Hokepoints Builds the IKEA Offense

I looked at that play a couple of times, and it looked like a zone read where Denard should have given since the DE was in his face.  Denard didn't have time for a pass fake, but he did have time for an "oh shit I blew the read, better follow Fitz through an amazingly open hole, hey look at that Fitz would have gained a lot of yards, hey after my cut there isn't any secondary guys left and I'm catching up to Gallon, is he slowing down to block or just not as fast as I am, oh here we go time to kneel down and say a prayer to my brother."

And I think even Lewan had the same point of view when he brought up this play and said, Denard could have handed to Fitz, either way the hole was there on that play.  He was offering it up as proof the poor performance of the Running Backs wasn't the running backs themselves but the blocking of the offensive line.

Denard saved himself on that blown read because he's Denard.  And probably since everyone on defense started moving toward what they should do after seeing Denard's mistake, didn't realize that Denard excels at awesome plays after making one mistake.  I.e. every run where Denard drops the ball is more awesome than he deserves.  I think Alabama was the only team that just stood around with patience and discipline until Denard tried to run.

Why would constructive criticism be dickish? Made some updates so others won't be as confused.

http://mgoblog.com/content/crimes-against-manpanda

probably should've been linked. it's unclear how helpful that is--why is this a crime against denard instead of against fitz or the OL themselves?--but that should be the reference.

So I've only once screwed up the different sized screws and had to take the thing apart, but everyone I know complains enough about it I figured it was a relatable experience. My main problem when building IKEA stuff is when you tighten anything the cheap particle board they make everything out of will crack way easily. Once those screws get exposed the furniture is done for.

or are the coaches (read: borges) not willing to give him that free reign to make the reads? considering denard's amazing ball-carrying vision, it's hard to imagine that he is to blame for missing so many read plays on runs.

I want to take a good look at that, too...it seems fairly basic, even for a guy that last played organized football in 9th grade. You run to where the guy next to you is now, and won't be, after the ball is snapped.  Or at least, right behind him...towards his feet or "bottom."  It seems like they're doing so in order to get more leverage on the first guy that they're going to hit....?

I'm at work so I can't replay the vid, but if we're talking in general. . . it's because they're not athletic enough.

A rule of thumb -- just a rule of thumb, mind you -- is that if you're gonna draw up movement on your O-line, the lines need to be roughly the same length.  This is because it takes time to, you know, put one foot in front of the other in what's known as "running".  So a guy who has to run six yards to get into position is going to do it in twice the time as the guy running only three, and if you don't time your contact precisely the play is dead behind the LoS.

Sorry if that came off as patronizing; I don't do this snarky style as well as Seth.  Point is, a lineman that can pull needs to be exceptionally quick for his size because of the distance he needs to range to reach the point of attack.  Not everyone can do this so I marvel at Borges' audacity to keep talking about execution.  This is an example of a pull:

It's actually a play action, but the O-line movement is the same for the base play (duh).  What should immediately pop out is just how far the left guard has to run just to reach his assigned gap.  IF your back rumbles like a locomotive and IF the goal is to push strongside for 4-5 yards, this is classic MANBALL, and that's fine.  I presume the RT takes on the SAM, which means the pulling guard's assignment is typically a ILB or safety who loses a step reacting to the play and has farther to go to get to the point of attack.  The unblocked weakside pursuit will be trailing the tailback whose job is to take a few steps and fall forward anyway -- tackling him from behind doesn't stop the play from achieving its goal.  The problems are this:  One, the tailback here is Fitz.  He's a speed demon, not a tank.  Even with a guard quick enough to pull properly, this burns rubber as well as a sports car tailgating a Mack truck.  Two, teams will often roll up the safety, blitz with a corner or use a robber to stop the run.  End result?  The defender reaches the gap before the guard does, the ball carrier's speed is neutralized going behind the late guard, and now you have all this speed in the backfield with nowhere to go.  Sports car stuck in traffic.  You don't really need to worry about the play action either; the same defensive alignment gets you a blitzer in the backfield because Fitz can't block and Smith can't run.  You can pretty much tell what Michigan's going to run (or fail to execute) by watching who lines up next to Denard.

I'm gonna say it:  It's a stupid, stupid, STUPID use of personnel.  It's not the guard's fault he's slower than Fitz.  You can't execute or drill or technique or "block better" into making this work with this team.  Even with an All-American left guard, you can't make this play work unless something weird happens (Fitz does something silly, a linebacker slips and falls) but that's not what you'd call a well-executed play.  With a true MANBALL team it's tough to stop, but with this crew it calls upon players -- including the defense -- to traverse distances inversely proportional to their speed.  The slower they are, the farther they have to go and vice versa.  The only way to make it work in order is to do it in slow motion but defenses won't cooperate.

What I REALLY don't get is that even if Borges doesn't see this on tape, Mattison should be destroying this play in practice.  Why are they still using it??

Our first 5-10 plays of the game against MSU need to be passes.  Throws off their entire game plan, even if we only hit a few of them.

Yes, we'll all bitch about it, it's what we do..

That's a high YPC, sure.  But it is based off a very small sample size of 30 carries and required two long TD runs (78 and 58 yards) against a below average defensive football team to get to that mark. 
 

What he's been unable to do successfully to this point is find that same level of success against top tier defenses.  His development from last year to this will be judged by the MSU game in my opinion. 

Well, he's already on pace to match last year's 18, so unless he gets a lot more careful with his passing, I think your prediction of 10 interceptions is overly optimistic.

Wholeheartedly agree.  It's almost as if he views it as a sign of weakness to call the play given that everyone else sees it's available and we dont take it.  

Well.....not everybody.   His boss must agree with him on some level for reasons unknown or this would get changed and fast.  As much grief as we give Borgess on our unwillingness to take the 5-7 "free" yards on a bubble, Brady could change it if he wanted to.

Well it wasn't too bad of a play but I'll let you be the judge of this: http://youtu.be/ZCOZy5i8vlg?t=27m57s

I didn't have space to write all my thoughts but I thought Barnum got away with holding and that's why his guy didn't make the play. Manpanda. If that block is legit then everyone did a good job and Michigan got 5 yards out of everyone on the line blocking well (4 yards) minus one from the safety reacting very quickly, plus two for Toussaint bowling that safety over for an extra 2 yards.

There's still a case that it's a crime against ManPanda, since the threat of Denard's legs is essentially zero on this play. Perfect execution by the O-line should be worth more than 5 yards with this offense.

Man, you just gave me the worst flashback of last season...I know they worked on that stuff after the game last year, but I hope that isn't a problem again. 

They weren't always run blitzing, though I agree with you those were adjustments to stop Denard as well as Fitz.

The major adjustment I saw was they were slanting hard to the expected playside for a Fitz non-counter. Since the handoff out of the shotgun comes side-to-side, that makes it so then can defeat blocking to that side with the DL. If Denard keeps the LBs are responsible for coming in on the backs of the O-linemen. Unless that strongside linebacker over there is going to be pinched in to close off Denard's escape route, they're betting their MLB will read quickly enough to route Denard to a filling safety. That's Denard poison they've picked, and that's what happened on a majority of the plays I remember from the Air Force game.

But I think what he meant was "we did everything we could, but Bama just outplayed us". Especially after seeing the offensive UFR, if the DBs weren't in our receivers' shirts every play, that gameplan could have worked quite well.