Hokepoints: First Down and a Long Way to Go
One of the most frustrating problems with Michigan's offense is they appear to be burning a lot of first downs by running Toussaint into stacked lines. Whether it's zone blocked or man, they've been tipping it the same with the same results. The concept has been discussed on here and will be again until it stops; my purpose today is to add some numbers to that discussion.
Love Affair with 2nd and Long. Excising all the non-normal situations (4th quarters, burning clock, attempting a comeback, 2-minute drill at the end of a half) here's a a quick breakdown of playcalls this year on first down:
- 101 handoffs to running backs for 3.0 YPC and 6 TDs
- 28 passes for 10.7 YPA, one interception, and 2 TDs
- 20 play-action passes for 17.8 YPA, one interception and 4 TDs
- 17 options for 5.6 YPA and a TD
- 7 called Gardner runs for 2.7 YPA
- 7 wide receiver runs for 10 YPA
- 4 screens for 5.8 YPA
- 2 false starts
Like basketball the efficiency of the things you do goes down the more you do them, and the efficiency of the counters goes up. I don't doubt that the ridiculous numbers for PA passes above are because it's five times more likely to be a handoff.
Michigan's is not the only bad offense that does this. The thing that MSU was doing when they had Le'Veon Bell was running him into stacked lines again and again to open up the occasional big play for a receiver or tight end. This burned a lot of first downs and killed a lot of drives but when you just need 17 points to win you'll take a high variance in drive results. What made it worthwhile was Bell was one of the best backs in the country at getting yards after contact. If a safety came down to fill the hole Bell could still run (or leap) over that guy and thus set up 2nd and manageable. This year they don't have the OL or the RBs to do that, so they line up to pass on 1st down far more often.
Borges doesn't have the RBs or the OL to do that and haven't adjusted. Instead he's gone the other direction, selling out even further with the unbalanced lines, and running even more often.
- UFR database (through Minn) says…
YPA, 1st Play of Drive | YPA, All 1st Downs | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Pass | Run | Total | Run% | Pass | Run | Total | Run% |
2008 | 7.0 | 4.3 | 5.3 | 63.2% | 6.1 | 4.3 | 4.9 | 64.8% |
2009 | 5.6 | 6.8 | 6.3 | 56.7% | 5.6 | 6.1 | 5.9 | 65.3% |
2010 | 9.2 | 6.1 | 7.2 | 63.1% | 8.8 | 5.3 | 6.4 | 66.7% |
2011 | 10.5 | 6.7 | 7.7 | 73.8% | 8.1 | 6.2 | 6.7 | 70.9% |
2012 | 8.6 | 5.7 | 6.6 | 70.9% | 10.0 | 5.1 | 6.9 | 64.2% |
2013 | 8.8 | 3.4 | 4.9 | 73.2% | 12.7 | 3.7 | 6.3 | 71.6% |
…that Michigan's drives are starting off with a whimper. If I take out 4th quarters and situations when Michigan is down more than two scores we're getting just 2.9 YPC on 1st down runs, which is over 73% of 1st down playcalls. But I showed the above because that's what Bill O'Brien was probably looking at when he and his coaches strategized for this game.
Let's play Being Bill O'Brien. This is how he responded. Here's the first play of the game:
[after the jump]
Michigan is shifting into its unbalanced formation; PSU already has 8 in the box, and all 11 players inside 10 yards. No guesses for what comes of this.
Here's the start of the next drive:
Michigan's unbalanced to the right; PSU has nine in the box. We run to the right. We get nothing.
Here's the next:
Again unbalanced. And there's eight in the box.
Next next next next next
Can you pick out the one above where Funchess burned them for a 59-yarder? Well yeah cause you can see the yard lines but anyway:
…they lined up in an Ace 3-wide with the twins side a stack—a passing look. PSU still ran a 4-3 against it because Michigan on 1st downs dur.
Can Michigan generate this response without bashing its head against a wall until opponents are just convinced we're insane? Yes. Those option plays mostly came out of shotgun/pistol formations and while they didn't work all the time they did generate 5.6 YPC despite running into lots of heavy stuff as well. That's not any better than what we were getting last year with the setup game, but right now we're looking up to last year.
October 15th, 2013 at 12:23 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^
we gave up 40+ points rushing 4....it wasn't working. We needed to try something else and we never did.
October 15th, 2013 at 1:46 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 2:06 PM ^
I hear you man.
The offense was terrible because they couldn't score any points.
AND
The defense was terrible because they gave up so many points.
AND YET
Through 3 OTs the game was tied.
October 15th, 2013 at 2:23 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 5:51 PM ^
This team is being set up to fail by the coaches. They nearly did so against Akron. They're terrible. They nearly did so against UConn. They're terrible, and recently fired their coach. They did fail against Penn State. A team that got waxed by Indiana and should not have the depth to compete with Michigan right now. The schedule gets harder and harder from here on out. If the decision making by the coaches is nearly resuling in losses (or actually, now that we're no longer undefeated) against our lowliest of opponents, do you really think what they're trying to make work suddently will against more competant teams? That November schedule is still looming, and it looks more and more ominous by the week.
October 15th, 2013 at 12:16 PM ^
The good news is that there's still time to figure things out. Perhaps maybe the coaches can use the insanity of this game to their advantage in November, such as running play action off the unbalanced set.
October 15th, 2013 at 12:23 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 12:27 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 12:37 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 3:53 PM ^
This is really a great point Devin throwing to linemen. His first interception, the linemen didn't even move or there was any confusion, he just throw it to the penn state guy. I was like what are you doing. He is right there stationery, how do you not see him. how can you thow it there. it is really frustrating
October 15th, 2013 at 12:35 PM ^
AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!
HULK SMASH!
That is my reaction to the numbers. It infuriates me to the point of wanting to break things.
I also think it is Borges thought process on playcalling, despite being Bruce Banner.
October 15th, 2013 at 12:36 PM ^
A honesty to God question here:
Does anyone actually know if it is possible to make the bigger changes that people want, such as using the pistol or shotgun as the base formation? (I get that we can pass out of an under-center formation more often. However, Devin does not seem to do that well. Seven steps and a laser ain't his game.)
I know that we are already using the shotgun and pistol for a limited number of plays. However, it seems very different to use one of those as the base and be able to call any (or almost any) play from that. Wouldn't that take time to implement and practice so that we don't have missed assignments and incorrect routes, especially with a young interior line and youngish WRs? Anyone have inside knowledge (as a player, coach, etc.) as to how this could work?
Disclaimer: This is not a Borgess defense. To the contrary, my fear is that we don't really have the time to change. We are running into a brick wall because that is really all we got and all we will ever have this year.
October 15th, 2013 at 12:43 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 1:16 PM ^
Not all blocking is equal. Offensive lines can suck at one blocking type or scheme and kick ass at others. I'm sure if you demanded that Oregon's line MANBALL it up, they'd look like crap.
Borges has chosen to run what we suck at the most, which is the depressing part.
October 15th, 2013 at 1:51 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 1:24 PM ^
The problem I think you're trying to touch on is the "base play". From this you have your bread-and-butter, but it's made effective by the use of counters (that mess with the defense's reads) and constraints (which exploit their alignment). No sane OC expects the run game to succeed with a stacked box; what they do when they see a stacked box is exploit it. The problem is that Borges doesn't use counters or constraints. If anything, he tips his plays -- for example, last year he'd run play action out of power but he wouldn't pull the guard, so the entire defense -- the ENTIRE DEFENSE -- was allowed to key on the weakside guard. That's how stupid this guy is. No offense on earth can out-execute 11 guys all knowing exactly where the ball's going to go. He makes up for it by drawing up plays that are almost guaranteed to work as long as no one has seen them, but he can only do that so many times a year. The problem isn't that he can't win the big games (especially when he has time to prepare); it's that he's arrogant when it comes to adjusting or preparing for not-so-big opposition. CMU had no way of knowing what Michigan was preparing for them and Borges rolled out a gimmick offense that manhandled Minnesota. He emptied his bag of tricks against ND; that was Borges at his best. But his plays aren't designed to work in concert. Any time a DC has even a single week to pick apart what Borges implemented, and he doesn't empty his playbook of surprises, his weaknesses are exposed and he has no answer beyond blaming the players (tactfully expressed as "execution"). Akron, Connecticut and Penn State knew what he was going to do, he did it anyway and the offense struggled mightily.
To answer your question, yes, this is a serious problem. The point of counters is to convince the defense you're doing one thing when you're doing another, so it has to be practiced -- rehearsed, really. But this tackle over stuff -- which I personally advocated as a changeup on this very blog, actually -- is not a base play. I suggested it, but not as a base play. It's difficult to run play action out of it, for example, because you've abandoned the weakside by alignment. That said, what you can do is at least fire a quick bubble screen to Gallon because PSU put him one-on-one with a soft corner, but Borges doesn't like constraint plays.
October 15th, 2013 at 1:32 PM ^
I'm not sure we even need drastic changes. Just get the run/pass ratio on first down closer to 50-50 and give Gardner the freedom to audible at the line more often (remember that he did to score his rush TD against ND) when the D is stacked in the box.
October 15th, 2013 at 1:08 PM ^
Can anyone name for me one pro-style or manball success Borges has to speak of so far in three years? Specifically, where he has institutionalized one aspect of his pro-style scheme with success.
Tight ends blocking? Derp
O line power? Derp
RB carrying load? Derp
Over the top downfield threat? Derp
Mobile QB? DING DING DING! Wait... oops, that's not part of what Al's trying to do.
The man so far is an utter failure, as is Funk.
Come off season, BorGERG begone, and take Funk too.
October 15th, 2013 at 1:21 PM ^
You asked for one.
Borges has had success developing both Hemmingway and Gallon as an "over the top downfield threat." Depending on your definition, you could take Funchess and make it 3.
There you go.
I could go on but you only asked for one.
October 15th, 2013 at 2:40 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 1:13 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 1:16 PM ^
One of my biggest gripes about the coaching staff, especially Brady Hoke, is how he seems to coddle the players. He says he doesn't want to open the offense up and run a QB-centric spread offense because he doesn't want Gardner to get hurt. It's this type of timid attitude that leads to losses and more injuries. QBs get injured more taking blindside shots in the pocket (to the head or knees or landing hard on a shoulder) than getting hit on a designed run or scrambling out of the pocket towards the sideline. Borges needs to utilize Gardner the same way Texas used Vince Young in 2004-2005. Young was able to use his immense talent to make plays and take over games when necessary -- and didn't get injured. It's not a good formula for the NFL but works in college. And who did Young have behind him at Texas???? No one noteworthy in 2004 and a true freshman Colt McCoy in 2005? Did Texas hold Young back? Nope. Why is Hoke so afraid to let Gardner loose?? If he gets hurt, he gets hurt. No one's going to blame you for the injury -- it happens in sports. I'd take the risk of Gardner getting injured if it means a potential 11-1 or 10-2 finish. What's the worst that can happen if he gets hurt? You go 7-5 with Morris taking over?? 8-4 or 7-5 is about where I'd expect Michigan to finish if changes aren't made to the offensive scheme. What's the difference at this point? Open it up! If Borges can't do this, bring in Greg Davis from Iowa to run the offense -- he was the Texas OC when Young was there.
October 15th, 2013 at 2:12 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 3:53 PM ^
Greg Davis and Al Borges have had similar careers, holding several offensive coordinator positions at top programs and some mid-major programs. They both were part of undefeated seasons and some sustained success at Auburn and Texas, respectively. I don't know how one can say Davis is a laughing stock given his success. I think he'd be a good fit at Michigan given his success with Vince Young (and then Colt McCoy - who played a game similar in style to Morris). Gardner clearly has the same physical gifts that Young possessed in college and I'd venture to say is more intelligent than Young. He could pick up the playbook in the spring, summer, and pre-season and be a surefire Heisman hopeful next season. Davis does prefer the pro-style offense, so he'd be able to shift the scheme for Morris or Speight the following season. Davis had one bad season at Texas! The overall body of evidence shows he's a good coach. Iowa had a bad year last season, but it was due more to injuries at RB (well documented on this site) than anything else. Iowa is doing better this year and is right where you'd expect them to be with the talent they have on their roster. Please elaborate on why you think Greg Davis is a laughing stock.-- I just don't see it.
October 15th, 2013 at 3:47 PM ^
I though the same things after the psu game. I am going to stop watching michigan football for the rest of the year. But here I am on mgoblog reading analysis and recruiting and many posts.
Comments