Picture Pages: This Is Not A Stack

No. 27 was a miniature Ron Dayne for Rutgers.  The Knights had a banged up offensive line that season (who's OL is ever 100% anyway)?

I have to accept all that you've written about the LB formations here, Brian.  I probably need to buy this book and study it.

Something's really effed up with this.  Greg Robinson clearly doesn't know the tactics and itty bitty details behind the 3-3-5, and sadly It's as if UM's defensive assistants (former colleagues of Jeff Casteel at WVU who are familiar with the 3-3-5) only understand half of the story as well, and that they are relaying things piecemeal to Robinson over time (i.e. reasons why to line up at x, reason why not to do y). It's all half-assed, delayed delayed and impromptu.

The way things are playing out Michigan is probably going to be 5-4 heading down to West Lafayette in a must-win game.  It's de ja vu 2008 Purdue, where we have a DC who doesn't know what in the hell he is doing or why he is or isn't doing it, and a bunch of fledgling defensive assistants who will be pointing fingers at their boss for the loss.

I think Michigan beats Purdue though and finishes 6-6.

Or would Michigan just be better if they just played man to man with some safety help deep?

At least they would be in the same zip code when a pass is thrown. 

can you please just post something that will make us all feel not so sad about the series of dongpunches that have come our way the past few days?

i have faith in you fearless leader, and ill be refreshing mgoblog every few minutes, waiting hopefully in anticipation.

The players have hearts, and brains, and ideas about how winning football is supposed to be played.

Almost all of these kids were very, very, successful at football in HS.

They decided to come to Michigan.

They put their trust in these coaches, worked their ASSES off, and expect to be rewarded with success.

When they experience nothing but constant failure how can any football player who knows how to play the game ever since Pop Warner not have their faith shaken?

I'm wondering why there hasn't been even MORE attrition than we've already seen?

 How many of these players secretly think GERG and Gibson are blithering idiots?

if we could get someone from the program to explain just what the hell is supposed to be going on here.

Never gonna happen for a lot of reasons, I know, but I desperately want there to be some reasonably straightforward explanation for this.  Somthing like blown signals such that half the guys were doing one thing and the other half were doing something else would be maddening, but fixable.

As it is, we're left guessing and those guesses are pretty unpleasant.

So Rich wades in, we hear about a bunch of player position moves during the week, and we play a different scheme than we did against Iowa. Also, GERG is forced to a 3-3-5 based scheme because that is what Rich and GERG's assistants know ....

GERG might be as no-longer-capable as you're suggesting Brian, but how can we really tell when Rich has forced mid-season experimentation ala-Purdue '08, the players are inexperienced, and he's already adapting his defensive plans to their 3-3-5, etc.?

I know this seemed to be the case in '07 under Lloyd as well, so maybe it is normal, but it just seems like the teams we have field these past few years are not really capable of developing in season. They get in the weekly cycle of prepping for the next opponent, so once you get through fall camp, trying to make mid-regular-season adjustments to scheme and position assignment are a recipe for more mistakes not less. (As we saw in '07 you can develop in post season bowl practice though.)

Like I said before Saturday last week - I was hoping the changes were around getting some guys game experience where they are to play next year, versus trying something new mid season, less a Purdue '08 result ensue. Well, the latter occurred.

This forgetting about the past / only looking forward thing, seems to be at the expense of overlooking valid lessons learned from the past ...

"This puts me in the same situation as Greg Robinson."

Brian, in no way shape or form are you GERG.  Your hair is not as stylish.  You actually know football.  And, you are not facing almost certain termination.

If you say GERG several times in a row (gerg gerg gerg gerg), it sounds like someone choking...

says we'll be schizophrenic with our fronts and formations again this week.  This team has no defensive identity and because nothing has worked the coaches are grasping at straws and trying new things every week.  They're on tilt.

Once Royster gashed us early, we freaked out and were susceptible to screens, etc. for the rest of the night.  Penn State's FB screen was to Michigan what Air Force

I was having nightmares about defending the option this week but in reality our troubles all boil down to an inability to cover and we'll get picked apart in the air once we sell out to stop the run.  Of course, selling out to stop the run means we'll still give up huge chunks on the ground as well.

P.S. One minor quibble I have with many of the above comments is the contention that the kids aren't being put in position to make plays.  This is true but only to a certain extent.  Talbott should have had a pick against PSU.  Vinopal could have broken the TD up on the fade.  Kovacs should have had a Rick-6.  Cam Gordon should have blown up TJ Jones.  There are tons of examples from every game where even decent (more experienced? more talented? less confused?) players make big plays to kill drives or create turnovers.  It's not all on the coaches.

Before I get to my point about Casteel, I don't see anything in this post from Brian that indicates there is a dramatic change from the Defense of the Iowa game and the defense of the Penn State game.  That to me would be an indication that the coaches are tinkering too much and throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks.  What seems more likely to me is that the Michigan D is facing progressively more talented offenses coupled with increasing injury to key players.  And what is wrong with Penn State other than the QB.  And actually this game granted was a walkon, but how hard is it to handoff?

In any case, if you are dead set on dreaming about he next DC, I doubt that it's going to be Casteel.  Based on this article, I think Casteel is licking his lips at the chance to become the HC at West Virginia.  And I think he had his sights set on that the day Rich Rodriguez left for Michigan.  I mean what would you do?  Leap at a lateral move to a talent depleted team in a glaring spotlight? or convince the regents at WVU that you've demonstrated both your loyalty and talent, so just give Stewart the boot and assign me HC?

If he wanted to be the DC at Michigan he would be here already, burning in the same purgatory the rest of us are enjoying.

It's hard to play 110% when you consistently get knocked off the line at the snap. Fuck alignments and schemes and position and lateral movement-- run defense is about one word, "penetration."

This to me just illustrates why RR must go.  I'm not at all sure how anyone (including Brian) could look at the defensive philosophy on this team and not draw the conclusion that Rodriguez is woefully inadequate in his position as head coach.  

Logic would dictate that if the defensive scheme is incoherent, but the head coach fails to draw that conclusion from obvious facts, then the head coach may not have the requisite knowledge of schemes he's previously run to continue in his position.  You simply can't reconcile one with the other.  You might disagree with Brian's analysis of the 3-3-5 (Michigan v. WVU).  But if you agree with Brian's analysis, then I don't see how anyone can't think RR just doesn't understand one major aspect of his job.

ngandu.com: the case against Rich Rod

Brian, I know everybody thinks I'm a Devil's advocate around here, but I have to say...

I'm not quite sure what you're criticizing.  Maybe I'm just a failure at reading.  But the point of the 3-3-5 is to have 8 guys in the box (in this case 7, since they spread us out) and outnumber the blockers.  On this play, every player maintained his gap responsibility, at least well enough to have a successful play.  There were guys who got manhandled a little bit, but they're all in their gaps.

Meanwhile, the fullback leads up on Mouton, which leaves Kovacs completely unblocked.  His job is to help to the inside, which he does.  If our DL holds their ground a little bit and squeezes down the hole, then Kovacs has a smaller gap to defend.  It would be great if Kovacs could step up in the hole like a full fledged linebacker and stuff Royster, but Kovacs isn't very big nor a great athlete.

This is a gap control defense.  The middle linebacker isn't meant to roam from sideline to sideline.  He's meant to have a gap (in this case the playside A gap), which he fills nicely.  Royster bounces it to the B gap, through which the FB is leading up on Mouton.  Okay, fine.  There's another guy in the box to make the play, which as I said, is the point of the 3-3-5.

I'm not saying these things just to be a Devil's advocate, and I really think I must have missed something in the post.  You seem to be complaining about this defense, even though a better tackle from Kovacs would have limited the play to maybe 2 yards, which is a win for any defense.  It's not run perfectly because some players didn't execute, but the scheme here seems to be fundamentally sound.

Great breakdown and shows what happens when you have a defensive scheme in place that nobody on the staff, you know, knows how to run correctly.  And you don't have players who can fit the system well.  And you have 8 freshman on the 2-deep.

It is sad, but the only thing that shocked me in these picture pages was the ticker below the WVU-Rutgers game that listed UVa as the #15 team in the country.  What happened there?

Nobody seems to be picking up on the ESPN story that says the NCAA dropped its charge that Rodriguez did not promote compliance.  Here's a link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5761408

That's good news for both Michigan and Rodriguez.

I know the origins of it, in a typo at Syracuse, adopted by exasperated fans there. But at Michigan it has generally been used as a term of ironic affection (especially in all caps), and I'm just not feeling it.

Although I think Magnus' critique of Brian's thinking is probably right. Michigan had a player in position to make the tackle, which is about all you can ask of a defensive scheme when you don't have players (i.e., Martin) in the game who can disrupt the offense.

The saving grace here is Kovacs, who sifts through the blockers and makes a mediocre ankle tackle that the RB (Royster, I think) steps through.

You are correct, sir, that was Royster.

I'm looking forward to the UFR. Not in a bragging way, but because I don't have the expertise to break down the game (I'm just a fan) and appreciate those who can.