Lewan was a wing TE on the left (with Schofield as LT) and we ran right, away from Lewan's side. I'm not sure if that's better or worse.
11/16/2013 – Michigan 27, Northwestern 19 (3OT) – 7-3, 3-3 Big Ten
In the long history of clock-running fire-drill field goal attempts there has been only pain and misery. When the game's about to end and you're trying to fling six guys on the field and take six off and align your kicker such that he can calmly take two steps and boot, you're gonna die.
Everyone knows this. Pac-12 refs know it so well that they don't even bother with last second field goals anymore as long as the defense squats on the ball like a hobo over a purloined chicken. Northwestern's student section knew it and was counting the clock down to their first Big Ten victory.
That's something I missed live and had to pick up on replay because I was dumbly staring at a horde of people exiting, a horde of people entering, focused on a line that I knew for a fact would not be set. So I also missed Drew Dileo sliding into his holder spot and recovering an instant before Glanda snapped it to him, possibly tipped off to exactly when he needed to get the ball off, set or not, by the numbers ringing out from the students.
Michigan's not set, in all probability, but there's no flag and Dileo's recovered from his sprawl and Gibbons ceases moving backwards, which oh by the way he is at the snap. Moving backwards. This is just an indicator of the doom to come—catch, placement, kick, overtime, whereupon it was ordained by fate that Michigan would pull this game out of their butt. Like it was nothing. Like it was always going to happen like that.
Because This Is Michigan, and That Is Northwestern.
The time for turning up your nose at any win, no matter how alarming, is past. Michigan could beat Akron on a triple reverse Hail Mary that Akron intercepts and fumbles out of their own endzone for a safety and it would be time to wave the flag and say hurrah.
So let us duly wave the flag. It is good to see the team happy. In the aftermath, various players tweeted out "Go team," each instance more delightful than the last, and then Taylor Lewan got piled on for following the crowd. Kyle Bosch did this.
— Kyle Bosch (@Kyle_Bosch65) November 17, 2013
And this time, Gardner destroyed the jumbled heap of pointy bits and gristle he calls a rib cage for a purpose. That purpose is looking an awful lot like not being in Detroit for a bowl game—SORRY, right, waving the flag.
While unit X's shocking incompetence is a callback to the Rodriguez days, so is feeling good for the put-upon players after a narrow win against a bad team. Even if I am in a emotion deprivation chamber for the rest of the year for my safety and that of people around me, the way you get out of those is by having good things happen, and that was a good thing.
It was also an obvious thing. My game previews have always been made in a spirit that says predicting things is dumb (thus the weird scores), but damn if this wasn't easy to call:
Michigan wins! On some bulllllllllshit that causes Northwestern fans to self-immolate.
Sippin' On Purple's Rodger Sherman has questionable taste in hats
This is what Northwestern does. Sometimes it's in the service of preventing a Big Ten championship game appearance, like it was last year; sometimes it's keeping you winless in that Big Ten. Either way, you could feel both sides of that stadium preparing to lose as Michigan embarked on the dread two minute drill. This one ended in chaos and fiasco, as they all do, but at the end Michigan managed to pull itself together and execute. Northwestern's bad mojo still trumps all.
That's not going to lead anywhere important—this season ends with an abattoir named Braxton Miller. In a landscape as bleak as the weather on Saturday, though, any ray of light is a welcome one. Let us forget about our worries and stare blankly into the butt of next week, ignoring what that hammering sound ahead might mean. It's probably meant for some other cow. Yeah. Otherwise I would not be so calm and tranquil.
Brady Hoke Epic Double Point Of The Week. This is a tough one because while the defense held Northwestern to nine points in regulation, nobody really stood out as the single best guy on that unit. I think we will go with James Ross, though; Ross had an important sack and nine solo tackles amongst 13 total; his speed and ability to get to the right place was a major factor in Michigan suppressing Northwestern's option game.
Honorable mention: Jeremy Gallon had ten catches. Brendan Gibbons was perfect on the day. (Matt Wile missed the 51-yarder.) Wile dropped punt after punt inside the 20 and had a 50-yarder. Collectively, Derrick Green and De'Veon Smith had a stat line that looked like an actual running back: 27 carries for 120 yards.
Epic Double Point Standings.
2.0: Jeremy Gallon (ND, Indiana)
1.0: Devin Gardner (ND), Desmond Morgan(UConn), Devin Funchess(Minnesota), Frank Clark(PSU), Matt Wile (Nebraska), James Ross (Northwestern)
0.5: Cam Gordon (CMU), Brennen Beyer (CMU)
Brady Hoke Epic Double Fist-Pump Of The Week. Michigan executes the first and only successful clock-running end of game field goal fire drill in the history of football. Go team!
Honorable mention: Jibreel Black sacks Siemian to put Northwestern in a deep hole in the third OT, Jake Butt's one-hand stab gives Michigan a torchclown, Joe Reynolds flags down a punt at the one, subsequent Northwestern punt goes out at the ten, Derrick Green runs through a guy for a 20-yarder, Gardner leads with his ribs into the endzone.
Epic Double Fist-Pumps Past.
8/31/2013: Dymonte Thomas introduces himself by blocking a punt.
9/7/2013: Jeremy Gallon spins through four Notre Dame defenders for a 61-yard touchdown.
9/14/2013: Michigan does not lose to Akron. Thanks, Thomas Gordon.
9/21/2013: Desmond Morgan's leaping one-handed spear INT saves Michigan's bacon against UConn.
10/5/2013: Fitzgerald Toussaint runs for ten yards, gets touchdown rather easily.
10/12/2013: Devin Funchess shoots up the middle of the field to catch a 40 yard touchdown, staking Michigan to a ten-point lead they wouldn't relinquish. (Right?)
10/19/2013: Thomas Gordon picks off an Indiana pass to end the Hoosiers' last drive that could have taken the lead.
11/2/2013: Clock expires.
11/9/2013: Nebraska muffs a punt through no action of Michigan's.
11/16/2013: Michigan executes a clock-running last-second field goal to get the game to OT.
[AFTER THE JUMP: decisions, waggles, I hate Illinois rollouts, a brilliant GIF, and physics.]
this was the dropped one, IIRC [Fuller]
How about that. Borges bounced up from recent nadirs by implementing a run-plus-constraint package that got Derrick Green some nice runs up the middle and successfully tested the edge with three bubble screens for thirteen, four (on second and five in the redzone), and zero yards. The unsuccessful one was a dropped ball that would have been a success, and the four-yarder (in OT, Funchess fumbled it at the end) probably should have been more but Funchess went inside instead of out. It gave the linebackers a crappy decision to make and Gardner a read and it just made sense even as you were watching it.
This helped Michigan go forward on the ground.
They're on to you. There were a couple points at which I did want to throw my nonexistent hat to the ground and stomp on it, though.
#1 was the fourth and two play late. Michigan comes out in a pistol package, and there is a timeout. They then come out in a goal line package with Taylor Lewan as a wing TE. They run the Gardner boot, and get crushed. Oh, the reasons this made me want to flee to a monastery and disclaim all knowledge of feet and balls:
If there was ever a team that was going to blow that up it was going to be Northwestern, and every team is going to blow it up since we've seen the last couple weeks that everyone is gameplanning for that play on short yardage. To run it there was incredible malpractice. It's over.
This continues a theme with Borges: he sticks with his cute stuff way too long. Remember that thing he did where he'd line the fullback up about a foot from the QB and then give him the ball on a quick dive over the top? Yeah, that lasted about three games too many and then was finally ditched.
If Michigan was intent on having Gardner run it, anything else would have been preferable. Literally anything.
#2 was the end of Michigan's first drive. They'd thrown and run effectively and unpredictably from various formations down to the Northwestern seven, whereupon they ran a stretch for a loss of two yards—cumong man—and then went with a waggle on second and goal from the nine.
That's alarming to me. Why on earth would Northwestern bite on that action when they just beat up the base play and you are in an obvious passing down? They did not; they put a guy in Gardner's face and blew the play up. To run that there is to assume Northwestern's staff is composed of morons who will fall for the world's most obvious feint.
There's a variety of poker player who is good but exploitable because he thinks he's smarter than everyone in the room. Sometimes I get overly aggressive and then show something dumb and then that guy is after you because he thinks you're a sap. Borges reminds me of those guys. He has a tendency to do the most obvious counter-move to anything he's just done. Supporting evidence: #1 above. He doesn't seem to anticipate that teams will adjust to things on film and pre-emptively insert the counter. That was a major cause of Gardner's near-INTs: Michigan was running the same things they always do and Northwestern was in the huddle on them. Linebacker undercuts on plays that otherwise look open, and that's a tough adjust for Gardner.
Gardner throwing it at people. Which people? Any people. While the near INT thing has been overplayed a bit by the BTN asserting that any fingertip-deflected pass should have been a turnover, hoo man did Gardner put a couple right in Wildcat breadbaskets.
I'll have to check, but on a couple it looked like Northwestern had specific robber zones designed to look like player X was open and then bait Gardner; these worked well save for the catching the ball thing. On Michigan's last drive Northwestern undercut a Dileo in route, which was Michigan's go-to play on fourth down last week (Dileo dropped it) and has been their go-to play for a long time on third and medium. Another was the pop pass which seems to be about 50% of their pistol snaps and hasn't actually seen a run from that formation for a long time.
Obviously, Gardner shouldn't be making these throws but with Northwestern jumping his primary reads and a line that's pretty leaky he's probably just reading presnap and going with that sometimes. This deep into the season I don't know if that's fixable. Guy has lost faith in his line with good reason and is making bad decisions.
ROLLOUT CITY. I hate rollouts. They are occasionally good for short conversions; run with any frequency and they become option-halving, time-limiting invitations for your quarterback to make a crappy throw without his feet set. In compensation you get some shorter throws that your quarterback is going to be less accurate on and you run away from certain rushers.
Michigan seemed to be using them to mitigate pass protection issues, but the 13 yard sack on the two minute drill was another damn rollout on which everyone was covered and the unblocked end—the intentionally unblocked end roared in to sack. Another sack was a rollout on which the end got outside of Schofield and Gardner tried to go around; no dice, another huge sack.
We talked about this some during the Denard era: paradoxically, rolling the pocket removes your QBs legs as a threat, as he can't threaten to break the pocket and go vertical. The pass protection benefits it's providing are dubious. Death to rollouts.
Goodbye, Toussaint? Zero snaps for Toussaint, who was dressed and on the sideline, as Green, De'Veon Smith, and Justice Hayes got all the tailback snaps; Kerridge also moonlighted as a pass protector. Afterwards, Michigan muttered something about injury. I generally hear things about guys who aren't likely to play and heard nothing about Toussaint; that seems like saving face to me.
In his absence, Green and Smith looked okay. Green had one nice cut in the hole to dodge a tackler, ran through a lineman on a 23-yard stretch…
WHAT HAPPENS NOW [Fuller]
… and fell forward all day. Nothing Smith did was amazing but he averaged five yards a carry, which is a lot more than none.
And seriously. I must have had a bad angle on the Gallon endzone fade, which I thought was close and turned out to not be particularly so.
Nevertheless, I still maintain that Michigan's insistence on not throwing the ball at their 6'5" leaping stretched-out guy in the endzone—like, ever—is nuts. This team should probably chuck him a deep ball about every fifth play just to see what happens, and yet I can't remember even one aimless chuck in his direction.
This should be Junior Hemingway redux here: receiver with size and ball skills bails out floundering offense time and again. It doesn't even take that long to throw a fade.
Butt. Nice catch, man.
I am glad you are not 5'8" in this instance.
I am the golfer they based par off of. Save for getting bombed by Indiana's tempo, this defense has a knack for hewing particularly close to expectations no matter the personnel shifts underlying the greater whole. Thomas Gordon came back in this game (with some authority); Jarrod Wilson ate bench for reasons inexplicable; Black continued being a seemingly exploitable nose tackle without actually being exploited; Michigan held an opponent offense down to numbers that would have been met with rapture if the offense had scored, like, points.
What happened here in eleven regulation drives plus three overtimes:
Northwestern's not what we thought they might be at the beginning of the season, especially without Venric Mark. They've rarely been that inept this year, even when they haven't had Colter at their disposal. That's quality output, especially when you look at the YPC: 5.3 passing, 2.9 rushing.
Gordon back, Wilson not so much. Thomas Gordon returned to his starting spot and seemed to play really well aside from a couple of missed tackles in space, which will happen against a guy like Colter. On the other side of the ledger, Gordon blew Colter up (albeit after he got the first down) on one play and made quite a few of those open field tackles.
He played next to Avery, and while Avery didn't do anything that made you question that choice, it did seem pretty strange to have him out there instead of Wilson, who is much better equipped to tackle folks.
On the edge, it seems like Stribling has re-taken the third corner spot from Lewis, at least until he does something where he phases out again, whereupon Lewis will retake the spot until someone puts a 40-yard pass in the six inches of space he's ceding, whereupon… yeah. Just call it the Mobius back.
Henry, Clark. This seemed like the third straight game in which both Clark and Henry playd well, better than they did earlier in the season. Heininger Certainty Principle is engaged. People aren't getting to the quarterback much, yeah. That's just something we have to live with this year.
Option stuff. Michigan held down the option so well in this one that more than once I was privately irritated that Michigan had given up five yards only to find out that they'd given up close to zero. They made two adjustments that I picked up live: the DE was far more committed to take the pitch man and on certain plays they went with two high safeties, which allowed the playside one to charge down to take the pitch. The results were very good: a couple of Colter runs on which he managed to slice through the blocking at the line and not much else. Good to see the week-to-week improvement there.
I am kind of out of things to say here. They did a nice job slightly better than expected and nothing terribly long or damaging transpired. They are who they are.
Punt cover explanation. I was right on the goal line where Joe Reynolds grabbed that punt that the side judge called a touchback that was eventually put on the one, and thought they'd screwed up the call in Michigan's favor. I've poked at the rules and this is what I've discovered: once a player has possession of the ball, the play is dead. So when Reynolds caught the ball, that was where the ball was despite his momentum clearly carrying him into the endzone*. That's why they put it at the one instead of the two, where Michigan eventually caught the Reynolds fling out of the endzone.
*[Note since it seems everyone who I talk to is unclear on this: in college the only thing that matters is the location of the ball. You can be standing with two feet in the endzone and grab the ball and as long as the ball stays out, it's at the one.]
I take back everything nice I've ever said about Under Armour. Good lord, these things.
Half-measures. Full measures:
Decision recap. I was vaguely in favor of going for it on the late fourth and two. My thinking was admittedly influenced by my desire to see the game end in regulation. In a strictly statistical world of average NFL defense versus average NFL offense, Advanced NFL Stats's calculator says that decision shades towards going but it's close enough to 50/50 that game context easily overwhelms that.
Add in the game context and… it doesn't get much clearer. There are six minutes left. Michigan is down three and their offense is terrible; Northwestern hasn't been much better. You're neither particularly likely to get the first down or particularly likely to get another chance to score a touchdown. I thought it was the right move because I'm in favor of aggression and I'd rather be the team with the ball last, which was more likely if Northwestern was trying a four minute drill in six minutes instead of trying to go down the field to win.
With Northwestern sputtering on the ground and Michigan having a first down-or-two buffer they were likely to get the ball back with good field position if they biffed, and that is in fact what happened. So… yeah, right move, but if Michigan kicked I wouldn't have thrown a fit. The Mathlete's college numbers are strongly in favor of going for it. The break-even point was a 30% chance of getting it:
Michigan has had its troubles on offense but a 30% break even point is a low bar. 3rd or 4th and 1’s from inside the 5 are converted at 57% historically. So even if Michigan was half as likely as an average team to convert it still would have been an even decision with kicking the field goal.
He also brings up the point about the four minute drill in a clear fashion:
A failed fourth down would have left Northwestern with the ball and the lead late. Coaching history as taught us that this is a recipe for most coaches to curl up into a ball and try and ground out the clock and if they’re lucky get a first down or two. Because of this often failed mentality, giving the other team back the ball with a lead can be more valuable than giving them back the ball with a tie where there is some pressure to push forward.
Michigan had two other fourth down decisions on which they chose the conservative option:
I did not like the punt, but like the fourth and two decision it was a close thing that could be argued either way.
The field goal was terrible, especially given the unpredictable winds. It made me morose. It made me hate this offense that has taken Brady Hoke's big swinging jibblies and turned them into Bette Midler albums. This is probably a reason I was in favor of going for it late. Yes, this thinking results in Breaking Bad. Whateva. I think what I want.
This has been decision recap.
Now more than ever, Pat White's critical commentary on growling sounds [Fuller]
I remember. I remember when I went to Ryan Field and came away with a smug sense of superiority about how much better Michigan Stadium's grandeur was. Now that only happens during the Discover commercials they put on the scoreboard.
There's little difference now other than the quality of the scoreboard, and about half the time Northwestern provides a camera angle that lets you figure out what the hell you just watched, so even that's a push. What good is your enormous scoreboard if you're never going to show the offensive line on replays? I ASK YOU THIS SIR.
Let's check in with the wife. Reminder: wife has enormous surplus of empathy and starts rooting for the opposition once Michigan goes up by many points. While that hasn't been relevant for a bit, she remembers the way this game ended last year and BTN slathered the Nebraska Hail Mary all over the broadcast. Result:
I wanted Michigan to win, and then they did
and I felt shitty
I was like "what is this shit?"
Her relationship with fandom is bizarre. In a different way than mine is.
Genius gif from Drkboarder:
(Yes, please put these in the diaries.)
Do recommend the Mathlete's post if you want the fourth and two decision from every angle.
Inside The Box Score is… whoah.
The Heisenborges Uncertainty Principle pits the Newtonian Mechanics school of thought (MOAR MANBALL!) against Quantum Mechanics (QUANTA SCREENS!) and the wave-particle duality of spread and shred concepts. Applied to Heisenborges, the traditionalists see a wave of defenders crashing through the inexperienced line, gathering TFLs by the bushels. The new school sees individual quanta of defenders beating blocks, one block at a time. The probability distribution function of each and every block working is directly related to the number of blocks that must be executed properly.
I think we have discovered that ST3 is a physicist. Also:
A week after NOT getting a single rushing first down, we had 10 against NU. This is primarily attributable to the running of Derrick Green and an adjustment Heisenborges made (the whole, pass to set up the run concept, i.e., DRAW PLAYS!) Green ran 19 times for 79 yards. It's been so long since we've seen positive rushing yards, I was expecting Green to be over 200 yards in the boxscore. If that's what positive 79 yards looks like, I'll take it.
Best: Northwestern: The ‘Eat Your Vegetables, There are Starving Kids in X’ of College Football
It’s a bit cliche, but I remember my mom whipping out the tired “eat your food, there are kids with far less around the world” argument when I wouldn’t finish my broccoli. Of course, little did she know that broccoli is the most deadly of the vegetables. Regardless, the point was to remind me that there were people out there with it worse off, and not to take for granted the bountiful opportunities before me.
Well, for UM fans those starving children are Northwestern. After a 4-0 start, NW has lost 6 straight, including one game on a last-second Hail Mary from Cereal Empire Progeny Ron Kellogg III and another after being Gibbons’ed with about a second left. Unless they somehow pull off an epic upset against MSU, they will finish with a losing record before they match up against Illinois, and a season that began with talk of a Rose Bowl bid will, at best, end with them playing in some god-forsaken shanty-town (or Detroit) in a late-December bowl game named after a Dave Brandon’s Mortal Enemyor the state in which it is held. So the next time you complain about being “only” 7-3, remember that there are a bunch of future hedge fund associates and medical school colleagues being bummed out for a couple more weeks.
reshp1 breaks down the results on third down, which were implausibly grim all day. Comes out thinking things are about equally distributed between Gardner, Borges, blocking, and Northwestern's defense doing a good job.
Out of time. Later, gentlemen.
Lewan was a wing TE on the left (with Schofield as LT) and we ran right, away from Lewan's side. I'm not sure if that's better or worse.
Then Borges is a fool for not running behind his All-America tackle.
Or he's a fool for trying to be too cute and running away from the "I'm running here" flag.
I didn't like the play because it was predictable, as we've used it on crucial -and shorts all season. That's a legit complaint. The other stuff is not only wrong, but of minor consequence. Just looking to pile on. And wrong, to boot.
I'm with Brian with hating this play but not for the same reason. You guys are right that Lewan was on the other side and that was suppose to fool NW into over defending that side leaving Gardner free on the other side. The thing is, we stuck Kalis out there as the RT (fine, we'd been doing that since Williams gets blown up) but also put Williams out there beside Kalis. As far as I can recall we've never done that before. It was a pre-snap tip that things weren't status quo as far as running left. We then pulled Kalis right which is like the key LBs are taught to read since Pop Warner. If you're going to run to your strength after annoucing it fine, if you're going to try and do something tricky off that, fine. But we tried to hedge by tweaking the alignment and it ended up undercutting the advantages of the tricky thing we were trying to do by giving it away.
In addition, you don't have a single eligible receiver to the strong side (other than Houma, who has one career reception, out of the h-back spot). And at the snap, the only even semi-plausible receiving threat is AJ Williams, who has zero career receptions.
Everyone is going to be coming downhill, so even if they buy the fake, you're going to have exactly what happened; the end who is left unblocked because Kalis vacates is going to force Devin way upfield, thus screwing the proverbial pooch.
It's an action that can work (and has worked), but from that formation and in that down-and-distance, this was doomed pre-snap.
because we have done nothing out of it the whole game and weeks before it. I loved the call to go for it, but could not understand why they did not come out in a shotgun set with Funchess, Dileo, Butt, and Gallon spread out (or switch Kerridge out for Butt) and have Green set up next to Green. The defense then has to defend possible throws to Gallon, Funchess and Butt in the back and corners of the endzones, Green on a draw up the middle, Dileo on a short inside pass right at the goal line, and a scramble/ delayed draw from Gardner.
Oh well, wins are wins. The O looked great in OT. Hopefully we see that against Iowa next week and set up a spoiler game against OSU.
That was one of the worst calls of all time. We were what, 0-12 on 3rd and 4thd owns at that point? Almost all of them short ones where we run right into their face? So do we take the three points and tie the game? No, we make it 0-13 on a play call in a situation that had absolutely 0 shot of working. Words fail to express the insanity of that call and I'm shocked anyone thinks it was a good idea. We are not the average nfl offense vs the average nfl defense, we are the worst offensive line in michigan history against .... anyone.
My problem with going for it on 4th and 2 is that we were 0-10 on third down up until that point (and hadn't attempted a 4th down). Granted, many of those were for more than 2 yards, but it's hard to say we had a 30% chance of making it when we were 0 for the game in situations where we had to get a first down on that play.
In this video, at 1:09:45 (1st down with :47 left on the clock), Schofield blocks down and leaves a wide open hole to the QB. Did he think maybe the RB was going to pick up the block?
(This is the video above: http://youtu.be/bXH4NeH68WU?t=52m43s)
Holding Northwestern to 9 points in regulation with a mentally challenged offense on the other side is a Tremendous performance even without flashy things like sacks and turnovers. If the offense had a pulse and the game ended like 30-9 we'd be extoling the virtues of Mattison. Great performance by them on the road, not a single bust I can remember
I think most fans who watched the game were impressed by that defense. It is still an above average unit, but with an equally above average offense this team probably has one loss, at most, this year.
The last three games I was able to watch live were, in succesion, Penn State, MSU and Nebraska. So my thorough apology to everyone. I have apparently jinxed the whole damn season you guyz. I should have been running errands and other honey-do's rather than enjoy Michigan football with a beer and some pals like last year.
So I hereby promise NOT to watch the Iowa game next Saturday. Instead I'll be at the nursery picking up some wood chips and 2 or 3 shrubberies for our back yard.
That should help lead to a favorable outcome all the way over in Iowa City. Right?
We shall say "ni" again to you, if you do not appease us.
Well, what is it you want?
We want ... a shrubbery!
to the captains as like a baseball innning, Al Borges breathed a sigh of relief that his bunting three times in a row strategy could now be executed.
Today I learned what abattoir means.
Wait, he's wearing a stretched out, bright orange, mom shirt, and you question the hat??
Not sure you make the kick that no one every makes in history (plus all the others) and not get the double point. But he got the gif, so he has that going for him, and that's nice.
I pretty much agree with the good to go for it, bad call to go for it with assessment. And I think the punt confusion was a product of being at the game because on tv it was clear the ref was saying he had it long enough to down the ball before letting go or going into the endzone.
that was more whole unit amazement and already ticketed for fist pump.
And you're right, certainly the whole unit deserves credit. I mean, Dileo needs some sort of reward for just the cool factor. Though again, he'll alway have the gif. Just thinking that the hardest part of that was actually making a kick under those circumstances, as it wasn't an XP flick. Maybe the play was so amazing it deserve X2 credit for both; mainly because the other wasn't an easy pick. But the defense deserved some nod too, so how you played it works just as well.
with going for it on 4th and 2. The offense is struggling to score TDs, so they had a decent shot at scoring a TD, and the defense was playing very well. What I have a problem with was the playcall after the timeout.
The offense is struggling to do anything.
The special teams and the defense are doing well.
I don't know why you would put your faith in the offense instead of the other two, but you know...I guess that's why I'm not an FBS head coach. And I'm sure that's the only reason. /s
Yeah, that was my feeling too. Kick it and it's in the hands of the defense. Go for it, and it's essentially ball game if you don't get it. That's not something I'd trust the offense to do with any regularity, average statistics be damned. Yeah, we won anyway, but a whole series of improbable things happened to make that possible (the review of the spot, Fitz punting instead of going for it, two 4th down conversions, a close PI call against NW, and The Gibbons, and that was just to tie it up and get back to a 50/50 chance in OT).
To get the ball back in good field position. The fact is the kinda blew it by giving up 19 yards on 3rd and 22. Give up 9 or 10 and you're around our own 32. Hold them to a few yards like 4 or 5 and you're out arund your own 37. Stuff it and you're getting it at midfield with over 2 minutes to get into FG range. None of that is very impossible. And if you get it in better position you can play for a TD there with that much time, for the win.
I'm not sure that the defense is automatically trustworthy in those situations since they gave up the drive at the end of the game to Nebraska, drive at the end of the half to MSU, looked awful vs. Indiana, and gave up the drive at the end of regulation to PSU...and nearly gave up a 22 yard 1st down vs. Northwestern. They've been good, but they haven't exactly been a strength in those end of period situations.
Even if the defense is perfect and NW goes 3 and out with no gain a decent punt gets the ball around mid-field. Even with the wind, you can't reasonably expect to get the ball back in FG range, at least not a high percentage one. Any give from the defense just puts the ball further back, which is very likely. That puts it back on your offense to drive to a makeable FG range, which I just don't like the odds of this year.
NW's punter is pretty bad in general and really had problems punting into the wind. If the D had held them without a first down, there was a good chance we'd have started around their 40, if not closer.
In any event, I supported going for it because we had a chance right there to score the game-winning TD. If you get it, you don't need any more points, or even the ball, to win. Kicking the FG, OTOH,still necessitates another scoring drive, which you may never get the chance to run given the time on the clock. My fear was that kicking the FG would lead to a picture-perfect NW drive that would score with 20 seconds remaining.
Kicking the FG, OTOH,still necessitates another scoring drive, which you may never get the chance to run given the time on the clock.
Not it doesn't, it's tied at that point. Your defense holds and it's OT. Then there's no time pressure and each team has a chance to respond if the other scores first. I like that cripple fight on even terms a lot better than being down 3 with time running out.
Fair enough, but I am not comfortable with giving the other team the ball last in a tie game in regulation, and kicking the FG with 5:00 would have given them that opportunity. The way this year's gone, I bet they'd have driven down the field and scored if we'd tied it up.
As the Mathlete notes, our chances of getting the ball back were probably better given that NW had the lead on the ensuing possession than they would have been in a tie game. With the lead, a conservative guy like Fitzgerald is going to sit on the ball. In a tie game he won't.
How getting the ball at mid-field with two minutes left isn't great position to try and get into FG range.
If you really think our offense can't do that then it makes all the more sense to try and get the TD and end it while we're close rather than expect another longer drive.
But, I'm thinking that they have so few chances of scoring TDs that Hoke thought "heck we have a decent shot of scoring a TD and our defense has been great, let's go for it and get out of here. And if we don't get it, they are in really crappy field position against our D."
Ace and Brian agreed with going for it, just the playcall stunk.
by saying the offense "had a decent shot at scoring a TD." Seeing as how they started the previous drive at the 10 and got negative yardage before kicking a FG, I don't see how you can conclude they had a "decent shot" at making the 4th and 2, let alone scoring a TD if they did somehow convert it.
is still the playcall. Staying in shotgun, pistol or whatever would have been a MUCH better option than going from undercenter and running a play they previously got stuffed on. Green could have picked up those two yards, A run/pass option, there were a lot of possiblities. But again, the playcall was worse than deciding to go for it.
"Borges bounced up from recent nadirs by implementing a run-plus-constraint package that got Derrick Green some nice runs up the middle and successfully tested the edge with three bubble screens"...can't wait for Heiko's Q&A with Borges.
Why is northwestern dressed in captain america uniforms? Wasn't halloween weeks ago?
That Mortal Kombat .gif is so awesome. Thank you to whoever created.
I'm pretty sure J Lehman designed those unis, because, obviously.
The fact that he was an announcer for B10 Network was icing on the cake.
Amurica - F*** Yeah!
Even America can't hold Michigan back.
...only Al Borges can do such a thing.
"Michigan wins! On some bulllllllllshit that causes Northwestern fans to self-immolate."
This made me laugh really loudly at work on Friday, and was never far from my mind in the 4th quarter. And since there is no way the entire OL was set on the last play, I award this the most accurate MGoPrediction, evah.
I don't think Al understands the reasoning behind a play action pass. There is no reason to run a PA pass unless the other team legitimately thinks there is a chance you might run the ball. On 3rd and 9, not a single person watching the game thinks you are going to run the ball out of I-formation. The two guys in the I could easily be used as additional receiver options. Borges seems to think that every opposing coach has the knowledge of a kid playing Madden for the first time.
I'm just afraid he vastly overestimates its current effectiveness.
I imagine him similar to a child playing hide and seek, giggling madly about their clever hiding place under a rug. Perhaps Mattison (as all good parents do), pretends not to be able to find him under the rug during practice (by allowing the PA to "trick the D") to boost the O's confidence.
Do you really believe the words you just typed?
This is wrong.
There are other reasons to run PA on obvious passing downs. One is the fact that certain route combinations are always paired with PA (at least in our playbook). A perfect example that all Michigan fans know is Wangler faking to Woolfolk before throwing a last second pass to AC against Indiana. There was no chance of a handoff, but those routes were only run with that action.
Also, LBs are taught to read keys. A lot. It becomes second nature to them. So, if you get one to hesitate even a bit, there is an ancillary benefit to the PA. Slow his drop, slow his blitz, whatever. You're not looking to really fuck with him and make him vacate a zone.
Also, this line is terrible. It is not out of the realm of possibility that the PA is called because the linemen block that protection relatively well. This is what a shitty line can do to an OC.
Will never forget that experience, sitting in THAT endzone, somehow got down to row 10
The fact that our playbook has route combinations only combined with PA is not a good reason to run a PA. You could easily do the same route combinations without using a fake that fools nobody. And you could add in an extra receiver for another option.
As far as the linebacker keys... yes, they're taught to read their keys. But on 3rd and 9 without any chance of a run, they already know it's a pass. You're not going to make them hesitate enough to open a receiver when they know what's coming. Furthermore, the specific plays Michigan ran were jump balls to the end zone by receivers. They weren't crossing behind linebackers.
I'll give you that the line is terrible and two extra blockers could help on pass protections. But they're terrible at pass protection AND the only defenders they can pick up will be right in front of them after the fake. If they weren't coming forward, they could stay with the QB and pick up a defender.
Bottom line, I-formation PA pass was a horrible play call on 3rd and 9. And throwing it to Gallon instead of Funchess is even more puzzling.
M's Defense brings to mind a certain strategy that one sees employed in Folkstyle Wrestling.
In a sport where so many contests end in scores like 5-2 or 3-0, every once in a while you will see a score that looks like 22-11 or 24-12. The winning wrestler in those contests is "letting him up". That is, the more aggressive, more skilled wrestler will take down his opponent, earning 2 points, then immediately let him up, yielding 1 point for the "escape". The reason he does this is because he knows that he can once again get another take-down, earning 2 more points and the cycle repeats. You willingly yield one point, because you feel confident that you will then earn another 2, resulting in scores like 22-11. During the crucial moment when you let your opponent up, you have to make sure he doesn't reverse you, yielding 2 for a reversal instead of 1 for the escape.
On the gridiron, the bend-don't-break approach has a similar feel. Gladly yield 3, because a field goal is like an escape. Design your D not to give up 7, because your opponent's touchdown would be like a reversal. And count on your own offense to put 7s on the board whenever its time to go on offense (a take-down). Hopefully, resulting in scores like 21-9 instead of 9-9.
The problem of course is that it does not make sense to wilingly give up a 1-point escape unless you are confident that your offense will result in a 2-point take-down more often than not. Bend-don't break would be a perfectly acceptable approach if the offense were living up to its end of the bargain. If.
But on the other hand. I'm not sure that if we played "not to bend," we wouldn't have a couple breaks a game, and our offense doesn't seem like it could match in that scenario.
I don't think you devise a defensive philosophy based on offensive output.
After viewing the replay it definitely looks like our line was not set and that should've been an illegal procedure penalty, Northwestern wins 9-6 (BIG TENNNNN!).
However, I'll take a win however I can get one.
I agree with this. But there's also reason to believe that NW didn't get all their men off the field. It looked like there could have been 12 on the field when the camera switched to the reverse angle. So offsetting penalties and one untimed down? I'm not sure if that's how it works though.
I was certain that the defense was going to lose the game. Felt like the last two games where the defense did everything they could to hold a team down, and the offense just took the wind out of their sails with, you know, not doing offense things.
Thank God for Northwestern Nothwesterning another game away. Whew.
what if Michigan had been flagged for a penalty (illegal motion, too many men on the field, etc.)? Would they have been penalized and had to kick over (with no game clock running)?