Picture Pages: Maybe A Third Of Why We Suck At Running Comment Count

Brian

Estimates are approximate. Michigan's spent maybe half of their snaps in the shotgun/pistol on running downs this year, running about five things: jet sweeps to Norfleet, QB draws, speed option, the inverted veer, and a kind of alternate to the inside zone called "belly" that Rich Rodriguez was fond of during his brief spell in Ann Arbor.

Oddly, Michigan hardly runs anything like a base play from the shotgun. They don't run the stretch, they don't run any iso or power type plays. There is a faint smattering of inside zone, but that's it, and that's not anywhere near established. In their first three games of the year I've got them down for three inside zone runs from pistol or shotgun; they went for a total of three yards. Nobody's cheating to a base run play against Michigan.

This allows opponents to tee off on the things Michigan is kind of good at. More importantly, it often seems like they're going up against opponents who are better drilled at defending modern offensive concepts than Michigan is at running them. Here's an example:

arc-block-please

Michigan's in the pistol with Kerridge as a fullback, Williams the tight end, and both WRs to the field. It's first and ten. UConn responds by shifting their line to the strength (an "over" front) and aligning their linebackers about evenly with a safety rolled up over Williams.

Michigan wants to read the end to the bottom of the screen. That will allow Michigan to blast the playside end off the ball with a sustained double; Williams will head for the safety as Kerridge deals with the playside linebacker. If the end crashes, Gardner pulls. If he contains, Gardner keeps.

arc-block-please

Snap. You can see Williams release, Lewan and Glasgow begin to bash the playside end off the line, and the frontside UConn LBs react to gaps that may need to be filled.

arc-block-please-2

Gardner is now considering the end, who does what ends are supposed to do these days: try to split the difference so that they can be useful on a handoff and still contain the QB. Gardner's trying to figure out what to do about this:

arc-block-please-3

(Note that Lewan and Glasgow are battering their guy inside effectively.)

Now, I think that's a pull. I gave Gardner a minus for that, because I want Gardner to test the edge against a defensive end who's standing at the LOS. But it's a gray area for the quarterback. The end is neither flat-out containing or crashing down; this is a situation in which errors are common.

At the decision point, Gardner gives. Kerridge is staring down two defenders, doesn't know which one to deal with, doesn't really deal with either but it doesn't matter because whoever he does in fact block is just going to funnel to his buddy.

arc-block-please-5

Poor Damn Toussaint, 2013 edition.

arc-block-please-6

That's a loss of two yards.

Video

Slow:

Items Of Interest

Remember the wheel route from the Notre Dame game? That's the opposite of this. Borges saw the wheel open, gave it a try once, and then pulled it out in a similar situation later for a big gain. Here Michigan just abandons these runs. How is this a similar situation? Like ND, UConn is playing this play in a certain way. If they play it in the same way again, you can alter what you're doing to bust it open. But Michigan hasn't done this, and so rarely does things that are misdirection that twitter blows up about it when they get five yards on it.

Arc, arc, arc, arc. Nebraska demonstrated the tweak against Michigan a couple years back on an almost identical play. Michigan shuffled Jibreel Black down, planning to contain with Kovacs on the outside. The fullback approached the end, and then…

black-ok-3_thumb[1]

Black could not recover in time to get out on Martinez, Kovacs got a guy in his face, and Nebraska ripped off a 23-yard gain.

Here it's a little different because the end does have contain on Gardner, but if Michigan pokes at that belly play again they can do something similar. Instead of having a true read it's a designated Gardner keeper on which Kerridge's job is to get outside and block whoever that contain guy happens to be, Michigan can burn the shuffle.

This is a paragraph of disclaimers and explanations. That's my thought process when I see things like that on the zone read, because that was Rodriguez's thought process. He probably forced defenses to create the shuffle a few years back when he started blocking backside ends trying to crash down and shooting Carlos Brown or Brandon Minor through the gaping hole scraping linebackers would leave. That burned scrape exchanges hard for a while, and then the cat and mouse game moved on.

Michigan is deficient at cat and mouse in the run game. I'm not trying to suggest that Michigan has to be a spread option team for their offense to work better; I am pointing this out because it remains my wheelhouse and it's a good example of the things Michigan doesn't do because they are a jack-of-all-trades offense that doesn't see how a defense is responding and do something to break it. Because to do that Nebraska thing above your fullback has to rep it and sell it, etc. It takes practice time.

Michigan's not thinking the zone game well at either the field level or the box level because they're not committed to it, and that extends to everything from stretch to power to iso.

Also maybe chalk that up as a missed read for Gardner. Because Michigan doesn't rep it consistently enough? I don't know. Has to be a consideration.

In other sad runs Michigan got out-schemed on. UConn was sending guys off the corner with frequency, but Michigan did not recognize it despite UConn tipping it hard. This inverted veer featured the dead giveaway of a safety moving down to line up directly over a wide receiver:

And on this one, how would you describe the playside corner's presnap technique? Is "right angle to wide receiver" a thing?

Michigan just gets lined up with 14 or so seconds on the clock and thus doesn't have much time to recognize what the defense is doing and adjust, like you saw Notre Dame and Akron do to Michigan's detriment several times. They're just eating bad playcalls. That's a natural consequence of spending 25 seconds in a huddle and not recognizing that one of the most common responses to spread stuff is to send extra guys off the edge.

None of this has anything to do with the offensive line. These are two TFLs and one miraculous Gardner escape wiped out by a Funchess holding call (which, BTW, ugh) on which the offensive line plays no part. The problems go deeper than their issues, which we'll get to later. This is Borges and to some extent Gardner—I don't know if he's got checks here—getting beat by the defensive coordinator. They got some back with the speed option, FWIW.

Who's up for a tedious 150 comment thread questioning whether it's worthwhile to read this? I certainly am! I hope there are content-free arguments. Let's make sure to ignore Ka'Deem Carey's 2000 yards last year when we're incensed at the idea Rich Rodriguez might be able to coach a run game.

Comments

OneFootIn

September 24th, 2013 at 5:36 PM ^

Count me among the hordes of the overly optimistic after the ND game. I thought Devin had magically become capable of running the offense after a handful of starts at QB.

I just watched the Monday Night Football pre game fluff on Peyton Manning, however, and was reminded once again of why he is so spectacularly good at what he does: he is a master of the X's and O's and can read the defense like an open book.

However athletically gifted Gardner is, he clearly still needs time to a) gain a higher level of understanding about how to read a defense generally and b) figure that out in the specific context of Borges' philosophy. Frankly, after watching the Manning stuff and hearing Steve Young say it takes a NFL QB 4 to 5 years to figure it out, I am amazed that college QBs ever look very good.

Here's to hoping that Gardner is learning faster than it looks like he's learning right now (and oh, yeah, to our OL getting better fast too).

Wolfman

September 24th, 2013 at 5:58 PM ^

Devin never looked as bad as in his third and fourth start this year. Surprisingly, in both cases, we scored on our opening drives and then everything thereafter, except for some good defensives stops, goes to shit.  I think, I hope, I pray much of it has to do with this inexperienced OL, and if so, get out of the huddle, go without a huddle and thrown passes needing two seconds of protection to mitigate his chances of the only escape route he knows, going backward.  We must be getting our pocket completely crushed which makes little sense inasmuch as some rushers have to rush outside just to keep contain which should lead to the abilitity to step up and through lanes where lbers are not blitzing. Gholson was a master at this in only his RS freshman year.  My guess is the qb guru he spent time with taubht him this. I think he was able to  get away with this move in h.s. due to his size and limited number of D1 talent he faced on opposing defenses.  Kid is super athletic, but his escape routes should be varied if Al wants him to throw from pocket inside of utilizing sprint outs where there's a hell of a lot more land. He never utilized Denard in this manner either, and that is something he'll never be able to explain away.

KBLOW

September 24th, 2013 at 5:37 PM ^

In the first play shown, why isn't the always FB coached to block the outside guy of the two?  I mean at least in this instance if he takes the outside defender then the inside guy either has to take the time to run around the two bodies in his way, run through them, or head back up field. All options lead to him not making the tackle behind the LOS.  Even if taking the outside defender only nets a two yard gain, that's way better than a TFL.  

  

Ron Utah

September 24th, 2013 at 5:39 PM ^

I think Brian has the play design wrong.  I believe Kerridge is supposed to the LB (which he does after chipping the DE) and allow for Fitz to get up the middle.  Fitz runs toward the middle, then stops and cuts outside.

I think this play is well-executed by everyone not named Fitzgerald.

Space Coyote

September 24th, 2013 at 6:40 PM ^

You wouldn't leave the playside DE unblocked on inside zone. And the FB doesn't kick the playside DE on inside zone. If it was inside zone, the FB would block the backside DE. If they think it's inside zone to the FB side, then the handoff wouldn't be to the strong side of the formation.

It's "veer option" out of the pistol, or "belly option" as Brian has stated. He has the play and the blocking absolutely correct.

Space Coyote

September 24th, 2013 at 10:22 PM ^

But Devin has the job to pull here and try to beat the DE around the corner. The DE is really in an "inbetween" position in as much that he can easily crash down on the RB but has to open his hips and get outside to either funnel DG to the sideline or to force him back inside, which is much more difficult.

More likely, he is playing inbetween, but will take a second to read the play, meaning by the time he reads it Fitz can reduce the gap between them and at least use his momentum to try to seal him inside with his body.

Anyway, the play is on DG, but Fitz can certainly help DG to a great extent by selling the run fake and then occupying the LB.

Ron Utah

September 25th, 2013 at 12:46 PM ^

Let's get on the same page:

  • #56 (Angelo Pruitt, listed as a DT) is being optioned.  I'm calling him the playside DE.
  • DG is reading #56.  If #56 stays outside, DG gives.  If 56 crashes to the inside, DG pulls and goes outside.
  • Fitz should be running inside 56 if he gets the ball.
  • The double team on the playside DT is supposed to leave the DE on an island, and make the read easy for DG.

I think Pruitt (#56) does a good job of staying in no-man's-land and making this read difficult.  I absolutely believe Fitz should be running inside of him if he gets the ball.  DG is clearly looking to run outside of him.

I'm not positive the give was the right move by DG.  It looks like the right choice to me (I think 56 stays home and gets to DG if he keeps).  I don't think Fitz would have blocked Pruitt if he didn't get the ball, since he's supposed to run inside of him.

My point is simply that Fitz should run inside of the DE on this play, and he didn't.  I believe that cost us yardage.

JimBobTressel

September 24th, 2013 at 5:49 PM ^

Yeah, reading that previous mailbag thread where a bunch of passive-aggressive clowns took their criticisms of Brian to the next level, I just LOLed.

 

Look. we get it. Sometimes Brian questioning of the coaches goes down the wrong way. But I wholeheartedly agreed with the fact that, if RR had one mad skill, it was tweaking a run game to continously rack up big yards. You know, Denard and the whole "NCAA all time single season record for QB rush yards" thing. RR had a lot of flaws, but gaining offensive yards was not one of them.

Bodogblog

September 24th, 2013 at 5:54 PM ^

On the inverted veer with the safety moving down the line... watch Kalis pull and run in between(!) two UConn defenders.  I know there are pulling rules and he's likely been coached to leave the first person who crosses his face (assume he's being optioned away), but this just looks so wrong.  In my head I thought there was a FB in that formation, but there's not - Kalis needs to realize someone needs to be hit there.

Gardner doesn't care, makes both miss and picks up the first.  Funchess hold. 

DG can still be great.

MGlobules

September 24th, 2013 at 6:07 PM ^

are we performing badly because we are between two systems, trying to play both? And (if so, considering that it's the ultimate goal) doesn't continuing to try to run the ball make sense even if it often fails, especially against lesser squads?

If the answer to the second question is yes, then you have to accept that the games were going to be much tighter than necessary but possibly--long run--worth it.

If the answer to the second question is yes and this is also Borges and Hoke's rationale, then you must come to the conclusion that they're not idiots, but playing the cards they've been dealt in a rational, if not always effective, manner. That would be my sense of this issue. We can't judge Borges yet.  

EnoughAlready

September 24th, 2013 at 6:12 PM ^

I was looking forward to those "content-free arguments" that Brian seems confident the readers of this blog engage in.  (That's a way to win readers!)  Instead, I saw several posts of people making observations and offering reasons why they think Brian is right or wrong.  I guess when you disagree with Brian, that just sounds "content-free" to him.  But of course, I'm one of those who finds his final comment about Arizona and RR to be petty, needlessly defensive, and even a little churlish.  But hey, I'm not an engineer who studies the internets for football!!!

Space Coyote

September 24th, 2013 at 6:19 PM ^

As one of the people that probably tries to counter Brian's analysis on things, his set up is absolutely correct. He is calling out the play and the blocking correct, none of that is wrong. I disagree on some of the conclusion. I think the play is fine despite going into an 8 man front when typically it will see a 7 man front. But the play would still work if DG keeps.

On top of that, the counter for this shouldn't be to switch up a blocking scheme. The counter should be giving run action and having Gardner hit some receivers, like when they ran the pop pass near the end zone but Gardner missed it because his footwork went to crap. Borges did set this play up and did counter it with that, DG missed it though.

Space Coyote

September 24th, 2013 at 6:29 PM ^

But for whatever reason I can't edit (and not just because I responded to it, I couldn't before), and no one has responded. I can edit other posts, but can't on this one. Never seen that happen.

Anyone, one mistake in it

*As one of the people that probably tries to counter Brian's analysis on things the most often, his set up here is absolutely correct. 

Space Coyote

September 24th, 2013 at 6:25 PM ^

Also, and this should probably be written in all caps, but seriously, can we not have the Rich Rod debate again. Can we just not bring him up and have to listen to people proclaim his greatest and people exaggerate his flaws or the bad things that happened to the program. Hoke isn't on the hot seat and shouldn't be. Neither is Borges nor should he be. Rich Rod was a good offensive coach. His teams didn't perform to Michigan's standards. We've moved on, it's done. Let's drop it instead of rehashing the whole thing to the googolplex power. It's so damn annoying.

That's right, I decided to bold it.

turtleboy

September 24th, 2013 at 6:28 PM ^

To Brian's point, it does at times feel like our offense is trying to do too many things all at the same time and floundering because of it. Devin and the young line are both having a tough time making even obvious adjustments and it's possible that's because they're a little overwhelmed by the size of the playbook instead of being comfortable having a simpler base offense to run out of.

Nothsa

September 24th, 2013 at 10:41 PM ^

RR's Michigan offense had what, about 6 running plays? Part of what made (and makes) his system effective is that the guys drill the same damn play over and over again. This is college - the kids have a finite amount of time to practice, and getting the reads right against all the things a defense can throw at you is really difficult. I'm sure Gardner's doing his best, but if he's not keeping when he should, or the line isn't blocking quite right, or if Toussant isn't sprinting to the hole, then the play blows up. We can call that a failure to execute - this whole thread highlights key issues, but it looks to me like a failure to identify the kind of run game the team is going to commit to and then practice the hell out of it.

CLord

September 24th, 2013 at 6:29 PM ^

I rarely see checkdowns by Devin, and when he does, it's always to a run play.  Borges NEEDS to be able to check down and adapt to defense like every single opponent has done to our defense this year.  So archaic.

Space Coyote

September 24th, 2013 at 6:39 PM ^

Check down is a pass, typically to a RB, as a third or fourth read in a pass progression.

Audible is switching plays completely. Checks are switching something within the design of the play or doing something within the scope of the offense while not switching the playcall (like the extended hand off to the WR check).

And Gardner does have checks and audibles within almost every play. He'll at least have one run audible (speed option), typically can check the play to the other side (he counts numbers every time he gets to the LOS to see if they can run the play), and probably has at least another run play or a pass play he can audible into as a "must audible" situation.

robmorren2

September 24th, 2013 at 6:42 PM ^

I think Borges needs to look at spreading things out a bit more after the bye. It's pretty clear that teams are stacking the box, and we don't have an answer. A stacked box requires players to win battles and make plays in tight spaces. I don't think Fitz or DG are good in tight spaces, and our O-line doesn't have the power or the cohesiveness to create space for them. We can't pass over the stacked box, because we don't have the receivers to win 1v1 on the edges. Gardner played well last year when things were a little more wide open. Send in more receivers or line up TE's in the slot, so teams can't load up the box. Give Devin some room to make plays, and give guys like Dileo and Funchess so room to get open. Right now there are about 17 guys within 8 yards of the snap. It's just a clusterfuck. The risk of spreading things out is turning the ball over. Well, playing manball has us in last place in turnover margin, so what do we have to lose?

Space Coyote

September 24th, 2013 at 6:45 PM ^

I think we have perfectly capable WRs and TEs of winning 1v1 match ups when teams stack the box. But they have to get to the right spots and DG has to hit them when they come open. It's as simple as that. You can spread it out, keep it as it is, whatever, DG has to hit the passes if he wants defenses to back off. Until then, well, this is what's going happen.

robmorren2

September 24th, 2013 at 7:58 PM ^

I think Devin can make the throws, because he's done it against teams like ND and South Carolina. For whatever, it looks like he gets flustered when there are a lot of bodies in close (even when they are blocked). I also think the pistol is not something he looks comfortable in. Gardner has looked good in the past in shotgun, or under center on bootlegs and rollouts. I think the rollouts have pegged by defenses after the ND game. There has been pressure off the edge or from the corner to shut that down. Shotgun seems like the best short-term fix. It gives him a comfortable buffer from the defense, and allows him to keep his eyes downfield (and he doesn't have to turn his back to the defense, which has caused huge problems). He does not look comfortable taking drops/PA from under center, or operating playaction out of the pistol. It just seems to speed up his thought process too much, he feels pressure even when it isn't there, and he only makes one read before he throws a bad pass or does the double-spin scramble. I've always felt like Fitz ran his best out of shotgun as well (I realize the threat of #16 helped with that).

CE93

September 24th, 2013 at 7:01 PM ^

Is the haphazard offensive scheme that Borges is running at UM the same he's run at other schools, or is his offense likely to morph into something else once he gets 100% his own recruits?

Also, are Borges and Hoke tied at the hip, or (if Michigan's offense continues to struggle for a couple more years) is Hoke apt to replace Borges with someone else? 

EnoughAlready

September 24th, 2013 at 7:07 PM ^

52 points.  41 points.  28 points.  24 points.  Those are the point totals for the first four games.  Despite numerous TOs by Gardner, some of which surely took points off the board.

You're simply begging the question when you say Borges's offenses "continue to struggle."  They're putting up a minimum of 4 scores a game -- even with DGs costly TOs.  The offense doesn't look pretty; but it is putting up points. 

Zone Left

September 24th, 2013 at 7:03 PM ^

At first I thought this was a bust on Touissant, but I think it's actually on Gardner. The end not committing is essentially the same as playing contain, which does make the read really hard, but Gardner has to know the defensive formation is set to bottle up the middle.

If Williams gets his block (hint: he doesn't), Gardner would have only had the end between him and a long gain. Kerridge also gets stuck in the whole trying to block the end instead of screaming through at the linebacker. I don't know if he could have avoided the contact based on the camera angle, but 

However, I still think Touissant could have salvaged the play for a 5+ yard gain. The zone read is designed to go inside or outside based on the end. If Gardner keeps, he's supposed to go outside the end. After the handoff, Touissant realizes Kerridge is caught blocking two guys and goes "BOUNCE, BOUNCE, BOUNCE" into the area Gardner optioned away from. If he just plants and burrows straight ahead, he's behind Lewan, which is a really safe place for a running back, and just inside of where he's supposed to go. If he's lucky, Touissant concurrently sees that Lewan and Glasgow have essentially eliminated the whole middle of UConn's defense, cuts back to the right, and gains 20 yards. 

Touissant mentioned that last year he was trying to win the game on every play in order to impress the scouts. As things go further off the rails for him, he seems to be doing it even more. He's got to cut up behind Lewan, where he is more or less supposed to go, and take his 5 yards.

Sopwith

September 24th, 2013 at 7:44 PM ^

are a couple of orders of magnitude more frightening than the "our OL sucks!" theme (yes, theme, not meme) that dominated the postgame chatter.  

Non-sequitur: was anyone able to hear the UConn fan trash talking Gardner on the ABC feed in the second half of the broadcast?  "You're a terrible passer! You couldn't hit a barn! A barn!" over and over.  The thing was, on the limited data sample of that game, he was right.

Non-sequitur turns out to not be a non-sequitur: If your QB can't hit open short and intermediate routes on a given night, I'm not sure that such a thing as constraint plays can exist in any part of your offense.  Even Air Force or other teams that throw basically never at least have the credible threat of being able to step back and hit a wide open receiver.  

Devin was so completely rattled in this game I think there's a cascade effect through Borges' head.  Fuck, my QB is totally off.  Fuck, look for Plays That Might Work.  Fuck, forgot to run those counters/constraint plays to punish the defense for how they're playing my Plays That Might Work.  Woo-hoo, Desmond Morgan World's Greatest Athlete!  We're saved!

I don't know, man.  I had a game plan for this post, but Brian rattled the hell out of me with the implication that our offensive braintrust isn't being trustworthy with their brains.

The FannMan

September 24th, 2013 at 9:23 PM ^

Its not  that Borges has forgtten the play book.  He just can't call them because his guys can't run them.  For example, the play with the corner turned sideways is begging for the QB Oh Noes! where Devin takes a step toward the line and drills the WR on an in route for an easy 10 - 15 yard play.  Denard did this with some regularly.  If the safety bit on the run too, it was an easy TD.  

Here is the problem - Who wanted to see Devin try to take a fake a run and then throw a quick pass over the  middle?  Ok, that's no one.  The way Devin was playing, that ball was likley to high or late or both which is a good chance for an INT.  Also, I am not sure that the interior line could give Devin the two seconds that play takes.

We have the counter play in the books.  Borges just doesn't trust his guys to run the damn plays.  Unfortunately, I have to agree with his assesment here.  (It is also possible that Devin was supposed to audible to that play, but failed to do so.)

Eventually, they went to very, very simple plays.  QB runs or zone sweeps where they just told Fitz to run outside of 77 and hope for the best.  Luckily that worked well enough.

mgoO

September 25th, 2013 at 12:38 AM ^

There is no QB play action in the playbook.  Michigan hasn't run that since 2011 and not well since 2010.

Meanwhile, the only QB run Devin has executed is the Draw.  The rest of his carries are on scrambles or keepers on the option.  Maybe a fake option if Brian's hypothesis is correct.  When Denard ran the "Oh Noes" it was playaction off of the outside zone or ISO.  So, what would Devin even be faking?

Michigan's running plays are all telegraphed by formation.

Under center it's the stretch, power, or ISO.

From the pistol it's inside zone/belly.

In the shotgun they have the inverted veer and QB draw.

There are a couple of other variations but nothing fits together and there aren't any adjustments made to any of the plays.  When something doesn't work, Borges just tries running something else rather than tinkering.

If you're going to run the stretch play as much as we have been it's indefensible to NEVER run it from the gun when Devin Gardner is your QB.  That's on the staff.

1M1Ucla

September 24th, 2013 at 7:58 PM ^

The simply look for something in the book that will work.  There isn't move/countermove planned or even executed.  ND shot gaps with linebackers, Akron did the same walking down safeties and sending corners, as did UConn and there were no counters or adjustments.  The blocking scheme remains static.  When you look at individual encounters, the job is being done on the interior -- Miller, Glasgow and Kalis don't get defeated in their blocks and they don't miss regularly.  The same is not true of the tight ends, save Butt from time-to-time.  The interior guys are often not going the right direction to negate what the defenders are doing.  In the play above, the line call was to double the tackle with Lewan and Glasgow -- done.  That left one to block by Kerridge and one to option.  Kerridge did just ok, but the free hitter hit Fitz two yards deep.  Call it a bad read by 98.  So, call it again and 98 keeps this time.  However, Al doesn't want to do that, so 98's runs are limited to "third plays" in the pass game.  So the defense doesn't need to respect the keep on the read option because there is no read and their is no option.  If he isn't going to keep, then you gotta block that free hitter because at that point all you have is an iso blocked like a read option and Fitz get popped.

And this happens play after play.

Unless Al is setting up the Big Ten with these tendencies, so that he can unleash his countermoves, this seems like deadhead football.

Last, I'm not sure why Al is looking at the pros for his inspirations, when the pros are looking to the colleges where more innovation happens and doesn't rely on the NFL way of unlimited study time, big bodies trying to stalemate each other and preying on individual mismatches set up in evil genius labs.  Bama,LSU and Stanford get away with this through superior beef and superior coaching.  Everyone else is looking up and trying to make the best with what they have, which requires in-game games and adjustments.

Mattison does it.  Al just wants to run his stuff the way he drew it up.

MGrad

September 24th, 2013 at 8:04 PM ^

1. O-line needs to block the right people. This is a mental thing and some technique.
2. Fitz needs to run the play that is called.
3. Gardner needs to stop turning the ball over.
4. We need a #2 receiver to emerge as a threat.

If those three areas were executed correctly then we wouldn't need to analyze these plays because the offense would be inherently less predictable and defenses wouldn't park 8-9 on the line.

Brian

September 24th, 2013 at 11:10 PM ^

I think he probably should block one or the other once two guys show but he is definitely supposed to pass off that defensive end, who is the guy being optioned. Adjusting to pop the corner may be desirable, but it's a really rare thing to see one of these option plays find a corner blitz and still succeed. That's an opportunity for brownie points more than a failing.

chewieblue

September 24th, 2013 at 8:44 PM ^

and for that he is to be commended.  I agree with almost all points he makes here.

I just disagree that we can have both:

1. an offense that doesn't spend "25 seconds in the huddle" 

and

2. a close to efficient defense

unless.....  the owner of the next nike graduates from UM, we start making fifty different colored uniforms, cheat via scouting services, play no more than two above average teams a year, and the state of Michigan legalizes mary jane.

Joking aside, I really believe our offensive pace is a direct result of Hoke's desire to keep our defense off the field.

It seems clear, that's not going to change anytime soon.  I am ok with that.  Maybe it's the purist in me.  I understand why some aren't crazy about it.  Chicks dig the long ball.

Roanman

September 24th, 2013 at 8:55 PM ^

I'm putting on Fitz.  He missed a real nice seam at 1 o'clock, turned left and drove straight into contact.

You gotta see the cuts that are there or there's no point in blocking for you anyway. 

Jon06

September 24th, 2013 at 10:03 PM ^

Who pissed in your cornflakes?

Who's up for a tedious 150 comment thread questioning whether it's worthwhile to read this? I certainly am! I hope there are content-free arguments. Let's make sure to ignore Ka'Deem Carey's 2000 yards last year when we're incensed at the idea Rich Rodriguez might be able to coach a run game.