H4: Forty-Three Shades of Purple
Upchurch
My biggest takeaway from last night is Michigan will need a very strong and well-coached front seven if Harbaugh is to pull a 1969 next Thanksgiving weekend.
The key to Michigan's dramatic defensive improvement in 2011 was that Brady Hoke and Greg Mattison gave Michigan's defense an identity. They went to a 4-3 under, single-gap run defense that Mattison brought from the Ravens, and over the course of the year found the best fits for the guys on hand.
 |
| Durkin knew Mattison from his Charlie Weis pants days. [photo: Joe Raymond|Freep] |
You remember, despite the relative success of this transition, that some fits were more or less awkward than others. Jake Ryan was a perfect SAM. Ryan Van Bergen worked as a 3-tech or a 5-tech. Mike Martin played nose because nobody else could, and his disruption was deployed with a lot of stunts, or weird stuff like when they came up in an Okie and Martin dropped back to essentially MLB. Roh at WDE was a solid run defender but wasn't built to take advantage of that WDE-tackle matchup that's supposed to produce natural pressure.
Last year of course they went to a 4-3 over base alignment, making Jake Ryan into an awkward MLB because the alternative was Beyer as a really awkward 5-tech. The kicker: offenses were forcing Michigan to play nickel 50% to 90% of snaps, which made Ryan into either an undersized defensive end, or a guy on the sideline.
JMFR is gone but Mattison will still be around, joined by new defensive coordinator D.J. Durkin. At the Cleveland event last night I suggested Mattison’s role will be as sensei to Durkin, who hasn’t really flown solo yet (Muschamp was very involved with that defense).
It adds up to a belief that Michigan won’t change its defensive style for 2015, but what is that style? Coverages are another matter; just speaking to the front seven: should they be the under that they recruited for, or the over they transitioned to?
Refresher on 4-3 philosophy
Mattison and Durkin both coached (Durkin as a graduate assistant for one year) under Bob Davie at Notre Dame, who with Jackie Sherrill developed the Texas A&M "Wrecking Crew" defense. Jimmy Johnson (another Sherrill acolyte) took it a step further in Miami, and Pete Carroll now runs in Seattle.
You’ll note that they used different alignments. Johnson’s defenses were the genesis of the 4-3 over, and so influential that this is what people usually mean by “4-3” defense, as opposed to Tom Landry’s base version. Carroll’s been coaching the 4-3 under since he learned it directly from Monte Kiffin, who developed it at Nebraska.
The under alignment was not the base concept; the real philosophy in Kiffin's terms was to give his defensive linemen simple assignments so they could play with aggression and disruption. The benefit of one-gapping is no defensive linemen stopping to diagnose the play. Once the ball is snapped, all of these defenses want those brains thinking "go!", "put my hat in a gap," "be a factor," and "attack that block!"
Mattison used a mix in Baltimore because he had Ngata, but at Michigan he’s had an almost exclusively gap-attacking defense. The question has been what alignment to run it out of, and that’s a question of which players fit it best.
(Start at 1:17)
So which alignment is Michigan going with this year? I think again it’s a question of personnel? I make diagram.
![overunder_thumb[5]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/overunder_thumb5.jpg "overunder_thumb[5]")
Michigan’s short on red dudes
The above is my attempt at showing the spectrum of qualities emphasized by the front seven positions in the 4-3 over versus the 4-3 under. I also gave a small approximation of color fits for guys I know something about (Spur-like objects like Gant and Wangler left out because I ran out of colors to depict DB-ness).
It's meant to show what we mean when we talk about the why nothing's a perfect fit for the talent on hand. Suggestions for improved shading are welcome. Takeaway from this experiment: Michigan's front the next few years may be better at throwing out different looks than it will be at rotating through shark teeth.
If you trust my judgment on the shading above, the over appears to remain the best fit for the guys we have, provided they can find some backup ends (the glut of DE/DT tweeners remains). As Mattison mentioned in the video above, the half of the time you’re in nickel to counter a 3- or more-wide look, you’re in an over anyway. D.J. Durkin used a lot of smaller players and changed things up a ton at Florida, and I expect the future will be a truly multiple defense with versatile front seven players. I expect when they can’t run Ojemudia and Charlton out there at the ends, Durkin will experiment with linebacker-ish dudes out there.
January 13th, 2015 at 10:48 AM ^
Btw, great post!
January 13th, 2015 at 10:59 AM ^
Very informative, MGoBlog is the bee's knees
January 13th, 2015 at 11:00 AM ^
My biggest take away from last night was - "Fuck..."
January 13th, 2015 at 12:30 PM ^
January 13th, 2015 at 12:53 PM ^
It will be interesting to see how OSU does without Herman but Urban has had OC's leave before and he continues to have success. To me the big story of OSU's offense, besides the 3 QB's, was how well the oline came together. You watch the VTech tape and then watch the games against Wisky, Bama and Oregon and it's a completely different oline. As of now, OSU's oline coach will be with them next year.
Under Hoke/Funk the oline struggled in 2012, 2013 and for most of 2014. It took OSU 3 months to turn a disaster of an oline against VTech into a wrecking machine in December.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:27 PM ^
No reason we can't do the same now.
January 13th, 2015 at 11:03 AM ^
The shading did confuse me a bit, as you've got the names shaded themselves to represent the players skills, and the cirlces are more the wants, but where you're looking for multiple things it's tough - the mix of colors might be my monitor but it is a little tougher to read. Two things that I'd love to see as additions to this nice posts - a chart with skills (maybe i'm chart CHART based rather than visual?) - and also comments as to how Durkin's 3-4 / 3-3-5 fits in with our personnel. I'm more worried about the D trying to run everything and being good at nothing as opposed to other issues.
Again, great work!
January 13th, 2015 at 11:45 AM ^
January 13th, 2015 at 2:07 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 13th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^
A 3-4 would look very similar to the 4-3 under version
January 13th, 2015 at 12:27 PM ^
January 13th, 2015 at 11:28 AM ^
Very informative. I thought that the colors idea was very interesting, but I don't understand the brown color (WLB/Gedeon/Bolden). Is that a mix of read-and-react and cover?
January 13th, 2015 at 11:29 AM ^
On passing situations slide Wormley back down to the five and play both Taco and Mario. Possibly RJS can provide some pass rushing capabilities too.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 13th, 2015 at 11:29 AM ^
Just look at how much bigger our circles are than theirs!
My god we are giants among little boys! 14-0 NC 2015/16 guys!
January 13th, 2015 at 11:42 AM ^
Two suggestions
1. Instead of shading, use split-color or pie-chart-style circles. This removes the nuance of trying to capture two to four base colors in a single shade.
2. Along with the projected 2015 alignments above, it would be very educational to have a corresponding idealized alignment using YMRMFSPA players from the past 5-10 years, to illustrate which skill sets are best suited to which positions in each alignment using past players whose skill sets are familiar to MGoReaders.
And while you're educating us, can you do one for the 3-3-5? Especially since rumor has it Durkin may employ 3-3-5 type configurations with some regularity.
Thanks! I'll hang up and listen.
January 13th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^
Pie charts would help.
January 13th, 2015 at 11:46 AM ^
Regarding Mattison's comments. . . does that damn team go three-wide? I haven't followed them closely (following Michigan in a vacuum was punishment enough) but Meyer has been traditionally spread-to-run and statistically they don't seem any different. Have they been using a slot receiver like RichRod's offenses did?
January 13th, 2015 at 12:01 PM ^
UM's total defense ranking ended up 7 in 2014, one spot ahead of MSU and 12 ahead of Ohio St. I'm not sure there is much of a need to shake things up on that side of the ball. As the post mentioned, I'd expect for things to look the same in 2015. Probably, as time goes on Durkin will tweak some things. I hope they don't go too small with the personnel in the future as I believe big, strong and fast is better than just fast (*small).
January 13th, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
Michigan also played some pretty terrible offenses; IIRC the advanced stats showed them as middling. There's room for improvement.
But I do agree about not too much. They couldn't slow down the *#F$eyes, but to be fair, no one else could either.
January 13th, 2015 at 12:58 PM ^
UM got to feast on some really bad QB's. Just using ESPN's QBR rating for QB's, in the second half of the season UM faced 4 QB's who had a worse QBR rating for the year then Devin Gardner - Hackenberg, Siemian, CJ Brown and IU's starter.
Also, Mattison loved to go to the prevent defense right before half time. I hope that trend is coming to an end.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:14 PM ^
It's all relative. OSU and MSU faced pretty much the same guys too. It's college football, just about every team in FBS has dogs on their schedule.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:24 PM ^
on the date of the rankings. OSU also faced Wisconsin, Bama and Oregon. MSU also played Baylor and had Oregon and Nebraska on their schedule. After OSU and MSU, there really aren't any teams on UM's schedule who have offenses that compare favorable with those opponents. Maybe ND and that's about it.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:41 PM ^
to fucking Rutgers. They were ok, not great by any means.
January 13th, 2015 at 12:08 PM ^
after tats, lies, and muscle cars with Tressel are officially over after last night's win. Now OSU can start to get on with business.
My hat is off to Meyer for his coaching. But the NCAA--now contemplating restoring JoePa's wins, too--remains something of a joke. And the Sweater Vest is in the hall of fame.
January 13th, 2015 at 12:48 PM ^
January 13th, 2015 at 12:15 PM ^
I'm not enthused burying Geddeon third on the chart in a 4-3 under. How about putting him at SAM. He's far from optimal height wise, but then again isn't he heavier than the other two and probably runs better?
January 13th, 2015 at 12:16 PM ^
Speaking of running linebacker-ish dudes out there to bolster the DEs, during warm-ups for the Ohio State game I'm pretty sure I saw Noah Furbush working with the DEs. He's 6-4, I believe, and seemed a likely candidate to outgrow the LB position. He could provide some much-needed depth at WDE, or develop into some kind of linebacker-ish hybrid as you suggest.
January 13th, 2015 at 12:18 PM ^
It shows two diagrams, one of which (the 4-3 over) has two spots for red dudes. Then the caption 'We are short on red dudes'. Then it says our personnel work better with a 4-3 over???
I think our D was 'good by the numbers' last year. But watching it it never seemed like a really solid D.
I'm hoping that improves as the general team toughness improves under Harbaugh. I also hope the D looks better when the offense starts to work and doesn't hang them out to dry as much.
January 13th, 2015 at 12:20 PM ^
I very much enjoy this type of content, even if I don't comment on it. Thanks.
January 13th, 2015 at 12:22 PM ^
January 13th, 2015 at 1:09 PM ^
I prefer to look at a defense from an opposing standpoint; as in, can you impose your will on the D. If the answer's no, you've got yourself a D.
The 4-3 over looks like the best "fit" and I don't dispute that. In their current state, what we have are a bunch of guys who can reliably execute their assigments. When it works, it works -- that's NOT a complaint. But on the flip side it's at a level where an offense with a playmaker can wreak havoc on the scheme, because there isn't anyone who can handle extra responsibility. The defense has held together by not trying to do too much, but as a result QBs in non-dysfunctional offenses have had a lot of success throwing the ball.
But that works both ways; a bona fide defensive playmaker limits the offense's options. This defense still needs its own playmaker up front, and like you, I think our current best hope is Henry. (Taco's an athlete but for some weird reason he looks to me like Charles Barkley in pads.) I don't think Henry's hit his ceiling. We've seen him toss linemen aside using just his arms so if he can force offenses to hold a double just to keep him at bay, they can't combo the MLB. When the OC's thinking he doesn't have enough linemen, you've won.
A long-winded way of saying, without some speculative leaps the defense is about as good as it can get (all due credit to Mattison) which is good, but a playmaker short of elite.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:20 PM ^
Martin was a major reason for why the 2011 defense was so good and we havent had anyone like him since. None of our interior linemen have really been that pass rushing force, but they are all pretty solid against the run. We also havent had a DE you really need to scheme around like a Brandon Graham or Woodley-type, Clark would flash some of it but was never really able to be as dominant as those guys. Pass-rush has been a major lacking factor for the last few years.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:58 PM ^
Pretty much any playmaker will do. The havoc a playmaker at SDE can wreak on the base run game can shut down an entire offense. A playmaking 3-tech is pretty much the difference-maker in an under defense (it's hard to NOT make the 3-tech the point of attack). Even a Woodson-like CB that everyone's hoping Peppers becomes, because that frees up a safety to focus exclusively on the run, or even show a bona fide BASE 4-4-3 because you can get away with it. Yeah we got 8 in the box AND your 3-wide's covered, bitches!
JMFR was a playmaking 4-3 under SLB that forced offenses to spread out. . . the problem was, that's exactly what Michigan's opponents wanted to do in the first place. That's why Mattison made the controversial decision to move him to MLB. It was shaky for a good while there, but it was either that, taking on the tackle as a DE, covering a slot receiver or standing on the sideline.
For the past two years Mattion's been preaching a form of disciplined football, with some occasional experiments at rushing 4 or press man with disastrous results. I take that to mean he's been trying to find a playmaker but the defense, for better or worse, is at its best when it stays within a scheme that doesn't expect too much from anyone. I think he stayed on in part to find out who's finally going to end that.
January 13th, 2015 at 12:36 PM ^
total agreement. And some fun facts.
OSU outgained M 416 - 372 this year in a blood thirsty rivalry game, where they never lack motivation, and they had zero turnovers to our 2 (one a fumble -six).
OSU rolled up 538 yds on Oregon with 4 turnovers of their own, this could have been 600+ with little imagination. M's D looked waaay less outmanned than the mighty ducks.
They will have a QB controversey next year of epic proportion.
It is obvious that the Big Ten was not as much of a limp dishrag as the rest of the football world assumed last year, not that this excuses M's year, but it is a fact that they we're not losing to cream puffs or donuts or whatever. Which is what made it so hard to experience, the repeated squandering of talent.
the year to year variability in the development and achievement of kids this age is an order of magnitude higher than pro players, lots can and will happen between then and now.
And I almost forgot. We just got a certified great coach.
Every action has a reaction. I'm calling for a 24-12 M victory or facsimile thereof at the big house.
January 13th, 2015 at 12:49 PM ^
UM held Ohio to their 3rd lowest yardage total of their 15 games played. One of the games that was lower than this was the Va. Tech game when OSU didn't quite have everything rolling yet. We're in pretty good shape on the defensive side of the ball and I'm expecting that D to continue to be good. The offense was putrid in 2014 and needs to be turned around immediately.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:00 PM ^
Just remember that it's hard to compare raw defensive numbers of Michigan and Oregon becuase the tempo differences skew things quite a bit. OSU put up 7.6 yards per pass and 6.0 yards per carry against us for a total of 6.6 yards per play. They put up 10.5 yards per pass but only 4.9 yards per carry against Oregon for a total of 6.4 yards per play. On a per-play basis, our defense performed worse than Oregon's.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:13 PM ^
January 13th, 2015 at 1:18 PM ^
They're raw numbers straight from ESPN. But if you're trying to measure overall defensive effectiveness, it seems like you would want to account for sacks (though you might want to put them under yards per pass rather than yards per run).
January 13th, 2015 at 1:45 PM ^
I agree that it's hard to just take numbers, even the advance stats, to evaluate overall defensive effectiveness. For example OSU was toying with Oregon most of the game, and they got "cute" coming out of halftime. After Jones fumbled they basically said F it, and ran their version of TaG over and over again because Oregon couldn't stop it.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 13th, 2015 at 1:14 PM ^
I just don't see any QB controversy next season for ohio, as much as we might like to foster discontent down there. Barrett will start, Jones will enter the draft, Braxton will either transition to another position where he projects better as a pro (and he could slide back over to QB were Barrett to get hurt again) or transfer.
Controversy over. Let's find some other ways to attack them - my 1st hope is we get BETTER!
I watched the game in a Bay Area bar with lots of buckeyes and they were all a little full of themselves, but also very much wanting to feel that old feeling where our game meant everything to their season.
One thing we can agree with them on!!!
January 13th, 2015 at 12:54 PM ^
Very interesting stuff. I agree that with the proliferation of 3+ receiver sets, you're playing 4 on the line anyway so you might as well plan on that being your base. Also, if you do want to show under by bringing that LB down, you can also use it to fake the blitz, something Michigan didn't seem to do much of last year, for whatever reason.
That said, I'm not great a X's and O's, so I might be completely wrong. But if Michigan is going to be competitive gainst your OSU's of the world, they'll need as many athletes as possible in that front 7.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:05 PM ^
a disciplined pash rush. That is all.
January 13th, 2015 at 1:14 PM ^
This is Marshigan!
January 13th, 2015 at 1:26 PM ^
I enjoy the similarities to 1969 and Bo vs. Woody in the 10 year war. That would be great if we could get anywhere close to that kind of rivalry drama again.
January 13th, 2015 at 3:30 PM ^
January 13th, 2015 at 5:26 PM ^
Amen to that. I lived in Scumlumbus when they won their last championship. I hope we punish them mentally and physically. Hell, I hope Harbaugh makes the Jim Schwartz back-slap look like thumb wrestling compared to what he's gonna give Urban & Dantonio.
Comments