Monday Presser 9-8-14: Greg Mattison Comment Count

Adam Schnepp

mattison

file

 

Opening remarks:

“Well, let’s get right to it. Obviously disappointed that we didn’t win the football game and disappointed that we didn’t do a couple of things better on defense and we’ve got to work about correcting those right now. Our players came in with a great attitude and we as coaches I think have a great attitude and that’s one bump in the road that we have to get over and go to the next one.”

 

I’m sure there are a few things on your list but is not forcing turnovers to this point pretty high up there?

“Yeah. The thing about that football game, and I felt it on the sidelines- I don’t know if ever you played against a good opponent where you held them to fifty-some yards rushing, and usually those stats can be misled, but not when a team rushes thirty times or twenty-some times for fifty yards. That part of it you said, ‘Hey, we’re fine here.’ The thing that we didn’t do that we have to is the same thing we didn’t do in the first game: we’ve got to play better red zone defense. That’s really hurt us. We have to, when we get down in the red zone, and all it takes when you get down in the red zone is one bad play and that’s gotten us. I think in the red zone we went to third down one time, they scored. Next time it was fourth down. That makes a whole difference in a ball game.

“The other thing is we’ve got to get turnovers. That’s hurting our team and that was a big emphasis for us. And I think the other thing that we didn’t live up to what I expected us to was third downs. The stats, they’re misleading again. What were they? Eight- or seven-for-fifteen? They hit some really crucial third downs in the first half and, you know, third down is third down. You get it, you get it. And there’s a couple [where] the guy’s feet…just perfect throw, perfect catch. But that doesn’t matter. You have to stop them on third down to be a great defense. Those are three places that we have to get better and for us as a team our defense needs to do that and we didn’t.”

 

How much, if any, concern about pass rush is neutered by the fact that they were getting the ball out so quickly?

“Yeah, I thought our pass rush- watching the tape we had some guys that were doing some pretty darn good things and the ball was coming out really quick which is, again, I’ll say that that’s concerning because that’s like last year. I felt we’d have a little tighter coverage to be able to stop that when the pressure got close and he threw some in there. Again, we’ve got to keep working on it. I thought our pass rush, I thought our guys came after him pretty good and worked really hard up front to try and get to him. We didn’t get sacks. We didn’t get as many sacks. That quarterback probably played the best game of his life. He played good. He’s a good player, you know. I give that to him and that’s one of the reasons for the outcome was.”

 

[After THE JUMP: Greg Mattison explains what he should have done differently and why he thinks the defense doesn’t need a wake-up call]

 

Going back to rush defense a little bit, against Notre Dame it was 54 yards I believe. Going back though, one of the touchdowns was up the middle and then I believe in week one Marcus Cox of Appalachian State scored up the middle. Is that something that you’ve thought about?

“No. The one they scored up the middle, if you watch that tape, if you watch it, Jake Ryan almost makes an unbelievable play where he dives up over the top of everybody and he’s right on the running back and their back, not the biggest guy, squatted down and ducked under Jake and got in. No. Am I worried about them running up the middle? No. That was a play that I think there were some gaps that we could have fit better there, not because of ability and not because of a guy not trying hard. Obviously when a team scores on our defense I’m saying that we didn’t do something right and, you know, we’ve got to shore that up.

“I think one of the biggest things in that ball game, and I’m going to put that on me, is you’ve got to go into a game and get the what-if’s done. I think we have to have our bigger people ready to play all the time. We love to play sub, we love to play nickel and when we had a couple guys get nicked up in that game I would have much rather have some of our more experienced football players who are playing different positions be out there playing than have somebody who doesn’t have a lot of experience, because he plays that position he’s out there. And I’m going to put that on me. I should’ve ahead of time said, ‘Now, if this happens or this happens or this happens what are we going to do?’ We have enough talent at places that we’ve got to get them all out there when they need to be out there and I’ll handle that. That’ll be something that I’ll definitely work on.”

 

Willie Henry is somebody who you’ve worked with one-on-one. Talk about watching him develop and what specifically he’s doing well in run defense and on the pass rush.

“Willie Henry is like a lot of Michigan football players that we’ve all been fortunate enough to watch over the years. Growing pains, young early and I think that’s the difference between here and other schools. He’s had coaches care about him as a person and say, ‘No, that’s not acceptable to not go hard here’ or do like young guys do. Not Willie Henry is understanding that and he’s playing extremely hard on every play. You’ll see Willie Henry running to the football in times of the game where he wouldn’t have before and he’s just growing as a player and that’s Michigan. That’s what we really work with. Some other places you could play early and just let it go, but here you better earn the right to play by doing it the right way and he’s done that and I’m really, really proud of Willie Henry.”

 

Brady said you guys played a lot more zone in the second half. What was going on with the press coverage early in the game?

“Well, their wide receivers were doing a great job of getting off our guys and we were up. We were up on them. It wasn’t like last year where you’re playing way off and saying, ‘Go ahead.’ We were up on them and they beat us. Their wide receivers did a nice job of double moves and the ball was out quick and the quarterback was putting it right on the money. I mean, there were a couple where you’re saying, ‘You’ve got to be kidding me.’ I mean, we’ve got a guy hitting him and the coverage isn’t awful and he put it right there. So I think that’s maybe one thing we have to do, go back and forth between some zone and man so they don’t know exactly what you’re in all the time.”

Is it a technique thing at the line? Were the releases too…

“No. It always comes down to technique and we’ve got to work on it. I mean, when you play man coverage you better be on your game or you’re going to get beat and they weren’t bombs but they ended up being touchdowns. I’m never going to blame the secondary. Like I said, that starts with me to be able to get who we feel are the best players at that time in there and that’s what my job is. The next thing is to make sure we have some adjustments to be able to do a couple different things and give those guys some relief if somebody goes down.”

 

For Jourdan [Lewis] to get two pass interferences on one drive like that, is that something that he’s just kind of grasping because he’s beat or is it…

“I’m never publicly going to ever say anything about officiating but when you play aggressive that’s going to happen. That’s going to happen. We all saw it that where you played off and watch people catch it in front of you and you say, ‘Okay, good boy. You played good.’ And all of a sudden pretty soon they’re right down there scoring. That can happen. The thing I- there were a few of the same things against our offense that weren’t called. I’m never going to complain about officiating. That’s just part of it when you decide to be an aggressive team. If they got them, they got them.”

 

You were talking about the what-if’s. Are there guys that have earned more time in those situations now if you had that to do again or doing forward?

“What I meant by that is if you’re playing sub defense or nickel defense and all of a sudden one of your best players, Raymon [Taylor] is on the sidelines and Peppers isn’t playing is it better to have James Ross be out there or Royce [Jenkins-Stone] playing a SAM linebacker rather than a nickel. A SAM linebacker and a nickel are the same thing. One’s just better at playing man coverage, you know. So I think if I had known all that was going to happen I would have worked a lot more with Big and Royce and said, ‘Hey, we’re going to play the guys who have played a lot of football.’ And then change our gameplan, maybe play a little bit more zone and these guys have been out here. They’ve done it and that’s what I mean by that. That’s my job. It’s my job to make sure you don’t ever put your defense or your team in not the best situation and that’s what I’ve got to make sure I do.”

 

How do you feel Jourdan responded after that first drive?

“Jourdan’s a competitor now. Jourdan’s going to be a great football player. You’ve got to have a short memory. If you’re going to ask a guy to go out there and play man coverage and go against one of their best receivers, a guy who’s having a great night, you see it in the NFL all the time. That guy better come back the next day and the next play and say, ‘Okay, that one’s over with.’ We as coaches have to make sure that you’re not successful isn’t because you’re not playing the perfect technique that we want you to do. Because of aggressiveness, that’s fine. But let’s make sure, and that’s what we all talked about as coaches, that when we watch the tape let’s make sure we’re playing perfect technique and we’re doing that.

“Like I said, on defense and in Michigan football it’s a group deal. It’s not a player. It’s not just a player and it’s not just a coach. It’s all of us. I’m the first to tell you that I felt bad for those kids. Those kids have given us everything and so when they aren’t successful we’re going to look at ourselves first and make sure we do our job and then they’ll do their job. I really believe they will.”

 

I’ve mentioned stats to you from last year. You know, you gave up 43 [Ed: ?] times but still finished I think No. 13 overall. Just quickly, looking at this game in terms of total defense and looking at this game do you feel this might be the shock and this was not the norm for the defense, do you feel like these guys can use that as shock therapy?

“I don’t think they need shock therapy. This is a different group. I’ll say the same thing I said when I talked last time or the first time I addressed it: I’m not worried about this defense. I mean, these guys, they hurt. It wasn’t because they didn’t prepare. It wasn’t because they didn’t want to. It wasn’t because their heads weren’t into it. This happens. This kind of thing happens and it wasn’t, ‘Oh boy, you got a shock and now you’re going to play better.’ No. Maybe you’re going to prepare the little things that you might not have done perfectly that we need to do. Maybe that part of it gets your attention but I don’t worry about this defense. This defense, they want to be a credit to Michigan. They want to be a great defense. They came in Sunday hurting just like everybody else and you’re going to see them play as hard- if you watch the tape, if you watch the tape I’ve never seen a defense play as hard as they played play-in and play-out for sixty-some plays. I’m watching the fourth quarter and I’m seeing Jake and Joe and Willie run as hard as they did in the first quarter. That’s all you can ask. The rest of it, that’s our job. We’ve got to get them to play the best they can play and they’ll do it. No. Not this defense. These guys, they want to be great.”

 

Given Jabrill’s athleticism and all the things that you said about him leading up, the fact that you haven’t really had him for two games- how much does that change what you planned coming into the season with this defense?

“When a guy has earned the right to be a starter, any time he’s not in there that hurts you. There’s a reason that hurts you and the thing that he brings is a lot of fire and a lot of physical play. More than anything I wanted him to be in there for him. For that stage, for his growth, for him to take it to the next step. For him to gain from this game. There’s another guy [who] if you would have looked at him and if you would’ve asked him, if you would have been around him when he knew in the warm ups that he couldn’t go and it just didn’t respond like we thought it would, I mean, the kid was crushed. He wanted to play as bad as anybody. That’s another learning thing for him so he understands don’t ever take this for granted. Not that he would, but you’ve got a kid there where he wants to be a great football player and wants to be out there on every play.”

Comments

Blue in Yarmouth

September 9th, 2014 at 2:58 PM ^

"40 three times" I'm not trying to be critical here, I'm really not, nut the transcribing of these pressers is not very good. I honestly know that Greg and Brady aren't the most well spoken guys on the planet, but I've never had trouble understanding the intent of their responses so I have to figure there is a lot of either 1) typo's or 2) misqoutes here. I don't think a little more proofreading would be amiss for furture posts.

Honestly, I'm not trying to bash the new guy, this is just some (hopefully) constructive criticism. I appreciate the hard work, I just think we could all get a little more enjoyment out of reading it if it were transcribed properly. 

Adam Schnepp

September 9th, 2014 at 4:21 PM ^

I can promise you I'm not tying to misquote anyone. My goal is to bring these to you word-for-word, for better or worse. I add in what I think are missing words in brackets when I can, but I frankly had no idea what the 43 was referring to so I just put it in verbatim. It very likely may have been "40 three times," as you mentioned. I just feel that it's better that I put things in exactly as they're said instead of editing to make them more coherent.

pearlw

September 9th, 2014 at 2:20 PM ^

I really think a key point was raised in this...you basically had James Ross on the sidelines the entire game because they were in the nickel playing man. Ross is a guy that had 85 tackles last year and didnt have one this game because he hardly saw the field. I couldnt recall even seeing him the entire game. I saw RJS out there for a few plays and he had 2 tackles. But Im pleased that Mattison realized this was a big mistake. Effectively they sat James Ross the entire game so Delonte Hollowell could play. And Hollowell was only playing so they could play this defense they had designed to take advantage of the capabilities of Jabrill Peppers and Raymon Taylor who were both not even on the field.

reshp1

September 9th, 2014 at 2:25 PM ^

I thought this live too. Between when Taylor went down and halftime is when ND did the majority of their damage. Michigan seemed to have no answer other than subbing in Hollowell at Nickel and hoping Lewis and Countess could hold up.

I really wonder if they were expecting Peppers to be ready until late, either right before kickoff or in the day or two before the game. They seemed ill prepared to adjust from the style of defense that really depended on these guys to be available.

 

pearlw

September 9th, 2014 at 2:34 PM ^

I found the whole thing strange...When things start to go bad, I think one of your first thoughts would be how do I get James Ross on the field? This guy is a veteran, 85 tackles last year, has played on the big stage...yet he was on the sideline almost the entire game while the defense is getting ripped. You have to get your best players on the field. If you take Ross off to put Peppers on the field, that is something you can argue either way. If you take him off to put Hollowell on the field, it just seems strange.

dragonchild

September 9th, 2014 at 2:44 PM ^

They played zone last year so this is one of those rare occasions where they actually had that at their disposal.  I know they wanted to stay in man but I hope they use both the rest of the season because whatever they were doing to ND in the second half WORKED.

In the second half ND had a TD gifted by a BS call on JMFR and bupkus.  They were completely shut down.  It's a shame it didn't happen fast enough but MGoBlog likes to complain about halftime adjustments and they really adjusted this time.  If the offense could get anything going this could've been a game, but as soon as they started taking risks it blew up in their faces.

I'm not worried about the defense either.  ND got lucky with some amazing plays and penalties at the perfect moments to extend the few drives they strung together, and Mattison is right to take heat for the result, but good lord look at how many times ND couldn't even move the ball 20 yards.  If they can do that more consistently this defense will be every bit as good as advertised.  Mattison's job depends on that "if", but I believe him when he said the team played hard.  I was seeing those guys flying around the field on the 4th quarter well after the outcome had been decided.  In a way it was heartbreaking.

reshp1

September 9th, 2014 at 3:03 PM ^

To be fair Golson missed some gimmes and in general didn't look nearly as sharp in the second half. Their 3 drives to in the first half really were a thing of beauty. We made mistakes, but they definitely were spot on play after play.

mgoblue98

September 9th, 2014 at 3:32 PM ^

I will be interested to see if Michigan plays more zone in the next couple of games if Peppers and Taylor are still injured.

I am guessing that based on what he said in the presser that they will practice it more and have it at their disposal.

pearlw

September 9th, 2014 at 3:54 PM ^

If those two (Taylor and Peppers) dont play, I would be surprised if they dont play zone for the almost the entire game. RJS and James Ross are going to be on the field in that case..not Hollowell.

Monocle Smile

September 9th, 2014 at 2:25 PM ^

Yeah, we got torched through the air, but we stuffed the run pretty damn well.

Are we going to face another QB like Golson or athletes like that at receiver again? Maryland has two studs, but CJ Brown is very much not Golson.

ifis

September 9th, 2014 at 9:16 PM ^

Our defense had to play a very disciplined pass rush aginst Golson.  That won't be the case against Penn St. or MSU.  Hackenberg, in particular, is going to feel a great deal of pain from guys like Ryan and Henry (if he survives until our game with Penn St.'s awful O-line).

mgoblue98

September 9th, 2014 at 10:50 PM ^

MSU and PSU are 5 or 6 weeks away.  I am much more interested in the next two games against Miami and Utah.  Last year Akron and UConn were supposed to be games where Michigan could show up and win by 35.  The game against Miami is a game that Michigan is favored by around 32.

PurpleStuff

September 9th, 2014 at 3:06 PM ^

Dres Anderson is a senior WR coming off a 1,000 yard season.  Travis Wilson is a junior QB who now has two years of starting experience who can also make plays with his legs.  Bubba Poole and Devontae Booker give them a pair of solid backs as well.  They will spread it to multiple WR and mix the run and pass.

I don't think it is going to go well, especially if our offense can't keep pace.

alum96

September 9th, 2014 at 5:06 PM ^

Any team can take away 1 thing if they are committed to it.   We could stop every team from running 100 yards if we want to (well most of the time - OSU's 2013 OL and Hyde - I doubt we could have) , but it would expose our back 4/5 all game.  So while it is a nice stat I dont know if we can take much away from it.   Not enough data - I mean if they can stuff the run with 6 in the box all year that is one thing.  MSU essentially has 7-8 in the box every game and dares you to beat their corners 1 v 1.  So they have a very good run defense and take their chances that their CBs and Ss will figure it out.  So in theory just about any team with a bunch of 4 star athletes could commit to stopping either the pass or run game.

I am not saying this to be a downer.  I read a lot of Brian Kelly's comments after the game (I recommend anyone to do this in any competitive game to get the other viewpoint) and basically they saw what UM was doing and decided to do quick 3 step passes all day.  It was a strategy once they saw what UM's defense was doing.

Likewise on defense they wanted to get us to 3rd down and then they unleashed schemes/coverages that Devin either had not seen or they changed it on every 3rd down to be different so he never saw the same thing repeatedly.

uncleFred

September 9th, 2014 at 11:02 PM ^

Did you read Kelly's comments after the 2013 game or the 2011 game or the 2012 game? Did that provide insight into what they did wrong and our team did well? I don't remember you commenting about his views in prior years but I may have missed it or have a bad memory. 

WIn or lose I take the other side's commentary with a pound or two of salt. WIn or lose hindsight is 20/20. 

MichAero

September 10th, 2014 at 12:10 AM ^

I wouldn't say that we really sold out to stop the run though. We were in the nickel most of the game, and I could be wrong but it didn't look like we were making a huge effort to get guys into the box to stop the run. To hold them to 1.7 YPC, 6.65 YPA, and 4.3 YPP without 2 or 3 important pieces is impressive. 

For perspective, their Tommy Rees lead offense last year put up 5.1, 5.9, and 5.7, respectively against us last year. 

maizenbluenc

September 9th, 2014 at 2:45 PM ^

What, was there a sign on the door: ask a biting question, and get moved to the Freep and John U Bacon equipment closet section of the press box?

Someone should have asked: "two weeks ago you said your were very excited because this defense is going to be special. What happened?"

mg-o-mg

September 9th, 2014 at 3:01 PM ^

In my perception, Taylor and Peppers were the top two corners, and Countess was overrated as a man defender.  Take away the top two young corners, we don't have much in the way of experience.  You're counting on Countess, who hasn't looked like a world-beater following his injury and people who haven't proven themselves.  The rest of the defense played pretty darn well, given the position they were put in.

markusr2007

September 9th, 2014 at 3:08 PM ^

he's been at some mighty low pointswhen coaching college football:

L vs Alabama, 3-31 in 2005

L vs Oregon State 9-41 in 2000

I looked at the teams he DCed in colllege from Michigan, Notre Dame to Florida, I don't think he's ever been part of a shut-out loss until now.

This just seems more than just a "bump in the road", but what can you do? Gotta move forward and play football. Ten more games to play.

samuofm

September 9th, 2014 at 3:25 PM ^

As Mattison says, the subsitutions and coverage didn't make sense given the available personnel. The entire season depends on our defense being as good as advertisted. This should be the best defense that Michigan has had since 2006.

During the Brady Hoke era our defense has rarely been the problem, especially on road games. Because we have a new offensive system, we need the defense to keep us in these early games. Its crazy to realize it like this, but if we lose Utah or Minnesota, this staff is probably on the way out. There is no margin for error anymore. There better be a plan B, C and D if guys get hurt and it better make sense. 

 

Uper73

September 9th, 2014 at 4:19 PM ^

Mattison thinks his defense only did a couple things poorly? Wow.

The run defense numbers are really meaningless, ND never needed to run, they carved us up with the pass and stuck to it.

Mattisons claim to fame is blitzing and pressure, but he has not put a D line out yet that gets to the QB, and, when the D line is able to hurry a QB, the back seven cannot cover. He has done a poor job at pass defense in his tenure.

No doubt he improved the D over the previous regime, but once an OC understands his tendencies, especially with a QB who can release quickly and who will hang in the pocket, opposing teams tend to move the ball easily.

maize-blue

September 9th, 2014 at 4:40 PM ^

I don't really have any concerns with the defense. Sure, there are things they can work on, but I feel like they are capable. This was a game that Michigan was probably going to have to score 30+ points to win. They scored none. All phases of the D didn't look the best, but this was going to be a shoot out kind of game. They probably could have held ND to a reasonable score with less turnovers on offense and a few more extended offensive drives.