Fee Fi Foe Film: Rutgers Offense
This became an interception! Seriously! (Don't worry, Gary Nova still had an awful game.)
So I just watched the 13-10 Penn State win over Rutgers from a couple weeks ago in which Gary Nova threw five interceptions and let's just get this over with as quickly as humanly possible.
Personnel. Rutgers doesn't just list a starting FB and TE—they mean it, coming out in a 2WR I-form set on just about every standard down. They trotted out this formation a few times, as well, in which they'd start from their base I-form, then motion both the FB and TE into a trips set:
Otherwise, they went I-form on standard downs and shotgun on obvious passing downs with little exception.
Seth's diagram [click to embiggen]:
We decided to expand the recruiting-related star from composite top-100 only to top-250, since that still encompasses relatively elite prospects while not being quite as exclusive—limiting it to just the top 100 from each class left out some highly regarded players with impressive recruiting profiles.
Spread, Pro-Style, or Hybrid? Pro-style. As mentioned, I-form is their base set, and the shotgun pretty much exclusively came out in third-and-long situations. Ralph Friedgen's offense is like a time portal to 1990s NFL football.
Basketball on Grass or MANBALL? A mix of both gap and zone blocking concepts. Rutgers leaned heavily on zone running early, then added in more power later in this game. RB Paul James had to make something out of nothing either way for the most part; in very bad news for Rutgers, James tore his ACL the next week against Navy. He'll miss the rest of the season, and his backups aren't of his caliber.
Hurry it up or grind it out? Huddletastic.
[Hit THE JUMP for the rest of the breakdown.]
Quarterback Dilithium Level (Scale: 1 [Navarre] to 10 [Denard]): Nova showed off some wheels in this game, escaping the pocket for a couple decent pickups and scoring RU's only touchdown of the night on an impressive 14-yard scramble:
He's mostly just going to run in a straight line until he meets resistance, but he's dangerous enough that I'll give him a 6.
Dangerman: WR Leonte Carroo essentially wins by default here with James out, the O-line looking bad, and Nova as much a danger to his own team as he is to his opponent. Carroo has 25 receptions this year, while no other RU player has more than ten, and he's averaging 19 YPC with five touchdowns. He had some issues with drops earlier in his career, and while he couldn't bring in a borderline but catchable slant in this one, he otherwise looked much-improved—he ran solid routes, provided a sizable target for Nova, and looked like he could be dangerous after the catch.
Zook Factor: Rutgers went on an impressive drive at the end of the first half, but got forced into an ugly second-and-very-long situation in Penn State territory after a holding penalty. A slip screen got them to third-and-11 but they couldn't get out of bounds, so they decided to... spike the ball with 16 seconds left to attempt a 32-yard field goal. With a screen called the play before, how could you not have a third-down play already lined up?
HenneChart: I actually expected this to look much worse considering Nova's 15/30, 194-yard, five-interception stat line:
Opponent | DO | CA | MA | IN | BR | TA | BA | PR | SCR | DSR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Penn State | -- | 16 (1) | 2 | 5x | 5xx | 1 | -- | 4 | 3 | 58% |
Two of the interceptions weren't Nova's fault. The first graces the top of this post, a flat route that Nova put on the money only to see it bounce off his receiver's helmet. The second is this one, when the receiver failed to get his head around on a short route while Nova—not for the first time in this game—came under serious heat from the Penn State front:
That isn't on Nova. This huck into two deep defenders...
...and this complete misread...
...were very much on Nova. His fifth interception was also a bad read, but not particularly worth clipping since it came on 4th-and-13 on RU's final, desperation drive.
In general, Nova was on target when he wasn't under heavy pressure or making horrible decisions; the problem is that both of those things occurred on a regular basis—he has a habit of rolling out and then trying to complete passes late over the middle, which is a huge no-no. Then there's this, which Brian suggested I mark as a BRlol:
No, that is not legal.
OVERVIEW
While Nova gets the brunt of the criticism when it comes to RU's offense because he makes the most obvious errors, his offensive line certainly doesn't do him any favors. You'll note the four throws marked "pressure" in the Hennechart; there were two main culprits on the O-line for that figure—RT Taj Alexander, who simply couldn't handle Deion Barnes rushing off the edge, and LG Kaleb Johnson, who repeatedly got destroyed by Anthony Zettel.
Here, Johnson is beaten immediately off the snap and has to take a holding call even though Nova gets the ball out very quickly:
Here he gets embarrassed by Zettel on a spin move that flushes Nova out of the pocket, leading to a fumble that Nova was fortunate to recover. Zettel would later utilize that same spin to record a sack. Johnson didn't fare a whole lot better in the run game—he has to execute a tough block on this play, but he's either got to get a cut block on Zettel or at least slightly impede his progress:
Paul James was only able to eke out 51 yards on 14 carries in this game, and he made that look like quite the feat, often dodging free hitters in the backfield to turn a sure loss into a few yards.
The primary backup RB and expected starter for Saturday, Desmon Peoples, is a quick little guy but not close to James' equal in terms of vision, power, or all-around ability—he actually had a bad habit of slamming into the back of his linemen on inside zones instead of patiently waiting for a hole to open, which doesn't go so well when one weighs 175 pounds. The listed co-starter at RB, Justin Goodwin, didn't play in this game.
The clear #2 receiving threat after Carroo is tight end Tyler Kroft, who's been very underutilized this year, but makes the most of his opportunities—he's a huge target who moves quite well for being 6'6", 240, and he'll haul in just about anything in his considerable catching radius. The other wide receiver, Janarion Grant, let Nova's first interception bounce off his face and otherwise had little impact—he's fast and shifty but looked a little off on a couple routes and didn't play the ball well in the air.
Especially with James out, this game is setting up to be one in which the team that is least incompetent on offense will emerge the victor, and there will be plenty of incompetence to go around.
October 1st, 2014 at 6:34 PM ^
October 1st, 2014 at 6:37 PM ^
So 5-4 us for real?!?!
October 1st, 2014 at 6:46 PM ^
We score 6 pts depending how hard Hoke claps.
October 1st, 2014 at 6:47 PM ^
Ace/Seth—
Just a thought regarding the diagram...
If you make the top-250 star pointing down instead of up (i.e., rotate it 180 degrees) the diagram could show recruit ranking and star-dom at the same time. It would be a minor tweak but would enable you to elegantly label a player as a top recruit AND star player.
Either way, love the new diagram, makes it really easy to compare squads at a glance.
October 1st, 2014 at 6:52 PM ^
I'll pass this along to Seth. Thanks!
October 1st, 2014 at 6:59 PM ^
Devil's advocate.
I am confused why other than for a true freshman we have their HS rankings at all on this sort of chart? If Glasgow was starting next to say Pipkins why does it matter one was a walk on and one was a 5 star? All that matters is what they do in college. I understand the stars around good college players but other than a true freshman starting with no history I dont see why we need to see where they were recruited; it has proven to mean little in year 2-3-4 of a player's college life.
October 1st, 2014 at 7:06 PM ^
...it helps give a general sense of the talent level on each side of the ball. Also, it's free information, so you might as well have it—it's not like we're omitting which players are considered the stars on each side of the ball.
October 1st, 2014 at 7:40 PM ^
it helps give a general sense of the talent level on each side of the ball.
Does it though? I can make an argument that right now the best 4 players on the Michigan defense are Clark, Glasgow, Henry, and Jake Ryan. None of which have this designation of top 250 player. If healthy the best player by a country mile for Rutgers was Paul James. He was a walkon like Glasgow. So on this particular 11 v 11 grid, the 5 best players might all be non top 250.
I understand the "if the information is free might as well put it there" argument but I don't think the HS starz tells us much about the general sense of talent level as does actual on field results.
Based on this star system UM should be tied for 1st with OSU. Rutgers should be bottom third of the conference. Rather than indvidual players which are completely hit or miss versus their stars, it would be interesting to hear what their average recruiting rank was the past 5 classes i.e. Michigan 14, Rutgers 52.
/Downvote away boys!
October 1st, 2014 at 9:33 PM ^
Agree that once they start playing the rankings are essentially meaningless, and can be actually misleading with regard to actual talent levels.
It's certainly interesting when you have Derrick Green (who I like) as the top RB in the country and a guy like Paul James a walkon. It's also an example of how some areas in the country are underscouted, and others overscouted to the point where things can get pretty skewed.
October 1st, 2014 at 11:06 PM ^
The top 250 thing is a snapshot at a point in time by folks that reasonably can be expected to be better than average at making the assessment, but certainly not infallible. Nonetheless, the odds should be higher that this pool will be better than those outside it. Another scenario is that some players develop their talent on a trajectory somewhat out of step with the top 250 whereby they come in under the radar of the top 250 and bloom later, to the surprise of all. Regardless, mathtematically speaking, programs can improve their odds but get no guarantee by tapping the highest rated talent they can find. The area where programs have the most influence on outcomes by far concerns having the smartest, most developmental and motivational coaching. When was the last time you watched Michigan win a game where it did not have an obvious physical advantage? Conversely, how many times have we watched them lose to teams that clearly did not have this? We are watching a Ferarri being driven by a blind man. Make it stop.
October 1st, 2014 at 11:25 PM ^
Well, duh on results vs recruiting. The information is easy to get and it's probably better than nothing, because stars are correlated with performance even though correlations aren't perfect and I'm tired of people having to explain this.
October 2nd, 2014 at 9:34 AM ^
"it has proven to mean little in year 2-3-4 of a player's college life."
...Just at Michigan.
Seriously though, I think it basically helps to quickly familiarize readers who are otherwise unfamiliar with players on opposing teams. It is normally mentioned only when the player is both highly ranked and proven in college. It's not like you see write-ups on the unproven 5-stars who are sitting third string. The rankings are more relatable and allow a better picture for readers, IMO.
October 1st, 2014 at 7:02 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 1st, 2014 at 7:09 PM ^
I like it the way it is. Not all freshmen are the same. If a team is starting Peppers at DB and Cole at LT, it's nice to know which one is expected to actually make a serious impact.
October 1st, 2014 at 7:14 PM ^
I don't know why, but I feel like we're going to play better than we have the last two games. Although we've been awful on the road, getting out of Ann Arbor right now might not be such a bad thing. Gardner, on his TD drive, looked like a completely different player than he had all season - like the Gardner who played in UTL II. I'm curious to see if he can keep it up.
October 2nd, 2014 at 1:29 AM ^
October 1st, 2014 at 7:18 PM ^
this weekend?
October 1st, 2014 at 7:25 PM ^
What is football?
October 2nd, 2014 at 10:36 AM ^
It's a ritual popular outside the U.S. where everybody runs around for 90 minutes, nobody scores, and its billion followers insist you don't understand. So, kind of a non-American version of Twilight, but that's not important right now.
October 1st, 2014 at 7:25 PM ^
This was so well-researched and well-written that I am curious why you are not part of the program staff. Any interest in becoming a head coach or athletic director?
October 1st, 2014 at 8:03 PM ^
I noticed Jake Ryan is no longer a star player.
October 2nd, 2014 at 2:16 AM ^
this is because Jake Ryan is only a shell of the man he used to be two years ago, before the ACL thing.
October 2nd, 2014 at 7:53 AM ^
October 1st, 2014 at 8:18 PM ^
October 1st, 2014 at 9:25 PM ^
You mean like every other mediocre QB we have faced in the last 15 games? What are odds of that happening again? I mean, strictly statistically speaking we should be due, right?
/statistics
October 2nd, 2014 at 6:06 AM ^
About the same as Gardner throwing two picks, one of which won't be his fault. They had the ball ricochet off a receiver's helmet; I'm sure we can top that somehow.
October 1st, 2014 at 10:03 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 1st, 2014 at 10:28 PM ^
October 1st, 2014 at 11:10 PM ^
This is all wrong... The corners should be level with the linebackers on that first graphic (third picture)... #Fuckpresscoverage #BendDon'tBreak
October 2nd, 2014 at 8:13 AM ^
(as if we need any of those) ...the entire MGoBlogosphere was ripping on Rutgers before the season kicked off, and as poor of a team as they seem, I'm pretty sure we find a way to lose.
I'm going to need three growlers of IPA to watch this fuckfest.
October 2nd, 2014 at 8:14 AM ^
Kudos to you Ace. The write up is great, but watching that Rutgers- Penn St. game, now that's commitment. Neither one of those teams deserved to win. Their offenses were nearly as incompetent as Michigan's has been.
October 2nd, 2014 at 10:05 AM ^
Maybe I'm reading it wrong but looking at the starting players for the UM defense, does it indicate that Bolden was a starter last year?
I thought Morgan started and Bolden came off the bench last year.
Comments