We got six-one'd by four and seventeen. [Bryan Fuller]

Neck Sharpies: The Talent Won Comment Count

Seth January 6th, 2022 at 2:43 PM

I think I might make a habit out of breaking out things I notice in UFR. That was the origin, after all, of the old MGoBlog feature Picture Pages, which in turn was the inspiration for Neck Sharpies. This one got broken out when I realized I was taking way too long to explain why Georgia’s talent was too much for Michigan’s, at least on this side of the ball.

It’s the first appearance by JJ McCarthy in this game, the first play of their second offensive drive, and a second early sign that Georgia’s incredible collection of talent was creating issues that Michigan hadn’t faced this year—not even against Ohio State:

THE ALIGNMENT

Michigan’s got their two-TE personnel in, which isn’t odd for them. Also not odd for them is covering a tight end to unbalance the line. Refresher of the rules: The offense needs at minimum seven men on the line of scrimmage. The end to each side can be an eligible receiver if he’s wearing an eligible number (0-49 or 80-99), with the interior five ineligible. In this example Joel Honigford (#84) is “covered” and thus must be subject to the rules for linemen. Hayes is also subject to those rules, since he’s wearing #76.

image

Also McCarthy is in, which is a signifier that the Wolverines are looking to do some old fashioned college crappe, which usually means some kind of read that removes a defender with the quarterback’s eyes. In these situations Michigan expects their opponents to stack the box, bringing at least one safety down because the offense is down a potential receiver. It’s an invitation that few would pass up, since it’s supposed to be an advantage for the defense. If the safety gets optioned by the QB, at least the numbers advantage from the option has been nullified.

It’s also part of how Michigan likes to play offense. The gamble here is the defense can’t do enough with the extra man to significantly alter an outcome: what are they gonna do, have the safety run into Hassan Haskins? On the other hand, a safety down is a chance for a big play, and these Wolverines led the nation in generating such.

That Georgia’s leaving *both* safeties high here is a thing we haven’t seen much of. Knowing that Michigan is likely to run, that McCarthy is likely to option someone, and that Michigan likes to bring material from the backside to overwhelm their numbers at the point of attack, the Bulldogs are saying “bring it.” Their one conceit to the threat of a run to Honigford’s side is they’ve lined up their DE/DT and their SAM (a 235-pound DE/OLB) outside the TE.

That’s saying a thing too. The big gap between the tackles is an invitation to put the linebackers in conflict between a hard-charging Haskins and a quick pass behind them.

image

In short, the alignment of the two teams here is a threat from Michigan to run 9 guys vs 7, and Georgia is saying “Bring it.” Of course neither team is being honest about their intentions.

[After THE JUMP: This goes down]

THE DEFENSE'S PLAY

Georgia actually intends to blitz those A gaps, twisting their two ILBs. Kirby Smart runs these twist blitzes as often as anyone since Dantonio, because it punishes offensive linemen who pay too much attention to the tackles. When you’re the center and Jordan Davis is lined up in your vicinity, your mind is probably on doubling him, not what to do about linebackers coming in hot to either side of you.

image

The interior gaps are actually strong; it’s the edges that are weak. And that’s actually the key to the way Georgia was playing Michigan: they trusted those OLBs to win matchups with their athleticism, leaving a pair of safeties back so if anything got past them the cleanup would happen long before things could get out of hand.

In this case, it might have, because Michigan was attacking the edge, and schemed up an extra guy to do so.

THE OFFENSE’S PLAY

Michigan is trying their 2018 staple, the Arc Read, which you may remember from such glorious moments as Shea Patterson running for a back-breaking first down on MSU, or busting an 80-yarder on Wisconsin. As drawn up, the tight end and QB are both supposed to be reading the playside edge, in this case the SAM (S):

image

If that guy looks like he’s going to hang low or come inside All’s block, All whoops him, the QB keeps, and it’s a free run outside. If he stays outside the QB hands off, the TE kicks his edge man, and it’s a free split zone.

Georgia’s pinch here should help that—both LBs are trapped inside by their blitzes and Honigford’s DE gave up the D gap outside of the TE, where the SAM should be in a conflict between chasing the RB inside and worrying about the QB outside. The Corum TD to kick off the Big Ten Championship rout was the same play.

HOW IT WENT DOWN

Our first snapshot here reveals there’s an issue with Michigan’s plan. Running off the backside works because the edge gets stuck in no-win situation between the RB and the QB, but when there’s an extra player out there the read is a little more difficult to make. Here’s the mesh point as McCarthy reads the edge defender, #4 Nolan Smith:

image

It’s relevant here that Nolan Smith was the #1 overall recruit, nationally, of the 2019 class to the 247 Composite. That’s a bit different situation than an Iowa linebacker; later on in this game McCarthy would try a keep on a similar read and get stuffed in the backfield. Smith’s talent is a game-changer here because he can shuffle closer to the running back’s path without sacrificing the safety of the edge. Smith is the reason Georgia doesn’t need to bring down a safety to even up the numbers on the edge. And here the threat of him exploding upfield is means McCarthy has to lean towards giving the ball to Haskins despite that being the low-upside option of an otherwise even read.

What that means however is the the quarterback run threat, and by extension the lead block of Andrel Anthony, have both been dealt with by forcing the keep. Georgia has evened up the numbers again, because Smith effectively covered both options of the option.

If that guy’s setting up camp over by the hash mark he’s more of a threat to the running back, but he’s also much easier for the TE to whoop around. The way many defenses defend a mesh is to delay that handoff as long as possible, allowing the rest of the defense time to beat blocks and the secondary an opportunity to get down to help. By reading a guy off a TE’s side Michigan is giving Georgia that extra time—a good couple of beats in fact—because they can’t get the TE over there any faster. Offenses that run options off the frontside know this and often move the mesh point towards the option player to speed that along. Others plan to block that guy 100% of the time.

Georgia has extended that line by how the DE, #44 Travon Walker, is playing Honigford. You can see in the screengrab above that Walker’s arms are extended into both shoulderpads. That’s a defender in position to threaten the gap outside while also being able to get back to the C gap. Winning that block is key for the Bulldogs, just as it was for Iowa:

image

But things are different with the Bulldogs. With this Iowa screengrab above you can see there’s one more defender involved. The Iowa guy who got read was the LB who flung himself upfield and is now trying to come back to Corum. The player in shuffle position—the job that Georgia has Smith doing—is a safety. And crucially for the result of this play, that safety is therefore not hanging deep.

Back to Georgia, as McCarthy makes the handoff, Smith has shuffled all the way to the end of the line where kicking him won’t really create much of a gap. Walker has begun fighting to take away the C gap. All has barely crossed the centerpoint, so Smith now has time, knowing the RB has the ball, to decide how he wants to take on the kickout block. With Walker inside, Smith knows he can’t let the play bounce around him, but he also can’t allow a gap between him and the TEs to form.

image

So he crashes. That flash of white is his back.

image

At this point we need to turn our attention to Haskins. One way Georgia can fix their weakness on the edge that’s now under threat is to have their linebacker cover both his interior gap and track down anything outside. This is the 6-1 gamble that Michigan tried with Michigan State. The advantage to the defense is they have almost every gap jammed up. The disadvantage is they are betting the ‘1’ linebacker won’t get beat by the running back.

That has a real chance of happening here. Haskins pressed the gap that Nakobe Dean is exploring, meaning the LB will have a hard time getting outside if Haskins bounces.

image

He does, Dean gets stuck inside, and this could still be a big play if Haskins can read how Nolan Smith charged inside of All. That’s a bounce we saw him make against Washington. But here Haskins is focused on the dive inside of All…

image

image

And though he breaks the tackle and leaps forward for four yards, it could have been much more.

image

LESSONS?

1. Georgia used their talent to cancel number advantages. All season Michigan invited safeties into the box to create opportunities for big plays. Georgia was the first to say “Nah, my seven can handle your eight.” They could do that because they could trust most of those seven to do very hard things consistently. Travon Walker got great extension on Honigford to play both sides of the TE. Nakobe Dean threatened a TFL in the backside A gap and was there to tackle when Haskins squeezed through the frontside C gap. Nolan Smith took away McCarthy’s read while still setting

Later on McCarthy would try Smith on the same read and get taken down in the backfield. The ability of an edge defender to play both sides of a zone read like that changes the approach of the rest of the defense. They don’t have to worry about the quarterback after all, because it takes a Denard-caliber runner to get around that dude. Also on this play they had their all-world NT leave the gap he was threatening to create a weird 6-1 front, because they knew the offense would be paying extra attention to Jordan Davis, and because they trusted Nakobe Dean to make them right if the offense found the open gap. Ultimately he did.

2. Michigan was pressing. You see it with Haskins, who was not going to try the bounce here:

image

Haskins has put his put his foot in the ground and run through tackles all year so this is not surprising. When they were really cooking this year, however, they were letting the game come to them. I think the offense got sped up by the moment, and the opponent. It wasn’t their sharpest game, and needed to be.

3. Or else they needed to get clever. I pointed out after the Rutgers game that there’s an opportunity on this play to make McCarthy relevant again: Have the RB pitch it out to him. It’s not a new play—teams have run that for two point conversions for as long as zone reads have been a thing. With all of those weeks to prepare, I wanted to see something along those lines. The only trick play they ran was the flea flicker, IIRC. I’ll get into this in UFR—which is delayed because the ESPN main broadcast was so zoomed in I couldn’t learn anything until All-22 became available—but in general I was disappointed with Michigan’s gameplan. Georgia was ready for everything the Wolverines had put on film, and I didn’t see much that hadn’t been already.

4. There was a chance. What Georgia did with their talent was even odds against a Michigan offense that could do its own unfair things, like move Devonte Wyatt with Andrew Stueber, and threaten a big run outside with JJ McCarthy while still making you want to keep your safeties in a two-deep shell, and blow out a guy like Smith with Erick All even with the extra setup time, and get a few extra yards after contact with Hassan Haskins. Georgia made the better calls, the better plays, and had the better players. But I wouldn’t say Michigan was incapable of playing with the Bulldogs. Hopefully they learned a few things about dealing with talent on this level, and about themselves. It’s right there for the taking, and should be again next fall.

Comments

Tex_Ind_Blue

January 6th, 2022 at 3:24 PM ^

With all of those weeks to prepare, I wanted to see something along those lines.

 

--- will wait for the UFR to tell us whether the coaches prepared anything new for the CFP Semi. I wish the score/game was a bit closer. No complaints otherwise. Enjoyed the season immensely. Good luck to the team and coaches. 

Yo_Blue

January 6th, 2022 at 3:37 PM ^

I know it's asking a lot, but if somehow Haskins could pitch back to McCarthy that could go all the way. I've never seen a pitch in that situation outside a straight-back flea flicker.

trueblueintexas

January 6th, 2022 at 3:55 PM ^

That is the most, "but if it worked", "it won't work", "yeah, but if it worked", "it won't work" play ever.

It looks so promising, but look at the distance the pitch would need to travel while the guy making the pitch is most likely getting hit. And the pitch has to be backwards making it a live ball. If not successful, the chance it becomes a TD for the offense if probably the same as for the defense. 

L'Carpetron Do…

January 7th, 2022 at 9:34 AM ^

Yes! I was gonna say - the only team I've ever seen do this is Nebraska. And I remember seeing them do something similar even several years ago. 

The nature of these modern RPO plays actually lend themselves to 2-on-1 rugby style situations in which the ball carrier gets an edge and finds himself one-on-one with an LB or S and a lot more room to run outside. With a QB who can run like McCarthy (and who is often trailing the play anyway), that opens up the enticing possibility of improvised pitches to bust open big plays (I think there was a lot of this stuff in football in the old days). 

I would also love to see a QB-sneak maul/pitch-back and a rugby-inspired wacky end-of-game Cal-Stanford play (I think it can be done). Harbaugh should head down to a spring rugby practice this year - he might get some ideas. 

m9tt

January 6th, 2022 at 3:53 PM ^

My biggest frustration coming out of this game was Michigan's offensive approach to Georgia's defensive athleticism. It felt like they didn't believe that the athletic/talent gap was as great as it proved to be and they could scheme open a Blake Corum swing pass or an AJ Henning end-around by Georgia's defense via scheme and pre-snap motion. That's the exact wrong approach to attack an uber-athletic defense like UGA.

Michigan needed to use that athleticism against them by getting Georgia players moving in the wrong direction. Brian mentioned the Ndamukong Suh trap-fest game against Harbaugh's 49ers or Scott Frost unleashing his linebacker-hell offense... If Michigan comes out and traps Jordyn Davis a couple of times on the first series or ejects Dean to the wrong side of the field with a fake swing pass, you'd get those players to start thinking rather than simply reacting, and it never felt like Michigan challenged Georgia's post-snap intelligence in any meaningful way.

trueblueintexas

January 6th, 2022 at 4:05 PM ^

Reading Seth's post, it seems like Georgia's coaches not only leveraged their team's athletic advantage, but also trusted them to make the right decisions. The play highlighted doesn't work if the end guy doesn't attack it the right way. 

I'm no fan of Georgia or Kirby Smart, but it's not like his defensive guys go to the NFL and fail. It's not like OSU QB's. 

Credit where credit is due. I'm guessing the UFR will yield equal amounts of "OMG - strength and speed" and "dude made a good play".

m9tt

January 6th, 2022 at 7:48 PM ^

Oh, absolutely. Full credit goes to Georgia. That's not what this post is about.

To phrase it another way (because you're a fellow UFR devotee like myself), I just can't shake the feeling that we built our entire gameplan around "trying to edge Dax Hill." If I'm trying to attack Dax Hill, I'm going to test him in coverage on a slot fade, not by throwing WR screens in his direction. 

Nakobe Dean is a great linebacker, but if I'm going to test him, I don't want it to be "Can you run across the field in time" but rather "Are you sure you're running to the right place?"  Dean can probably handle both problems because he's a great player, but I know for an absolute fact that he can do the former. 

GoBlue96

January 7th, 2022 at 9:08 AM ^

I tend to agree with you.  The coaches have to fully acknowledge that there is a large talent gap when creating the game plan.  We see teams like Boise State and other smaller schools perform well with a larger talent gap frequently.  I don't think our coaches did that.  You have to build more trickery and deception into your plan.  It's not going to work all the time, but it gives you a better chance.

Carpetbagger

January 6th, 2022 at 4:13 PM ^

Finally, someone who put into the proper words what I've been trying to say since that game.

Georgia's defense seemed so much faster because they always knew where they were going, and we never made them be wrong like we did OSU.

We had 26 days to work out a completely different approach to Georgia, and instead we rolled out the same set of plays we did for OSU.

Watching From Afar

January 6th, 2022 at 4:47 PM ^

I tend not to get too high or low given individual plays/games, or at least I try to. In some cases, that's being a debbie downer and in others it's not acknowledging big problems.

For example - I never thought Warinner was amazing. He rescued the OL from the Drevno days and got them to be good in pass protection, but with 5 future NFL draft picks on the OL they were never top 5 in the nation and constantly struggled to run the ball.

With Brown I had some blinders on after the 2018 OSU game and thought it was just a weird confluence of events that would otherwise be addressed. Took me a few extra weeks to come to the conclusion he was the problem as much as the scheme/players.

That brings me to Gattis, who deserved a lot of the accolades he got this year to a degree. The OL paved dudes, they almost had two 1,000 yard rushers, and that OSU game was a mix of tricky stuff and the OL putting OSU's defense in an atomic wedgie. BUT, his play calling can be a bit milquetoast from time to time (Rutgers) and the passing game wasn't CFP worthly. I know Brian joked that there should be a flea flicker every game, but that's kind of what the offense turned into. "O this worked. Let's do it again."

Or a play call works in theory, but they miss a key part in execution. Case in point, that orbit motion swing pass to Corum that was stopped for a loss. Dean (or whichever LB) could run flat out to chase down Corum because he had no traffic to weave through. Whether that be other LBs/Safeties in the box pre-snap or a WR/TE post-snap, we've seen LBs/CBs get beat on those motion passes because they have to clear some garbage in their path. Michigan has been beaten by it before, they have Corum and think "this should work" but don't account for 1 thing that screws it up.

All of that being said, Gattis got better this year and the offense returns a ton next year so I expect it to continue it's improvements. But that UGA game was a bit of "we've done this to everybody, it should work again" mixed with "uhhh I don't have a plan B."

Carcajou

January 9th, 2022 at 7:18 AM ^

We had 26 days to work out a completely different approach to Georgia, and instead we rolled out the same set of plays we did for OSU.

 

Though I suspect a small part of that was Gattis probing Georgia (especially in the 1st half) to see how they played stuff Michigan had shown before, and they may have schemed some answers to that. But they didn't expect the defense to give up so many points, so early.

schreibee

January 6th, 2022 at 4:34 PM ^

Ah, you've stumbled upon Michigan's problem in this game very aptly M9tt - challenging Uga's "post snap intelligence"!

All year long Seth & Brian have illustrated Cade's pre-snap intelligence  They've simultaneously decried his almost total lack of post-snap adjustments!

I had my first "Uh oh" moment when I saw Cade's head swinging thru his reads before dumping off ineffectively on maybe the 2nd or 3rd play of the game. My "oh shit" moment was when they ran the Flea Flicker so early, without having established the run 1st, and it too was a dump-off.

I knew then (as best you could with the ESPN telecast so zoomed in, as Seth pointed out) that they were fucking with Cade's pre-snap decisions - whether by dominating physically or with post-snap movement wasn't immediately clear. 

Turns out the answer was YES!

SeattleChris

January 7th, 2022 at 3:59 PM ^

Precisely what I was saying to friends offline. We've seen this time and again. With prep and in-game coaching there's a balance between calling what you've been good at and works for your personnel and changing to plays that have worked well against the opposition via film study and scouting. I was disappointed in the game play that we didn't have: 

  1. Quick hitting trap game 
  2. A bit more inside/outside zone combos (though I may be wrong when UFR comes) 
  3. RPOs on things like the arc read (could we have had Anthony fake the block and catch a flat or stick route)?
  4. More seam and same side crossers (arrow/slant)  route combos in the passing game 
  5. Tempo to keep their dline subs in, just like MSU did to us.. 

I agree that the coaches overestimated our 1:1 match-ups, team in general was sped up by Georgia's talent and reacted with uncharacteristically poor play and finally, that Georgia has one hell of a talented team. How many LBs can blitz an A gap, abandon and recover to tackle the C? Not many. 

SeattleChris

January 7th, 2022 at 3:59 PM ^

Precisely what I was saying to friends offline. We've seen this time and again. With prep and in-game coaching there's a balance between calling what you've been good at and works for your personnel and changing to plays that have worked well against the opposition via film study and scouting. I was disappointed in the game plan that we didn't see: 

  1. Quick hitting trap game 
  2. A bit more inside/outside zone combos (though I may be wrong when UFR comes) 
  3. RPOs on things like the arc read (could we have had Anthony fake the block and catch a flat or stick route)?
  4. More seam and same side crossers (arrow/slant)  route combos in the passing game 
  5. Tempo to keep their dline subs in, just like MSU did to us.. 

I agree that the coaches overestimated our 1:1 match-ups, team in general was sped up by Georgia's talent and reacted with uncharacteristically poor play and finally, that Georgia has one hell of a talented team. How many LBs can blitz an A gap, abandon and recover to tackle the C? Not many. 

Gulogulo37

January 8th, 2022 at 1:10 AM ^

I agree they could have had a better gameplan (e.g., traps), but I think "using their speed against them" sounds a lot better in theory than reality. It's better to have fast players. They did try some misdirection and tricks. That double fake was supposed to do exactly that, but their DL tore through our OL and then everyone criticized the play because it looked so bad. Using their superior talent allowed them to keep safeties back and also play more conservatively with their LBs at times.

Space Coyote is breaking down some plays on Twitter. I've only seen one so far but it's the same idea. It was the flea flicker. Michigan tried getting the safeties to bite on play action and all the beef going right, but you can see Georgia's safeties and LBs not attacking at all. All was probably still open enough for a throw, but it wasn't a bust. They played to prevent those explosives by not committing to the box with their ears pinned back. They schemed not to have their speed used against them. Someone posted a video here from some Georgia analysts and I thought the guy was pretty spot on. He said Michigan's OL is good but not a bunch of butt kickers and we saw that.

I think a lot of people had the idea that they're talented but dumb because it's the south or they only recruit like LSU bball or something, but they're not. And they don't play a simple defense like OSU was running. I saw some quote from Kirby I think at a coaching clinic where he says coaches worry about putting too much on guys' plates but then sometimes there's a call you need and you don't have it. They're a very diverse, extremely talented defense. Michigan should have kept it closer sure, but I'm really not sweating it because I think the way Georgia played, Michigan really had no chance to win this game.

Also, I had forgotten myself, but the offense was moving the ball some, not easily of course. The problem was the D got torched so bad it really took Michigan out of their game almost immediately.

95civicex

January 6th, 2022 at 3:58 PM ^

The only trick play they ran was the flea flicker, IIRC.

The 2pt play was pretty nifty....though anyone would be excused for not having made it to that point in the game.


If I recall correctly, they did the thing Penn St. used to do with McSorey/Barkley where the QB and RB hop to their left (or right) putting the RB behind center in the shotgun and the QB now lined up as a RB

On the 2pt play Corum handed off to McCarthy, who flipped to Henning on the reverse with Corum and All as lead blockers.

Snazzy_McDazzy

January 6th, 2022 at 4:03 PM ^

A lot of this game came down to two factors IMO. First, we needed superior quarterback play and instead found ourselves facing a version of Stetson Bennett even his own mother wouldn't recognize. Second, Michigan acted like the team that hadn't been here before and was just happy to be invited to the party. That happens when you are the first preseason unranked team to make the playoffs. Georgia's staff knows what it takes from previous experience and Georgia's players wanted to punish someone, anyone for what happened in the SEC championship game.

ak47

January 6th, 2022 at 4:36 PM ^

In some ways I think the paving of OSU might have made Michigan a little overconfident in their ability to win at the line of scrimmage against anyone. Georgia was a more talented team and they played sharp and well coached. OSU was a more talented team that played without technique and no plan.

Carcajou

January 9th, 2022 at 7:30 AM ^

Michigan a little overconfident in their ability to win at the line of scrimmage against anyone

 

Winning the Joe Moore award only reinforced that overconfidence. I thought they were much improved this season, but best in the nation? I wasn't so sure (they seemed like they were getting better game by game, but far from perfect), and gave the Georgia DL extra motivation they really didn't need. They especially controlled the edges, on both sides of the ball.

BlueMan80

January 6th, 2022 at 4:55 PM ^

I remember watching that play and telling myself, "Close but no cigar, because those guys got there in a hurry with numbers."  Thanks for peeling back the layers on this.

AlbanyBlue

January 6th, 2022 at 6:13 PM ^

I have been really positive since it became obvious to me that the coaching -- and coaching situation/roles -- had improved this season. That said, I'm taking one small step back. I will wait for UFR and more knowledgeable people to chime in, but it seems as though Michigan could have had a better gameplan for this game. As we all know, this has happened many times before -- for some reason, Harbaugh's Michigan teams don't have their best games during bowl season. I would reeeeallly love to see that improve as well.

SDCran

January 6th, 2022 at 6:44 PM ^

I agree, I really thought UM had the plays and players to hang much tougher in this game.   I’m not saying UGA didn’t have a clear advantage.   But some plain old  execution would have gone a long way to closing that gap.  

AC1997

January 6th, 2022 at 6:54 PM ^

I always learn a lot from these - thanks Seth!  

Obviously we all want trick plays all the time with flea flickers, half back passes, triple reverses, hook-and-ladders, etc.  I'd love to see some crazy play come out of the garage for this game (or any game).  But you can't build an entire offense on those.  I also suspect that the reason that I can honestly not remember ever seeing a RB pitch back to a QB on a sweep play like this outside of a crazy 2-point conversion is the risk-reward.  Not only is that a live ball, risky, difficult, etc.....but what's the upside if it goes back to JJ - he runs until the safety gets him at 9 yards?  Most coaches aren't taking that risk/reward.

What wasn't mentioned in the podcast and isn't mentioned here is the OL performance in the game.  I think one of the most critical reasons for our success this year was our OL play - getting our RBs to the LOS with a chance and keeping Cade clean. This play wasn't terrible, but the point at which Haskins has to make his read there isn't a single lineman who's been able to move his man much.  The OL didn't give our RB or QB many options to choose from or time to choose them - which means our coaches don't have as much opportunity to try exotic stuff.  

Jon06

January 7th, 2022 at 7:59 AM ^

The only trick play they ran was the flea flicker, IIRC. I’ll get into this in UFR—which is delayed because the ESPN main broadcast was so zoomed in I couldn’t learn anything until All-22 became available—but in general I was disappointed with Michigan’s gameplan. Georgia was ready for everything the Wolverines had put on film, and I didn’t see much that hadn’t been already.

I thought our two-point conversion play was tricky and new. But it was the only new thing I saw, and they only broke it out after the game was virtually over. Very disappointing, that.

Amaznbluedoc

January 7th, 2022 at 1:40 PM ^

Great breakdown of a single play which was an indication of the GA talent and strategy.  All told it comes down to TPE (talent, preparation, and execution).  GA was way out front on the Talent component and far exceeded us in both preparation and execution.  They schemed us perfectly on the other side of the ball too, with perfect blocking up-front, double-teaming Aidan on nearly every play, and exploiting our defensive weaknesses with the bubble screens, swing routes, and quick throws.  My only hope beyond continued recruiting is that our team learns from this experience and redouble our efforts.

Gulogulo37

January 8th, 2022 at 1:19 AM ^

I don't remember the origin of the name, but it's basically what you see here. Brian was doing UFRs and Seth would pick out one or 2 plays that gave you an overall feel for what they were trying to do in the game, often with a little history or breaking down how a specific play works with all its variations.

ShadowStorm33

January 13th, 2022 at 2:42 PM ^

Not sure if he does it anymore, but Harbaugh used to have a sharpie attached to a lanyard that he wore around his neck all the time. While it never got as much publicity as the khakis, it was still prominent enough that someone (can't remember if it was here or MDen or what) made a t-shirt with a graphic of a sharpie hanging from a lanyard around the neck.

So the title evokes the fact that coaches use markers to draw up plays, and that Harbaugh at least used to wear his marker around his neck.