Picture Pages: Multiple Flood

This, my friends, is why I read mgoblog.

I kind of like the way Boise State's coach describes their offense.....and I like how that leads to sheer utter confusion on the defense not knowing what they need to drill to stop or what base plays we will run and what constraints we will run off those base plays.

Kind of means you never know what the hell we might do!  Makes our offense......

It seems like something like this formation could also be used to throw a screen to Denard...get Denard out in space with a blocker (Hemingway in this case) and assuming Hemingway can occupy at least one corner, having to beat only 1 person for a Big gain.  Or maybe I'm just crazy??

It is why Gardner shouldn't start and it is also why Gardner needs to play. Great teaching moment for Borges. Gardner will get it. Patience as always,

I don't understand the

Michigan based its offense off pro-style power running (even though they couldn't run).

when was this, I don't recall this era of M football, refresh my memory please

It is amazing how much Denard commands the attention of the defense. Basically Gardner had the chance to have his tea because if the defense pressures him, Denard is open.

Did anyone notice the Michigan cheerleader in the back celebrating after Purdue picked it off?  I believe it was an alumni and as soon as she noticed her mistake she turned away, I chuckled at that.

Gardern will be fine, like you said above, all teaching moments. 

Whoa Logan88, let's not get carried away.  Gardner isn't ready to start, but that doesn't mean he's not on track in development to be a starter.  He just needs more snaps in games to get there, but there's no reason to think he can't be an excellent starting qb in the future.

While the offense during the last couple of years could be pretty effective at times, I never found it as interesting and diverse as I was expecting, especially wrt misdirection or ball fakery, in relation to my admittedly naive knowledge about RR's offense. What I saw against Purdue was as interesting a Michigan offense as I've ever seen on a sustained basis, and damn fun to watch as long as we weren't throwing interceptions. Give these kids another year working with Borges and the rest of the offensive staff and I think it can be truly lethal, especially if we have a defense that's getting us the ball back quickly.

Anyone that watched Penn State play Illinois this past Saturday knows that we could be far worse off at QB.

I really like the exploiting trips that Borges has just started to show, with a little coaching Denard and Devin will both be able to take advantage of this. These bunch/stack/trips/etc. formations seem to be the only interesting/effective thing that NFL offenses have innovated in the last 10 years IME.

NFL Matchup highlighted the Steelers' use of this a few weeks ago and they used it to a tee against the Patriots this past weekend.

...that Gardner should not have been in the game on this exact play.  I'm curious if the same people are going to give Brian the same degree of derision for saying basically the exact same thing? I doubt it.

Substance-wise, I'm glad Brian has shown this for what it was: not a bad play, but one that was poorly executed by a player who should not have been put in there at that stage of the game.   

Will Gardner eventually be an excellent starting QB?  I think so.  

Should he get reps whenever the game's result is beyond question?  Again, I think so.  

Should he be put in for a pass play when the game is tight and our starter has just thrown a 60-yard bomb on 3rd and 20?  No, no, no, and once again, no.  

Is it possible that one of the WR ran a bad route?

Or after looking at the video, it seems like Hemingway wasn't even anticipating it and Gallon seemed to have his hands ready to catch it. Maybe the throw was very under thrown and should have been thrown towards the corner where Gallon seemed to be heading?

I'm trying to legitimize that interception somehow, b/c otherwise it was a TERRIBLE decision.

in here, I'd like to just throw out a few raw numbers. I didn't take sacks out of any of these numbers, I just took what was on the Michigan Football team's official website. In 2010 our team rushed for 5.6 yards per carry. This year, it's up to 5.9. The passing yardage per attempt bumped from 8.4 to 9.1 (obvious caveats about bomb passes being hauled in apply). Total offense bumped up from 6.8 to 7.0. The FEI rank has fallen from #2 to about #15 at last check. An increase in turnovers is an obvious negative to this years offense compared to last years.

Just thought I'd throw some raw numbers out there, point at that it's the first year in the Borges offense, and hopefully excite everyone about the possibility of Denard/Gardner in Year 2 of this offense.

...was that Borges put Devin in.  Denard has been plagued all year by "good Denard/bad Denard" moments -- largely related to what kind of momentum he has.  This has been particularly true with his longer downfield throws. 

So the moment he completed the long pass to Roundtree, I said to my buddy "that was beautiful!  Good Denard is emerging!"  And then he gets pulled at QB the very next play.  I can't think of any better way to kill the guy's positive momentum than to pull him just as he is getting going. 

While the announcers kept complaining about using Devin in the MSU game (why pull your best player off the field?), I had no problem putting Devin in there, as Denard's passing was awful.  But in this game -- man, this was not the time to pull him. 

Any chance Devin made the right read and overthrew Hemmingway instead of the wrong read and underthrowing Gallon? I didn't think so during the game, but looking at the picture, Hemmingway is pretty much as close to the ball as Gallon when it comes down. Did Hemmingway adjust to it in the air better? I think the wind was blowing from right to left so if anything it knocked the ball down on that play which doesn't support my theory. Just wondering if anyone knows for sure that Devin was targetting Gallon. I don't think so, but the thought crossed my mind.

The next play was when Martin blew up his blocking and sacked the QB for a safety. Perhaps it was in Borges' gameplan to throw a deep interception that ends < 5 yards from Purdue's goal line so they can get 2 points and the chance for more.

</day_dream>

I'm glad you made the comment about Gardner at the end. I said the same thing when watching the game live.

It's a simple mistake, can be corrected with more reps and playing time, but it proves the point that it isn't necessary to pull Denard. Dendard made some really nice throws in key situations on Saturday.

I'm fine with Denard throwing 14 times in a game, as long as he is converting those key 3rd downs (obvious passing situations), like the 3rd and 20 bomb (even though it was underthrown).

As other comments mentioned, Denard at QB makes the offense better because the defense has to key in on him, even if he is faking an end around.

He asked what his style of play was, and he dismissively responded that he didn't have a style, the implication being that he didn't need to be boxed in by any given set of tactics. 

Are we to take our "baseless offense"  as a good thing or a bad thing? Boise State has been very succesful, but the tone of the piece doesn't really sound laudatory either.

Frankly I love it. When RichRod was hired, I was more excited about the fact that maybe we would be less predictable than adopting the spread offense. The Lloyd years often had plays you saw coming from a mile away, even as a simple armchair fan.

"Anyone calling for Gardner to start should be shown this play over and over."

I was questioning Denard considerably after the MSU game. My feeling on him changes week to week. Right now I definitely want him to be our starter. But  to be fair, there are a plethora of plays showing Denard doing this exact same thing, from this season even.

This is also why  read mgoblog. I have been thinking about this play all week. Even though it happened right in front of me, I could not figure out who devin was throwing to. At first, I thought it was to Tacopants but then I realized that not even Tacopants could get to this ball. My next thought was that a reciever (Gallon) must have run a wrong route or that Devin forgot where the reciever was going on this particular play. Thanks Brian for this excellent post.

Devin will be a very good quarterback and I think we will all be wishing he had another year of eligibility in 3 years. I am not one to bash Rich Rod and I actually think that most of his decisions were with the intent of bettering the team and the program. His decision not to redshirt Devin was IMO more motivated by a desire to put Forcier "in his place" than anything. We lost a year of eligibility for Devin for what, like 10 min. of play? This decision irks me more than anything else Rich Rod did or didn't do during his time here.

Moving Picture Pages treatment now showing at http://mgoblog.com/diaries/moving-picture-pages-multiple-flood.