charge of Roh and Brown last year; this year he's got all three linebackers. Robinson himself believes Mouton could be a breakout player. Here is a classic Robinson-ism that will make Troy Nunes Is An Absolute Magician delighted: "We just need to get him to slow down to play faster." Mouton overruns plays because he's "too instinctive" and doesn't always follows his keys, as anyone who remembers his 5-minus 8-minus 3 lines in UFR can tell you.
I've been pretty positive about the idea of running Jordan Kovacs out as a box safety since he was a heady kid and solid tackler and in the 3-3-5 DVD I have that is no longer a wasted purchase, Jeff Casteel repeatedly emphasizes that those characteristics are by far the most important when it comes to spurs and bandits. As a bonus, as the weakside guy Kovacs has the luxury of playing in space (usually) unblocked, so his size won't be a major hindrance.
HOWEVA, discussions with Observer A made it clear that running a 1-high defense* constantly is a recipe for getting four verticals in your face time and again and that teams could force Michigan into a two-deep alignment by formation or playcall. Jordan Kovacs being a walk-on sort of guy, they will do this constantly until Michigan proves they can deal with it.
Why not just deposit Marvin Robinson or Josh Furman at this spot in fall? Think about it: the bandit has to roll up to the line of scrimmage and act as a force player in the 3-3-5. Force players are important. It's their job to funnel everything inside of them. (This is often called "leveraging the football.") If they screw up, the runner is outside everyone and loping for a first down. In pass coverage they have to read and drop into flat zones, play something called "flat buzz" that I'm not quite clear on yet, and generally act as a cover two corner would. So there's all that. Then the bandit will have to rotate back into a two-deep on occasion, play a deep third when they switch up coverages, blitz, respond to motion, etc etc etc. It's probably the most complicated position on the defense. Throwing a freshman in there is asking for it.
Kovacs is Michigan's best option at the bandit, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's a good option.
Spur is also sketchy. Mike Williams has plummeted down the depth chart and is now behind both walk-on Floyd Simmons and redshirt freshman (and scholarship possessor!) Thomas Gordon. Williams is healthy, FWIW. Gordon did get some daps/love/props from observers who thought he was aware and athletic enough to deal with the coverages he'll be asked to run—a "pleasant surprise"—but he's safety-sized and is going to be asked to play over a tight end. He's also a redshirt freshman. Simmons also made a few plays and might be an okay option as a backup.
Observer A evaluated this group of eight players as "slow, small, inexperienced, or injured." He didn't add "pick three," but my brain did. Michigan's got a couple of fantastic prospects for the future in Josh Furman and Marvin Robinson (plus Carvin Johnson), but a couple of painful years beckon before Michigan has any chance of getting a guy who has both athleticism and a clue on the field.
The combination of cluelessness and lack of crazy athleticism led to a couple plays were Michigan just ran a tight end straight down the seam without a bump and gave up 30-yard plays. Michigan has an adjustment they want to install, but they haven't done it yet.
*(A one-high defense has one safety in the middle of the field and is usually cover 1 or cover 3 unless the defense is playing a disguised coverage. A two high defense has two safeties approximately on the hashes and usually suggests cover 2 or 4.)
The three members of the secondary proper actually didn't scare Observer A very much. Woolfolk is pretty good, Floyd is improved—though he shared my skepticism he would ever be above average because of his speed deficiencies—and Turner, while rougher in drills, got the proverbial "just makes plays" endorsement. It's tough to tell a kid's playmaking rate based on limited observation, but the general impression I got was that Turner should be okay eventually. It seems logical that when the freshmen arrive, there might be some reshuffling with the spurs and safeties. Observer B also thought Turner "was OK."
James Rogers seemed to be doing well in drills, too. He's "beginning to learn the position," which is a sad thing to say about a
fifth year senior who's bounced around so much.
Cam Gordon is the guy at free safety, but you knew that.
Robinson's entire session at the coaches' clinic was on his tackling system, which is unusual in a couple ways: it uses different aiming points than conventional systems and doesn't ask the player to break down and wait for the ball carrier to arrive; you "shimmy" to the ballcarrier. It's also unusual because Robinson picked it up from a high school coach, something the old regime "wouldn't be caught dead" doing. Michigan's current group of guys seems far more likely to pick up an innovation being run by high schools or lower division schools than the old guys, who talked to the NFL and only the NFL, which is probably why they couldn't defend the option worth a damn for almost a decade.
Here's how Greg Robinson explains Braithwaite's hire:
Robinson used the new coach, Braithwhite as a demonstrator of technique. He said the “best demonstration” coach he ever saw in his life was Jim Colletto but he says that AB is every bit as good. The impression they give is that this guy was hired because a) he knows what he is doing and (b) he is great at demonstrating techniques to the players.
Observer B notes a difference between the offensive and defensive coaches: the offensive guys are "tireless" explaining and drawing their schemes, but it's hard to get anything out of Robinson. Where Robinson gets expansive is when it comes to the aforementioned fundamentals. There was a chalk talk in which Robinson spent a good deal of time illustrating the right way to do a "dip and rip"; Bruce Tall was also in the midst of an animated technique discussion that lasted two hours.
One of the best things about having a hybrid-laden defense is it minimizes situational substitutions in today's fast-paced modern football environment. You should be able to respond to whatever the offense throws at you without having crazy packages where non-starters get pushed into the lineup, and can adjust to bizarre formations (wildcat) on the fly.
I got a vastly different perspective from defensively-oriented observer than was provided by the posters here over the weekend. We're going to have to score some points. I think in objective "this is Michigan" terms the defense is going to be bad, but one of the main confusions batting about the internet at the moment is someone asking "is this defense going to be (as) bad (as last year)?" and someone answering "(in terms of what I have come to expect from years of watching Michigan play and taking that as a baseline) yes."
I had this same sort of foreboding Q&A with Observer A, but when I asked point-blank "will they be better" I got a pretty solid "yes," albeit with the caveat that the same guy thought they'd be considerably better than they were last year.
That doesn't mean the defense is in a spot where it will remind anyone of 2006, or even 2005. In the Saturday scrimmage the defense did well on the first couple series but "after that the carnage was brutal," with the offense moving the ball "almost regardless of what unit was facing what unit." You can get a hint of that in the quarterback stats provided by MGoBlue in the most recent Inside Michigan Football, which are 9/11, 9/12, 100 yards rushing, made a pony sort of things.
There aren't any walk-on punters who are serious threats to play; the best guys they currently have are averaging in the 30 to 35 yard range. This is Will Hagerup's job as soon as he steps on campus.
Placekicking will be an adventure. Brendan Gibbons has a big leg but is "erratic at best." Walk-on Justin Meram was the other kicker who participated in the scrimmage; he seemed accurate on short stuff but his range might top out at 40 yards on a good day.
to have your input again.
...and listened to Greg's presentation on tackling. It made a lot of sense. If I get back into coaching it's something I plan on using. I will say that I think that the body angle needs to be emphasized as much as proper shin angles because I think players have a tendency to be too upright and not get the hip roll that brings power into the tackle.
A lot of guys now are losing the phrase "break down" because of the negative technique the terms imply. "Come to balance" and other phrases are now more common.
shimming down. its about short quick steps, still getting down hill towards the ball carrier.
and yes part of the technique is sinking your hips...
when he was doing his clinic with us, we actually had the kids working down a large hill, running, then shimming down, the hill forces them to keep their weight in the proper places, sinking their hips and staying under control..
squeezing your butt cheeks in and rolling your hips on contact.
we tlak about dead legs all the time, i hate dead legs on contact. besides the claw, elbow in upercut technique that williams is famous for, he spends an awefull lot of energy with knee placement and leg and feet issues AFTER contact. its good stuff...
if/when you ever do get back into coaching, i have approx. 5 hours of tackling stuff from robinsons/williams everything you can imagine. even specific hip tackling techniques for db's
ps so what whas the purpose of going to the clinic if you arent coaching/not planning on coaching?
keeping things open, partly interested in always being abreast of what michigan is doing
i would be very interested seeing the entire 5 hours of tackling stuff
That's interesting that GERG says that Colletto was a great demonstrator, because his Purdue teams were demonstrably terrible.
When Colletto had his season as Lions offensive coordinator, I think a lot of us were thinking 'why is this guy even coaching?' and GERG provides an answer.
"The combination of cluelessness and lack of crazy athleticism led to a couple plays were Michigan just ran a tight end straight down the seam without a bump and gave up 30-yard plays."
oh god no.
If Will Campbell really has improved as much as people have said I'll feel good about the d-line. We'll need it cause I think we are still a year away in the back seven.
Mike Martin's natural position is at end in a defense that uses three down linemen. Many people keep saying that he's to big and to slow to play end. This would be true if the end in the 3 man front has the same priorities as a four, but they do not.
Actually, his natural position is 3 technique in a 4 man line. He's slightly out of position as an end in a three man line, but he should still be very good, and it's far better than having him at the nose.
Coach Rodriguez said the other day they had moved some (unnamed) player(s) inside because of Sagesse's injury. It sounds as if this is Banks. Certainly possible that this is a spring move only in order to have enough bodies at the position.
"Rodriguez mentioned yesterday that they've moved Adam Patterson to the nose,"
I really like the scarlet and gray shirts and shorts on the one photo. Too bad none of those players could play for the Scarlet and Gray.
Again, I think the Michigan offense will do just fine. It could be even better than last fall.
But it looks like only "marginal" improvement can be expected on defense in 2010 for Michigan. This really sucks.
Consider that last year Michigan won two close games by less than 6 points (Notre Stain and Indiana), but lost another three close games by 6 points or less (MSU, Iowa, Purdue). The rest of the games were pretty much decisive wins (DSU, WMU, EMU) or decisive losses (PSU, ILL, WISC, OSU).
I think this year's schedule is more difficult, so it will be interesting to see what a "marginally improved" Michigan defense means in the W-L column in 2010. I think we'll see a continuation of several close wins, a lower number of close losses, but more of the same in terms of soul-crushing blow out losses that we've all come to know and hate. On those days I know what it was like to be a Northwestern fan during the Rick Venturi era.
But seriously if Michigan hopes to land in a bowl game this year, it first has to lift itself off the Big Ten bar room floor on defense:
Big Ten rushing defense (10th, 171 yards/game)
Scoring defense (8th, 27.5 pts game)
Ugh. It hurts just thinking about it.
You think the offense "could be" better than last fall? Are you high?
I'm guessing he's referring to OSU, Iowa, Wisconsin, PSU. I think we will crush Iowa and give PSU at least a run for their money.
OSU will be just as tough a game for us this year as last. But not so with the other 3. Wisco and Iowa are at home this year, which might have been enough against the Hawkeyes last year and Wisco is a solid but very beatable team. PSU lost its best defenders, its OL is a mess and they can't find anyone who can play QB even decently (see mgo.licio.us). I don't see any of these being soul-crushing, and 2 to 3 of them are almost toss-ups.
And Markus, I like a lot of your commentary, but you are about the most pessimistic person I've seen yet about M in 2010. The offense "could be" better? We lose a couple of oft-injured backs and a couple of average linemen. Those linemen are getting replaced by players who are almost certainly better and there doesn't expect to be much drop off with the RB's. Add in that Molk is coming back from injury and, herro, the QB's. Toss in the addition of the younger "RR types" like Gallon and T-Rob and our offensive should be somewhere between "drastically improved" and "fucking lethal."
Good stuff, man.
For me, the most reassuring point of that post was reading that Mike Williams is plummeting down the depth chart. In my opinion, he was without a doubt the worst starter of last season. He just seems like a complete lost cause to me, in contrast with Ezeh and Mouton who I still hope can regain their prowess with some consistency in terms of defensive coordination.
I almost added the same thought to my above post. Hoorah for that.
+1 for ripping on an amateur athlete that is trying his best playing for a team that you love...
Because I'm happy that others are finally passing him? That would indicate that our players are oh, you know, developing, or that we now have better talent? Yeah, that's really ripping on the kid isn't it? I guess I should just want to keep all of our sub-par defense from last year then...
Edit: to be super clear here, the comment that I was referring to in my initial response and +1 comment was that Williams is being passed on the depth chart, not that he is a "total lost cause". I guess I should've been more clear. You have never (nor anyone else) seen me rip any player that has been put in a tough position, and won't.
I should have worded that comment a bit more eloquently. On top of that, I was being hypocritical. I always say that I hate fans that rag on young, unpaid student athletes, which is exactly what I did.
Reiterating what you said, I'm glad our coaches feel that some of our safeties have surpassed Mike Williams in the depth chart since he wasn't able to get it done last year. I really think that bodes very well for our team.
This is about the same type of comments we were seeing last year about Stevie Brown. Then, after another year of maturity and a minor position switch (both of which are likely with MW this fall) he was one of our better defensive players. Also like Stevie Brown, MW was a highly rated prospect who was asked to play a tough position before he was really ready. Let's not give up on MW just yet.
I just commented about how I was being hypocritical with my original comment, but I can't force myself to stick up for him right now.
Last year Michigan was running some sort of containment "blitz" with Williams against IU and more specifically, Juice. The real turning point of that game was not Roundtree getting dragged down on the 1. Nor was it Michigan getting stuffed 1st and goal from the 1. It was Mike Williams getting sucked in on the read option and letting Juice loose for 20+ yard gainers. I'm sorry, but that is unacceptable. When you're a 4-star recruit brought here from California, I expect a bit more.
To me, that was the game that broke the camel's back and killed our season. Neg-bang me as you wish.
that GERG has brought in people to help teach tackling fundamentals. You can never have too much work on basics, and this will hopefully reduce the amount of arm tackles this year. I have to admit, this article scares me more than it gets me excited. Our biggest problem last year was stopping the teams we played. Our offense was productive all year. Gone are the days of 14-3 as a final score.
Eh, This isn't a shot at RR or anything, but I wouldn't say our offense was productive all year. We averaged 22.13 points per game in the Big 10. We put up 20 against MSU, 10 against PSU, 13 vs Illinois, and 10 against OSU.
We averaged less than 4 yards per carry in Big 10 play (and actually less than '08 in Big 10 play), less rushing yards, less rushing TD's etc. Our passing game was vastly improved however.
While I think the offense looked better and more in sync, I certainly wouldn't say it was productive all year (productive being the operative word).