So, this was pretty cool [Patrick Barron]

Michigan 31, Washington 10 Comment Count

Alex.Drain September 12th, 2021 at 12:16 AM

Michigan came out of the halftime intermission and received the opening kickoff of the third quarter. They promptly ran eight plays to gain 73 yards and scored a TD to go up by 17 points. They did not pass the ball once in those eight plays. That was the kind of the night it was for the Wolverines, who bullied the Washington Huskies all game long on the ground, showing a casual indifference towards the concept of moving the ball through the air. After Cade McNamara completed a back-shoulder pass to Cornelius Johnson on a third and long with 4:24 left in the first quarter, Michigan never seriously challenged through the air downfield again. It didn't matter.

Michigan mounted a bulldozer in this game and drove Washington right back to Seattle. Blake Corum and Hassan Haskins were driving that bulldozer. Behind those two monster RB's, both of whom gained over 150 yards on the ground in this one, the Wolverines paved the Washington Huskies en route to a 31-10 victory. The crowd was told to wear Maize— and they did. Most of the 108,345 person crowd was seated nearly an hour before kickoff, and the atmosphere for the first night game with fans since August 2019 was electric. They forced Washington into a delay of game penalty on the game's opening play and the feel of Michigan Stadium, with Maize pom-poms waving, could only make your author salivate from his Toronto couch.

Washington got the ball first but the teams traded punts on their opening possessions. A sack from Aidan Hutchinson put an end to Washington's second series and a good Caden Kolesar punt return gave the Wolverines stellar field position. That drive quickly stalled out, but within field goal range of the magnificent leg of Jake Moody, who split the uprights from 52 yards out and gave UM a 3-0 lead. The next time the Wolverines had the pigskin, they drove all the way to Washington's goal line with ease but then ran into the beefy bodies of Tuli and Taki, Washington's hulking defensive tackles who represent the teeth of the Husky defense. Two consecutive runs between the tackles stalled, puzzling playcalling given the vulnerability on the edge of the Washington defense, and Michigan turned it over on downs at the goal line.

Blake Corum had himself a night to remember under the lights [Patrick Barron]

They got it back soon enough, though, and after a gutsy decision to go for it on 4th & 1 at the Michigan 30 yard line paid off, Blake Corum answered a house call and ran it 67 yards for a touchdown. Washington wouldn't threaten again in the first half after their own 4th down attempt came up short in Michigan territory, as Richard Newton was mauled by Aidan Hutchinson and a swath of angry Wolverines defenders behind the line of scrimmage. The score was 10-0 at the half.

That's when the aforementioned grueling drive to begin the second half occurred: four Hassan Haskins runs followed by four Blake Corum runs and Michigan was in the end zone. Given Washington's publicized struggles at coming from behind, it felt like game over at that point. In the end, it was.

To UW's credit, they responded with a long drive, but Michigan's bend-not-break defense held them out of the end zone, and though a Peyton Henry FG got the Huskies on the board, it was too little too late. A Hassan Haskins six-yard TD carry on the next Michigan possession made it 24-3, and that's when you could mentally begin moving onto next week and Northern Illinois. The teams traded TD's after that, a Dylan Morris pass to Terrell Bynum over Rod Moore and a late-game Corum tally, to make the final score 31-10, but the game's victor was not in doubt at that juncture.

Gotta give some love to Haskins too [Bryan Fuller]

In the end, the box score tells a tale of two different strategies: Michigan rushed for 343 yards and passed for just 44. Washington passed for 293 and ran for just 50. Given that the Huskies were being stonewalled at the line of scrimmage and playing catch up the entirety of the game, the Washington distribution makes some sense. Michigan's distribution brought much discussion online. Cade McNamara didn't really show anything heinous to justify stuffing Michigan's entire passing attack in a locker the way that Gattis and Harbaugh did, but perhaps they were satisfied with the showing on the ground.

The Maize & Blue offensive line mauled the Husky front and when you have two backs as good as Corum and Haskins, and are playing with the lead, it's hard to argue with that. Still, many eyes will be on McNamara and the receivers next week in a tuneup game at the Big House against NIU. Corum finished with 171 yards and 3 TD's, perhaps kickstarting his Heisman campaign, while Hassan Haskins got more carries (27), rushing for 155 with one score. Hard to find a better RB tandem than those two anywhere in America right now.

Josh Ross led Michigan in tackles [Patrick Barron]

Defensively, Michigan allowed 343 yards, but it felt better than that. They held Washington to 122 yards in the first half and it wasn't until Washington fell down 17-0 that they began to move the ball. UW had just four drives in the second half, but they went for an average of 55.5 yards, with Dylan Morris finding holes in Michigan's zone defense and Michigan perhaps slinking back into a more preventative look. The run defense was excellent, though, and the Wolverines got plenty of pressure.

It was a standout day for Aidan Hutchinson, playing in front of a smorgasbord of NFL scouts, finishing with 2.5 sacks and 4 tackles. David Ojabo added a sack of his own, and Taylor Upshaw was credited with a half-sack. Josh Ross led the home team in tackling by a mile, finishing with 11. It was another day for heavy defensive rotation, as 22 different players are credited on the Stat Broadcast box score as having recorded a defensive event (a tackle, sack, PBU, or QB hit).

Michigan's defense is still learning the scheme and the offense is still trying to find a playcalling rhythm and an offensive identity. If tonight was any indication, that identity is probably on the ground. And most importantly, the team is still unbeaten, advancing to 2-0. They host Northern Illinois in what should be the easiest game on the schedule, at the Big House next Saturday at 12:00 pm EST.

[AFTER THE JUMP: Nothing]

Comments

stephenrjking

September 12th, 2021 at 12:25 AM ^

This is a game that really begs for something nobody really has time for, and that's a play-by-play analysis of what looks Washington was providing pre-snap. 

Because Michigan couldn't get anything on the edges, refused to try to get anything downfield at all... and did whatever it wanted inside.

My occasional glances suggested that Washington's defense was presenting non-packed boxes on the regular, which made run calls logical, and with Washington watching the edge plays, keeping the ball inside made sense. 

And Michigan executed. The RBs are both fantastic. The OL was executing every scheme superbly (ironically, the blocking scheme conspicuous in its absence appears to be pin-and-pull; in its place is an array of gap schemes and a well-executed tranche of various zone concepts). They made holes, they hit their blocks, the RBs made the right cuts, made the extra yards, all of it. That first drive of the second half was a delight. Counter. Outside zone. Inside zone. Broken tackles. Evaded defenders. Through two games, this is the best Michigan has looked on the ground since Denard Robinson was playing.

The problem is the passing game. And, further, the history of the program under Harbaugh. QBs that regress. Offenses that leave points on the field. "Body blow" philosophies that win a number of games but lose when it matters most. This looks startlingly like Michigan's 2018 team on offense, a team that did some terrific things midseason but collapsed so spectacularly at the end of the season that the program has yet to recover. 

Washington's offense is bad, and they're probably a bad team, but it's a very good win in a season when growth, rather than perfection, is the goal. But the fact that the offense's resistance to attacking downfield is the recurrence of an old trope will explain why people are so sensitive to it that fans were actually booing an undefeated team that was pitching a shutout and held a lead in the first half. And why we're frustrated about it on here.

Because that was Jim Harbaugh's philosophy out there. Again. It was never Pep. It was never Gattis. It's Harbaugh, for better or worse. 

Kevin13

September 12th, 2021 at 8:51 AM ^

We refused to do it last night because we didn’t need to. The object of any game is to do what works and win the football game. We bullied them up front ran the ball down their throat and win the game easily. Don’t try to out think yourself and go away from what works. If they can’t stop it keep doing it 

bronxblue

September 12th, 2021 at 9:56 AM ^

They were confident with him throwing last year against Rutgers and PSU and he threw sufficiently in the half of football he played last weekend.  Hell, he threw 9 of their first 23 plays.  I get more of a sense they don't trust their WRs, who didn't get much separation from the corners and also borked other stuff like blocking on screens and the like.   Johnson (?) getting a personal foul for half-ass rolling toward a guy's knees to block him was embarrassing.  

BrightonB

September 12th, 2021 at 1:09 PM ^

I agree.  From what I have seen from Cade he is a very good QB overall.  Passing the ball is up to the play callers and clearly in this game they wanted to play it safe with their QB and run the ball if they could.  Running means the QB barely gets touched and also it's less likely (typically) for turnovers.  I don't like this run (over and over and over) thing either but it for sure worked last night.   I have a feeling next week they will work on their routes and passing more on an easier opponent.  Again I don't like all the runs but we don't know what else is going on behind the scenes.  Could be the WR's need a little more work or Cade had a slight injury of some sort we don't know about or they simply wanted to run the ball if it worked and keep Cade from getting hit and work on their blocking.  They got a LOT of work last night on run blocking that is for sure.  300+ yards rushing is no joke.  I too hope they open it up but the run game worked last night as we all know. 

abertain

September 12th, 2021 at 2:59 PM ^

I agree that block was meh. Also though, if you call 4-5 downfield throws out of 60 plus plays...I might lost interest in blocking as well. I don't mind 15 passes, but they threw what, 7 or 8 screens? None of those screens worked. I'm so old I remember Michigan having a star receiver every year and that was under Lloyd Carr mostly, who wasn't renowned for his love of the forward pass. I don't know if the scheme is just putrid or if the lack of a receivers coach has hurt them as much as a lack of a safety did last year, but they haven't been good for a bit now. 

outsidethebox

September 12th, 2021 at 9:12 AM ^

A long time ago, when I was a youngster, there was a coach at OSU who won many games with a "three yards and a cloud of dust" strategy. Current offenses have "required" defenses to make significant adjustments for "speed in space"...and are now quite unprepared to stop the "stodgy" ways of days gone by. With the disparity of recruiting talent, this may in fact be a/the winning strategy. Love him or hate him this fits Coach Harbaugh...don't be surprised if he says "to hell" with conventional thinking here.

JFW

September 12th, 2021 at 12:49 PM ^

I think there is alot of truth to that. I don't think Cade won't pass for the rest of the season. He passed effectively last year. But when we are kicking people's ass on the ground, and their defenses aren't prepared for it... well, why not? We have time to tweak the passing game, and having an awesome running game as a foundation is a hell of a way to run. 

If we were running a spread and ran for 25 yards and scored 31 would people be bitching endlessly because of a lack of running game? Unlikely anything like this. Probably be more like 'I'd like to have more of a running game but damn we hung a ton of yards on them...'

This is just stupid. People are finding reasons to complain. The QB didn't run enough. He didn't pass enough. He turned his back to the defense. We aren't 'modern'. Blah blah blah blah blah. 

Seriously, for those of that ilk, go root for Oklahoma. You'll be happier. 

BlueMetal

September 12th, 2021 at 9:42 AM ^

Obviously we will need to pass the ball to beat OSU. Keeping their offense on the bench with long, sustained drives that end in touchdowns will go a long way, too.

The offense as we saw it yesterday isn't beating OSU, but there are a lot of games between now and the end of November and if the defense can continue to improve and the offense can continue to build then maybe we have a shot. We saw when Ronnie Bell was in that they will take some shots downfield so I gotta think they'd do it again if a receiver emerges. 

 

 

 

Rabbit21

September 12th, 2021 at 12:31 PM ^

Disclaimer: This rant could just be because I was convinced the team would fold like a lawn chair after the goal line stand and was pleasantly surprised that they didn’t so my neuroses were soothed in a way others weren’t.  I’m also an Air Force fan so I’m used to winning games without that whole “forward pass” thing.
 

This complaining feels like it was because the offense wasn’t pretty and it didn’t do what everyone just KNOWS is the way to win nowadays and Ohio St. has done what I was afraid it was going to do and driven this fan base nuts the way Alabama has driven the SEC fanbases nuts.  Only we channel it into hating our team whereas they channel it into hating on their coaches and claiming Alabama’s success as their own.  
 

I think Oregon just showed that dominance in the trenches is a way to compete with Ohio St.  Michigan is on its way to establishing that and a game like this is a great step towards that.  The passing game has to improve but today it didn’t have to.  Let’s just take the W and move forward.  I swear everyone is acting like we lost by 50 after a nice win just because it doesn’t measure up to a mythical measuring stick, it’s nuts.

Rabbit21

September 12th, 2021 at 8:27 PM ^

Your definition of acting like we lost by 50 may be different from mine, I've seen nothing but a lot of "UNACCEPTABLE!" on here after a 21 point win against a Pac-12 team with a decent defense.  So I don't know that I'd say LITERALLY no-one is doing that because there is an awful lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth going on.  

Amaznbluedoc

September 12th, 2021 at 12:42 AM ^

Sitting in the stands - and yes it was a heck of an experience - the analysis is fairly accurate.   I’m sure Harbaugh took some of his Stanford PAC-10 experience and leveraged into tonight’s game.  Corum was running deftly and Haskins was solid.  The o-line was run blocking well though the pass blocking was abysmal.  Our routes were terrible, receivers not achieving separation (w has a good secondary) and our receivers can’t sustain blocks on the perimeter.   This is a big concern as we move along in the season particularly if the run game stalls.

There we’re a few decisions which left us scratching our heads such as putting the qb in jeopardy late in the game with a run play when the outcome was already decided. There were too many penalties and had the w coordinators stuck with what was working, it might have been more of a contest.  Overall the players seemed motivated and having fun - something I haven’t seen on the M bench for years.  The 9/11 tributes were wonderful and a W against w is always good.  BTW a big shout out to Oregon for making my day.

stephenrjking

September 12th, 2021 at 12:49 AM ^

The Cade pull was weird. Obviously the right play with Washington sending edge defenders charging toward the point of attack.

But the way Cade was laughing toward the sideline after the play... I half wonder if he just improvised the pull himself. Hilarious if he did, and if it really was called as an option, good for the staff making that call. 

WolvinLA2

September 12th, 2021 at 12:29 PM ^

This is exactly it. Even after reading the FFFF I was convinced this is what we would do. They have great CBs. They had a vulnerable front. We took advantage. That's GOOD coaching.

Compare this to basketball. If we played a team who had great perimeter D but poor post D, and we fed it to HD all game, took no threes but Dickinson poured in 35 points (and we won big) no one would complain.

This is the football equivalent to that.

jsquigg

September 12th, 2021 at 12:45 AM ^

It was ugly for awhile, but Washington was playing deep safeties all night. Their secondary athletes were better than our receivers. I actually think that, based on the post game comments, they are game planning more specifically based on opponent this year. They want to be physical on the ground and establish that as an identity. We'll see if they can pull it off, and frankly I don't think they have the personnel to sling it around. 

Let's look at this in the context of Ohio State:

a) Keep possessions limited.

b) Dominate the run game on both sides of the ball

c) Get better at your zone defense by the time November rolls around

If you squint you can see good things happening.

bronxblue

September 12th, 2021 at 10:07 AM ^

I mean, the 41 there was a pretty big problem.  And it was 19-24 at halftime, so if we're going to pick arbitrary points for comparison I'll pick that one.  And it was 25-41 at the beginning of the 4th.

The offense wasn't great but they were moving the ball against OSU for stretches.  They averages 5 yards a play in that first half - it wasn't pretty but it worked.  The problem was OSU was averaging 7.6 ypp and that included two negative drives.  There is probably no iteration of UM this year that beats OSU, but I'd much rather have this one than the last couple that tried to do a dime store version of that offense and failed at it.

UMxWolverines

September 12th, 2021 at 1:50 PM ^

It was 24-19 at half largely because OSU gifted us a score by muffing the kickoff after we made it 21-13. Then of course the defense still gave up another field goal despite OSU only having 30 seconds or so. 

You are right it was 41-25 at the 4th, but we never got within less than 2 scores. OSU was definitely playing a more relaxed coverage by then. 

stephenrjking

September 12th, 2021 at 3:36 PM ^

It was 24-19 at half because Michigan got a turnover on a kickoff after scoring their first TD with 3 minutes to go and then converted the turnover into a TD. Before that they had scored 2 field goals in 26+ minutes of football. One of those field goal drives features 7 runs and 2 passes. There were 3-and-outs.

Then, with the game miraculously close, Michigan went the entire 3rd quarter without scoring. Regularly running on first down. And while the D wasn’t great, it was making a few stops. But at key moments of the game, when OSU was using live ammunition, Michigan was shooting blanks.

Essentially, Michigan brought a knife to a gunfight. They were prepared to play a game that was relatively low-scoring, that didn’t require tempo offense, that didn’t need to line up and gain big yards with the pass when the defense knew you would pass. The game they got was a shootout, and they spent much of the game playing from behind, unable to function in the space the offense was designed to run in. And that bespeaks a fundamental problem; certain offenses are effective only in limited circumstances. Triple option offenses aren’t suited for comebacks or 2-minute drills. Tempo air raids expose their defenses and can’t protect leads. They aren’t bad offenses necessarily, but they have flaws. Harbaugh’s 2018 offense had the same flaw; it needed the right circumstances to be effective. 

When OSU was scoring in the third quarter, Michigan was going 3-and-out. The right circumstances weren’t there. And this exacerbated a bad situation for the defense, allowing the OSU offense to attack without pressure.

The D’s failure was obviously the prImary cause of the loss, but the offense absolutely played a big role. They did not score points early when OSU was initially inconsistent in its own offense. When the game closed back up at halftime, they failed to answer and in fact directly set up two OSU scores.

And the philosophy this year appears to be the same. It is what it is, and given our pessimism about the OSU game it might be less of a problem, but in my opinion this hurts the offense going forward.

 

Eng1980

September 12th, 2021 at 9:31 AM ^

Yes, the offense was the problem.  Open with 3 and out while running into OSU's strength.  Three dropped passes that led to great OSU field position.  Most of OSU's drives started around mid-field, meaning not deep in their own territory.  This left OSU in position to use their full playbook.

As bad as the defense was, the OFFENSE was the larger problem.  Field position.  A special teams blocked punt for a TD is on the defense?

ironman4579

September 12th, 2021 at 8:42 PM ^

This is quite simply false.  OSU's first drive started at their own 43.  After that, on non turnover drives they started at their own 25, 25, 20, 21, 25, 25, 42, 22, 25, and 48 which was on a kick return.  Of those 8 drives that started around the 20, they scored 5 TD's.  They started in Michigan territory twice thanks to INT's, which isn't offensive philosophy, it's offensive execution.  Dropped passes aren't offensive philosophy, it's execution.  No offensive system is going to matter if you get a punt blocked, throw two interceptions and drop 3 balls.  

Swayze Howell Sheen

September 12th, 2021 at 8:46 AM ^

This doesn't really prove anything. Don Brown's "defense" was so bad in that game, almost any offensive plan / approach would not have won it for U of M. 

I like what they are doing here. It's Harbaugh making a Harbaugh team. Let's go all in and be who we are. I suspect it might end up better than people think.

JFW

September 12th, 2021 at 9:30 AM ^

One of the podcasts I listened too sais their safeties were excellent. So combine:

a) excellent safeties

b) a younger receiver corps without its star

c) a fairly thin QB depth situation, and 

d) our ability to maul them and our great RB’s, and 

THIS WAS A RATIONAL GAMEPLAN THAT GOT US A WIN. 

I get so frustrated with fans. The spread isn’t my thing. But if we were 2-o and dominating a team using the spread while defense gave up a ton of points like I’ve heard say “ it’s just the way things are now on defense” I wouldn’t be booing the team.

Dear God. For people like that Harbaugh and the team not only have to win but they have to win exactly the way those fans want. They din’t want to root for a football team. They want to have live action madden. 

Red is Blue

September 12th, 2021 at 11:13 AM ^

I believe many of the folks that wanted Harbaugh gone and they are now looking for any reason to justify their position.  It is early, they could still be right.  But complaining about mauling another team because you didn't threw enough is misguided.  It would be much more concerning if they had tried going through the air and had been unsuccessful.  As it stands, I don't believe there is enough evidence to conclude whether they avoided the pass because they are bad at it or because they simply didn't need it.

I'd imagine they same folks complaining about lack of passing would be also complaining if you moved a 150 yards from the run to the pass column and and Michigan had squeaked by in a close one.  If you strain hard enough, you can almost hear the echos of "why did they threw when they were so dominant in the ground" in that scenario.