Position To Fail Comment Count

Brian

10/12/2013 – Michigan 40, Penn State 43 (4OT) – 5-1, 1-1 Big Ten

10268848885_2917380b57_b[1]10268835064_2e431ff4cb_b[1]10268925246_ce09bfacd3_b[1]

Mace triptych, by Eric Upchurch

Devin Gardner dropped back to pass. He had two guys in the route, both of them headed to the endzone from the 40 yard line. Two seconds later he ate a blindside sack, because Taylor Lewan was pretending he was a tight end and AJ Williams was pretending he was a left tackle.

Last year in Notre Dame Stadium, Denard Robinson faked a handoff and turned around to find Stephon Tuitt in his face. He reacted badly, because he always reacted badly in that situation.

This fall, Michigan told the offensive line they should do that stretch blocking thing the coaches had run maybe six times the previous two years.

Drew Dileo watched most of these things from the bench and Dennis Norfleet all of them because Michigan would rather play underclass tight ends who couldn't shove a toddler into a ball pit in three tries.

------------------

Any individual play can be blamed on a player. Any structural issue in the first couple years can be attached to the previous coach. But there's a breaking point at which it becomes clear that something is deeply wrong with the guys in charge, and this Penn State game was the offensive equivalent of watching Matt McGloin shred a clueless JT Floyd and company in 2010.

I went back into Michigan's statistics archive, which goes back to 1949, and pulled out the top 200 running back games in that database in terms of carries (the max allowed). The sample ranges from 51 to 23, and here's the bottom of it in YPC:

Name Att Net Yd Yd/Att TD Lng Season Opponent
Ron Johnson 33 84 2.5 2   1968 Minnesota
Don Moorhead 25 57 2.3 0   1969 Michigan State
Anthony Thomas 29 60 2.1 0 8 2000 Ohio State
Jamie Morris 27 52 1.9 1 7 1987 Iowa
Fitzgerald Toussaint 27 27 1 0 12 2013 Penn State

We're talking about the worst game from a tailback in the history of the program here, and nothing about it was actually Toussaint's fault. This is Greg Robinson level output. The only faith you can have in the offensive coaching is that two to four times a year they will come out with a gameplan so clueless that you spend four quarters telling yourself that you won't send that BORGERG tweet out. It's time to break the seal.

There are ways to work around the personnel limitations Michigan has, but they are not the ones Michigan wants to run. They want to be a rough and tumble Stanford offense; they spend large chunks of games with one wide receiver and three guys vaguely inclined towards blocking, and they've spent almost a month of precious practice time installing an unbalanced formation that resulted in the above table as soon as an opponent saw it on tape. This has been a miscalculation as bad as believing Russell Bellomy was ready to back up the oft-injured Denard Robinson, with results exactly like the second half of last year's Nebraska game.

This is nothing like what Rodriguez did on offense because there was no offense in which Stephen Threet, Nick Sheridan, seven scholarship OL, and a parade of freshmen at wide receiver would be effective. It is instead exactly like what he did on defense: faithlessly pretend to fit personnel to scheme early, ditch that at the first sign of trouble, shoehorn players into roles they are not fit for, make alarmingly large mid-season changes, and get the minimum possible out of available talent. Michigan is 117th in tackles for loss allowed, giving up eight per game.

No offensive line is bad enough to pave the way for 27 yards on 27 carries, because teams running for one god damn yard an attempt stop doing it.

----------------------------------------

There are problems up and down the team that I can list if you like. Devin Gardner has Miley Cyrus-level ball security. Taylor Lewan went out. Rich Rodriguez didn't recruit any offensive linemen. Brendan Gibbons should be able to make a 33-yard field goal in the dead center of the field. Yes, all of these things. Granted. At some point, though, you zoom out from the micro issues that can be explained away and you get this:

  1. Michigan 14, MSU 28: 250 yards of offense
  2. Michigan 16, Iowa 24: 323 yards of offense, 166 50 minutes into the game when M went into hurry-up shotgun throwing
  3. Michigan 23, Virginia Tech 20 (OT): 184 yards of offense
  4. Michigan 6, ND 13: 299 yards of offense and 5 INTs
  5. Michigan 9, Nebraska 23: 188 yards of offense and 3 INTs
  6. Michigan 21, Ohio State 26: 279 yards of offense and 4 TOs
  7. Michigan 28, UConn 24: 284 yards of offense and 3 TOs
  8. Penn State 43, Michigan 40 (4OT): 389 yards of offense in 19 opportunities, zero OT TDs, 3 TO, worst rushing performance ever by a Michigan tailback

If you are so inclined you can add games against Alabama and MSU last year plus the 2011 Notre Dame game to the pile; I certainly don't think anything about UTL was to Borges's credit.

There have been some brilliant games over the last three years, but we're one upcoming debacle away from having a third straight year in which a quarter of Michigan's games feature offensive performances that are (almost) impossible to win with. Some of those could be explained away by injury or bad luck or a flood of turnovers from the quarterback, except that the offensive coordinator is also the quarterbacks coach.

After his year three at Michigan found high expectations dashed, John Beilein overhauled his program. Now he's coming off a national title game appearance, on the verge of making Michigan into a top-ten program. Unless there's a major turnaround, Brady Hoke's going to have some hard decisions this offseason.

Unless they're easy ones.

10259441905_e704092064_c[1]

Bryan Fuller

Highlights

Via BTN:

Awards

10259309256_78df831b2a_z[1]

Fuller

brady-hoke-epic-double-point_thumb_3[1]Brady Hoke Epic Double Point Of The Week. Frank Clark was in the right place at the right time to scoop a ball off the turf and score when Michigan opened the second half down eleven and added two sacks besides as part of the best damn 43-point performance college football's ever seen, so let's give it to him.

Honorable mention: Raymon Taylor had a pick and was generally avoided otherwise; Devin Funchess had another 100 yard game as a "tight end"; Jeremy Gallon remains an excellent safety blanket and all-around player.

Epic Double Point Standings.

1.0: Devin Gardner (ND), Jeremy Gallon (ND), Desmond Morgan(UConn), Devin Funchess(Minnesota), Frank Clark(PSU)

0.5: Cam Gordon (CMU), Brennen Beyer (CMU)

Brady Hoke Epic Double Fist-Pump Of The Week. Should I even do this after that? I probably shouldn't. I will anyway: Funchess's second touchdown displayed his incredible potential, as he shot through the center of the defense to get over the top. This one wins because Penn State was actually trying to cover him this time.

Honorable mention: Gallon's shake gets him wide open for a touchdown; Chris Wormley rips through to sack Hack, as does Jibreel Black, as does Frank Clark a couple times; Fitzgerald Toussaint gets past the line of scrimmage that one time.

Epic Double Fist-Pumps Past.

8/31/2013: Dymonte Thomas introduces himself by blocking a punt.

9/7/2013: Jeremy Gallon spins through four Notre Dame defenders for a 61-yard touchdown.

9/14/2013: Michigan does not lose to Akron. Thanks, Thomas Gordon.

9/21/2013: Desmond Morgan's leaping one-handed spear INT saves Michigan's bacon against UConn.

10/5/2013: Fitzgerald Toussaint runs for ten yards, gets touchdown rather easily.

10/12/2013: Devin Funchess shoots up the middle of the field to catch a 40 yard touchdown, staking Michigan to a ten-point lead they wouldn't relinquish. (Right?)

[After the JUMP: decisions, and the rest of things.]

Decisions

Complete dossier of late game faildowns. I didn't think the strategy completely went to hell until overtime, much to the dissatisfaction of some people on twitter. Clock management is another matter entirely—taking three delay of game penalties is ludicrous. But that's another spittle-flecked bullet point.

Sticking to the high-level decision-making, after the delay of game penalty it's third and fourteen from the 32. PSU is out of timeouts and there's about 1:40 on the clock when you snap. You're up a touchdown. You can either

  1. try to end the game by getting a first down
  2. try to pick up 5-10 yards for a long FG attempt
  3. guarantee Penn State has to drive 80+ yards with under a minute on the clock and no timeouts

In that situation I'm running and taking those 40 seconds instead of taking a 50/50 chance that I will gain any yards for a 50/50-ish chance at a long field goal. Those 40 seconds are huge. Once you run the ball for –3 yards, which is yet another spittle-flecked bullet point, the punt is obvious. The 15+ yards is more valuable than the vague shot you have at a 52-yard field goal.

That was a totally different situation than the one you might be thinking of in the 2005 OSU game. OSU had three minutes, was down two points, and Michigan had fourth and four. That was absolutely indefensible. Here the punt was the move. 

The strategy in overtime was purest sphincterball, enraging and depressing in equal parts. Michigan settles for a 40-yard field goal in their first shot at three-points-to-win, going so far as to set a down on fire by "centering" the ball almost on the opposite hash on third down. Blocked. On their next possession the scoring offense re-emerges, drives Michigan down to chip shot territory, and gets a field goal. They did so by isolating Gallon on one of PSU's crappy corners and giving Gardner an easy read. The second free shot to win is less of a decision issue since they had third and one. That's on Michigan's inability to get one god damn yard; more of an offense ineptitude and structure thing. Once it's fourth and one you kick for the win. 33 yards out is a chip shot.

The worst part is the pucker pucker is out of character for Hoke, who has consistently been able to put aside fears of something going wrong and make the right tactical move by being aggressive. Here Michigan lost because his opposite number did so (and could run for one goddamn yard, unlike Michigan… sorry, different spittle-flecked bullet point.)

BONUS dispiriting thing. Michigan threw away a possession that started with 90 seconds left in the first half. Turnover concerns are the excuse, but down eleven halfway through the game with zero run game outside of Gardner you're going to have to ride or die with the guy whether it's before halftime or after. You cannot allow that opportunity to slip through your hands.

Problem with the punt. Take a delay of game—also saving you a timeout—and give Wile more room. You want that extra buffer; in that situation every yard is precious and anything inside the 20 is a bonus. I mean: take Robinson's catch and move it back ten yards. You've still got a great chance to win.

Clock management debacle #854. Michigan's dedication to the slowest possible pace is enraging. It enrages to see opponents get to the line, see what Michigan is doing, and check to a play that uses that information. It is enraging to see Michigan get to the line of scrimmage with six seconds on the clock, unable to react to the defense, unable to even to have a snap count that might allow the offensive line to react to a tipped blitz. It is the most enraging to have Michigan eat critical delay of game penalties because the offensive coordinator is consistently having all these things happen and putting his players in a position to fail.

Gardner and Hoke share responsibility there, as well—Hoke moreso than Gardner, who's trying to get to the line, read the defense, and check with six seconds while Hoke should be on top of the playclock—but at root the issue is Michigan's dedication to the archaic art of huddling.

Bonus inanity: Michigan spiked the ball with the clock stopped on their final drive of regulation. That cost them a critical second that probably would have allowed them to take a shot at a closer field goal, if they'd saved the timeout they burned when Penn State had first and goal on the one.

Offense

10268810174_97336b79f4_c[1]

Give us your poor, huddled Toussaints yearning to be TFLed [Upchurch]

The thing. Fitzgerald Toussaint had 27 yards on 27 carries and I thought he got everything he could. UFR review, of course, but high up in the endzone is a pretty good vantage point to see a game and it looked like he was looking at a wall of dudes on every play and his cuts away from the playside were necessary if he was going to avoid a TFL/pick up one goddamn yard.

What can you say? There is no possible excuse there. The tackle over stuff was met with an array of blitzes that saw Penn State crush Michigan in the backfield, because Penn State had no respect for the idea Michigan would pass and Michigan still has no counters in their game. The plan was everyone's worst fears brought to life: Michigan lined up and said "we're running over here, try and stop it" and Penn State said "okay."

This was against a defense that just faced 27 carries from Indiana's tailbacks. They gave up 153 yards on those carries. It is literally impossible to overstate the fail here. They spent three weeks practicing this! They KEPT RUNNING TACKLE OVER WITH TAYLOR LEWAN ON THE SIDELINE.

!!!

10258957036_866305c8b8_c[1]

This was the only long pass to Funchess that wasn't a touchdown, and it was close to one. [Fuller]

Throw it to f***ing Funchess. At least take a shot. Even if you're seeing interceptions around every lamppost in overtime, how risky is just throwing up a punt to Devin Funchess? Or throwing a slant to Jeremy Gallon matched up against a defensive back who's gotten shook by yards in the second half?

It was quickly obvious that every first down run was a down set on fire, and that Devin Funchess was insane. 30 attempts from the running backs to 11 Funchess/Gallon catches should have been at least even.

Yes, Devin Gardner throws too many interceptions. I'm not inclined to cut the coaches any slack about that since they looked at Gardner and Bellomy last offseason and thought Bellomy could be viable. But even if Gardner throws too many interceptions, you can give him some easy throws to the field. When Denard was a sophomore, Rodriguez patched together some nascent passing offense by running a bunch of high/low stuff on the corner on which Denard's read was quick and easy. It didn't really work against high quality defenses, but Penn State's not one of those, what with their true sophomore converted WR at CB and such. There's a baby-steps passing offense that you can run out there.

FWIW, the fumble was not on him. It was the sack/strip on which Penn State ended up rushing their four defensive linemen; Michigan slid the line over and no one even blocked the DE. Gardner pumped because the wheel/hitch was covered and then he got nailed from the blindside.

Tackle over WTF. A gimmick. A gimmick that Michigan has practiced for almost a month now and leads to blindside sacks and less than a yard per attempt for Michigan's running backs. Ironic that the kind of person who comes up with this as a solution to Michigan's running issues harrumphs at the spread as a gimmick.

It was ominous that everything on the internet about unbalanced lines like the ones Michigan ran out the last two weeks described it as a way to mess with keys. What happens when the opponent's entire week is spent fixing those keys? That. Michigan dressed it up with a bunch of motion that attempted to get PSU misaligned; they did not misalign; game over.

Norfleet. Has disappeared because Michigan would rather hope nine guys execute nine blocks instead of one guy executing one.

Defense

Most valiant 43-point defensive effort ever. Penn State had one drive of more than 24 yards halfway into the third quarter, and by the end of the game they'd had a whopping 19(!) possessions, six of them starting at or around the Michigan 25 yard line. They acquired four turnovers and a four-and-out turnover on downs and scored a touchdown. Any criticisms of individual defensive plays should be taken in that context.

The Stribling-ing. The defense had one WTF coaches thing: Channing Stribling getting in on the final drive, covering Allen Robinson of all people on that fateful bomb. Your guess is as good as mine there. Mine is that they'd seen Courtney Avery get beat on a back-shoulder-throw-it-up thing in the second quarter, and that the significantly taller Stribling would be a better bet to defend heaved prayers.

They got those prayers at Stribling, the first of which he should have intercepted but somehow let go over his hands… or something? I'm still unclear even after watching it. The second was just a miracle ball that I don't think you can really blame him on. Yeah, he could have chosen to shove Robinson OOB instead of leaping for the ball but he doesn't know how everything's going to work out and he has time to look for, undercut, and leap for the ball. On anything except that exact throw and leap combination by Penn State, he wins. Sometimes you just get beat.

10259670005_c5807f37c7_z[1]

Fuller

Outside of the Stribling-ing. Michigan gave up 79 yards on three passes on the desperate final drive and 5.5 YPA the rest of the day. Michigan did not match up Countess—or anyone—against Allen Robinson, playing it straight the whole way. The starting secondary did a pretty damn good job.

Meanwhile on the ground. PSU tailbacks ground out three yards a carry with a long of 13. While Zwinak isn't much of a big play threat, he was relegated to the backup in this one and Bill Belton, who is much more explosive, got 27 carries on which he gained more than one goddamn yard each. He got 3.1. It was irritating late when Penn State seemed to get five or six on the first play of every overtime drive.

Fourth down and game. Power at Black, stacked up pretty well, Morgan does not get outside of a tackle releasing and that's the crack. If Michigan had rolled down Wilson he's likely in position to stop it.

10268863485_98fec7edb0_h[1]

Upchurch

Right to rush four? Hey, four sacks and all from the defensive line. That's actual progress. Michigan did a much better job of constricting the pocket, giving Hackenberg few opportunities to break contain and find a throw. When pressured he had no obviously good option as to where to move. The results were encouraging. They've been too stop-and-start to get that excited about what next week might bring, unfortunately. Have to see them string together some performances before the progress there seems real.

Wilson. I'm not going to get too bent out of shape about the pass interference in the endzone. It was, it wasn't a great play, he got beat, it happens. His interception was very nice, and I don't think either of the touchdowns after the Gardner INTs were on him. PSU's TE cleared the LBs before he could get over on the James one and the second he had nothing to do with.

Here

Chaos! Anarchy! Lots of people talking about running the ball! Here's Magnum PI:

Who are we as an offense? This is a tough question to answer. Let's start with who we are not. Yesterday, we ran 34 plays on first down. Here are the results:

Play call No. Yards per play <2 yard plays
Running back run 17 1.8 11
Quarterback run 8 8.4 1
Pass 12 13.8 5


In a power running offense, you rely on three to five yard runs on first and second down to gain short-yardage situations on third down. Yesterday we averaged 1.8 yards per play on first down runs, including 11 of 17 plays that went for one yard or less. When Devin Gardner ran on first down, he gained 8.4 yards per play with only one run for less than two yards. On the 12 occasions that passed on first down, we averaged 13.8 yards, including incomplete passes that gain zero yards.

We are not a power running team.

dragonchild presents Borges vs. Field Marshal Haig:

Melchett:       Field Marshal Haig has formulated a brilliant new tactical plan to ensure final victory in the field.

(lemme guess. . .)

2nd and 1 at MICH 29    Fitzgerald Toussaint rush for no gain to the Mich 29

3rd and 1 at MICH 29    Fitzgerald Toussaint rush for no gain to the Mich 29

2nd and 1 at MICH 48    Fitzgerald Toussaint rush for no gain to the Mich 33

Blackadder:     Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

Darling:        How can you possibly know that Blackadder? It's classified information.

Inside The Box Score brings back the Lizard Brain theory, noting that Michigan's reversion to what they are comfortable with—losing yards under center—was apparent in the results:

Final 7 minutes of regulation

10 plays run from under center gain 9 yards total, with 5 producing zero or negative yards.

4 plays were run from the shotgun. They gained 55 yards and there were no turnovers.

So on the first drive, three plays are run from under center that gain 2 yards. The 40 yard FG attempt is blocked. On the first drive, we just needed a FG to win, so Al went super conservative. He didn't want to risk the turnover by going to the shotgun, even though the turnovers were not related to the formation.

On the second drive, we needed a score, so Al went exclusively shotgun. We gained 18 yards on five plays, but are forced to kick a FG when the officials missed a blatant facemask on PSU. (Ripping a guy's helmet off has to be illegal, right? Refs -1.)

On the third drive, it's back to under center, as all we need is a FG to win. Two plays gain -1 yard, and one gains 10. On second viewing today, it's clear Gallon crossed the 15 yard line, so another -1 to the refs. Bill O'Brien goes for it in a similar situation. We kick the FG.

On the fourth drive, we start under center. PSU gets away with lining up offsides (-1 for the refs) on an incomplete pass, and it's back to shotgun (anyone getting dizzy yet?) An incomplete to Dileo and a delay of game penalty (-1 coaching staff) follow. Gardner gets 6 yards on a shotgun scramble, but we have to settle for a FG. PSU gets a TD and that's the ballgame.

Best And Worst managed to find some bests and sticks David Foster Wallace and pro wrestling into the same column. This is about people calling for players to be replaced but it's also indirectly about how that game played out:

I know this all stems from the potential of the unknown, the unreasonable belief that you’ll get the card you need on the river for the flush, that the prize behind door #3 is better than cash in hand, or that someone will catch that lob with no time left because, well, it’s happened before.  Just like Devin and Fitz weren’t ready for primetime when they stepped onto campus years ago, expecting either Morris or Green to perform adequately, let alone markedly better, than the current starters is reactionary and nearsighted.  In particular with Green, if the guy can’t earn more than a couple of snaps from the coaches against teams like Akron, UConn, and Minny, he’s just not where the coaches need him to be.

Elsewhere

HSR:

Al Borges's vindication for this game does exist (I have seen two of them, which refer to games in the future, perhaps games not imaginary), but those who went in quest of Al Borges's Vindication failed to recall that the chance of a man finding his Vindication, or some perfidious version of his, can be calculated to be zero.

MVictors:

The coaches can argue they put the team in position plenty of times to win the game and players need to make plays.  That’s fair to a certain extent, but if you’re on the sideline and you can see clearly that the coaching staff has no balls, doesn’t that affect you at some point?

Also:

mood_thumb[1]

Sap's Decals:

YOU – If you watched the entire game and maintained your dignity for the duration– congrats, you get a decal.

I don't get a decal.

TTB:

Let's see more of this guy on offense . . . Dennis Norfleet. If Norfleet's going to be a slot receiver, he needs to be on the field. And not just in special packages where it's a near certainty that he'll get the ball. I somewhat understand not putting him out there a ton if he's your full-time returner, but now that Drew Dileo has taken over the punt return duties, Norfleet's duties have essentially been cut in half. Michigan needs to spend more time in the spread and less time with two or three tight ends and a fullback. And if that happens, Michigan will have to spell some guys with the likes of Norfleet.

Fouad:

Here's why: imagine yourself as anything other than Michigan fan, and picture yourself watching this team. What do you see? If you're being honest, you'll see a average squad with exceptional talent and ability in spots, but not enough to produce a consistent effort on either side of the ball. Michigan turns it over a lot (i.e. like a bad team). Almost entirely irrespective of its opponent, Michigan runs the ball like an FCS team trying to run into the teeth of Alabama's defense.

Maize and Go Blue. Maize and Blue Nation. Big House Report. Baumgardner:

In football, this stuff always catches up with you.

Three turnovers. Countless missed blocks. Questionable play calls. Questionable game management. Missed field goals.

Please, allow me a second to catch my breath.

Penalties. Blown coverages. Dropped passes. Lack of toughness. Lack of grit. Overall carelessness.

Need I go on?

Deadspin has video of the macing and a report from the stands.

Comments

Ron Utah

October 14th, 2013 at 12:44 PM ^

I'm afraid Hoke is just as responsible as Borges.  It would be easy for him to say, "Al, we need to play more from the shotgun and use Gallon and Funchess.  That's the gameplan I want."

My fear is that we bring in another OC and run the same stubborn offense because that's what Hoke wants.

EGD

October 14th, 2013 at 12:58 PM ^

I think this is probably the case.  One of the first things Hoke said when he was hired was that he wanted to run Power O as the base of our offense, he didn't want to be a spread team, etc.  Borges seems like he's trying to give Hoke what he wants.  I don't think it's quite like Rich Rod ordering Gerg to run a 3-3-5, but at the same time I don't think Borges really had the freedom in the offseason to just put in whatever he thought would work best.  A new OC would probably come in with even more rigid marching orders.

UMgradMSUdad

October 14th, 2013 at 1:06 PM ^

Everything screams to me, also, that it is Hoke who is insisting on running it up the middle over and over.  His comments to the reporter at half time, something to the effect of "we have to do a better job of establishing the run,"  the fact that he was a lineman as a player and buys into that old school mindset of smashmouth, manball football.  Getting rid of Borges isn't the solution, because it's not Borges who is insisting on running between the tackles almost every first and second down.

umumum

October 14th, 2013 at 1:42 PM ^

its not Borges calling for the first down--under center--runs on his own.  None of us really knows the extent to which Hoke dictates the offensive play-calling.  We do know that Hoke doesn't wear a headset--which doesn't seem so cute anymore--and he says that Borges calls the plays.  Hoke is ultimately responsible for his offense--like RichRod was for the defense--but nothing says Borges isn't in charge and calling the plays.  And, as a seasoned offensive coordinator, I am hard-pressed to believe he would sit back and allow Hoke to dictate play-calling he opposed. 

The jury is still out on Hoke.  He recruits well and appears to be a good guy.  But Borges has done absolutely nothing to justify the apologists.  The games specified by Brian are some of the worst called offensive games in Michigan history IMHO.  The fact that he may be able to coach with a star-studded team shouldn't be a saving grace.  There are hundreds of  offensive coordinators who can do that.   The ability to create a good offense from what-you-got should be the real standard.  Borges fails that test---badly.

wolverine1987

October 14th, 2013 at 1:58 PM ^

Speculation is legit, but I doubt Hoke is the one respnsible for all of those questionable play calls--he seems much more like a general strategy guy (I'm not making comparisions, but I run a department and that's how I see my role, on a smaller scale) that does say "yes, at Michigan we want to control the line of scrimmage and run power" but does not micro manage calls during game time. In fact Hoke described himself in similar terms before. I think Borges knows what Hoke wants overall, but he has the freedom to call plays during games as he wants.

UMgradMSUdad

October 14th, 2013 at 2:24 PM ^

You and umumum are basically making the same point I am, just leaning in the other direction.  Pretty obviously Hoke is not calling the individual plays.  But ask yourself this, who is it that continually talks about the manball aspects of the game and having to establish the run. I'm not saying I'm sure Hoke is the one insisting on the running plays on 1st and 2nd down, but there's a liklihood that he is the one most responsible for insisting on this approach and Borges is carrying out his wishes.  I get it that it's a simpler problem if it's just Borges.  Fire him and bring in somebody else.  I'm just not so sure this is all or even mostly on Borges.

EGD

October 14th, 2013 at 3:56 PM ^

Right. Borges may call the plays, but he's only going to call plays that the team has practiced. Contrary to popular belief, modern football teams don't just draw up new plays on the chalkboard at halftime. You install plays in fall camp and a little bit during the season when you are preparing for specific opponents. If Borges decided this summer that we have the players to run a successful power-running offense and decided on his own to install that instead of something better-suited to our personnel, then that's on him. But it seems more like that was a predetermined choice based on Hoke's philosophy.

umumum

October 14th, 2013 at 5:26 PM ^

I don't generally like to comment a second time on the same subject--there is usually little to be gained--but as your response was so genuinely polite and fair--rather than a pissing contest--let me just add:

1. While I agree that Hoke sets the tone for offensive and defensive schemes, I don't think Borges would have come here if he felt Hoke was going to force him to play manball--or at least the concept of manball some have here. 

2.  If Hoke is forcing him to coach differently than he thinks best, I assume Borges will resign.

3.  As we sometimes do something other than hand the ball to Toussant on first down--with better success--why would Borges take that risk if Hoke opposes it?

4.  Every indication is that Borges called the first-down-under-center runs and everything in OT.  If Hoke instructed him to do so, we need some evidence--not mere speculation-- of it.

5.  The embarrassingly-called offensive games listed by Brian are consistent with the approach at the end of the Penn State game,

6.  And I hope I was clear that I was not letting Hoke off the hook.  Not only is he ultimately responsible for the Penn State loss, but unless he fixes the coaching defeiciencies--like Beilein did--the future is less bright than once thought.

Blue in Yarmouth

October 15th, 2013 at 10:10 AM ^

If I'm not mistaken (but I very well could be as I've tried to erase the memory of that game) I seem to recall while watching the game a clip in overtime (just after our three runs into the center of the defense) of BH grabbing the headset and talking to Al in what looked to be a not very pleasant discussion.

I remember thinking at that point "please BH be telling Al to stop this BS and go for the win". The next series was the one where Gardner actually threw the ball. Again, I'm not certain that is exactly how it played out, but that is my recollection.

Regardless, I just don't see Hoke being the kind of coach who is micromanaging every playcall. I do buy the fact that he is telling Al he wants MANBALL, but not telling him "I want you running on every first and second down, right up the gut". 

I believe Al knows full well what BH philosophy is, but has the freedom to call the game in the manner he sees fit. I just can't imagine Hoke has much input in the various plays throughout the game. As the coach he should be able to jump on the headset and say "Hey Al...Pass the damn ball a bit" though. 

coastal blue

October 14th, 2013 at 12:47 PM ^

One point of dissention: While a 52 yard field goal obviously wasn't ideal and less than a 50/50 probability...at that point in time was there really a threat that Penn State would drive 55-60 yards and score a touchdown? They had one drive over 24 yards at that point and they had 6 points in the second half. Our defense had them fairly locked up. Why not take the 30/40% chance at victory and then trust your stronger unit with stopping an offense that hadn't shown the ability to sustain a drive all game? 

I'm not saying that it was the wrong call to punt, just offering up an alternative which I feel would have been more in line with the coaching Hoke's done in the past. 

M-Dog

October 14th, 2013 at 1:02 PM ^

Agreed.

The sequence that maximizes the chance of a win should have been this:

- Michigan has 1st down at the 27.  We need about 5-7 more yards to get in better FG range, 10 for a 1st obviously.  

- Throw safe and short to Gallon or Dileo in the slot on 1st down.  If it fails, try similar on 2nd.  

- If you make the 5-7 yards on 1st or 2nd, then you can run a safe 1-yard handoff.  If you don't, just do the safe handoff and get your yard.  DO NOT TAKE A DELAY OF GAME.

- Kick the FG from no worse than the 26.  If you make it, game over.  If not, they still have to drive 3/4ths of the field in under a minute.

You've now given yourself all 3 chances to win: a possible 1st down on YAC, a game winning FG from no worse than the 26, or a stop on D with them having to drive for a TD in under a minute.

Had they done this, they probably would have never even gotten to chance #3.

 

Red is Blue

October 14th, 2013 at 3:32 PM ^

Delay of game was a huge, critical mistake that the coaches should have avoided. Take a timeout and run a 3rd down play that hasn't proven all night/season to have a good chance to lose yardage and your looking at a 45 yard field goal. Even if you miss, PSU gets ball on 25. Agree - keep it on ground, but not with Fitz.

Red is Blue

October 14th, 2013 at 3:32 PM ^

Delay of game was a huge, critical mistake that the coaches should have avoided. Take a timeout and run a 3rd down play that hasn't proven all night/season to have a good chance to lose yardage and your looking at a 45 yard field goal. Even if you miss, PSU gets ball on 25. Agree - keep it on ground, but not with Fitz.

CLord

October 14th, 2013 at 3:34 PM ^

Reading people dissect and  argue over failures at the individual play level is about useful as two guys pointing out that the third tire on the left of a football field sized tire fire is a Michelin vs a Goodyear.

Retract focus a bit and see the bigger picture, which is that Al Borge and Funk must be fired come year end. 

The debate over Borges' incompetence has been raging ever since Nebraska second half last year, and if anything this Penn State game does us the "no pain no gain" service of clarifying the picture for the slower kids in the room.

Vasav

October 14th, 2013 at 12:53 PM ^

Denard and Devin both have TO problems. Last year's and this year's line both have trouble in the interior. QB TOs and an underperforming OL have defined this offense for the past two seasons. And as Brian mentioned, a quarter of our games with Borges has us wondering "why the heck would we run this offense with these players? What happened to Nebraska and Ohio 2011?"



Hopefully he has gotten his one "oh for fuck's sake what was I thinking" game out of his system for this season. The Iowa 2011 game was followed by "Al Borges is an Evil Genius." That's my only hope. And I'm not too hopeful.

MVictors97

October 14th, 2013 at 12:56 PM ^

I will try to stomach re watching the game tonight to locate the specific problems in the running game.  But without re watching it I can tell you right now that Michigan needs to change their approach to the running game. Duh. But that does not mean running Gardner more out of the spread. Right now the only thing that worries me more that Gardner throwing is Gardner running. I know I know Michigans only running success has come from him. But putting any more of the running load on him will result in the following: 1) He will be seriously injured. He does not know how to take a hit. He run awkwardly and leaves himself open to take major hits. He is already wearing a knee brace and he got up slow and looked shaken up several times on Saturday. 2) He will fumble. Right now he is just begging for someone to rip the ball out. He rarely covers it up. And he has good vision to locate guys at the next level but seems completely unaware of the fact that there are guys trying to tackle him from behind or coming from the side. I am not saying run Gardner less, I think he is running a good amount right now with a couple veers, couple draws and scrambles. Just don’t increase his load.

In my opinion what Michigan needs to do is run the ball still from under center but in more 3 wide and 4 wide sets. It’s just so predictable right now what Michigan is going to do. On one end they line up in the Gun with 3 wides and they will pass, run the inverted veer, or a qb draw. And on the other end they line up in a set with 2 backs and 2-3 tight ends and they are going to run power, stretch or play action pass. No in between... When they lineup in these power running sets they are ignoring the fact that the other team knows what they are going to do and they are trying to flat out over power them. This works against Minnesota but as we saw will not work against any defense that is at least decent. The defense is going to sell out against the run with 8 maybe 9 guys in the box and run blitzes. They aren’t scared of the play action because they will usually be 1,2 maybe 3 man routes and the blitz more often than not is getting there before the routes develop. I am 100% in favor of Michigan trying to establish a power running game. But they need to find a new way to do it.  Next year or the year after Michigan will be able to lineup and run against 8 in the box. But right now they are just not cut out for it. So they need to find ways to get 6 and 7 guys in the box. And they have the athletes to do this with Gallon, Dileo, Chesson, Funchess, Norfleet and Butt. There is no reason they cannot still run the power o play and inside and outside zone plays in 3 wide sets with 1 te and 4 wide sets. There are plenty of variations of gap scheme power runs vs. the nickel defense. The emergence of Funchess as a WR threat now gives you the option to line up 3 wide with him in the slot and can still motion him into a position to block in the power play. So you’re essentially keeping 2 tight ends in the game. And if they defense wants to keep the extra guy in the box you hurt them with quick passes.

Which brings me to another concern I’ve noticed. Someone correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t believe Michigan has done a straight 3 step or 5 step drop from under center. Anytime they have passed from under center it has been playaction. So once again they defense knows that 100% of the time when Michigan is under center they will get a run or run action. Why? Does Gardner not feel comfortable dropping back? If so, that’s a major concern. For someone who was being considered the next in line to be a dual threat pro prospect you’d would think he has the ability to 3 step stop from under center and hit a slant or curl.

All in all I agree that Michigan can’t keep running into a brick wall in the power game but I don’t believe going to more spread with Gardner is the right move. I think spreading out the defense still from under the center is the best option. For whatever reason over the past three years we have little to none of this from the Michigan offense. They are hell bent on using the fullback to establish the run. I don’t understand why.

wolverine1987

October 14th, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^

I made that quote up, but I'm sure there is a more eloquent version of it throughout history somewhere.

And another point: a general problem with coaches is that they fail to see that their strategy CAUSES poor execution, instead believing that poor execution undermined their strategy. I fear that Hoke believes that the run game was so poor because guys didn't execute, when instead it may be a case of asking guys to do something they aren't good at. 

MVictors97

October 14th, 2013 at 2:52 PM ^

You're right about the execution. I haven't re watched and was under the influence of quite a few "pops" during the game but I believe the box was loaded up and they were blitzing against their unbalanced power formation. As they should.

A great NFL o-line coach once said "If you love a play, don't let the defense run you out of it" What he meant was not run into a brick wall because you love the play, but find another way to run the play. Whether that be through formation or adjusting the assigments to put yourself in a more favorable spot.

Its obvious Hoke loves the power play. As do I. So I don't think they should scrao it,  but they need to find a new way to run it to give themselves a chance.

ST3

October 14th, 2013 at 3:28 PM ^

I think on our very first run of the game, we had 3 blockers on the left side trying to block 5 defenders. The result, as expected was a four yard loss. The runs to the sidelines were horrendously bad. Like Brian wrote, all 9 blockers have to execute, meanwhile, as the play stretches east-west, the DBs attack the edges and poor Fitz ends up in a pile 3-4 yards behind the LOS. A halfback pass would have gone for big yards. That's a play I haven't seen all year. I guess it left with Vincent Smith. One of Fitz' few positive carries came when he cut back against the wall of humanity at the sideline and eked out a few yards.

FlexUM

October 14th, 2013 at 12:55 PM ^

This is what I don't understand...

These coaches want to keep their jobs right? If you are a normal human being and you are Al Borgess don't you look at your team, take a deep breath and say...

Ok...I do have talent...not as much as I'd like yet but it's there...and what I'm doing isn't working. I need to figure this out and do something different.

We all do that in our normal jobs right? I mean I am ultra competitive in my job and if somethign isn't working (ie I'm not making sales) I take a step back, evaluate, get others' advice, and implement some new strategy.

That doesn't mean he has to be a spread lover but maybe think; more passes on first down, more easy reads to get DG going, fast pace during the game between plays, more speed guys like norfleet in the game. It's not even a total change in philosophy just small changes could be a huge help.

i don't get it...

Duncan

October 14th, 2013 at 12:57 PM ^

Frank Clark is a fine choice, but Jibreel Black played an outstanding 2nd half.  Forced the fumble that Clark picked up..a couple of sacks/pressures..Granted one was just a break down in the blocking scheme by Penn St.  But I'm going to guess, based on UFR, that he was the best player on the field for Michigan Sat.

kb

October 14th, 2013 at 12:58 PM ^

for telling it like it is. I was at the game and left feeling embarrassed about Michigan football. There are some people on this blog who keep saying to themselves that the close games and this loss are because we "always get the best shot from our opponents because we're Michigan" or some other inane logic, but the fact is that this team has myriad issues.

mGrowOld

October 14th, 2013 at 12:58 PM ^

I could not possibly agree with this post more.  It is everything I've said over the past 48 hours rolled up into one eloquent ball.

Borges has go.  Funk has to go.  Hoke needs to hold underperformers accountable and make the tough decisions necessary to be successful.

mGrowOld

October 14th, 2013 at 1:53 PM ^

If Hoke IS the one mandating this offense then he needs to one of the following three things IMO:

1. Get a coach/coordinator who can execute his offensive vision better

2. Hope like Hell the influx of "his" players will achieve different (and be different I mean a jillion percent better) results

3. Buff up the resume.

Indiana Blue

October 14th, 2013 at 12:59 PM ^

last Saturday night.  High up in the stands does give you a different perspective, than my seat at Michigan Stadium.  

But I cringed during our last possessions, when I saw the coaching staff pull Funchess AND Dileo from the field at the same time.  This is when we needed them - because PSU didn't have an answer for our passing gaming in the 2nd half.  Remember our last three drives before the 35 yard line punt were FG, TD and TD.  But no, we pulled our passing threats to the bench and PSU responded by stuffing run after run, just like they had done ALL NIGHT.

I have the game on the DVR ... I doubt I ever watch it.

Alf Urkel

October 14th, 2013 at 12:59 PM ^

If Hoke truly cares about this team and cares about Michigan and cares about his players, he'll do what needs to be done.  Which is fire Borges and Funk.  The head coach needs to know when there is a problem, needs to know what the problem is, and needs to fix it.  If he's unwilling or unable to fix the problem, then we need to wonder if he's the right guy.   

alwaystrueblue

October 14th, 2013 at 1:01 PM ^

I got taken to task a few weeks ago by the mods here and some high-point posters for saying this was a very average Michigan team that was not very good at any one thing.

 

I feel very vindicated reading what Brain said here and he is spot on.

 

Fire coaches?   Fine....but we still have the same players and some of them are just not as good at football as we wish they were.

 

Hoke?? Did not like the hire to begin with as i see him as simply a back-up plan when the coaches we really wanted would not bite.   He is and has always been a mediocre coach.

 

They wont fire Hoke.   They wont run him out of town like they did RR.  He says the right things and represents the school the way Brandon wants a coach to.  But the bottom line is....he is a very average coach in a league that is and will continue to be dominated by a very damn good coach in Columbus.

 

snoopblue

October 14th, 2013 at 1:01 PM ^

Hoke won't make any decisions. Borges isn't going anywhere. Hoke is LLoyal (see what i did there?) to a fault. My issue is he is putting his personal loyalty before Michigan and the team. The sad part is even Morris and Bellomy have been INT in their limited snaps. What do they all have in common? Yes, this guy sucks. Who would be a good fit to replace him....Cam Camer----god damnit.

Hoke or Borges have yet to be ripped by the media, but I really don't think any reporters or columnists have the balls.

jmblue

October 14th, 2013 at 1:29 PM ^

Except that Carr did in fact let guys go (or at least kicked them upstairs) on a few occasions - Fred Jackson, Stan Parrish and Jim Herrmann all were relieved of their coordinator positions.  

Likewise, I'm pretty sure Hoke did clean house at Ball State after he started out poorly.  Also, at BSU his offenses progressively opened up until he was running a passing spread in 2008, when he went 12-1.

 

Bigku22

October 14th, 2013 at 1:02 PM ^

Rich Rod and Al Borges who have tried to integrate their offensive philosophies with no regard for personnel or ability to execute or EVEN results on the field. It's square peg round hole all day. Borges has figured it's year 3 and he's done trying to coach out of his comfort zone in a Denard type running spread offense, and this year it's been a complete disaster. The power won't work, any jackass who's watched us for 5 minutes knows we should be running a 4-5 wide spread with quick easy throws and A LOT of Gardner runs mixed in. Borges has failed this team and it's gonna lead to a 7-5 or maybe even 6-6 season.

jdon

October 14th, 2013 at 2:05 PM ^

The reality is that what you are describing is most coaches;  most coaches have a system and coach to it.

Only the truely elite are the imaginative coaches who fluctuate. 

Personally I want someone of the Belichek theory:  put preassure on your opponents weaknesses...

The sad thing is that Borges won't get fired, he will have some more offensive talent next year and survive.  If we win a National Championship it will because of MAttison and the defense (and with peppers/mone/all the other kids)

jdon

 

Michigan4Life

October 14th, 2013 at 2:19 PM ^

has great offense by year 3. Offensive line was very good thanks to Greg Frey who is IMO one of the best OL coaches in the country (he's the OL coach for Indiana).  The biggest downfall for RR is the defense and his insists of running 3-3-5 which the DC aren't comfortable running the scheme.

French West Indian

October 14th, 2013 at 1:03 PM ^

...sucks.  And now that his luck is running out everyone can see it.  He took a Rodriguez team to the the Sugar Bowl but is regressing and the 2013 Wolverines should be 3-3 right now.

Blue in Yarmouth

October 15th, 2013 at 10:28 AM ^

did you watch us against UCONN, Akron, or Penn State this year? I'm not advocating for BH to be fired (though I would definitely support AB and DF getting the axe) but I'd be hard pressed to argue that Az may just get to the rose bowl before we do.