Hokepoints: Kick Out the Jams!
Among this year's great disappointments has been the understandable, but nonetheless depressing, regression of 2013 Michigan's two best defensive players. Jake Ryan looks lost at MLB. Blake Countess is now the third or fourth best cornerback on this roster. Both appear to be a direct result of the offseason decision to switch from Michigan's 4-3 under/zone defense to a jam-man, nickel/4-3 over base.
I'm sure Brian is going to cover Jake Ryan with a picture pages, so I thought I'd zoom in on a play that's demonstrative of what's happening with Countess, and how that's hurting the defense. This is the first of Rutgers's many 3rd down conversions. Michigan had a backside blitz on with the front seven and was playing man-high pass D. Rutgers ran a pick route from the trips tight formation:
This is a standard thing you do against man coverage. The Y receiver will run his route directly in the path of the cornerback trying to guard the outside (Z) receiver. It works just a like a perimeter screen in basketball: the pick man and the defender following him create a wall between the target and his defender…
Voila: easy pass…
…which is unfortunate because a certain Rutgers lineman blew his MIKE assignment and Jake Ryan was about to turn Gary Nova into paste. Jeremy Clark then compounded matters by setting up too far inside and turned it into a big play.
To a degree you might RPS this, because Rutgers called a pick route against man coverage, and Nova pointed right at the matchups to show his guys they had what they wanted. But the way Michigan's defense is supposed to work is for man-tight to be a base play, and there is absolutely a way to defend this pass with Michigan's defensive call… [jump] [also if you're at work maybe put your headsets on because you know what's coming]
MC5 probably got the idea from Bo's defense
If Countess can jam the Y receiver, Lewis's guy either has to delay his route, or ends up 1-on-1 with Lewis on a slant.
Countess got the latter. One BTN review didn't have it in the screen and the other only captured it on the edge but here's the money shot:
That's a receiver accelerating downfield, and Countess's arms extended into nobody. It is a Sheridan-duck-against-Utah moment where you have to just say "this guy isn't going to do this thing well for the foreseeable future."
Which makes sense because Countess's game has always been as a zone merchant. Based on watching his play, statements from his coaches, and that one time I got to meet him, Blake is an exceptionally bright guy. He understands zones and what receivers try to do them so well that last year we routinely saw Blake improvising to bait quarterbacks into interceptions and covered routes. That's his jam. He can probably learn how to jam-jam well enough to do it on occasion, but he obviously hasn't yet.
Going to a pugilistic, MSU-style bump-and-run coverage scheme and having Jake Ryan move to MLB in a 4-3 over were the major offseason adjustments to the defense. At the season's half-way point, it appears that both haven't worked out. I do think Mattison is a good coach, and I totally see the logic behind the changes given the abilities of the younger guys on the team, so this isn't a "What are you doing?!?" complaint so much as a reassessment.
That reassessment says two of Michigan's best defensive players have become liabilities by being asked to do things in Michigan's base defense that are not their strong suits, and that they're not progressing fast enough at those things that we should expect adequate improvement during the tougher second half of the season.
Going back to last year's defense has its own problems. It sucks for Countess, but the best solution to this seems to be getting Peppers back.
October 7th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^
And a good write up here. The gif really demonstrates the difference. I like that the focus is back on football as well.
As a huge fan of bunch concepts, the biggest downside of the concepts is if the up-man gets jammed. It ruins the timing and the path of all the other routes that attempt to use the man on the LOS as a natural pick (so you start running screens that take advantage of his leverage, or a few other tricks, but that's the basic deal). This looks like your standard Bunch-In/Out Adjustment, where the SS takes first inside of the two off WRs, and Lewis takes the 2nd inside/1st outside. Countess is locked on his man and must play him straight up at his split. But the most important thing is for him to knock him off his timing, because that disrupts the timing of everything else and also allows Lewis to stay attached to his man.
This is why I think Peppers moves back to the NB spot if/when he comes back. These are common ways teams will use bunch concepts to defeat man coverage. But they can be defeated by even a decent jam on the up-receiver. A complete whiff leads to a big play every time.
You look at this play, if Countess gets his jam, it's a free shot at the QB because of the blitz. The defense even has help inside as Wormley drops into the underneath coverage. This is a good defensive play call that is likely to end in a sack or an INT if only one player gets that jam. But in Cover 1, everyone has to do their job and there are few ways to cover a blown assignment, as seen here, it's the difference between a big play for the defense and a big play for the offense.
October 7th, 2014 at 12:05 PM ^
"I like that the focus is back on football as well."
Space Coyote gets called out for being passive aggressive, says he most certainly isn't passive aggressive, and then writes this.
Yep, you're totally not doing anything that would cause the writers on this site to get annoyed.
October 7th, 2014 at 12:15 PM ^
I like the fact that the focus of Seth's post is back to football, rather than some of the other topics that have been discussed lately both on the board and in the forum. I'll feel the same way when Brian posts his UFR posts, as that will be back to some sense of normalcy that brought me to this blog. I've always appreciated the football content on this blog, and this is a prime example, and I like that after last week strayed from it a bit, that this works back in that direction.
Apparently, when stating that I appreciate this football related content after last week strayed from it, I'm supposed to insult at the writers as well so that I'm not "passive aggressive"?
October 7th, 2014 at 1:21 PM ^
Except that this blog has never been just about sports. It has always been written from the perspective of a fan. If you came just for the football specific content, then it is up to you to stay away from the rest of the posts that aren't about the technical aspects.
I won't pretend to know why you first started reading MGoBlog, but you shouldn't pretend that the only reason it exists is to give break-downs on plays and games. And any time someone says something like you did, it comes across as rude and dismissive of the great writing done here that encapsulates the emotion invovled with being a fan.
October 7th, 2014 at 2:12 PM ^
Nor should it be, that would make it a different blog altogether, rather than a Michigan blog. But it has always been a great blog that mixed emotions and subjective analysis with objective analysis like this one. Last week I thought was much, much too heavy on the former, and I'm glad to see it getting back towards it's normal structure this week.
October 7th, 2014 at 2:13 PM ^
I'm pretty sure the writers on the blog appreciate his input since they not infrequently specifically request his insight.
October 7th, 2014 at 9:04 PM ^
Space Coyote.
October 7th, 2014 at 10:39 PM ^
Negged. Nice attitude. You put way too much into that one line he wrote.
October 7th, 2014 at 9:24 PM ^
So Countess' man is the guy who really needs to get jammed, right? Does this mean no one on the team can jam guys? Can't Lewis do it? Hollowell isn't that quick but seems he's physical.
October 7th, 2014 at 9:59 PM ^
You can do some things to switch players around, you just have to be able to communicate it effectively and then live with the consequences when a team gives you an initial look but motions out of it. At one of my first stops, we'd always put the SS on the up-man because that was one of our more physical DBs. I don't think that's the answer at the college level, the CBs should be better at it, but it's just an example that you can move guys a little bit.
But I just advocate Peppers and then not worry about the rest of it.
October 7th, 2014 at 10:52 AM ^
Blake has regressed
October 7th, 2014 at 7:32 PM ^
Saying Blake has regressed is overly simplistic. It's like saying Jake Ryan has regressed. JMFR is literally playing a different position. BC is playing a drastically different technique on a huge number of plays. The difference may seem somewhat subtle, but I thought this post made his new duties really really clear. Perhaps I should go back to last year and find some threads on his good technique in zone coverage /shrugs.
October 7th, 2014 at 10:53 AM ^
Shouldn't Brandon be pointing this out while they are watching film?
October 7th, 2014 at 11:17 AM ^
The quality and or quantity of the cameras is terrible. Probably hurt us against Rutgers on the replay challenge
October 7th, 2014 at 11:19 AM ^
Well, now I'm going to have Bad Brains stuck in my head all day.
October 7th, 2014 at 11:20 AM ^
Do you have video of the play? I'd like to assess the technique (being a former man coverage DB coach and all).
October 7th, 2014 at 11:23 AM ^
I had to grab all of this off my brother's DVR (we can get screen grabs but there's some sort of protection that we haven't worked around to get video) since the torrent isn't available yet, but MGoVideo has the full game up: http://mgovideo.com/2014-michigan-vs-rutgers/
October 7th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
Got off balance and reached to try to jam his man. But I only saw it once and wasn't looking directly at it, so can't say for sure.
October 7th, 2014 at 11:33 AM ^
Steve - I'll try to Moving Picture Pages(ish) this tonight.
October 7th, 2014 at 11:38 AM ^
Much appreciated if you could capture pre-snap alignment.
October 7th, 2014 at 9:00 PM ^
Video is here.
October 7th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^
October 7th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^
how difficult is it to teach bump and run? Why doesn't Countess learn? Why doesn't someone else play in his stead? Just not that complicated.
October 7th, 2014 at 11:39 AM ^
is currently learning how to teach jam coverage himself.
October 7th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
for alluding to the craziness of taking Manning away from our LB's - an improving force last year - and putting him on the DB's.
On that note, why not scheme around two of your best defenders' strengths: 47 lining up outside and Countess in more zone coverage? Are the two not compatible?
I am no expert, but it seems that Ryan was far, far more effective on the outside edge. Maybe Morgan's injury has screwed it all up, but I'd rather have him creating havoc and Bolden, who looks pretty solid insofar as tackling, in the middle. Which I guess leaves Ross on the other side, a bit scary yes, Ross with Bolden as cover. Charlton looks sometimes like an LB on the end.
October 7th, 2014 at 1:57 PM ^
I said this from day #1. There was no reason to move JMFR. The kid was a stud on the edge, and was easily "THE" guy that made big plays. OC's had to adjust scheme because of him ... now he simply lost learning a new position during his SENIOR SEASON in which people come at him from every direction. Not sure if Hoke or GM had this idea - but it was a bad, BAD, BAD idea.
Go Blue!
October 7th, 2014 at 4:02 PM ^
IIRC, Mattison has said that the reason for the change was to keep JMFR on the field for all 3 downs, rather than having to be subbed out for 3rd down passing plays. That's not necessarily a terrible idea.
In hindsight, however, it may be better to lose one of your best defensive players for 3rd downs if he is struggling at the Mike. I don't know...
October 7th, 2014 at 7:37 PM ^
Going into the season I thought the defensive backfield would be a relative strength (at least the corners). With the depth and talent at CB I thought swicthing to man would be a great idea, and take some coverage pressure off of the safeties.
This post really clarifies how difficult the transition is for the CBs. Perhaps it's personel, perhaps it's position coaching, perhaps some of it is playcalling (when you are telegraphing zone or man you lose any advantage).
Regardless, I have to assume it's hard enough to teach that Blake Countess is having a hard time picking it up.
October 7th, 2014 at 11:39 AM ^
I was unable to see, but was poor jam technique also the problem on the long TD pass? The reason I ask is the only thing viewable on the TV was Countess about 3-4 yards trailing behind the receiver. If he did have poor technique and got off balance like the gif in the post above, it would explain why he got burned so bad - just curious.
October 7th, 2014 at 11:43 AM ^
That one looked like a communication bust by Michigan. Countess was aligned and then worked back into his coverage in such a way that he looked like he expected inside help. Wilson (I believe) crashed down on a dig route and wasn't deep center. So miss-communication I think lead to that play, not sure who's right/wrong though on it.
October 7th, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^
The GIF shows Taco dropping into a zone in the center of the field. Is he spying the QB on this since none of the receivers appear to be coming across the middle of the field?
October 7th, 2014 at 12:23 PM ^
Yes and no. It's a zone which includes spying the QB. Maybe some of the coaches (Sharik? SC?) can weigh in but I was told by a coach that the concept of a "spy" as understood by fans is incorrect. A linebacker usually has a zone to cover, and part of that zone can be threatened if the quarterback comes up. Mattison has said he doesn't like to have one player just sit on the QB.
It all amounts to the same: Taco has the frontside A-gap in a run fit and is covering a short zone in a pass fit. If the offense brings the TE across the formation Taco would have to cover that since Wilson is back..
October 7th, 2014 at 12:31 PM ^
He's most likely playing the Rat zone, which is basically looking to come down on the first receiver or ball carrier that attempts to cross his face. It gives underneath inside help, in this case, most likely for the SS who will be covering a guy where he can't necessarily play with inside leverage (depending on offensive formation). If Countess gets a jam in this case, it likely forces the outside receiver to have to work further inside to get open, but further inside is a guy sitting in an underneath zone.
Also, he'd be responsible for any RB slip screen that has been killing Michigan for back-to-back weeks. The "Spy" concept, like you said, is a bit misunderstood. It's basically a wasted player in theory (you have a guy only mirroring the QB) when that guy could be doing something else while maintaining his eyes on the QB (you can play underneath zones, you can scheme blitzes, all just as well mitigate QB runs but also provide other benefits).
October 7th, 2014 at 1:02 PM ^
Great information and detail!
October 7th, 2014 at 1:17 PM ^
- They watch us align to bunch, then call TO. We come out in exact same look post-TO. RPS -1.
- Countess does reach first, but playing bunch is different. If you're going to jam the point man, you have to get physical. It's a different technique than bump man.
- I don't like playing bump man or even "banjo" man against bunch. Too difficult with all the pic, rub, and hide routes.
- You can't ask a player to knock the snot out of the point man, then run vertical with him, which is what a lot of bunch routes incorporate. Countess is not put in a position to be successful imo.
- Friedgen knows that we're playing banjo, so it's easy to flash to the outside where the defender is waiting, then cut back inside where there is no one (since the inside DB was taken away by shallow cross) and the WR has big time leverage. RPS -1.
- Taco was playing low hole, replacing blitzing LBs. This is a fire zone (not to be confused with zone blitz, b/c we're playing man coverage, not zone).
The reason this would be RPS -2 imo is 1) for not changing the look post-TO and 2) for simply getting out-schemed on bunch concepts.
This is how I like to play bunch:
October 7th, 2014 at 1:32 PM ^
Terminology
Banjo: Inside man takes 1st man to commit inside or 2nd man to commit outside, outside man takes 2nd man to commit inside or 1st man to commit outside. Tied to a three receiver formation, one player will be in "lock", typically with the up-man.
The picture he shows what is an adjusted "Box" adjustment (a standard Box plays a lot like Banjo), which is standard for Cover 4 teams. Though I'd be worried about multiple verticals with the alignment above. I like to wheel the #3 and run the seam with the #1 or #2, then run a smash or option route with the third receiver, this appears to cover that, but I'm not sure how it'd play three verts. Steve, wanna explain how you're adjusting to some different looks out of this coverage? Particularly three verts or a seam from #3. I like that it takes away a lot of the short stuff (basically any spacing concept is pretty easily covered), but other than that I feel like you could attack it with some Cover 2 beaters.
I've always liked the way that Michigan theoretically was playing the bunch, as I thought that has been the most disruptive to a lot of the things I've liked to do out of it. Though there are certainly games that can be played to mitigate some of this stuff (basically pick the CB over #2 by releasing one of the other receivers vertical first and have the on-line man delay his route off of that, also WR screens, to name the two easiest adjustments).
October 7th, 2014 at 1:34 PM ^
No fair replying while I'm in the middle of an edit!
Kidding aside, like Saban does with zone coverage, the Backer/Nickel over the point man only has to re-route if the point challenges the seam physically. If the point WR runs inside or outside the seam, you simply drop a little to cover the intermediate seam. If you jam and run with an inside or outside release, you've vacated the seam for another WR to run into, which is exactly what offenses are trying to accomplish and exactly what happened here. In this zone concept, there is a deep safety over the top that the Backer/Nickel can release the point man to and then sit on the route that attacks the seam, which, in this case, was the snag route by the outside WR. He comes right to the vacated seam. If Countess sits in the seam, Nova doesn't throw the ball quickly and takes a JMFR punch in the face.
As for covering multiple verts, always carry 2nd receiver through the zone, so a wheel would be carried by the flat defender and a receiver running across to the opposite hash would be carried by the hook defender (plus the opposite safety over the top for help).
October 7th, 2014 at 7:40 PM ^
I love that the comments thread is grad school football.
Thanks guys!
October 7th, 2014 at 9:07 PM ^
around here!
October 7th, 2014 at 1:37 PM ^
We continue to take functional and even great players and put them in positions that compromise their talents. Last year, I thought we had this pathology confined to the offense, and now this cancer has spread to the defense.
October 7th, 2014 at 1:53 PM ^
You mentioned how the injury to Peppers has affected Michigan because it now asks Countess to do things he's not as qualified to do (as did the health issues with Taylor). But you could also mention what Desmond Morgan's loss has meant to this team. They basically aren't taking Ryan or Bolden off the field anymore after a heavy rotation last year of multiple LB. When Ryan biffs a play and needs to be talked to (or Bolden for that matter) there isn't a Morgan to put in the game. Add to the pile of injuries the chaos at safety with Wilson and Hill both having various injuries and the continuity plus depth have been sapped while learning to adapt in a new defense. This play felt like the offense at times - the theory was okay, the execution by one guy blew it up.
October 7th, 2014 at 2:00 PM ^
Can you please take some time to do a Hokepoints on 1) the 10 man punt coverage team & 2) the 10 man punt return team. I really think it would clarify the coach's logic to us less educated fans.
Go Blue!
October 7th, 2014 at 2:53 PM ^
It was clear quickly that this was a pick play an Countess was beat. If he could have switched with Lewis, they both could have been in a better position than they ended up in.
October 7th, 2014 at 3:37 PM ^
October 8th, 2014 at 6:36 AM ^
Nice post.
Comments