Michigan State 29, Michigan 6
Bryan Fuller/MGoBlog
Michigan had two weeks to prepare for Michigan State. This resulted in a record-setting day.
Michigan's -48 yards rushing is school's all-time low in a game (surpassing -46 vs Minnesota in 1962). #MSU
— Chris Mackinder (@Chris_Mackinder) November 2, 2013
Sorry, that should've said that the first half yardage is an FBS worst since Notre Dame rushed -45 yards in a first half in 2007.
— Chantel Jennings (@ChantelJennings) November 2, 2013
It takes a special kind of failure to achieve such lows: complete, utter failure from top to bottom. The gameplan from Al Borges lacked coherence, an issue that's plagued him during his entire tenure at Michigan. The play-action from under center isn't fooling anyone and still gets brought out several times a game, yet the shotgun runs somehow lack any sort of constraint or misdirection. A piecemeal offense isn't going to beat MSU's defense.
The offensive line couldn't open up holes for the running game, nor could they keep Devin Gardner upright. MSU registered nine sacks, and even with that yardage removed along with kneeldowns and a negative-20-yard bad snap, the Wolverines mustered 1.3 yards per carry.
Gardner often held the ball too long, for his part, and missed some open receivers, then capped the performance with an ugly interception when he hucked a designed back-shoulder fade three yards in front of Jeremy Gallon. By that point, however, he'd earned considerable respect simply for standing up and facing the inevitable beating.
Eric Upchurch/MGoBlog
Michigan mustered 168 yards on a meager 2.8 yards per play despite Gardner averaging nearly eight yards per pass when he could actually get one off. The defense fought valiantly, holding the Spartans to just 237 yards and 16 points through three quarters and setting up the offense with a chance to make it a game when Raymon Taylor picked off Connor Cook and returned it to the MSU 41. The Wolverines subsequently took a five-yard loss on an blown-up option followed by consecutive sacks—burning a timeout before the second one—to lose 21 yards in three plays; a Matt Wile punt, his eighth of the afternoon, opened the fourth quarter.
By the time Jeremy Langford capped the scoring with a 40-yard touchdown run, Devin Gardner's day was done—it would've been unconscionable to put him out there for another possession—and fans from both sides steadily streamed out of Spartan Stadium.
On Michigan's final offensive play of the game, Shane Morris tried to scramble on fourth-and-four, only to faceplant at the line of scrimmage. It was a fitting coda to a miserable day.
November 3rd, 2013 at 12:00 AM ^
but we were at the point of losing to App State...
November 3rd, 2013 at 1:52 AM ^
August 30, 2014 will be here sooner than you think.
November 3rd, 2013 at 2:29 PM ^
All three of Hoke's teams have more talent experience than Rodriguez's three teams. He inherited the most complete/uninjured Michigan team since 2006 and went 11-2. He's never had to deal with something like the 2008 offense or the 2010 defense.
Did Rodriguez underperform? Yes, absolutely. But let's not pretend like Hoke won 11 games in year one with the 2008 offense and 2010 defense.
November 2nd, 2013 at 10:06 PM ^
Rich Rod lost his job when he lost his team in the 2nd half of the Bowl game. I don't know if Hoke lost his team in the 4th quarter, but they sure didn't finish strong.
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:48 PM ^
We got destroyed. Pathetic effort. Coaches, this game plan is on you.
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:54 PM ^
I reallly thought having Denard on the sideline and two-weeks preparation would have had a better result. We got our asses handed to us.
Edit: Still fuming over Holly Rowe calling Taylor Lewan "Tyler" Lewan at least twice. Seriously, Holly?!?
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:59 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 7:49 AM ^
Denard has magical powers. Surprised you didn't know that.
November 3rd, 2013 at 8:19 AM ^
Or the interview with Denard when she couldn't seem to remember his last name.
"Last year's starter Denard, er"
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:49 PM ^
The offensive line is an all-time disaster. I'll repeat my suggestion from earlier: Hire Mike Tice to consult, to get an outside perspective.
It is one thing to be young and not terrific; I can accept that. However, they are not just young, and not just occasionally making mistakes; they are unable to accomplish anything against any sort of competent defense. And it's not the recruiting, because there are plenty of good recruits in the mix, and none of them are getting it done.
No OC could have won that game. Not Urbz, not Chip Kelly, not Dana Holgerson, not Bill O'Brien, nobody. There is nothing you can do when you are that overmatched at the line of scrimmage.
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:55 PM ^
I agree with this. But did you notice how MSU had checks in place when we blitzed? All those dinky crossing routes that constituted most of their offense before halftime? Why could their OC do that and ours cannot?
When you know it is going to be Rock, there is always a Paper that you can play. It's not like we didn't know that State was going to uber-blitz inside. Do you remember that key third down conversion, when everyone knew they were going to blitz everyone, and we ran an inside zone read, allowing Devin to get clobbered while he stood there? There is no read when everyone is blitzing.
So I agree with you, just as I usually admire your cogent analysis. But tell me how Borges helped our offense, given the tire fire that is our offensive line? Should his expertise prove to be helpful?
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:06 PM ^
That's a fair question. It is reasonable to wonder if perhaps there should be better checks for blitzes. Some checks that work with other teams aren't always practical, though--MSU's press coverage and excellent DBs force OCs and QBs to think twice about quick throws, because the players that would normally be targeted aren't actually as open as you'd expect.
This leaves them vulnerable deeper... but of course Michigan had trouble holding off blitzes long enough to make that matter.
Also, and this is something I do critique Borges for, Devin is not the best at reading defenses. I have before and still do question whether or not using Al Borges as the QB coach is the best situation, and wonder if a dedicated QB coach could help Devin and other quarterbacks grow more effective. Consider, for example, the play where Lewan wound up standing alone while Fitz was blocking the DE--Devin was checking at the line, I believe to adjust protection for a blitz he felt was coming. It was the wrong call. Is that something he did wrong?
It's hard to tell.
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:14 PM ^
Good response. But everything MSU did was well known in advance. We knew they were going to press the receivers at the line. But there are helps for that, if not outright fixes. You can put the guys in motion. You can flare out the blocking back (as MSU did so effectively). You can run the triangle pattern that was so well explained on this website. My problem is that everything that MSU did today is what they have done to us for three years in a row. Our schematic and our well-practiced reads should have been tailor made to stop exactly what they threw at us today.
Not much he can do about the center snapping the ball over the QB's head at a key juncture in the game, though.
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:19 PM ^
That's on Lewan as much as anybody. He's got to know that there is virtually nobody between that DE and Gardner. So he let's the DE go free, finds himself doing nothing, then gives a token double to the DT. If that's the way 5th year seniors are expected to perform it is no wonder the OL finds itself as oversized doormen.
November 2nd, 2013 at 11:53 PM ^
same play-- where they left Fitz to block the DE. I'm pretty sure Devin checked into that protection. This is one (of the billion) frustrating parts of michigan football since Carr left: our quarterbacks cannot read defenses. I don't know if it's scheme, their mobility meaning that could focus on it less because they could get away with it, QB coaching, or whatever. But since Henne we haven't had a goddamn quarterback who could go to the line, read a defense, and make a proper check. It's turrible.
November 2nd, 2013 at 10:23 PM ^
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:58 PM ^
Funk obviously hasn't done much with what he has. However, I don't remember a well-functioning OL that had three interior guys with as little experience as Michigan's interior OL has. I remember a true freshman or even freshman here or there (and I'm thinking of all of the college OLs I've ever seen, not just Michigan's), but I don't remember anything like this for an OL was good.
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:21 PM ^
interior have to do with #77 allowing the DE to go free while he gives a token double to the DT?
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:31 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 12:02 AM ^
The problem this year is experience. The problem last year was the line didn't fit how Borges runs things, most notably Omameh.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:31 AM ^
what's it gonna be next year?
November 3rd, 2013 at 12:29 PM ^
At what point is there not a "problem"? And, at what point is the current staff capable of taking responsibility and accountability for the team's performance?
November 3rd, 2013 at 2:13 PM ^
is when it becomes the current staff's problem. But, by then, people will probably just say that RichRod broke it beyond anyone's means to fix it, and that Hoke and co. can't be held accountable.
November 2nd, 2013 at 9:41 PM ^
I'm sorry that I have to respectfully disagree.
The problems with the offensive line have been with the team all season. This game (and others) validated what was seen in the Akron and UConn games.
There is no getting around it, the line may not even be functioning on the level of a DII team. There aren't too many 3 and 4 * Akron and UConn players lining up against our players.
The excuses are getting old.
If we are supposed to be on the same level as Ohio State, how come they never have these problems?
If it is Rich Rod's fault, how come the problems are getting more, and not less, acute the further away we get from his tenure? And will it still be Rich Rod's fault, after 4 years, when our 2 tackles leave for the NFL and the team is then plagued with poor tackle play as well?
Excuses can be made, but all teams have losses due to graduation and attrition. How come Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State with their scholarship reductions, don't have all the damn problems we have?????
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:01 PM ^
I respectfully disagree. Not the part about the O-line being bad--that part is true. But to say that the design of the gameplan and the calls being made couldn't have been packaged differently given the talent level on the line is incorrect (in my opinion). Certain offenses are designed to shift focus away from porous offensive lines. Short, quick passes have been the focal point of the run and shoot and many spread offenses, for example. It's always a good thing, but you don't need good offensive lines to run those gameplans.
Borges' or Hokes or whomever you'd like to say has responsibility for the existing playbook focuses on longer route which require a moderate to great offensive line in order to succeed. That is in direct conflict with the abysmal offensive line. The playbook at its most basic form is simply not completely compatable with the level of talent or the maturaty of the current kids on the roster. That absolutely goes on the coaches.
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:16 PM ^
Here's another for instance on this theme. Instead of play-action passing (with no real running threat), we might have sprinted Devin out. Get him out of the pocket since there is no pocket. We did that once by my count, and he made a good pass (that Funchess dropped).
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:17 PM ^
I have some agreement and some disagreement here. It is true that Borges likes the long ball, and Michigan has tried to build its offense around his long-ball-happy scheme. It is also true that short passes are a good way to keep pressure off of the OL.
But there are some problems. First of all, Devin's unreliability--a startling number of his interceptions have been on short throws. His very first, against Central, was about as simple of a short pattern as you can get. Even when he does not throw picks, his productivity has been poor in the short game and he often misses reads.
Also, MSU's defense, outstanding to begin with, is well-suited to combating a short passing game. Press coverage with great DBs, experienced LBs, etc. They don't give you freebies. Frankly, Michigan did use some short throws that wound up getting it nowhere.
As I've said before, I don't think there is any OC that can make lemonade out of the offensive line, as it was against MSU. I think it would be a mistake to think that there is somehow some magical gameplan that can deal with serious OL issues, or that firing Borges and hiring someone else would magically fix what the problem is.
But it is fair to wonder if the checks were adequate, or if there is a way to incorporate shorter passes that Devin can handle. I wish he had a dedicated QB coach.
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:43 PM ^
I enjoy reading your posts, since they are often very thought out and rational. In this case, although I don't totally agree with you, I see where you're coming from. Your first point might have some credence, as I remember a few interceptions being short ball. But can we really say that Devin throws more interceptions that are short to mid-range compared to down field? I'm not sure--especially considering the idea that Borges rarely throws short passes anyway. Remember, even with Denard, who was much less gifted throwing the ball than Devin is, Borges rarely threw short. I just can't see that as an excuse to not do it.
I agree that MSU's defense is good, but we don't really have a comparison to test the "short passes are unsuccessful against them" idea. It's especially difficult to determine since they haven't played anyone, but the closest to a dink and dunk offensive team that MSU's encountered is Indiana, and they put up the most points on that defense this year. When UM ran short yardage throws today, they generally got what they were supposed to--which is four or five yards. The one bubble screen (to a tight end, headscratchingly) gained something like 8 or 9 yards, if my memory serves correct. There just weren't very many three step drops to test whether it could've been successful at sustaining drives or not today. In any case, trying it had to be better than having an average of 3rd and 8 or whatever it was.
I guess altogether I have a difficult time believing that this offensive line--with two solid senior tackles and a young, but talented interior--are that much worse than other lines around the country. Remember, this is the same unit that couldn't get any success against Akron or UConn or Penn State, let alone MSU. Perhaps taking the focus away from them by passing short would help that unit. Perhaps coaching on the line needs revamped. Perhaps they're just plain, headscratchingly bad. In anycase, I think we can both agree that the performance is less than adequate.
November 3rd, 2013 at 7:48 AM ^
It's easy to say that no OC could have done anything with the offene we put on the field in week 8 of the season. But at some point, shouldn't the OC/HC/entire offensive coaching staff be blamed for the offense that's put on the field in week 8 of the season?!?
This is our offense. We haven't been plagued be injuries. If recruiting rankigns are to be believed, there is plenty of talent on that side of the ball, even if some of it is young. We should be better on offense. As most believed that RichRod could only be retained if he replaced his entire defensive coaching staff, I'd like to see an entirely new offensive coaching staff. Maybe we can keep the WRs coach.
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:50 PM ^
This was a humiliating loss. How did we get from the initial Hoke press conference to this? Everyone, starting with the head coach, needs a major gut check.
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:51 PM ^
At this point, play the kids. Give Dymonte, Stribling, Taco, Gedeon and the lot snaps. Get them prepped. Why not? What do you have to lose? Hoke has again, according to him, failed to do what he set out to do.
November 3rd, 2013 at 7:16 AM ^
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:51 PM ^
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:53 PM ^
Hate to say I told you so, but this is NOT a well-coached team. Yeah, you can spout wins, etc., blah, blah, blah, but the fact of the matter is that a truly good coach would have a much better team after three years. Even in losses, a team can be, and look like, a well-coached team. Yeah, you can say fire Borges, but the offense isn't the only problem. There's a lack of fire and determination which Hoke can't seem to instill. We do exceptionally poorly after a bye-week. That's a motivational issue which falls squarely on the head coach who sets the tone. Motivating your program to achieve excellence is a head coaches "it factor." Hoke doesn't have it. The great ones do. Michigan deserves a proven coach with a legitimate track record of winning at the highest level. If you want to dance, you have to pay the band!
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:56 PM ^
Dantonio's first three years weren't so great either. It was in Year Four that MSU took a big step.
Also, John Beilein. His third season was a disaster. If we used your logic JB would have been fired.
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:03 PM ^
No, it's too early. What is key for Hoke is how he responds to this. Does he make the coaching changes that are needed (assuming that they are, which I do)? Does he lay hold of the right motivational approach to mold the team in rising up from this abyss? People may say that it is an excuse that we play so much youth, but it really is not an excuse. This team is too young. But next year that excuse simply will not fly. And next year begins in the MSU locker room tonight.
There are so many great things about Hoke that I will be very sad if he fails. But he has not yet failed. What he has done is entered the crucible of his Michigan career. We are about to find out if he has what it takes.
November 2nd, 2013 at 10:20 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 12:25 AM ^
You are probably right about this timing. In my mind the 2014 team should be fully developed. But it probably is 2015 before we see what a full grown Hoke-developed team can accomplish, and you are right about the 2014 schedule. Starting in 2015, though, we should be the old-style (or new-style Alabama) juggernaught or Hoke has failed. But we have to give him that time. And he's such a great guy, why would we not give him that time?
The Michigan fan base is sickened because it has been so long since we had the old style teams. I feel the same way. But we have gone one way with the program, then stopped and gone back another way. That has wreacked havoc with our roster and it just takes this long to get it fully developed again.
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:05 PM ^
Horrible coaching. Unprepared team. running right into the strength of the defense. unbelievably incompetent coaching. Heads should roll. I hope some people light up Brandon's phone. this is unacceptable after 3 years with a Senior quarterback getting our ass kicked by a 2 star sophmore. Pathetic and inexcusable. Fire somebody
November 3rd, 2013 at 7:17 AM ^
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:53 PM ^
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:19 PM ^
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:54 PM ^
of games this year, probably watched 50+ FBS teams. I have yet to see an offensvie line as bad as Michigan's or a team with a combition of Off and Def lines as bad as Michigan's.
You can only do so much in a game plan on either side of the ball when you can't win an inch on either side of the line of scrimmage.
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:55 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 1:29 PM ^
I disagree... msu wasn't bigger, stronger...... we had enough to beat them had we had a cerebral qb who can actually read a defense, a qb who doesn't cower....a qb who can handle it mentally..... Gardner's demeanor should tell you everything... he simply cannot handle it.
Our OL is young and is gonna get worse before it gets better with Bosch, Kugler, Dawson, etc... but MSU's OL isnt bigger or stronger.... their DL is, but not by much.
November 3rd, 2013 at 2:14 PM ^
that is all.
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:56 PM ^
November 2nd, 2013 at 7:59 PM ^
Did he predict that Michigan would win this game? I didn't see that. He's only ever said that Borges wasn't doing as badly as some believe.
November 2nd, 2013 at 8:14 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 2:30 PM ^
I thought we'd be competitive. Instead we were beaten by 23 points with a team starting a freshman at QB.
Comments