How Good Is The Offense? Are We Really Asking This?
Emotionally, this is an odd week for me. I find that I don't care about Ohio State at all. They're a very good team that's going to win in a not-that-competitive game on Saturday, like they always do. I get irritated at the hurr hurr coming from the Ohio State blogosphere but mostly because Michigan's so far from their level that it seems like a waste of time.
My hate still exists but it's focused internally, as the emails pile up and message boards pile on because I have the audacity to say if it was my decision I'd keep Rich Rodriguez on the condition he reshapes the defensive staff in such a way that we can expect them to do one boring thing reasonably well. I've explained why. In a sentence, the offense is excellent and should maintain that level over the next two years as the defense digs itself out from a massive hole.
This has caused the wing of the Michigan fanbase that thinks keeping Rodriguez is absolutely insane to search high and low for various metrics in which Michigan doesn't rate well. They can't take any of the basic stats...
| Category |
National Rank |
Actual |
National Leader |
Actual |
Conf Rank |
Big Ten Conference Leader |
Actual |
| Rushing Offense | 10 | 257.36 | Georgia Tech | 319.36 | 1 | Michigan | 257.36 |
| Passing Offense | 30 | 257.18 | Hawaii | 391.18 | 2 | Indiana | 283.27 |
| Total Offense | 5 | 514.55 | Oklahoma St. | 552 | 1 | Michigan | 514.55 |
| Scoring Offense | 15 | 36.82 | Oregon | 50.7 | 3 | Wisconsin | 40.91 |
| Sacks Allowed | T-11 | 0.91 | Stanford | 0.36 | 1 | Penn St. | 0.91 |
…and they certainly can't take any of the advanced metrics that rank Michigan second* and fifth nationally, so they resort to things like in-conference points per drive. Michigan is tied for third in the league in that metric.
If you are using this stat, you have decided that Rich Rodriguez should go and are backfilling reasons. If you're trying to downplay Michigan's second-half points against Iowa, Penn State and Wisconsin, you're doing the same thing. Michigan got back in those games by scoring often and quickly, by bombing away. Michigan scoring drives against Wisconsin lasted 3:57, 0:22, 2:19, and 2:57. They could do this because defenses were aligned to stop Michigan's powerful ground game even with big second-half leads, which is why Denard Robinson racked up a bunch of deep completions against single-covered WRs in the second half. Prevent defenses do not give up sixty yard touchdowns to tight ends, as Penn State did.
The whole reason the FO stats exist is to smooth out differences in opportunities and schedule strength as best they can and they indicate that whatever problems Michigan has don't include being the nation's #15 scoring offense against a schedule with two real nonconference opponents and without Northwestern (82nd in FEI D) and Minnesota (98th).
David Brandon's got a tough decision ahead of him—something it only seems that people who are still in favor of Rodriguez returning acknowledge—because the offense is elegantly constructed and deadly. Michigan's quarterback couldn't throw a pass straight in the first half and the receivers couldn't catch it when he did, but they still ended the day with more points than any Michigan team had scored against Wisconsin since 1990. The 31 they put up on Penn State were the most since 2000. They're solidly in the top five of the best metrics available with two seniors and a sophomore quarterback. They're going to obliterate the best rushing YPC mark Carr put up since the turn of the century by over a yard and finish in the top 20 in passing efficiency.
Anyone seriously arguing that Michigan's offense is not a reason to keep Rodriguez around is a raving lunatic. Period. I'm tired of being vilified for using numbers in non-abusive ways, but that's what we've come to. My hate week is about other Michigan fans.
*(FEI ranks Michigan second but has not been updated for last Week's games. Since Michigan put up a touchdown better than Wisconsin's scoring average any drop from Michigan will be minimal.)
November 23rd, 2010 at 8:08 PM ^
Brian---um, the team, the team, the team. The day that "hate week" turns into "your hate week" is troubling. The Game is about the team. Hate week is about that team down south. Period.
Let's not mix our opinions with the truth of the greatest rivalry in sports. I hope for a retraction of that comment.
November 23rd, 2010 at 8:49 PM ^
how someone negged you for this comment. So I restored it to proper balance. Some people on this blog need to take a chill pill, especially with regards to RR, and wait for the rest of the season (including the bowl game!) to play out.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:03 PM ^
I'm sorry, but Brian does get to have his "hate week" just like you get to have yours. And if Brian isn't feeling it this year, not only can't I blame him, but he's probably being much more honest than some of us have been about this. The platitudes have been spouted, the lip service has been paid, the dogma repeated, but just like some people aren't in the "holiday spirit" in December because of stuff going on in their lives, some people aren't in the "Ohio State week spirit" this week because of what has happened this season, or the last three seasons, or the last six seasons. You want to tell them to cheer up and get in the spirit, that's your prerogative, but understand that others might not be right there with you because they're dealing with some stuff.
Brian opens by pointing out that something that I have been looking for a way to encapsulate for the last 48 hours: Ohio State is piling on because it's what they do, but it feels wholly unnecessary this season because the self-loathing and open hostility in the Michigan fan base is as vitriolic as anything coming from Columbus. We're sniping at each other because there's nothing else left to tear down. We're at war with each other because it feels like the only fight we can win right now.
Is it possible to rationally expect that the game on Saturday will not go well for Michigan while hoping, in whatever irrational part of our brains hope lives in, that Michigan pulls off something that could more than likely be qualified as a minor miracle? I certainly hope so, because this is the dichotomy is what is getting me though this week. But wanting Michigan to win and expecting Michigan to win are two different things and it would be my hope that we as fans can appreciate the difference without denigrating those who are being honest about their feelings.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:47 PM ^
Let's not mix our opinions with the truth of the greatest rivalry in sports. I hope for a retraction of that comment.
Dude, it's Brian's blog. Blog, as in, short for "web log." As in, an on-line, written log of the author's opinions and feelings.
November 23rd, 2010 at 10:35 PM ^
I'm not questioning Brian's authority to write his own opinion on his own blog. I am countering/questioning his opinion that we each can have our personalized hate week against whoever is aggravating us. Whether you hate ignorant fans, poverty, the TSA, whatever, "hate week" and "the game" have a historical context that in my opinion is to be respected.
November 23rd, 2010 at 8:14 PM ^
Instead of focusing on the raw metrics, which has the Michigan O fifth-best or second-best or whatever in the country, I'm just gonna say that from what I've seen the 2010 offense has not been a great one. We were not competitive against any good Big 10 team this year, with only the possible exception of Illinois. Against Iowa, MSU, Wisconsin, Penn State we were down by three scores in the fourth quarter--that's not a competitive game. The defense gets the lion's share of the blame, obviously, but if the offense really was that tremendous we would've at least been in a couple of those games.
The offense's primary weapon this year was Denard's legs. All of those ridiculously open deep routes happened because of that. But we struggled running from the RB spot, struggled with the WR screen game which is so important to a running spread, and had really, really shaky passing in passing situations. Turnover problems continued. For Michigan to have a successful season (9 wins) next year, the offense is going to have to improve, in more than just an extra-year-of-experience kind of way. The team is sloppy on both sides of the ball.
November 23rd, 2010 at 8:35 PM ^
Obviously it can score; but how good would this offense be without Denard? And how often does a talent like that come along? Why did we get blanked by Wisconsin? And why did we only put up 17 vs. State? The offense is good, but its not magic. And it has put a ton of gaudy statistics up against really bad teams that I see people leaning on really hard.
Its true. I'm not a huge fan of Rodriguez; but frankly, I'd rather just win. He'll get another year and I hope it all works out really well. My fear is that we spend another year going down this road, and maybe Denard gets hurt early; so our offense goes from vaunted to pretty good. And our defense is just a little better. So then next year we go 6-6 or 7-5 with alot of people saying 'Just wait till next year! Just wait till he gets more of his recruits!'
I think our team is like a top fuel dragster. It may go like hell down the track, but there is a damn good chance the thing will just blow up too.
So DB's choice, in my eyes, is hope that the thing stays together for everything to fall in place just right. If it does, he looks brilliant. If it doesn't, its time to change and we've blown one more year.
Flame on.
November 23rd, 2010 at 8:42 PM ^
It was pretty good with Tate against Illinois, which other than that game has been a pretty good defense.
November 23rd, 2010 at 8:45 PM ^
One one of the places where I give RR alot of credit is that the offense doesn't even seem to hickup with Tate coming in; when his game is so much different from Denards.
But I don't think Tate will put up the same numbers over the course of a season. Even over the course of a game you'd see D's starting to adjust to him, and he is easier to adjust to than Denard.
One more thing; If the offense needs to kill the clock, can it? What if it just needs a long drive to give the D a breather? Can it do that? Honest question.
November 23rd, 2010 at 8:51 PM ^
That's a pacing issue. The clock is still moving after basically every play, so if we slow down it should work (though slightly less effective as their defense won't be as gassed).
November 24th, 2010 at 12:16 AM ^
The final 10ish minutes of the 4th quarter against UConn were eaten up by one monster drive that didn't even result in points. It was just a huge clock killer.
November 23rd, 2010 at 8:52 PM ^
The offense is strong, and among the better ones in the country-- it's just that its performance is more towards tied-for-3rd-in-a-very-competitive-Big-Ten than "ZOMG 100 yards/game more potent than the #2 Big Ten offense!"
It's not a crippled hot rod (?) like you two seem to be making it out to be. Also, our offense is run by SOPHOMORES for heaven's sake. You guys need to chill out.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:32 PM ^
It still my opinion the offense isn't rounded out; and its too QB dependant. That said, you make a good point about it being run by sophs. And, its what's there now. I'll be cheering for UM this weekend. I hope to God they win. I'd be on cloud nine if the D rises above itself and slows itself down, and Robinson shreds OSU.
I'm not expecting it, mind you, but that's what I'm cheering for and the hope is in the back of my mind. Nothing would make me happier than to have my concerns shown to be unfounded. But its okay to have questions and concerns about this Michigan team. That doesn't make one a bad fan.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:44 PM ^
I'll defend to the (digital) death your right to say it, you raving lunatic, you!
GO BLUE!
November 23rd, 2010 at 10:16 PM ^
I--I think his name is, like, Date or Fate or Kate or something. I hear he's doing pretty okay when he gets to play?
I'm just messing with you. But honestly, It looks to me that while Denard takes this offense from good to OMG WOWZORS (IMHO anyways) I think with forcier we'd still have a pretty decent offense. The guy has what can only be described as "sick moves" despite not having the top end speed of robinson.
(I hear that ILL linesman is still looking for his jockstrap after Forcier juked him in the OT)
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:51 PM ^
I signed in just to give you a +1. And for the die hards, OMG how can you give a +1 to a guy with so few MGoUseless points?!?!? As for the stat geeks unfortunately the game is played outside in a 3D environment where math based projections for beating Penn State proved to be inaccurate. Let's be honest, this team has a long way to go.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:29 PM ^
"Instead of focusing on quantifiable data, I'll instead go with my uninformed personal opinion."
Brilliant.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:36 PM ^
no need to say anything
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:46 PM ^
Fisking a noob.
Instead of focusing on the raw metrics, which has the Michigan O fifth-best or second-best or whatever in the country, I'm just gonna say that from what I've seen the 2010 offense has not been a great one.
Translation: Sure "numbers" and "statistics" say that the offense is good. But I know better. Trust me.
The defense gets the lion's share of the blame, obviously, but if the offense really was that tremendous we would've at least been in a couple of those games.
So when evaluating how good the offense is, we're going to hold the defense's incompetence against the offense. If the defense gives up 100, the offense is only good if it scores 101. Gotcha.
The offense's primary weapon this year was Denard's legs.
You mean Denard Robinson? The guy no one else wanted as a QB, and that many (myself included) assumed would end up as a slot receiver? The guy RichRod recruited and took from a true freshman with a 45% completion percentage to the first 1500/2000 guy in history in ONE YEAR? Yep, that pisses me off too. Besides, the offense seems to hum along pretty well with Tate.
All of those ridiculously open deep routes happened because of that.
That's not an accident. That's the design of the offense. It isn't as if defenses aren't TRYING to defend the pass. It's called "the spread" for a reason.
But we struggled running from the RB spot....
Mike Hart's career average was 5.0 YPC. Chris Perry was at 4.6 YPC. Michigan is currently averaging 5.2 YPC from non-QBs, despite nearly all of them being injured at one time or another... and that's excluding our best runner, Denard Robinson.
...struggled with the WR screen game which is so important to a running spread...
Any evidence? Cause I've seen stuff like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUJbocSx2YE and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwyRW7EXo5I and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpsEa0aRikY and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UQJTRN4gEo....
...and had really, really shaky passing in passing situations.
You mean like in the second half of games, when Michigan was down big? Isn't half of the argument that Michigan does all of their scoring in situations where they already trailed, which are BY DEFINITION passing situations?
That is all. For now.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:50 PM ^
That was srsly the best "F@#k-You-And-The-Horse-You-Rode-On" I've ever seen. Well done.
November 24th, 2010 at 1:25 AM ^
feel free to break that cardinal rule more often. Thank you.
November 24th, 2010 at 1:40 AM ^
Fucking git' em.
That is all.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:57 PM ^
Despite how good the offensive numbers are, what is lost is how good they could be with more possessions. If the D could force more three and outs and allow less time (and soul) consuming drives, the offense numbers would be more gaudy.
November 23rd, 2010 at 10:24 PM ^
Overrated may be too strong. However, it's clear that despite the overall stats, the offense has struggled in the first half against the top teams in the Big Ten. With this awful defense, that puts us behind the eight ball.
November 23rd, 2010 at 8:37 PM ^
I'm not going to read through 250 comments, but thanks for expressing this entirely rational and sound position. The idea that the offense is overrated is ridiculous.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:14 PM ^
Brian you are right this team has made great strides. Greg Robinson is responsible for us only winning 7 games and if Robinson would have done his job we would have won 8-9 games this year. Look these haters attack the Defense and I can understand that but attack the Offense well i will prove it is elite by saying this We are better Offense then Stanford, LSU, and San Diego St. why mention those teams because they are run by Michigan Men. I mean we have better offense then the supposed Number one quarterback in the Draft Andrew Luck's Stanford team who plays in a conference as bad as the Big EAST with only 3 bowl eligible teams who has a tough time beating a 4-7 Arizona State team and all you haters talk about Ryan Mallet well guess what Rich's Quarterback that he has chosen has accomplished more in one year as a Quarterback then Ryan Mallet has done in his entire playing career I guess Rich made the better choice. Look Mr. Brandon you know where to fix THE DEFENSE tell Rich to part ways with Greg Robinson and get a guy in here that is very Aggressive in generating Sacks, and very good in points aloud and we can't take over the Big Ten.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:28 PM ^
This is the MgoBlog I remember. When I first began visiting this site on a regular basis, we were right in the middle of the "Fire Rich Rod" period last year. I see we're back in it.
Somehow, many of the arguments haven't changed. The only difference is that we are currently a 7-4 team, and people are acting like we are 4-7.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:28 PM ^
I would have to imagine that Thanksgiving at the RichRod house is going to be rather somber. I would also imagine that RichRod has a lot of sympathy for the turkey(and giblets).
In Rod We Trust
I believe a much more interesting topic would be as to where RichRod's next job is going to take him.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:33 PM ^
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:56 PM ^
Thanks for this, Brian. I know you've been saying it all along, but it's nice to read it bluntly in one condensed post. I appreciate that.
Retain Rich Rod, build the defense into something half as good as the offense, win 9 or 10 games next year.
Fire Rich Rod, lose everything we've accomplished, begin at ground zero, win four or five games next year (optimistically).
I'm confident Brandon will make the right decision.
Go blue.
November 23rd, 2010 at 9:59 PM ^
I was at the Wisconsin game with my brother sitting in the recruit section. I had to sit next to some grumpy ass old-man who wouldn't stop bitching the entire 1st half, even screaming at the players (we were row B behind the Michigan bench) that "You should be ashamed of yourselves!!!!" as the half ended.
Who should be ashamed of who?
Of course he STFU in the beginning of the 2nd half when the offense went on a tear, but wouldn't stop talking about how RR needed to be fired and "Bo this, Bo that." How many national championships did Bo win? How many Bowl victories did we have during his reign?
I'm guessing Brian has a few senile old Michigan alumni like this in his section. They are so miserable to be around and have begun to infiltrate this blog. They make me ashamed to be a Michigan fan and it's sad how I want Michigan to win just so half of its fanbase will STFU for a week.
GO BLUUUUUUUUUUUE
November 23rd, 2010 at 10:12 PM ^
The offense is solid and the numbers back it up. But the failures on D and special teams, injuries excepted, come back to the head man. "Cupboard bare" or not, he's had three years to recruit and two DC hires and we've still got walk-ons and freshman playing. Perhaps more troubling to me is a marked lack of player development (D and ST) and a defensive coaching staff that doesn't seem to have a coherent coaching or recruiting philosophy. Not sure if it's poor recruiting decisions or bad chemistry in the locker room driving attrition up, but either way it all comes back to the man in charge.
In a perfect world it might be time to cut our losses and bring in a new HC, however the quality of the offense and DB pushing (forcing?) RR to make changes on the D staff, paired with a not insubstantial buyout and the realities of a plummeting APR mean we will most likely have RR to kick around for another year.
November 24th, 2010 at 12:53 AM ^
November 24th, 2010 at 12:54 AM ^
November 23rd, 2010 at 11:01 PM ^
This thread is essentially MGoGroupThink/NegBangFest shot into the stratosphere. Yeesh. We truly have it all. Well-reasoned arguments. UNACCEPTABLEs. Copious ad hominem attacks. Negbangs. It's all here.
Although I salute Brian for saving us the trouble of wading through about 50 MGoThreads about this by containing the Pro-RR/Anti-RR slappers-only fight to a single venue.
November 23rd, 2010 at 11:23 PM ^
November 23rd, 2010 at 11:01 PM ^
I don't think the defense will be good enough to win more than 8 games next season. I also think we may lose to MSU, NE and OSU next season as well. I worry that lofty goals may be placed on RR and the team for 2011. In 2012 we should be in much better shape with the defense and should compete for the b10 division title. If not then it will be time to part ways with RR
It will be interesting to see what path DB will go down. RR may have made a fatal mistake by not forecasting the defensive problems. You can say a combination of events happened to make our defense so weak. Part of the problem was due to RR wanting a DC that would get along with his defensive coaching buddies and not recruiting solid defensive players after the 2008 season.
November 24th, 2010 at 12:07 AM ^
What exactly is a lofty goal, beating a decent football team? Having a winning record in the big ten? Our goals should be the same every year, NC, regardless of what coach tore down the program. There is no reason if Rich Rod comes back that he should be given another year to have low standards, if he doesn't beat MSU and get a winning record in the big ten hes gone, and that should not be a lofty goal.
November 24th, 2010 at 11:54 AM ^
We are building a program. We are getting better. We are still very young. Kick RR out now, and we go for another reaaaallllyyyy bad dip.
<br>
<br>We DO need some changes on Defense, but losing 10 DBs in one offseason didn't help (I would like to think we would have been better starting Warren and Woolfolk against Wisconsin, then Avery and Rogers). We do need more & better recruits. However, there are good signs of progress that will play out to really good things if we are patient, all be it painful... These 8 freshman on D are going to be 8 Juniors (w/ Demens & Roh as Seniors) before we know it. Throw in a Senior Denard Robinson, and that looks like a championship team to me.
November 25th, 2010 at 7:42 PM ^
I guess I wasn't aware that Michigan as a program had to be built up. Thought Michigan was an established program, maybe I don't know as much as I thought I did.
November 24th, 2010 at 2:08 AM ^
That after hearing "2009 is the jump year", "no, 2010 no excuses", "2011 if we aren't competitive he's done" that there won't be people making excuses to wait till 2012...we don't even have to finish the 2010 season for evidence of it.
November 23rd, 2010 at 11:57 PM ^
Weakest Brian column in the history of mgoblog.
Those of us wanting RR gone (hell, I've said Monday's his last day for 3 f-ing years) do not need to "backfill" reasons. It's wins and losses. After 3 years of "his players" Michigan is *not* a competitive team. Don't matter if we score 100. We are not competitive.
In year 4 of the RR experiment, with yet another new DC that Rich Rod hands the reins to, Michigan will be -- in our wildest fantasies -- the 4th best team in the new Big 10. After four years, fourth will be the best case scenario. And 7th place is not out of the question.
End this nightmare now.
November 24th, 2010 at 12:29 AM ^
In my personal opinion 2008 never happened. It did, obviously, and it's really that year's bitter stain that is with us still. But in my opinion that 3-9 record was not of Coach Rodriguez's making and I find it extremely hard to hold those losses against him. He came into a situation where any and all experience on either side of the ball was gone, green as hell, or not suited to the new regime. Thus, disaster.
So, discounting 3-9, Rodriguez's record at Michigan has been 12-11, with two more chances this year to push that number in the first column higher. Could/should that number already be higher? Probably yes. Hiring Gerg was obviously a hideously bad idea, but then I am also unconvinced that there's a Defensive mind in the country that could've made the MASH unit masquerading as the 2010 Michigan D into a functioning unit. So, 12-11, with an obviously explosive audience (Brian is absolutely right in saying those who are denying that are willfully ignoring data) and an atrocious defense and the prospect of both units getting better in the course of an off-season.
With another year of training and depth-building this offense will stand right next to the death squads at Auburn and Oregon in its terrifying potential. Another year of training, recovery, and depth-building and the defense will probably look like...a mediocrity. But MSU is currently 10-1 going into their final game of the year with a defense that is more or less mediocre, and a mediocre defensive unit bailed out Penn State in the early part of the season. A mediocre defense (one that allows say 24 ppg) paired with this offense, would mean that Michigan probably adds another 2 or 3 wins next season. Another 2 or 3 wins means we are competing for a Divisional/Conference crown well into November. That's what I think next year and every year after holds for Michigan if Rodriguez stays. Any other solution just looks like more transitions and misery to me.
November 24th, 2010 at 2:03 AM ^
2008 might have deserved a pass, but this was in no way true on the defense in 2008.
November 24th, 2010 at 12:37 AM ^
My hate week is about other Michigan fans.
After Carr, Gittleson, administrators, players who have stayed and players who have left I guess all that's left is to turn against fellow fans. Hate on us as you wish but we are not responsible for your lack of interest in the game this Saturday.
November 24th, 2010 at 2:14 AM ^
I think the whole part of OSU having their way with us, again, probably has a lot more to do with it. Because no fan could turn off our interest if one felt like we were going to win. Which makes it more sad, because we haven't actually, you know, lost yet.
<br>
<br>But when you run out of people to blame, that kind of only leaves yourself, and at times it's hard to contemplate you might have been wrong, and the jagg offs in the media might claim victory. But as it goes longer and longer, I've wondered the same things. Has all this defending been in vain?
November 24th, 2010 at 2:31 AM ^
Especially against OSU. I will be watching from the kickoff through the final seconds. I'll be rooting and cheering for our team in front of the television. You never know, may be the defense will play inspired and DROB and the offense will score a ton of points. Go Blue!
November 24th, 2010 at 7:41 AM ^
November 24th, 2010 at 9:56 AM ^
This is bizzaro world. The ones claiming to "hate" fellow Michigan fans, not care about the Ohio State game, and attacking anyone who dares suggest "hey this offense is really great, but not yet the best in the country" are the "positive" ones, and the people they're attacking are the "negative" ones.
Hey, I care about the OSU game. I don't hate anyone. Is my negativity destructive also?
November 24th, 2010 at 1:42 PM ^
Comments