Opponent Watch 2019: Week 3 Comment Count

BiSB September 19th, 2019 at 10:54 AM

About Last Week

Wow. Now THAT was a week. Not a week for well-played, quality football, mind you… but quite a week nonetheless. We had an El Assico, an El Assico with 17 total points, a third El Assico with a 19 yard field goal with the kicking team trailing by 7 in the 4th quarter, and a fourth El Assico with two safeties and a seven yard punt. Fair warning, though: you might want to stock up on schadenfreude and canned goods this week. Next week's schedule is brutal.

The Road Ahead

Wisconsin (2-0, 0-0 B1G)

Last week: Bye

Recap: No Recap. Bye.

This team is as frightening as: When the Allies first busted out tanks in World War I. Still a little clumsy, and they're still working out the tactics of how to deploy the things. And while it might not seem especially modern by OUR standards, imagine the fear of being a German on the Western Front just getting slammed into by inside zones day after day and all of a sudden "holy Kaiserballs, Fritz, they are throwing the ball to Jonathan Taylor SINCE WHEN CAN THEY THROW THE BALL TO JONATHAN TAYLOR AND WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO USE TO STOP THAT???"  Fear Level = 8

Image result for world war i tank

Fun Fact: Leonardo da Vinci's original turtle-shell design of an armored fighting vehicle was inspired by watching Paul Chryst run a two-minute drill

Michigan can sleep soundly about: Wisconsin ain't played nobody.

Michigan should worry about: Michigan also ain't played nobody, and Wisconsin has looked significantly better against their nobody.  

When they play Michigan: I hear Wisconsin is lovely this time of year.

Next game: vs. Michigan, noon, FOX (UW -3)

Rutgers (1-1, 0-1 B1G)

Last week: Bye

Recap: No Recap. Bye. Sweet, merciful bye. Like a warm embrace that says "I love you" but also "I'm sorry about what is about to happen to you."  A conjugal visit from Not Getting An Atomic Wedgie At This Moment.

This team is as frightening as: Well-rested Rutgers. Fear Level = 2

Michigan should worry about: uh

Michigan can sleep soundly about: Rutgers' opening-week statement win over UMass is looking a little less statement-y, as the Minutemen have since been blown out by Southern Illinois (45-20) and Charlotte (52-17). Rutgers is more than a touchdown underdog to a Boston College team that just lost 48-24 to Kansas. The transitive property of football is flawed, but none of this seems good.

When they play Michigan: That "freshmen get to play four games" rule may as well come with the clarifier that "one of them will be against Rutgers."

Next game: vs. Boston College, noon, BTN (Rutgers +8)

[AFTER THE JUMP: the conference, as they say, lost the plot]

Iowa (3-0, 1-0 B1G)

Last week: Won at Iowa State, 18-17

Recap: The good news is that Iowa notched their most consequential road win since 2015. What's more, this incarnation of EL ASSICO was, at worst, the third most Assico game of the Big Ten slate.

The bad news is that I watched this game live, and I dove into the advanced stats, and I have genuinely no idea how Iowa won. They weren't really better at anything. They were outgained by approximately 3.4 yards per play, which is a huge margin (for comparison purposes, that is a larger margin than last year's Michigan/Michigan State game or the Michigan/Ohio State game). Iowa threw for 5.7 yards per attempt, while Iowa State threw for 9.3 yards per attempt. The running games were roughly equal. And as tempting as it is to suggest that the hilarious ending to the game helps to explain it…

…it doesn't explain how Iowa had a lead through the 58.5 minutes leading up to that.

This team is as frightening as: 

Kinnick Iowa:  Image result for The Good Place

Road Iowa:     Image result for Young Sheldon

Fear Level = 6

Michigan should worry about: Jim Harbaugh has a losing record against two Big Ten teams: Ohio State and Iowa.

Michigan can sleep soundly about: Iowa's defensive front has generated shockingly little havoc. They have only three sacks through three games (3.2% of pass attempts, dead last in the conference), and they are last in the nation with 6 tackles for loss. AJ Epenesa is generating a handful of QB pressures, but unless they develop some additional threats, Epenesa is going to be eating double-teams for the rest of the year.

When they play Michigan: Don't get caught looking ahead to Illinois.

Next game: Bye

Illinois (2-1, 0-0 B1G)

Last week: Lost to Eastern Michigan, 34-31

Recap: I know, I know. But this isn't that bad. EMU had a transitive win over Ohio State last year, and is light years beyond the days of the EMU program that averaged 2.5 wins per year under Ron English. Chris Creighton has built a thoroughly unremarkable program in Ypsilanti, which itself is remarkable.

Image result for eastern michigan tower

Not pictured: Michael Penix

That said, since Lovie Smith arrived the Illini are 4-23 against the Big Ten and 2-2 against the MAC. EMU, meanwhile, is a MAC team who is a MAC team in the MAC, and they are 3-0 against the Big Ten in that span. If you can find me an Illinois fan who wouldn't trade Lovie for Chris Creighton tomorrow, I would say, "wow, you found an actual Illinois fan in 2019," but then I would say, "yeah, that's nuts."

This team is as frightening as: A poor man's Eastern Michigan. Fear Level = 2.5

Michigan should worry about: Defensive End Oluwole Betiku Jr. leads the country with 6 sacks. Betiku was a 5-star who spent three years at USC and grad-transferred to Illinois this spring (and has two years of eligibility left). Betiku's run defense would make him unplayable on standard downs for a lot of teams, but he brings athleticism and some real pass rush upside.

Michigan can sleep soundly about: A vanilla RPO-plus-read-option offense should shred this team into confetti.

When they play Michigan: Muck Fichigan. Get it? GET IT? Lol, owned.

Next game: vs. Nebraska, 8:00 p.m., BTN (Illinois +13)

Penn State (3-0, 0-0 B1G)

Last week: Beat Pitt, 17-10

Recap: Ordinarily, this would be the point where we would point and laugh at Penn State for a little while.  After all, they HATE this game. They hate this game like Michigan hates Michigan State, only without the feelings of respect, parity, and camaraderie.  If this is Pitt's Super Bowl, it is Penn State's Festivus. It's an annual tradition they absolutely despise that involves a lot of yelling and grievances and awkward feats of strength, set against the backstop of strained family relations.

And this one was worse: it was close and competitive and terrible. Penn State was a 16.5 point favorite at home over Pitt, yet they had to fend off two late possessions to pull out a narrow and rather hilarious win. And we would love to dwell on the fact that Penn State surrendered 372 passing yards, the most passing yards by Pitt against a Power 5 team in six years, and that Penn State couldn't run the ball at all. But then Pat Narduzzi did the dumb thing, so we have to point and laugh at that instead.

Can Math feel sadness? Because I feel sad on Math's behalf.  I only took a few semesters of math in college, and even then I am actively offended by this level of stupidity. I don't even know which argument is the dumbest, or the dumbest part of each dumb argument. But, for starters:

  • Yes, you need two scores to win. You know one of them can come in overtime, right? Like, you don't have to actively SEEK overtime because you think overtime is for the weak or is filled with spiders or lava or something, but if you end up there, you can still win from there, right?
  • Yes, you need two scores to win. And one of them needs to be a touchdown. When are you going to be closer to scoring said touchdown than when you have the ball on the one yard line?
  • You think overtime is lava spiders. Got it. But you do know you can go for two after the touchdown, right? In which case, (a) if you make it, congratulations, there's your second score, and (b) if you miss, congratulations, you STILL ONLY NEED THE SAME ONE SCORE YOU NEEDED TO BEGIN WITH.
  • You don't think you have a third play that can gain one yard? Bummer, but okay. But then what's your plan for driving somewhere between 50 and 90 yards when (if) you get the ball back? You know that the field is just comprised of a bunch of one yard chunks that you will eventually have to traverse, right?
  • You trust your defense, eh? Well, you know a great place to trust your defense? On the ONE FREEKING YARD LINE. A safety gets you the ball back, and also counts as one of your two scores that you have to get in regulation to avoid the lava spiders. And even without a safety, the odds that Penn State has to punt out of their own end zone are really high. If you kick the field goal, whether you make or miss you let Penn State out from the goal line.
  • You are dumb.

You have out-Frames'd Frames. I award you no points. So you still need two scores to win.

(Of course, Frames did give Pitt an extra timeout on the last play of the game for unknown reasons, but overall he was the more cunning and shrewd tactician. My brain hurts.) 

This team is as frightening as: A fax copy of the #Tuddies Penn State team of a few years ago. You can see the similarities, but nothing is as sharp, the lines are fuzzier, and a lot of the details are kinda screwed up. Fear Level = 7

Michigan should worry about: Jordan Stout. The sophomore kicker has some sort of bionic leg or is perpetually hopped up on goofballs or something. He has booted 25 kickoffs this year, of which 24 have been touchbacks (and most of which have been totally unreturnable). He also accomplished a first by making me say aloud, "huh, I guess James Franklin knew what he was doing" by thumping a 57-yard field goal in sloppy conditions to end the first half against Pitt.

Michigan can sleep soundly about: After rushing for 3.3 yards per carry against Buffalo, Penn State struggled on the ground again against Pitt. They rushed for 5.2 yards per carry, but only 2.6 yards per carry outside of one (magnificent) Journey Brown 85-yard run. Penn State is relying heavily on big running plays, and it remains to be seen whether they can churn out yards consistently against decent teams.

When they play Michigan: Don't kick 19 yard field goals.

Next game: Bye

Notre Dame (2-0)

Last week: Defenestrated New Mexico, 66-14

Image result for touchdown jesus

[Stock Notre Dame image here]

Recap: I don’t want to talk about Notre Dame this week.

You can’t do that again.

The hell are you doing here?

Only one UFR to do this week. Got bored. Figured I’d wander around the building. And it’s a good thing I did. ‘Cause you can’t not talk about Notre Dame two weeks in a row.

Why not?

You can’t punt on the same team in two consecutive weeks, other than Ohio State. This isn’t a late-game field goal attempt. There are rules.

There literally are not rules.

...

And we’ve got SO MUCH other crap to talk about.

FINE.

Recap: Notre Dame beat the unholy hell out of New Mexico State, covering the 35-point spread for good with about 28 minutes left. This was never gonna be a game, and it wasn’t. Happy now?

If you want to be the kind of person who only does the bare minimum.

I hope the next UFR is 94 plays. And the only replay available is in standard def. And the audio is out of sync by six seconds. And is in Portuguese.

On the positive for ND, they averaged 9.1 yards per play, and Ian Book threw for 360 yards on just 24 attempts. Everything worked, from the stuff that looked really cool to the stuff that looked catastrophic. As a Michigan fan, if you want to be frightened of something, it is the success Notre Dame showed in testing edges and with crossers. The secondary has been opportunistic and has generally not allowed a lot of open receivers.

If you want some negative takeaways, you need to really nitpick. After a rough outing against the run against Louisville, Notre Dame surrendered 5.3 yards per carry to New Mexico, and there remains reason to be concerned about their linebacker play. Offensively, while they had success being way bigger and faster and better than the Lobos, Book didn’t really have much success throwing down the field; most of his explosive passing plays were touch passes or screens. Still, when everything that you try works, it's hard to fault a team for picking the wrong thing that works.

This team is as frightening as: 2018 Ohio State. Fear Level = 9

Michigan should worry about: Notre Dame is #4 in the country at 12.5 yards per attempt, and #3 in the country in 30+ yard passes per game.

Michigan can sleep soundly about: I've said it before and I'll say it again: Notre Dame's linebackers can be had.

When they play Michigan: It feels like the weird scheduling is going to take some shine off the rivalry aspect this year. Unless Michigan loses, in which case it will be a couple solid weeks of HARBAUGH CAN'T BEAT RIVALS.

Next game: @ Georgia, 8:00 p.m., CBS (ND +14.5)

Maryland (2-1, 0-0 B1G)

Last week: Lost at Temple, 20-17

Recap: It wasn't that Maryland's offense was bad last year. It was just astonishingly inconsistent. They put up 10.3 yards per play against Illinois and 8.6 against Ohio State, but 1.9 yards per play against MSU and 3.0 against Iowa. Their average – AVERAGE – difference in yards per play from any given week to the next week last year was 4.4 yards per play. That is insane. It was never within 1.8 yards per play of the previous week. That number was as high as 8.4.

That's what made the first two weeks so promising; they put together back-to-back solid offensive performances. If they could continue it into Week 3, you might just have yourself a brand new day at Maryland. Instead…

image

YPP since the beginning of 2018. Note the era of consistency

…yeah. Four of Maryland's points on Saturday came on safeties (one intentional, one yakety-snapped), so the Terps scored 13 points on 17(!) offensive drives. Their last two drives, down 5 points in the 4th quarter, started at the Temple 4 and the Temple 10. Neither yielded any points. Josh Jackson missed a bunch of receivers, and completed 39.4% of his passes for 4.8 yards per attempt. And to make matters worse, Maryland's best offensive lineman, Terrance Davis, left with a knee sprain and will miss 4-6 weeks.

They will, however, light Penn State the hell up in their next game, and then beat Rutgers 5-3. Because Maryland is the new #CHAOSTEAM.

This team is as frightening as: Questionable potato salad. Best case, it's fine and unremarkable. Worst case, uncontrollable pooping. There is no middle case. Fear Level = 5

Michigan should worry about: Anthony McFarland and Javon Leake each looked dangerous and had some explosive carries. Even if the offense can't sustain drives, they can both pop big runs at any time.

Michigan can sleep soundly about: But mostly when they are Upswing Maryland.

When they play Michigan: Michigan is scheduled to face Downswing Maryland, so I feel good about this.

Next game: Bye

Michigan State (2-1, 0-0 B1G)

Last week: Lost to Arizona State, 10-7

Recap: Nostalgia is a funny thing. Our minds crave order and look for patterns, and as a result we seek to recognize the past in the present. So in recent years whenever Michigan State played poorly or lost a game they shouldn't have or generally looked dysfunctional, many people wanted to declare "Sparty No." But us old-timers urged caution as the youths besmirched our cherished memories: "I know you might think losing to Jeff George Jr. or losing on a late bomb to Nebraska or getting annihilated by Alabama is a Sparty No, but it's… it's not. That's different. Just trust me. Some day you'll see."

Then, in the time it took to count to twelve, we were carried back into a world of the coaches screwing up the game or running the option in Hurricane Katrina or blowing a Big Ten title by bumping into a punter. It was that smell of your old girlfriend's shampoo. It was the opening bars of a song from the mix tape you played every day when you were in 9th grade. It was a moment where those memories came flooding back, and your brain reminded your soul of all those old feelings. A full, unadulterated, unqualified Sparty No.

image

Eleven; Not Eleven

Michigan State's offense wasn't terrible. They gained over 400 yards at nearly 5.5 yards per play.  Brian Lewerke looked functional, and Darrell Stewart made some impressive catches. Elijah Collins looks to be a solid feature back-type substance. They had drives of 70, 63, 58, 53, 46, and 36 yards. And they still scored 7 points.

That should scare Sparty as much as anything. Michigan State's entire raison d'être for the past decade has been 'success against all odds.' Dantonio formed this Michigan State program around an ethos of Victory by Intangibles (or, if you prefer, Victory By Some Monumental Bullshit). He could duct tape a pigeon to a tractor and somehow the thing would fly. This game was a callback to the days of John L. Smith. To failure against all odds. To the days when success wasn't enough for victory.

MSU had a defensive 4th and 13 to win the game and used two timeouts to come up with a defense that never had a chance to stop Arizona State. They outgained Arizona State by almost 200 yards. They were at home against a team that struggled to beat Sacramento State. The Sun Devils essentially made no effort to move forward or score points for approximately 80% of the game. This was on a platter for Michigan State, both because of their own defensive play and because of Arizona State's Herm Edwards-ness. That's why the missed leaping penalty wasn't a thing; on that day, the way things were going, can anyone make a straight-faced argument that Michigan State wouldn't have found a way to screw things up?

Maybe this is a blip. Maybe Mark Dantonio can recapture the magic of a scrappy team who can win by sheer force of wanting to piss you off. But if "being better at offense" wasn't a cure for Michigan State's offensive problems, what exactly is the solution supposed to be?

This team is as frightening as:

 clip_image008

Not thinking I'm going to regret this one.  Fear Level = 6.5

Michigan should worry about: Michigan State is still allowing 0.9 yards per carry.

Michigan can sleep soundly about: Their offensive line is, once again, a mangled mess of injuries. Cole Chewins, AJ Arcuri, and now Kevin Jarvis are all out at left tackle, leaving Tyler Higby in a place he really should not be.

When they play Michigan: Dantonio has already started to script the first series.

Next game: at Northwestern, noon, ABC (MSU -9)

Indiana (2-1, 0-1 B1G)

Last week: Lost to Ohio State, 51-10

Recap: Michael Penix missed this game with an undisclosed injury (believed to be a problem with his throwing arm), and while it probably didn't make much of a difference in the outcome, it certainly didn't help. Peyton Ramsey threw for only 4.9 yards per attempt with no TDs and a pick. Indiana also struggled once again to run the ball, averaging under 2.8 YPC if you remove sacks. The defense also offered very little resistance, surrendering 30 points in the first half.

This team is as frightening as: Man, it's really tempting to make them another rock. But I think that's against Opponent Watch rules.

YO, Bolded alter-ego

Sup.

Can we do more than one rock in a year?

What do you mean?

Like, is it against the rules to have two teams be rock?

What rules? There aren't any rules.

God I hate you.

Fear Level = 4

Michigan should worry about: Michigan State may have lost their "some bullshit" mojo, Indiana has Doomsday Preppers quantities of it stored away in 55 gallon barrels, all labeled "DO NOT OPEN 'TIL MICHIGAN."

Michigan can sleep soundly about: Much of Indiana's 2018 offensive mid-season renaissance/Brownian-Motion-in-the-right-direction was based on the emergence of Stevie Scott. That appears to be a non-recurring event.

When they play Michigan: Bullshit. Yada yada yada. Victory.

Next game: vs. UConn, noon, BTN (IU -27)

Ohio State (3-0, 1-0 B1G)

Last week: Won at Indiana, 51-10

please ring the bell please ring the bell please ring the bell

Recap: I know this will shock you, but Ohio State bludgeoned an inferior opponent in a manner that left any complaints feeling moot. They outgained the Hoosiers 520-257. They threw the ball well. JK Dobbins tallied a had his best yards-per-carry afternoon since 2017 (8.8 YPC), and second string running back Master Teague broke 100 yards for the first time. The run defense gave up almost nothing, and the only hiccup in the pass defense was a double-pass trick play. The defense also scored on a pick-six.

This team is as frightening as: Yes. Fear Level = 10

Michigan should worry about: Ohio State seems to have not gotten worse.

Michigan can sleep soundly about: Probably couldn't beat the Miami Dolphins. Probably.

When they play Michigan: Not yet.

Next game: vs. Miami (NTMorTMD), 3:30, BTN (OSU -39)

Objects in the Rearview Mirror

MTSU (1-2, 0-0 CUSA)

Last week: Lost to Duke, 41-18

Recap: Pretty unremarkable game, though not a great one for the hope that MTSU was secretly a juggernaut. Asher O’Hara threw for 201 yards at 7.4 YPA, and rushed for 95 yards on nearly 8 yards per carry (sacks removed). The MTSU defense, though, allowed Duke QB Quentin Harris to complete 24 of 27 passes, and the game was 31-3 at the half. We can probably ignore the Blue Raiders from here on out.

Next game: Bye

Army (2-1)

Last week: Beat UTSA, 31-13

Recap: UTSA decided to schedule Army, and for some reason, that wasn’t enjoyable. Kelvin Hopkins missed this game with an injury, but that didn’t seem to make much of a difference. Army rushed for 6.2 yards per carry and held the Roadrunners to 1.9 yards per carry. The Black Knights jumped out to a 10-0 lead less than 5 minutes into the game, and other than a couple of fumbles allowing UTSA to keep it close — gee I wonder how that feels — this one could have gotten out of hand early.

UTSA’s leading rusher was Sincere McCormick. I just thought you should know that, mostly because I feel like we should be on the lookout for his evil twin, Nefarious Penzey’s.

Next game: vs. Morgan State, noon, CBSSN (No line, but Morgan State lost to James Madison 63-12 last week, so Army -many)

Comments

Needs

September 19th, 2019 at 11:03 AM ^

Hey, Narduzzi's teams play "60 minutes of unnecessary roughness." 

They don't play "60 minutes and then a number of alternating offensive and defensive series beginning at the 25 yard line that continue until there's a winner of unnecessary roughness."

dragonchild

September 19th, 2019 at 11:09 AM ^

Fun facts about World War I:

  • Contrary to popular belief, it wasn't very fun.  Let's switch this to "not very fun" facts.
  • Those early tanks didn't have an engine compartment.  You were roommates with a huffing, puffing engine.  The crews would often pass out.  On the upside, death by carbon monoxide was sweeter than chlorine gas.
  • Contrary to popular belief, for real this time, trench warfare was hardly a bunch of poison gas panics and bloody charges into no man's land until the tank came along.  The tank was the idea that finally broke the stalemate, but it wasn't the first try.  There was a morbidly fascinating arms race in the gutters that included, among other things:  the return of the medieval morning star (the "trench club"), medieval-style shields ("trench shields"), medieval armor (not called "trench armor", unfortunately), "plunging" fire (this is where you have all your soldiers point their rifles into the air in hopes they'll hit a target 2-3 miles away), grenade slingshots (!!), and even cute little mini-cannons -- kind of a precursor to the modern mortar but it really looks like toy artillery.

On that last note, GIS for "3.7 cm Infanteriegeschütz M.15".  I mean:

. . . that's a weapon.  A real weapon.  BiSB, this has got to be some kind of metaphor for Rutger.

I learned a lot of weird things doing research for a tabletop game.

treetown

September 19th, 2019 at 11:29 AM ^

That 37 mm gun looks cute but is a serious weapon, that very little handle and wheels were meant to help it be pulled and hauled by one or two men crawling or crouching through muck, mud, and barbed wire while they had their gas masks on and being shot at. Once up close the cannister round from that is like a huge shot gun.

The picture used in the OP is a British Mark V - there still is still a working model over at The Tank Museum, in Bovington, UK. It actually runs and was once run at shows but it is now fragile and so they just keep it intact. Here is wonderful short clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lf6xMm0GVlw

By the way, a working Mark IV shows up in the movie "War Horse" and here is a clip of running.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFbYTYt6Ok8

Finally, if any entity can and deserve to trade mark "The" as part of their title, it is The Tank Museum.

dragonchild

September 19th, 2019 at 11:41 AM ^

37mm is less shotgun and more a grenade launcher.  I do understand that gun meant serious business.  It apparently weighed over 180 lbs. fully assembled and could lob explosive shells over 2km.  I mean, it was WW1; they fielded it because it was expected to massacre people.

But it still looks like a toy.  Kind of like Rutger.  Or maybe Maryland?  Purdue?

yossarians tree

September 19th, 2019 at 1:39 PM ^

Can you tell us some highlights? Seriously, not trying to be a smart alec, but of all the stupid wars WW1 seems among the stupidest. A lot of poor bastards just ground up in trenches of mud or gassed until their lungs eploded through their mouths. WWII on the other hand was truly global and had massive air and naval campaigns. Even the villains were "better" in a truly sick way.  

DoubleB

September 19th, 2019 at 7:14 PM ^

The start of World War I might be the most idiotic in all of history. If the results weren't so tragic and for which we are STILL paying for in some way to this day, it would be a comedy. 

In short, an empire that had long since had any real utility ran into a bunch of teenagers in a city where three major religions (Catholic, Orthodox, and Muslim) abut each other. If you don't know the details of that fateful day in June 1914, it is a truly fascinating story and worth reading about.

I will say that World War I caught Europe up to its more rightful history. 

DoubleB

September 19th, 2019 at 7:18 PM ^

It was a defensive war. Whatever else wants to say about trench warfare, it saved lives. I believe the French lost more men in the first year of the war than any other year (please correct me if I'm wrong) and the first 6 weeks were just a bloodbath prior to the formation of the trenches. 

MadMatt

September 19th, 2019 at 1:39 PM ^

I'd also like to add that tanks were a less effective version of late WWI trench busting tactics. In their 1918 offensives, the German army relied on "storm trooper" infantry tactics to break lines, and came close to reaching Paris.

In summary, an attack would start with a brief 30 minute artillery barrage. This contrasts with earlier offensives featuring a ham-blasting barrage that would last hours. Much as this shattered the morale of the enemy troops in front line, it gave him plenty of time to move reserve formations into position behind the lines to stop the assault, and counter-attack.

Leading the German infantry assault were groups of "storm troopers" trained not to attack enemy strongpoints, but instead to bypass them. They got into the defense's rear areas, cutting communication between HQ and basically intact front line positions, and generally sowing confusion. After being isolated for a while and having no idea what was happening, the front line defenders would surrender. All this without staging a bloody charge of machine gun emplacements.

This kind of assault worked in the sense the Germans could break through trench lines and get into "open country" beyond. They lost momentum for all the reasons forward movement in WWI was generally hard. As the attacker moves forward, he's moving away from his transportation and communication network, and his supplies and reinforcements have to cross the shattered terrain he just seized. In contrast, the defender is falling back on his intact transportation and communication network, and closer to his sources of supply and reinforcements.  The latter included the U.S. Expeditionary Army, whose divisions had 2-4 times the number of men as anyone else's, and who was pouring 100,000 new troops into France every month. When the Allies late war offensives with tanks launched, they attacked a German army that had shot it's last bullet.

In WWII, blitzkrieg warfare was basically storm trooper tactics, combined with mechanically reliable tanks, and close air support capable of doing what artillery could do, but far behind the front lines where conventional artillery couldn't reach.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

September 19th, 2019 at 1:41 PM ^

WWI is truly the first Industrial Age war.  Warfare was simple before then: you had some guys on foot and some guys on horses.  They swung things at each other.  They also shot things at each other, so the invention of the firearm didn't actually revolutionize war all that much, other than easing back considerably on the stuff that you swung.  But, you still needed swingy weapons (or stabby ones) because you still couldn't win without physically occupying the space your opponent currently held.

When the Industrial Age got into full gear, they started inventing warfare tools that could kill pretty indiscriminately, but also very inefficiently.  Nobody really knew what to do with that.  They learned pretty fast that taking over ground was a lot harder than it used to be, because killing indiscriminately but inefficiently is great for defense but lousy for offense.  So they decided to maximize their ability to defend by digging in, and spent a great deal of time and manpower trying to figure out what do with these new toys and how best to use them and which ones were actually kind of dumb and so on.  But they were all schooled in the simple kind of warfare where either you attack or they do, and you swing stuff at each other until one side retreats.  Ultimately didn't have a clue how to integrate the new stuff into the old knowledge they had.  It only ended because the Germans ran out of guys first and because the insertion of the US into the war put fresh troops on one side and tilted the balance.

Carpetbagger

September 19th, 2019 at 2:15 PM ^

I would argue the US Civil War was the first modern industrial war, and a precursor to WW1. The Civil War even had trench warfare. The biggest differences were scale. In Europe you had many more soldiers in a much smaller area. Add in improved weapons from the late 19th Century and it was a slaughterhouse in the West.

The East and Balkans were much more fluid theaters for the same reason the Civil War was, space, especially west of the Appalachians.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

September 19th, 2019 at 3:53 PM ^

I would disagree, in large part because one side wasn't industrialized at all and the other side only crudely.  There was some trench warfare, but it didn't dominate.  The war was mainly fought on horseback and with relatively mobile foot troops.  Armies moved around the country, met in battles, and departed from each other within days.  During the Civil War, even the industrialized world had yet to make full use of things like electricity and explosives.  Steel was not yet common, nor was petroleum or rubber.  The science of chemistry barely existed.  There were no diesel engines or steam turbines.  All of these things played a major role in WWI.  I would call the Civil War the last big non-industrial war, at least from a US perspective.

Also, the Eastern and Balkan theaters weren't all that much more fluid - trenches were still prevalent and almost all offensives were unmitigated disasters (Gallipoli, Sarikamish, etc.) or campaigns lasting months before any success was achieved.  Anyone trying to move around on horseback was slaughtered almost instantly and armies weren't much more mobile than in the west.  It was, as you point out, the density of the troops that caused all the bloodshed in the west, but the tactics and conditions in the east were pretty similar.

AlbanyBlue

September 19th, 2019 at 6:56 PM ^

You could make the case that WW1 basically came about because major European countries had shiny armies with professional staffs, and really were okay with flaunting their nationalistic fervor and seeing what those armies could do. They all got tangled up in the alliance systems of the time and the assassination of Franz Ferdinand was the excuse they needed.

So needless, and the USA was smart to stay out of it as long as they did.

ShadowStorm33

September 20th, 2019 at 3:38 PM ^

Putting aside arguments that war is never necessary, WWI was quite possibly the most pointless war of all time. And really the blame lies with the French and British, for starting a world war in order to get involved in another country’s completely domestic dispute half a continent away. 

It would be like Mexico declaring war on Canada to support the Québécois in their bid for independence. 

ShadowStorm33

September 20th, 2019 at 3:44 PM ^

WWI gets kind of a short shrift in video games, as (realistic) FPSs are typically either WWII or modern themed, but Battlefield 1 was a great game and you get to learn a lot about the technology and weapons that were used. 

First thing I thought when I saw that tank was “that’s a Mark V Landship,” those are fun to play in...

Don

September 19th, 2019 at 11:25 AM ^

"Their offensive line is, once again, a mangled mess of injuries. Cole Chewins, AJ Arcuri, and now Kevin Jarvis are all out at left tackle, leaving Tyler Higby in a place he really should not be."

Doesn't matter. When we play them, their OL will suddenly play like a collection of Rimington candidates, regardless of their game experience or performance in the prior week.

Don

September 19th, 2019 at 2:15 PM ^

Here's Ace's official MGoBlog preview of MSU's OL before the 2017 game:

"On the Michigan side, Chase Winovich has sustained his remarkable play long enough to earn a shield, and he should be in for a big day against MSU's young, skinny tackles.

On the MSU side, right guard David Beedle is questionable after missing last week's game with an undisclosed injury. True freshman Kevin Jarvis, who started last week against Iowa, would take his place if he can't give it a go. Either a banged-up guy who was a sore spot last year or an 18-year-old kid will have to block Maurice Hurst on occasion. That projects to go rather well for Michigan."

Just to repeat: "he should be in for a big day against MSU's young, skinny tackles... That projects to go rather well for Michigan."

MSU rushed for 158 yds for over 4 yds/carry, and we didn't record a single sack against that lousy MSU offensive line. Was that a dominating offensive performance by them? No, but it was a far cry from Ace's confident predictions that things would "go rather well for Michigan."

Yes, the weather was horrible, but it was horrible for both teams. 

Was I exaggerating when I said they'd play like Rimington candidates?

Yes, but if I had a ten-spot for every time I've read or heard over the past decade or so that MSU's OL is lousy/banged-up/shitty and our DL will eat them alive only to see them give a perfectly respectable performance in the course of unexpected Spartan victory (unexpected by UM fans at least), I could buy another bottle of Lagavulin.

BiSB

September 19th, 2019 at 3:51 PM ^

Did you watch that game? They had one 50-yard run (that was mostly on the linebackers) and the rest was absolutely nothing. Murderation. A full-on stomping. Two touchdown drives (one 46 yards after the Isaac fumble of doom) out of 14 drives. <2.8 yards per carry. Nothing.

Last year? 1.8 yards per play. Two FEET per carry. Nothing.

GoBlue1969

September 19th, 2019 at 11:27 AM ^

Other than Rutgers, the schedule is a rough one. Hoping to see, since the Army game adversity, this team begins to grow into a tough team to face that schedule. Grow from any adversity and difficulty they will face. Ugly road wins are okay. Ugly wins agains teams that they should handle rather easily has me worried. But, they are all wanting to make a statement in this game. Let's see it. Go Blue!

The Mad Hatter

September 19th, 2019 at 11:32 AM ^

I have a crazy idea.  Indiana hasn't beaten us since like the 1930's, but every year they play us like it's the Super Bowl.  Our guys get hurt, tired, and Indiana seems to have a knack for showing OSU exactly how to beat us.

So this year, I say we forfeit the Indiana game.  Just spend 2 weeks getting ready for OSU and skip playing Indiana entirely.  They'll get the win they've wanted seemingly forever, and we'll be rested and battle ready for The Game.

If that plan is a no-go, just play walkons and guys that would otherwise never see the field.  We might still win.

Chris S

September 19th, 2019 at 11:42 AM ^

I laughed out out about 8 times during this post. Most of which came in the Pat Narduzzi decision breakdown.

 

I also remember watching the MSU-OSU game with my dad when the coaches were screwing it up. Good memories.

Hugh White

September 19th, 2019 at 11:42 AM ^

"This team is as frightening as: Questionable potato salad. Best case, it's fine and unremarkable. Worst case, uncontrollable pooping. There is no middle case. Fear Level = 5

Michigan should worry about: Anthony McFarland and Javon Leake each looked dangerous and had some explosive carries. Even if the offense can't sustain drives, they can both pop big runs at any time."

I'm confused.  Does "they can both pop big runs" qualify as "uncontrollable pooping"?

crg

September 19th, 2019 at 11:50 AM ^

Just think: when the "new" CHAOSTEAM (Maryland) plays the "old" CHAOSTEAM (IU), it will either be the ridiculous, slapstick cavalcade of errors and hero-ball plays... or a boring grudge match that would even make Kirk Ferentz yawn.