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

Mr.Jim

October 14th, 2013 at 1:05 PM ^

for bringing up the bone-headed timeout call when PSU had the ball on the Michigan one-foot line. This, along with Devin spiking the football on the last Michigan drive during regulation time, probably prevented Michigan from geting closer for the possible game-winning field goal.

stephenrjking

October 14th, 2013 at 1:13 PM ^

Yeah. The spike was absurd--even the players knew it. Remember how they turned to the sideline, hands in the air, wondering why it was called?
And when they have trouble trusting the staff to make the right calls, that spells trouble.
I've sort-of copped out on Borges elsewhere, btw, but that call surely was on Borges.

Blue in Yarmouth

October 15th, 2013 at 10:32 AM ^

BH just had the equivalent of two timeouts worth of time while the refs reviewed the play. He should have been prepping his players for what was to come but instead, he calls his final timeout. 

If we had that final timeout we could have tried a pass over the middle on the final drive to try and get a closer field goal, though we all probably know that what Al would have tried would have been a run up the middle. 

NYWolverine

October 14th, 2013 at 1:05 PM ^

Can't we shift to a Texas A&M style offense with the pieces we have?

I said it first in a different thread, but why can't we just make pistol our offense and run the same zone stretch base with a pulling guard, but emphasize screen passes and wheel routes over run? It would look exactly like zone stretch run, it wouldn't be going away from the blocking techniques the team has practiced, but we pick up 3-5+ YAC on 1st down instead of -2.

Airraid, but simple airraid.

If there's no play, the strength of the o-line gives Devin room to scramble, and maybe he picks up a few yards himself. Hell, throw in a FB or TE motion to "lead block" for Fitz/Green to sell run even when you're intent is stick, wheel or screen. When you do run, clearly the extra help will be necessary from what we've seen.

The idea being, when we don't hand off to Fitz or Green, he just goes next level to help the pulling guard or make another block, and it sets up a nice little screen caravan for, say, Dileo or Norfleet? Or Fitz/Green can detach and run a wheel for potential big gains? Or Gallon/Funchess sits there for a 3-5 yard stick (if Funch, he can sell stick to get behind coverage to use height for a big play)?  Isn't that the system we have the guys to run (at least somewhat effectively)?

I'm not an expert, obviously. But I'm curious what those of you who are experts think we can do with the pieces we have, considering what they've spent the most time getting coached up on. My sense is the fundamentals learned can be tweaked to the strengths of the players by using sensible allignments, and basically create a structure that allows these guys to play backyard football and use their athleticism.

Possibly to great improvement.

Don

October 14th, 2013 at 1:09 PM ^

It's highly improbable to me that he's not running what Hoke wants to run. Just as people said ad infinitum about RR, the head coach has to take responsibility for a team's poor play, and it applies to Hoke now too.

I was hoping that the Akron and UConn games were simply aberrations that didn't indicate the true nature of the team, but unfortunately I'm having to fight the suspicion those games meant the same ominous thing for 2013 that the 2010 UMass game did: getting past 7 wins is going to be a tall order, and that we were going to get physically manhandled by our most serious conference opponents. The more ominous unwanted thought that keeps popping up is that 2011 will prove to be Hoke's high-water mark at Michigan.

gwkrlghl

October 14th, 2013 at 1:09 PM ^

but I'm afraid it's going to lead to Hoke not making the correct decisions like Beilein did. I'm afraid he's just going to rid the Borges-Funk train all the way to the whole staffs doom. The defense has been good-to-great for 3 years, hoorah. The offense has been acceptable performances mixed in with unbelievably awful performances. So painful to watch 

93Grad

October 14th, 2013 at 1:24 PM ^

leads to Hoke getting fired.  He effectively has a lifetime contract under Brandon, because he is a "Michingan Man."  As long as he wins at least 7 games per year he will never be fired, becuase the powers that be prefer having a Michigan Man in charge to actually hiring the best football coach available. 

 

I'm not saying that Hoke should be fired this year or that things cannot improve, just that I don't really expect them to all that much because we just don't value winning like the top programs do.

MileHighWolverine

October 14th, 2013 at 5:26 PM ^

If we have back to back seasons with 5 losses (or worse) his seat should be smoldering with 2014 a make or break year for him. The previous regime was replaced after 3 years despite facing hurdles much larger than the ones Hoke is facing and they were showing signs of improvement (on offense, at least). If he shows regression after 3 years (which we are on track for) then I think he has to be on the hot seat for 2014.

umfanchris

October 14th, 2013 at 1:10 PM ^

I think there were even more coaching mistakes then mentioned in this article. Brian mentioned conserving timeouts, but never said anything about the timeout we took right before PSU scored their last touchdown of regulation. The long pass play to Robinson took the ball down to the 1 which was reviewed for almost 2 minutes. Yet Hoke took a timeout after the review was done. Was that 2 minutes not long enough to get your team ready? Were they completely caught off guard at the multiple plays Penn St could run from the 1 yard line? He wasted that Time out which could have been key on getting 1 extra play in on our final drive. If you remember Gibbons final kick of regulation was straight on just needed an extra 3 or 4 yards. Would have been nice to have that extra play to possibly get a little closer.

That was the worst game management I have seen in a number of years and they did not put our team in a position to win. Maybe Hoke should put on a headset for once so he has a clue what is going on.

stephenrjking

October 14th, 2013 at 1:10 PM ^

I honestly believe that everyone is overreacting to the play calling in the second half. Not so much in OT. But I think Borges called most of the second half pretty well...
Given the constraints placed on the team by its philosophy and player development.
And that is the real problem. I think Hoke is a good coach, and I even think Borges is a good coach, but the MANBALL slow huddle philosophy has been a disaster.
Three years now the coaches have EMPHASIZED the need to run the ball from under center. And in three years they have spectacularly failed. Something needs to change.
That doesn't necessarily mean firing Borges; I think Hoke dictated from the top the speed of huddling and the emphasis on under center MANBALL running, and I think Al could work under different constraints.
But they need a different QB coach, because Al is not doing well there. And they need something to happen on the Oline. This is now three years of regression.
Brian's take here is pretty accurate; the game was awful, but the whole reason they were running all the time is that three years ago the coaches decided that was how they were going to win games, and just like Lloyd Carr, they have no alternatives to turn to.

coastal blue

October 14th, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^

You just nailed the problem, though I'm not sure you meant too. 

The playcalling in the second half was fine - up until the last couple of drives and overtime. The problem is, we decided to go away from what was killing Penn State in the second half back to what didn't work at all on our crucial plays at the end of the game. And that is entirely on Hoke/Borges. 

MVictors97

October 14th, 2013 at 1:26 PM ^

Under center vs. Shotgun is over simplifying it. Its what under center formations they are using that is the problem in my opinion. You can still spread them out and run from under center. I think more 3 wide and 4 wide sets are the solution. Running more from shotgun means running more with Gardner which will lead to more turnovers and probably and injuried Gardner.  There is an in between solution here. But for whatever reason we haven't seen this offense try to run from 3 and 4 wide sets under center at all in the 2 1/2 years. Its either shotgun spread concepts or 2 backs and 2 tight almost goaline/short yardage concepts. Need to meet in the middle.

B-Nut-GoBlue

October 14th, 2013 at 2:32 PM ^

I liked your post above and I'll comment here, but I like your line of thought.  I thought the exact same thing, in regards to what you said above, Saturday night while watching, that Michigan under center is either a run play or play-action.  I don't know if I finally just then realized it but it finally became something I actually though about for a moment.   But yeah, there's never been a "drop-back".  How is that possible?  Is Devin that awkward and unable to do a simple 3/5 step drop back?  IF so, that is unexcusable.

But to your other points, I again like this train of thought, there needs to be more middle ground between running a Maryland-I and running a 5-wide let if fly-type offense (my hypberbole aside).  I know football isn't a video game but the concepts posters such as yourself bring up (i.e. dropping back out of under-center, running from under-center with recievers spread out) and concepts our dear leader Brian bring up (USE Dennis Norfleet, ya know, cuz he's fast a great slot weapon, throw slants when teams GIVE it to you) are so glaringly obvious to work that it's hard to understand why our coaches don't utilize any of these ideas/concepts/schemes.  It again goes back to being balanced and using the players you have and putting them out there to do things they do well and not forcing a philosophy/scheme on them that sets them up to fail.  It's not as though we all want to see something completely innovative and other-worldly from this offense but some simple concepts can help this team utilize the talent they do have and beat other mediocre football teams.

Blue in Yarmouth

October 15th, 2013 at 10:45 AM ^

You say you think BH and AB are good coaches but then cite issues with player development. Who's job is it to develop players? 

I mean seriously, who has improved a significant amount since AB has been here? 

-Lewan, he was bound to be a beast no matter who he played for.

- Schofield, he has been steady since RR was here but hasn't really gotten a lot better.

-Toussaint, not close.

- Denard, not close

-Gallon, here is a victory for the staff

Having thought about it you can look at position groups and say basically, the only ones who have really progressed are the WR's. RB's, no; QB's, no; Linemen, no; TE's; catching maybe, but blocking, no.

Lots of people followed Gardner in t he summer. He went outside to find some more independent coaching and was being talked about as one of the top QB's in the country and thought of as a potentail player who would contend for the heisman and leave college early. Since being back under the care of AB it has been steadily downhill. 

I agree that execution and player development has let this teams down just as much as playcalling, but the coaches are responsible for developing their players and coaching the in ways that will lead to them executing the plays that are called. To this point this offensive staff hasn't proven to be able to do that. 

 

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

October 14th, 2013 at 1:13 PM ^

So if anyone has ever had any kind of relationship with VATech fans, you now should understand how they feel. We are VATech's twin mid-2000's. An Inexplicable team with a winning record...

If there is a bright side...if I was another BIG team on our schedule, I would be sort of worried because you have no idea how well we will play against you. If we put together three quarters of good football, we meant actually beat you kind of badly. Or, we might look like we have recently, and you feel confident in victory.

gwkrlghl

October 14th, 2013 at 1:21 PM ^

The huge difference being is that Virginia Tech has not fielded a team with as much talent as Michigan has ever (likely). VT has always been a bunch of 3*s held together by great defensive coaching. We've been a team of 4*s held down by coaching

Blue in Yarmouth

October 15th, 2013 at 10:49 AM ^

the teams on our schedule know exactly what they are going to get when we play them...under center rb carries right up the gut on first and second downs with a playaction pass on third and long. As a bonus, if they can force an interception, all passes will cease and we will just run straight up the middle the entire game.

PasadenaFan

October 14th, 2013 at 1:14 PM ^

I could guess what UM was going to run.  UM needs to use mis-direction the way the LIONS do.  Running up the middle with an O-Line is stupid.  Just stop.  We are just wasting downs.

Question I have is how and why does this O-Line suck?  2 Seniors in there.  Center is 6'6"  And absolutely no push whatsoever no matter what team we play!  MAN UP guys; tighten your jock strap and block.  Geez

Also playing to "NOT LOSE" is B.S.  Play to win and bury.  Bury to win!

Borges: Pull head out of bottom and stop running up middle. Use mis-direction.

Drbogue

October 14th, 2013 at 1:15 PM ^

I remember watching BTN or ESPN early on and hearing the announcers talking about Michigan "lacking" an offensive identity. This occurred mostly after Gardner read options and seemed to indicate that we were falling back on Denardian play calling. The implication was that good teams establish an identity (ie Northwestern, Stanford) of how they are going to play and slog through a few years of pain prior to getting there. Once established, this "identity" becomes a strength because the offense knows what they are going to do and they have the experience to dictate their gameplan despite defensive corrections to it.

Unfortunately, I think we are seeing the "identity" emerge: a complete lack of plasticity in play calling. The idea that the square peg will fit the round hole if you hit it hard enough. Enough is enough. West coast offense/manball/power running. Call it what you will, it doesn't work for this particular offensive unit. Let's stop kidding ourselves, evaluate what is working, and expand on that. When they tried to make Denard run everything under center, it didn't work and they changed gears. Now, it's time to stop asking this O-line to run power and switch gears. Borges will dictate whether he keeps his job in the next 6 games. Let's just hope for Team 134 that it's in the positive.

UMgradMSUdad

October 14th, 2013 at 1:28 PM ^

I'm pretty sure what we're seeing out of Michigan is not the West Coast philosophy at all, which is one of the reasons I think Hoke is more instrumental in the play calling than most here seem to think.  The West Coa st offense has nothing to do with running between the tackles on first and second down. It would be interesting to look back at Al Borges career, but I'm pretty sure he's never before coordinated an offense so bent on establishing runs up the middle.  The question is, then, has he changed his philosophy or is this philosophy being imposed by someone else?

leu2500

October 14th, 2013 at 1:18 PM ^

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."

That is correct. 

RR's record in his 3 years at UM was 15-22. 

In less than 2.5 years, BH's/AB's record is 24-8.  If UM loses the rest of it's games this that will be 24-14.  

But go on saying that Hoke/Borges is worse than RR.  Coaches aren't the only ones with lizard brains. 

  

 

 

 

 

El Jeffe

October 14th, 2013 at 1:35 PM ^

I have always maintained that the spittle-flecked RR haters are, on average, WAY more unhinged than the spittle-flecked RR supporters ever were, and here is an excellent case in point.

How on earth did you miss the very next, very critical of RR sentence?

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.

THE_SHOCK_DOCTOR

October 14th, 2013 at 1:19 PM ^

When a guy like me (a 19 year old who gets most of his football knowledge from football blogs) can tell what play this team is running then I am almost positive that someone who gets paid to study this offense and shut it down with his defense can do that too. This offense just seems too predictable on first and second down. 

gwkrlghl

October 14th, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^

I'm just a ninny who reads mgoblog, but I watch games live and say "This is obviously a run/pass/QB draw" then people who are studying tape must realize this too right? PSU blowing up the tackle-over stuff is just another example of that. Same with putting Denard on the field late last year- completely predictable. How does Al not realize that?

charblue.

October 14th, 2013 at 1:25 PM ^

should have gone. But when the numbers make hindsight superflous, and when doing the same thing over and over again yields the same useless or negative results, why would fans who aren't rational or sane after a loss, gain perspective about blowing opportunities. 

The concept and gameplan for this team seems aimed at putting square pegs through round holes, which are seemingly always clogged because of a reliance on an offensive system that is either too random or too predictable, and more often than not like Saturday, was both. The same patterns of play keep being reproduced. 

People will say that was an exciting game on Saturday. I can't remember when I was more depressed after a Michigan loss. And, of course, knowing that Michigan would never hold PSU out after a first and goal at the 2, as soon as Belton cleared the LOS and was into score, I mentally checked out, left the room and tried to fathom what I had witnessed. 

I know that this outpouring of frustration, venom and self-loathing about what went wrong is universally felt, and it's because we know what this program is potentially capable of if it ever finds itself and plays a complete game, regardless of youth and experience. Let them play. 

I don't know how many times coaches have to get it before they get it. When you give your opponent a chance to beat you in a college game, the attitude of that team changes in that prospect between the hunter and the hunted. 

We've seen this movie too many times since 2006. Fergodsakes, even Hoke brought a team into the Big House and nearly pulled off what Penn State did Satuday. You'd think he'd get it after awhile. 

Soulfire21

October 14th, 2013 at 1:26 PM ^

Just an all around failure.  Coaches put the players in a position to fail, players also didn't execute as well as they needed to at times, etc.  Just failure from the top down for the most part.