“The player development is the main thing I like (about Michigan),” Williams said. “You can see that they develop their players. They get them in the gym and they work them hard. And their hard work pays off.”
"He's a hard worker, and he watched me and Tim (Hardaway Jr.) and Nik (Stauksas) put work in to become (first-round picks), and I'm just happy he's getting better," Burke said. "It's great for the program, too. It shows what type of program the University of Michigan is and the direction it continues to go in."
Lloyd Carr coached every game like he had a fantastic running game and great defense. He usually had an okay running game and a good defense, so this caught up to him from time to time. When Jim Tressel arrived and showed the men of manball what manball really was, Michigan's downward spiral began. In time, Tresselball would come to signify the exact same thing Lloydball did except without the oh and we lose the most important game of the year every time.
I grew to hate Lloydball.
The moment I threw in the towel is crystal clear in my memory, and by this point probably many longtime readers: punting from the opponent 34 against Ohio State in 2005. It was fourth and four. The clock read 4:18. Michigan had a two point lead. They'd recently had a nine point lead, but OSU ripped off a five-play touchdown drive in under a minute to change that. Michigan's defense had faced four do-or-die drives* already that year and failed on all of them. Faced with third and eleven, Michigan threw a screen to Antonio Bass for seven yards. They punted out of a field goal formation, which was so obvious to Tressel that they put a guy back there to field it. He would have had a shot at a touchdown if the punt hadn't exited the field at the twelve.
Just minutes before—literally in the same quarter—Lloyd had taken his frenzied quarterback's advice and gone for a QB sneak on fourth and one on his own 40. This caused everyone in the stadium to pick a partner with whom to share an incredulous look. This was not the way things went. The fourth down was successful; one bomb to Manningham later Michigan had staked itself to a two-score lead. That only made the knife cut deeper when in the moment of truth Carr reverted to form.
Michigan punted once Saturday.
I'm not sure if it's football in general that has shifted or if it's just Brady Hoke, but when Michigan had a fourth and two around the same area on Saturday, eyebrows were only slightly cocked when Michigan went for it. While Michigan was down 10-0, this was still the third quarter.
Lloyd wouldn't have even thought about it if his defense had given up 139 yards to that point. But he wouldn't have been down 10-0 in the first place. He would have squinted at his quarterback, wondered where the six-six artillery piece had gotten to, shrugged, and told his offensive coordinator to thud out a ten-point win based on Michigan's superior ground game. Only he would have had that faith, because he always had that faith.
But it was true. Take out a knee and ND averaged 3.2 yards a carry. Take out three sacks and a bad snap for Michigan and they averaged 5.1. That's a cavernous gap, one that a dinosaur coach would have driven through to a boring, field-goal-heavy victory.
Instead, we got several more entries in our database of what happens when Denard Robinson gets unblocked rushers in his face.
Is it good? No. Does it make any sense at all to run play action from under center on passing downs? No. Is it ever going to stop? No.
Well, maybe. Michigan did not throw a pass before third down on their two grinding second-half drives before the hurry-up was called for. Do that for the next eight games and run play action off plays you actually run and then Denard might get back to the things he was doing in an offense that was not trying to jam him into a hole he clearly does not fit. I thought maybe we'd learned that lesson after Iowa, but apparently not.
When stressed, people making decisions find it very hard to move away from habit. Everyone reverts to their comfort zone unless they are making a concerted effort to get away from it. Even then, you fall back into old patterns. Lloyd punted. Rodriguez installed a 3-3-5 defense. Borges starts calling plays from a long-ago offense helmed by a guy who was a better passer than runner. Denard throws the ball somewhere, anywhere.
Over the bye week, Michigan will refocus on what they're good at. This will get them through some games. They'll get comfortable with this, think they can install more stuff, and we'll get another Iowa, one they might pull out since the defense might be good and the Big Ten is definitely bad. And Denard will soldier through it, taking barbs from people who don't realize he could be in his first of two years at Oregon now, doing what he was born to.
He's not. He's doing this. This is "this": Al Borges has been Michigan's offensive coordinator for 17 games now. Five were against non-BCS opponents. A sixth was against Alabama and will be set aside. Of the remaining eleven, five were out-and-out debacles: both Notre Dame games, MSU, Iowa, and the Sugar Bowl. That Junior Hemingway rescued two of those doesn't change the fact that in about half of Michigan's games against real competition, the combination of Borges and Denard can't put up 200 yards until bombed out of the gameplan by events on the field.
You can blame Denard if you want. Sure, that happened in 2010, when Denard was a true sophomore and the second-leading rusher was Vincent Smith. I'm more concerned about the guy who isn't gone after this year, the offensive coordinator who vows to never work with a quarterbacks coach again and can't stand it when anyone dares to scream "RUN THE GODDAMN BALL" at him over and over and over and over and over, except whatever the press conference version of that is. Asking about bubble screens and stuff.
One day Borges will have a shining golden hammer of a quarterback, six-four, carved from marble, jawline for days. This man will coolly survey the field after faking a handoff to a two-hundred-thirty-pound bowling ball with knives sticking out of it. No one will run up in his face, because they are afraid the bowling ball has it. He will throw it to another six-foot-four man, this one long and graceful, built for escaping packs of hunters. This will be a good day. Nails are so dead.
Until then, here's to running, punting, and humility.
[Wisconsin: 52 yard, 11 play, four minute TD drive to win. Minnesota: eight play, 75-yard FG drive to win. Penn State: 13 play, 81-yard drive to wi—OH MY GOD MANNINGHAM. Iowa: 9 play, 74-yard FG drive to tie; Ferentz played for OT once in FG range, because he is Ferentz.]
All the INTs:
Bullets Yes More Bullets In The Head Please
Sanity check. I know I may not be entirely reliable on this matter, but stuff coming through my twitter feed from the folks I respect most as college football observers helped me think this was not just a mania. Smart Football:
Nice call Borges. Denard struggling? Let's run some kind naked waggle pass from under center where we let Denard throw vs unblocked DEnd
An Al Borges cooking show would be great if you like seeing someone throw everything into a blender even if it makes no sense at all.
Blaming it on "execution" is horseshit, plain and simple. When the offensive coordinator flat-out refuses to take free yards on the outside and has not once used the devastating play action on which Denard is moving towards the line scrimmage before throwing, it is on his shoulders for not using the tools he has in the way they are most effective.
A third of the way through the ND game, Michigan had run Robinson three times. Instead Michigan threw the ball all the time against a rampant DL. The first INT was a running back in the redzone. On the second, Michigan rolled the pocket and told a redshirt freshman fullback to block Prince Shembo. On the third an unblocked Te'o roars straight up the pocket. On the fourth he ran a waggle on second and seven, which got an unblocked Tuitt in Denard's face after having thrown INTs on back to back passes.
This is a consistent theme. They go into games doing something other than making their running QB a runner, and then are surprised when it goes poorly. They have the guy turn his back to the line of scrimmage and are surprised when 1) opposing defenses prioritize getting a guy out on him and 2) he reacts poorly. The exception was last year's OSU game, during which Denard threw all of 17 times.
Robinson failed, sure, but he was put in a position to do so by a guy who puts three tight ends on the field on second and goal from the twelve yard line and fools no one with the subsequent play action. Coaches have to execute too. Borges's gameplan was a disaster, again.
Come on Denard. Let's ask Peyton Manning to be Pat White stuff aside, at some point you've got to just eat the ball, or not throw it at a guy so covered you're trying to throw it through the chest of not one but two opponents. That first Te'o interception was probably the worst throw of Denard's career; if one of the two guys underneath it didn't get it a safety in coverage on the corner had a shot at a PBU.
I bet a dollar that someone else was open on that play.
The fumble was the real killer, though. Michigan has just taken their first drive of the half 71 yards and Denard has just made it first and ten at the ND 11, boom ball out drive over everyone thinks of 2010 when Michigan put up scads of yards and usually had ten points to show for it. Down two scores and suddenly running all the time, Michigan really needed that drive to pay off.
Blame Gardner? Some people on the twitter and then Ace suggested that the slant INT was on Gardner instead of Robinson. I don't think that's the case. It looked to me like he ran a fine route and was open and Robinson just missed.
When to go for high risk trick plays. When there is a payoff commensurate with the risk. The Gardner pass is fine. You've got a play that is potentially 70-some yards if everything goes well. The Smith pass gives you at most ten and is less likely to get a guy wide open just because there's far less space. Last year's Smith TD pass was 30 yards out, which gives the WR room to break past the safeties and the RB room to throw it long. Doing that in a constricted space is asking for it when Manti Te'o is raging his way into a running back's face.
The only time I can recall Michigan running a trick play like that inside the red zone was during the 2007 Illinois game when both teams were actively conspiring to lose. With Henne shuttling in and out of the game and Mallett insane, trying the Arrington end-around pass after a muffed punt was a defensible decision. At the end of an 11-play, 78-yard drive maybe not so much.
What is this huddling business again? There's a case that you shouldn't be doing it at all; not only is huddling a useless anachronism but going away from it locks defensive personnel on the field and gives you easier looks as the opponent struggles to keep up. See Oregon, of course.
But even if you're intent on huddling the time to do so has passed when you're down two scores with 6:46 left. There's something to be said for the idea that an offense should be using tempo as much as possible so that in situations like that they are naturals at it. It's a lot easier to slow down than speed up.
Anyway, I had bad flashbacks to that Iowa game as Michigan took 3:19 and used a timeout on their last drive.
OTOH, didn't mind the end of the first half playcalling since in that situation you're worried about giving ND a possession they can use and you've just thrown interceptions on three straight plays. Why throw a Hail Mary with 16 seconds left, though? And what was Roundtree even doing there?
Defense! Woo defense! Also filed under "if you told me before the game…" with "Michigan would punt once": "Notre Dame would have under 200 yards of offense with three minutes to go." Before Floyd stumbled on that third down bomb to Eifert, Michigan had held two ND QBs to 5.6 YPA and two interceptions, with the only completion over twenty yards another tough fade on the sideline.
From way up in the stands I had a great view of the routes developing and nobody was open basically all day. Combine that with Quinton Washington problems like "is not tackling when he bursts into the backfield on three consecutive plays" and you have a soothing balm to apply as you look forward to the rest of the season. I'm actually eager to get to the UFRing just so I can see how the guys on D did. Live I saw Ryan make plays, Campbell make plays, Washington make plays, and that allowed the linebackers to flow freely, with the 3.1 YPC results mentioned above. Kenny Demens looks a lot better when he's not trying to fight off two different blockers on the same play.
If Washington can translate those plays against UMass and Mattison hype into an impact day on the interior line against a real opponent, Michigan's biggest question that isn't "how will Denard fail to be Peyton Manning this time" is a lot closer to resolution.
Potential caveat: ND's interior OL may not be very good. They got annihilated by Purdue (Riddick: 53 yards on 15 carries, five sacks on Golson, two by Kawann Short) and ND didn't do much against MSU that wasn't deception (counter draw) or Wood getting cutbacks similar to the one he busted for ND's only big run of the day.
Caveat caveat: "only big run of the day." The shot above is Michigan corralling the play I started calling "That Goddamned Counter Draw" after DeAndra Cobb staked MSU to the lead they'd give up during Braylonfest. I call it TGDCD because Michigan has never stopped the thing (except once, I think). They did it up there.
Brady Hoke Epic Double Point of the Week. I have no idea yet, but it's obviously someone on defense. There is a weird lack of stats for such a dominating performance, with no sacks and just two TFLs, one for Kovacs, another split by Morgan and Washington.
For now, Jake Ryan gets the nod for most impactful-seeming impactfulness, but I reserve the right to switch this to Kovacs or Washington pending review.
Freshman linebackers. They're basically co-starters at this point. I'm still nervous about them but if the D continues to perform like that in the Big Ten season, expectations for that crew will be enormous next year with four-ish returning starters, all of whom will still be around in 2014.
Demens did rotate in during the second half. He was in on six tackles, Morgan seven. Ross had one and Bolden did not register. IIRC Demens was the preferred option on passing downs, which makes sense since zone drops are often a struggle with young linebackers.
Norfleet. Please do not jump like that again. The air up there is dangerously low on oxygen and people are trying to kill you. Stay low, where you are under the radar and can execute deep infiltration missions.
ND future. I wouldn't get too worried about a full-on return to glory. If that interior OL is what it seems to be and they're flipping between Rees and Golson against the rest of their schedule, they'll drop some games. They'll still probably get that BCS bid so they can get stomped on by someone a lot better.
Funchess. Didn't really have much impact; I'll pick up the Mandich thing the next time he takes a significant step towards it. Did feature in this picture:
In the week preceding this game, some random internet poster guy asked what was the worst performance you’ve seen by a QB. I ran screaming from that post, but couldn’t escape the images of Demetrious Brown throwing seven interceptions – SEVEN INTERCEPTIONS!!! - in a game against MSU many years ago.
WHY DID YOU DO IT RANDOM INTERNET POSTER GUY, WHYYYYYY
When I was 16 and learning how to drive, my Dad, trying his best to impart some constructive criticism without being overly harsh, said, “ST3, your driving lacks a certain smoothness.” I think it’s wonderful how Devin Gardner has moved over to WR to help the team, but at this point in his career, I think his route running lacks a certain smoothness.
The results of this game and a record of 2-2 are not indicative of the abilities of this team, and it would do every Michigan fan good to forget about what has happened and to concentrate instead on what can be accomplished in the BIG. I rest easier after seeing the O and D-lines gel and play very well. Denard will bounce back.
The rest of the BIG continues to look shaky, to say the least, and Michigan should be licking their chops against the likes of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, and I dare say Michigan St at this point. Ohio has obvious problems as well, letting UAB run wild on them. Michigan should have distinct talent advantages against Northwestern and Purdue.
It’s well known that the media is prohibited from cheering in the press box but it’s not just a collection of writers upstairs at Notre Dame. After Denard connected with Gardner on a third down conversion in the first half some dude belted out, “DAMN IT!”. When Denard took off on a run later in the game, I heard, “GET ‘EM!”. And so on. I’m actually glad this happened because it created some much needed lighter moments on the glass.
The group sat in the family and friends section of Notre Dame Stadium. Steve wore his best friend’s varsity jacket. The two girls wore “Shoelace” and another Robinson-themed shirt.
This section is different. Here, the hits sound louder. The mistakes sting more.
From here, you can reach out and touch the bass drums in the Michigan band. When a Notre Dame wide receiver was open on the goal line, the parents shouted and pointed, so Thomas Gordon bumped over and covered.
Robinson’s supporters sat in the fifth row, tucked in between friends and family of freshman linebacker James Ross III and the family of fifth-year senior J.T. Floyd.
Robinson’s parents come to games “very rarely, very rarely,” J.T.’s father, James, said. Normally the Robinson clan gathers in Robinson’s grandmother’s house in Deerfield Beach, Fla. around a television.
“Every Saturday,” Durrel said. “Everybody (goes). I can’t even tell you who don’t go.”
Let us use this bye week to get back to the basics and for Borges to come back down to reality. The big ten is very weak and this loss will mean nothing if we execute well and have proper play calling the rest of the season. We can easily win out, but if we keep putting Denard under center and call trick plays on first and goal we can expect to end up 7-5.
(Brian may have gotten confused by the scoring summary there, because Smith also caught a 28-yard TD pass in that game, but the pass he threw was 17 yards.)
That's further out but I don't know how big a difference those extra seven yards made. Dileo was open against ND, but Smith panicked and threw a much worse pass than he did against Minnesota.
Anyway, I don't disagree that it was a gamble that was probably unnecessary, but it's not that unusual for teams to run trick plays in the opposing red zone. I remember USC running a modified transcontinental against us in the Rose Bowl (either 2004 or '07, forget which one).
I think that's a fair point - though we should note that most of our red zone trips on the season prior to this game came against Air Force and UMass, who are simply poor defensive teams. Against an ND team that had given up 30 points in its first three games, I can understand why we might have thought it was necessary to go with some trickery. It's definitely a gamble, regardless.
Especially the D line. But Borges is NOT putting Denard in position to succeed. Denard can throw very well when his feet are set. Denard is a terrible thrower when his feet aren't set. Everyone knows this.
If you want him to succeed as a thrower, have him throw with his feet set. It's that simple.
"Over? Did you say, over? Nothing is over until we decide it is!"
See if you guys agree with me . . . It seems as though there have been two games so far where Borges appears to over-think the game planning. Iowa last year and now ND this year. Last year against Iowa, he tried to throw the Hawkeyes a curveball by running a bunch of I-Formation MANBALL, something he hadn't done all year. This past weekend, he seems to have tried to run play-action constantly and throw the ball time after time. Maybe he couldn't do differently last Saturday because ND was giving up the pass (or because their corners needed to be exposed)? It just seemed to me from my vantage point on the couch that he got away from what he's used successful in the past in an attempt to out smart the opponent.
corners did need to be exposed, but in the correct manner. having denard in the pocket with 7 rushing and getting in denards face while he throws off balance is not the way.
denard needed to be under center with a 2 step drop throwing to a wide open wr on a quick out. the ND corners were 10-12 yds off the line on almost every play. let our guy make a play one on one with their guy. our guy wins it's a great pick up, their guy wins it's still a positive play of 5-6 yds. MSU beat our heads in with this under RR. it works USE it!
Especially since it has taken him 4 years to START to get the zone read. For as freaking awesome as he is, he has some pretty major limitations that Borges has mostly done a great job compensating for.
Watch the highlights of Saturday night's Arizona - Oregon game, and tell me if you think Denard could compare to Oregon's QB wrt decision-making in the passing game. If you think he can, cool, but it's worth a look.
I think we're all kind of ignoring the elephant in the room here. Even if this offense isn't a perfect fit for Denard, why is he frequently throwing passes into double- and triple- coverage? Why doesn't he just throw the ball away when no one's open? That's a pretty basic thing to do in any offense. If we really want to get on Borges here, it's on him as a QB coach moreso than OC - somehow he isn't able to get this point through to Denard.
I think Denard sometimes locks into the idea that he's going to run a play as called or throw to a certain receiver come hell or high water. He is the reverse of the player who improvises all the time and doesn't follow the game plan. I don't think he ever thinks to himself, "The coach can call what he wants, but I'm the one down here on the field, and I'm going to do what I know will work." I think that's just who he is, and I don't think it will change much.
"All of the doughnuts have names that sound like prostitutes."
The bigger question is, why does he do that more now than he did two years ago? Why are the results worse than two years ago? I give Denard no free pass at all on those awful throws, but why did he make less of them than in 2010? The only different variable is Al Borges.
"We can't overestimate the value of computers: yes they are great for playing games and forwarding funny emails, but real business is done on paper. Write that down."
He did throw 11 interceptions in 2010, most in the latter part of the season. I think as that year went on, teams caught on to some of his tendencies. Usually against a mobile QB, teams will run a lot of zone coverage in the secondary because they're concerned about their DBs having their back turned to the QB if he scrambles. But because Denard rarely ever scrambles on a designed pass, it's not as necessary to do that. You can be free to play man coverage, which makes it harder for our receivers to get open, and forces Denard to be more accurate than against a zone. It becomes a vicious cycle: because he won't scramble, defenses don't respect his scrambling, and then that makes it harder for him to pass. And then, the fact he also won't throw it away when everyone's covered just makes things worse.
His reluctance to scramble is incredibly frustrating. After years of statue QBs, we finally have a guy who can fly - but he keeps that part of the arsenal under wraps on pass plays.
But why the reluctance to scramble? Personally, I agree with the poster above in that I believe he is trying very hard to "buy in" to Borges' system and not be a scrambling QB. Its conjuecture, of course, but that's what it seems like when we all can see miles of green ahead of him but he choses not to run.
Maybe, but he didn't scramble much under Rodriguez either. I don't understand it. Somehow there's got to be a way to get him to realize that he can become a much better passer if he also uses his feet on a passing down. Remember his first-ever play at Michigan - "Broken plays can be dangerous - look at that speed!"
I haven't seen every play in Denard's career, but offhand I can't recall ever seeing him throw a ball away.
One small adjustment like that, learning to do that a few times a game, could pay huge dividends. He does make plenty of throws with great accuracy, but he doesn't seem to be able to decide when a play is dead and say "No worries, we'll take another shot at it on the next play."
Like Flutie said at halftime, "The reads are 1, 2, 3, row E..."
Harmon40 "When the 'ol season is over, you and I know: it'll be Michigan again...MICHIGAN!"
There isnt much worse than the casual sports fan who always has to be That Guy who is smarter than his teams coaches, by comparing them to the coach who runs the amazing Hindsight scheme, where every play ever imagined can be run perfectly, without sacrificing anything else, because the closest the casual fan has come to coaching an actual football game is in a video game.
At least in the case of OSU fans, they do this to Bollman, etc because they are being homers for their teams players, its even worse when That Guy does it because he is homering for some coach who really, really sucked.
After about 30 years of watching football, I have come to the conclusion that sometimes That Guy is right. I no longer accept coaches' decisions as self-validating, just because they are the coach. Maybe they are great managers, teachers, and leaders of young men, but some of them make decisions that are indefensible.
For my entire life, fans of football teams have booed when the punt team comes out on 4th and 1. The color commentator then always makes a lighthearted comment that the coach knows what he's doing and that the fans don't. But at least a few statistical compilations have shown that going for it on 4th down is the right decision way more often than conventional wisdom would say. What's the takeaway from this? My interpretation is that the fans boo when the punt team comes out on 4th and 1 because they know from experience, instinctively, that it reduces their probability of winning the game.
For about the first 20 years of my football-watching life, the conventional wisdom with running quarterbacks was that they should stay in the pocket and throw the ball. Whenever Michigan faced a running QB, I would pray that he would do just that. God I wish that Donovan McNabb would have just stayed in the pocket like conentional wisdom said he was supposed to do. I never used to get scared of teams that used a power running game, but teams that could pass scared the hell out of me, and teams with a quarterback who would scramble would keep me awake at night. The proliferation of spread offenses over the past decade has proven what I knew instincitvely when I was about 10 years old, that the conventional wisdom was wrong.
Is That Guy smarter than the coach sometimes? My answer is -- yes, he is. Football is loaded with all kinds of shitty conventional wisdom, and coaches don't get to where they are because they are wizards when it comes to understanding the concept of expected value. But maybe coaches succeed in spite of that because gamesmanship is only a small portion of the game.
Of course coaches are sometimes wrong.
But when someone looks at the deficiencies we had last year, and how we were able to go 11-2, with wins over ND and OSU, and a BCS bowl win, and their conclusion is "man, look at how our OC held us back," then that person has an agenda, and an annoying one at that.
Bollman has made mistakes too. SOME of the complaints have validity. But when OSU fans claim that every loss is entirely his responsibility, and that the players would win NCs every year if they just werent being held back, those people have an agenda. Albeit a much less annoying one than pining for a coach and a scheme that just got done losing 22 games in 3 years
Fair 'nuff. And for what it's worth, I didn't think that this game was the most egregious example ever of bad OC play-calling. Probably wouldn't crack Mike Debord's top 5. The 2nd quarter was awful, but for the rest of the game, I thought that Big Al did an OK job of putting the team in position to win the game. Last year's Iowa and MSU games bothered me more.
I'm surprised you didn't comment on the Wilson pass interference. I don't recall the other personnel on that play, but I question the decision to have a true freshman safety in on that crucial down. Especially since he has proven himself raw so far. I think he'll be a great player next year ... but we needed Gordon in at FS for that play.
And then he followed it up with another penalty on the ensuing kick off coverage two plays later. I didn't pay close attention, but I hope he sat on the bench the rest of the game to think about his poor decisions.
I co-sign this. Its has to be an unbelievably stressful situation for him to be in, coming in when Michigan is down like that. But I will say that those two back-to-back penalties were pretty brutal. Can't fault the kid for playing hard and trying his best but they were pretty big mistakes.
As supreme universal authority of football judginess I hereby still render judgment against the professionals (read: coaches) rather than the Denard. It seems to me that the vast majority of Denard’s picks are a result of him forcing the ball into a window any college QB would struggle to fit into. His judgment under pressure is terrible and has always been so. What’s even more frustrating is that he is his own check down. I can’t imagine why it has not yet been drilled into his head that if it’s not there, he needs to scramble.
It’s this simple, really:
If IsOpen(Guy) then ThrowTo(Guy, SetFeet=True);
else Goto Run_It(Dilithium=10);
I think the groundhog's day feeling of it all is on the coaches. I assume they’ve had that discussion but it keeps happening. So, either the coaches don’t care (doubtful), Denard isn’t listening (unlikely), or they haven’t gotten through to him. Yeah, Denard should probably know better by now but he’s a valiant and flawed champion with almost nothing but flaws surrounding him, and hey, it's worked twice before. If he doesn’t make a play, who will?
i was having back-and-forth on this same topic in a thread yesterday (only to be negged). they insisted that the coaches are drilling into denard to run or throw it away. i indicated that i was skeptical how much this is stressed in practice, considering i have never seen him throw it away and he rarely just pulls it down and runs.
to put their players in a position to succeed. Hoke was right when he said in the postgame conference that the players and the coaches have to do a better job. Perhaps Brian should have written "Blaming it entirely (or primarily) on execution is horseshit."
It sounded to me like he meant it. "I need to do a better job at coaching the game of football" doesn't sound like coachspeak to me. In any case, my point was that I agreed with him, regardless of whether it's coachspeak or not.
Michigan's OL had zone-blocked with a ton of stretch blocking for two years before RR showed up and the skill guys were basically all freshmen. The only thing that was new was constant shotgun and zone read mesh points; the structure of the run game was very similar and they passed about half the time.
Also there was no offense that fit Threet and Sheridan's skillsets because they had none, especially w/ Threet as a freshman.