Preview: Ohio State 2013 Comment Count

Brian

ben-affleck-batman-fun-reactions-matt-damon-robin-tumblr[1]Essentials

 
WHAT Michigan vs Ohio State
WHERE Michigan Stadium
Ann Arbor, MI
WHEN Noon Eastern
November 30th, 2013
THE LINE Ohio State -17
TELEVISION ABC
WEATHER partly cloudy, mid-30s
0% chance of rain
10 mph winds

Overview

panic

Run Offense vs Ohio State

sports_shazierONLINEFEATURE-694x360[1]

Ryan Shazier got better.

The Northwestern blip was just that: a blip, as Michigan's offense retreated back into its shell against Iowa. Thanks to buckets of Iowa turnovers this staked Michigan to a lead until late, but this was back to the pain factory. It was probably worse than usual, actually, as Gardner only suffered one sack. Take that out and Michigan rushed for 74 yards on 28 carries, a thrilling 2.6 yards an attempt.

This is still forward, I guess, and therefore represents progress. The kind of progress last experienced in the Dark Ages, but progress nonetheless.

This is too depressing to contemplate for very long. Michigan again went with a bunch of inside zone, whereupon Iowa linebackers fired into the gaps over and over again like Notre Dame did. Michigan has no idea how to deal with that other than "execute better"; they have no way to back those guys off; they have a bunch of play action on which the fact that the linebackers run literally to the line of scrimmage before going "oh" and backing into short zones is okay for the defense.

The unit they're going up against is not quite a vintage OSU outfit; it is still plenty good enough to see Michigan to another grunting performance under 100 net yards. Once you remove sacks, Ohio State's run offense is in a tier below Michigan State's face-crushing unit with Wisconsin and Michigan; they're giving up just under 4 yards a carry.

The existence of a healthy, clueful Ryan Shazier is particularly bad for Michigan. Two years ago he was a limping freshman who showed up in the hole against Denard Robinson and ended up left in the dust. This year he's nearing OSU records for TFLs against the worst team in the country at giving them up. His strengths—slashing into the backfield as soon as he reads run foremost amongst them—line up perfectly with Michigan's weaknesses.

The line is a slightly better matchup than it was last year with Jonathan Hankins in the NFL. They have not replaced him with a similar space-eater. Michael Bennett, their best DT, is 285. Unfortunately, he's a Jibreel Black++ type player with 10 TFLs and 5.5 sacks to his name. But that's another depressing section. Against the run he will be more moveable. Not that it's going to matter.

Key Matchup: Denard Robinson versus NCAA Eligibility Rules

[Hit THE JUMP for just don't hit the jump]

Pass Offense vs Ohio State

SPT-OSU29phh[1]

Hide yo kids, hide yo quarterback. The aforementioned Bennett is a problem against the weak interior of Michigan's line. Weak. I need a new word here that means WEAAAAAAAK; it doesn't appear one is coming.

Ohio State's acquired 36 sacks this year from a variety of organic and blitzing sources. Bennett has his; sophomore Noah Spence has 7.5; freshman Joey Bosa has 5. Various other linemen suck up almost all of the rest, leaving just Shazier's 5.5 and Curtis Grant's 2.5. OSU will send the occasional linebacker but is mostly content to drop back in coverage and see if one of their three effective rushers can get to the passer.

That is a terrible omen for Michigan. OSU will probably fling Shazier at Gardner and drop six plenty, which gives them 3 or 4 plausible avenues to Gardner on any given play. Iowa's single sack comes after Michigan giving up 19 in three weeks and is not likely to last.

When not getting buried under a wall of meat, Gardner will try to hit Gallon and Funchess, and basically only Gallon and Funchess. This will probably not go that well as OSU drops into the routes Michigan can run, which are few, and Gardner makes the kind of decisions you make when you are expecting a 300-pound ferret to burst into your chest at any moment.

Key matchup: Devin Gardner's Sternum versus Shattering Into A Thousand Pieces

Run Defense vs Ohio State

carlos-hyde-snaps1[1]

best case scenario

Foremost amongst the thousand depressing things about this game is Ohio State's superlative ability to manball its opponents. 242 pound Carlos Hyde has been tackled for loss this year.

Once.

Hyde is averaging 7.7 yards a carry despite not playing in OSU's first three walkovers and getting just five carries in OSU's equivalent of the Delaware State game, a grisly 76-0 beating of Florida A&M. He's done this without many distorting long runs. He had a 55 yarder against Illinois, but it's not like his stats are a Carlos Brown combination of 80 yarders and nothing.

But you knew that already. The #1 thing on Chris Borland's All-America highlight is a goal line stick of Hyde that anyone who saw live had a internal monologue that went "touchdown… OHHHHH NO WAY," because people do not stick Carlos Hyde. It just does not happen. They hit him and at best Hyde slides off to the side with his legs churning and picks up 2 YAC. Combine that with Braxton Miller and an offense that will happily screen you to death if you try to load the box and you get a lot of situations in which the best case non-Borland scenario when you try to tackle Hyde one on one happens five yards downfield.

Right: Miller. He's bounced in and out of the lineup with injury but has still rolled up 738 yards at 6.4 a pop without even bothering to remove sacks. You have seen him play against Michigan twice; you know the game-changing ability his legs bring. He's improved as a passer, as well. Between Miller and Keny Guiton, OSU QBs are over 1,000 yards on the season at 7.3 yards an attempt, without even bothering to remove sacks.

Finally, Ohio State has a three-headed scatback that is over 1,000 yards itself. Jordan Hall is the primary guy; freshmen Ezekiel Elliot and Dontre Wilson chip in. All are RB/slot hybrids to some degree, with Wilson the most slot-like and Elliot the most tailback-like; these guys flit out of the backfield to grab screens, take outside runs, sometimes just take inside runs, and are preferred in OSU's option game to Hyde for obvious reasons. Collectively they're averaging 7.4 yards an attempt.

As a team Ohio State has nearly 3500 rushing yards at nearly 7 yards a carry and 36 touchdowns. But it won't work in the Big Ten.

Michigan's run defense is pretty good and they have an edge weapon or two (read: Jake Ryan) that can allow Michigan to be more aggressive in the box without giving up a ton of easy edge stuff. It's not going to be enough. This is an A+ offense against a B+ defense, and to some extent they're going to get exposed.

Key Matchup: Brian's Head versus Mounting Internal Pressure. This is my worst nightmare as a fan. Michigan is going to watch this death machine rushing offense beat them by using spread concepts with huge animated question marks over their heads, and they'll ignore that as they go forward so they can go back to the glory days where the incredibly loaded 1999 offense rushed for 3.2 yards a carry.

Pass Defense vs Ohio State

braxton-miller[1]

The structure of the offense and Miller's continual improvement have made this another area to consider with a jaundiced eye. Miller and Guiton combine to average 68% completion rate and 7.8 yards an attempt; Miller has 19 touchdowns against four interceptions; Guiton has 14 touchdowns against two interceptions.

OSU only passes about 38% of the time because of the previous section, and a large chunk of those throws are wide receiver screens, so maybe 30% of the time an Ohio State quarterback will survey the field, looking for someone downfield. This results in the kinds of problems you'd expect: zero pass rush as a run-focused DL is caught off guard and is trying to contain Miller at all costs (13 sacks allowed on the year); guys running open as linebackers and safeties suck up; cornerbacks left on an island by Miller demanding safety attention.

Miller is still not Dan Marino, but it hardly matters in an offense that rarely finds itself in true passing situations—when you average seven yards a carry, third and seven is a standard down and how often are you even in third and seven?—and uses Miller's assets to open up great cavernous holes for him to explore with buckets of time.

OSU's WRs are not great. Devin Smith is probably their best; he makes spectacular catches and is their best downfield threat. Philly Brown is the guy with the most catches; often those are of a screen nature. They do throw to the tight ends, with Jeff Heuerman and Nick Vannett combining for 28 receptions; three-headed scatback has 36 receptions itself. Entertainingly mouthy Evan Spencer is a short-yardage third WR.

Michigan's held up pretty well here this year—actually that's an understatement when they have almost as many interceptions as they've ceded passing touchdowns. This is a good secondary, especially when they're not futzing with the safeties for no reason. Michigan will bring Gordon into the box, leave Ryan on the field over the slot, and try to live with Countess and Taylor in tight-ish coverage that may leave them exposed deep. But it might not.

This will be a sidelight to the run game, one on which Miller has plenty of time when Michigan isn't going for all-out blitzes on third downs. It'll be up to the secondary to cover long enough for Miller to engage terrifying scramble mode, and then Michigan will have to contain that.

Key Matchup: Mattison dialing up pressures that might confuse Miller on third and longs, which will occasionally happen?

Special Teams

Drew Basil has attempted all of nine field goals on the year against 66 extra points. I'm cold. I'm so cold. Aussie punter Cameron Johnston is averaging 44 yards a kick, and has only allowed six returns on his 34 attempts, though one of those was returned for a touchdown. Philly Brown is their punt returner; he is meh. Kickoff returns are almost irrelevant but Ohio State is pretty good at both phases.

Key Matchup: AHHHHHH YOU put it through the uprights to make the final score look a tiny bit better

Intangibles

Sad-Cat[1]

Cheap Thrills

Worry if...

  • The xenomorph Max Bullough implanted in Gardner's chest finally bursts through on a third and thirteen, grabs the ball, and throws it directly into Noah Spence's helmet. Gardner is then tackled by all eleven Ohio State players. Eventually, Spence wanders into the endzone… FOR AN OFFENSIVE SCORE BECAUSE EVERYONE'S CHASING THE XENOMORPH… that makes the final 76-7.
  • You perceive one football program that has successfully modernized itself without internal strife, starting with their seemingly hidebound dinosaur coach, and one program that holds up 3.2 yards a carry with four NFL offensive linemen, Tom Brady, David Terrell, Anthony Thomas, and Marquise Walker as the pinnacle of football.
  • You are going to the game.

Cackle with knowing glee if...

  • Braxton Miller gets hurt… actually, no, that won't work.
  • Braxton Miller and Kenny Guiton get hurt, leaving Cardale Jones in to not play school? No, that probably won't work either.
  • It's the only thing you can do to prevent yourself from crying.

Fear/Paranoia Level: 10 (Baseline 5; +1 for They Are Good, +1 for We Are Not, +1 for Showing Manball Proponents What Manball Really Is, +1 for Michigan OL versus OSU DL Matchup Is Puppy Versus Woodchipper, +1 for WE GON DIE)

Desperate need to win level: 10 (Baseline 5; +5 for Obvious)

Loss will cause me to... thank God it's over.

Win will cause me to... DIV BY ZERO ERROR.

The strictures and conventions of sportswriting compel me to predict:

Michigan wins! At losing.

Finally, three opportunities for me to look stupid Sunday:

  • 35,000 Ohio State fans.
  • A giant John Flansburgh rips off one of the press boxes and starts playing "She Was A Hotel Detective" at maximum volume level. The game is cancelled midway through the third quarter. A John Flansburgh statue is installed, commemorating his valiant effort.
  • Urban goes for two.
  • Ohio State, 39-0

Comments

uniqenam

November 29th, 2013 at 2:35 PM ^

I'm really getting sick about the whining. Should we lose? Of course. Will we? Who knows, that's why we play the football games. It's sort of irritating to me that everyone is only looking at worst-case scenarios, as if OSU is the best team in the NCAA by a mile. These posts are more negative than the 2008 M-OSU posts, and the difference between programs then is much wider. What's the difference? Brian's slavish devotion to SPREAD FOOTBALL OMG BEST. Seriously, stop the fellation of anything that is spread, and stop acting like Stanford and Alabama are unsuccessful offenses with their non-spread old school idiocy.

goblue20111

November 29th, 2013 at 2:40 PM ^

They run more traditional offenses but it's hardly a lineup in I form and run into the gut. They do incorporate spread/shotgun runs and screens to receivers in space, at least Alabama does. Can't really speak to Stanford. So yes traditional non-RR/Urban Meyer offenses can win -- no one is denying that. The problem is our offense is predicatable and uninnovative.

uniqenam

November 29th, 2013 at 2:44 PM ^

So then why is Brian insistent that we want to run the Lloyd Carr run-up-the-gut for 3 yards? It doesn't seem that Borges/Hoke want that, as they've explicitly stated they're interested in a WCO with the ability to shred the clock. It seems like Brian from the beginning has tried to project all of Carr's bad attributes onto Hoke and Borges, and it started from the second that Hoke was hired. Carr being conservative about punting/going for it on 4th? HOKE WILL BE A CONSERVATIVE CRONY TOO!!!!!! Peoples' defense of Brian's whininess is really surprising to me. No one wants to read a 24/7 'poor me let's all whine about everything'. Criticism is, of course, fine, but I don't see the value in becoming Bitchfest 9000 for 3 months.

ESNY

November 29th, 2013 at 3:51 PM ^

Because at least a dozen times each game we do try to run the I-form up the gut.  It has never been successful all year and we get blown back every time.  yet there is the same play again and again and again.  With Borges, that play is like herpes.  Just keeps showing up at inopportune times.

Brian

November 29th, 2013 at 2:47 PM ^

I have gotten this comment for three solid years. All it does is make me not want to read comments. I believe a certain thing about football and have explained it and your outliers with Andrew Luck and Alabama talent do not move me. 

I could turn the dime store psychonanalysis around on you and accuse you of wishing that Michigan football was in a better place and twisting various pieces of information around to create a sunnier view of the world than it actually is, and that would piss you off, because it's a bullshit way to argue. So why would I be moved by some guy accusing me of having a slavish devotion to the spread in an empty post devoid of anything resembling an argument?

 

uniqenam

November 29th, 2013 at 3:04 PM ^

1) Of course I wish Michigan was in a better place. 

2) Some people are willing to twist various pieces of information to create sunnier views of the world than it really is, and they're colloquially referred to as optimists. 

3) I don't think it's any secret you have a slavish devotion to the spread, as I thought you openly accepted that with your 'spread zealot no foolies' tag. I didn't know I had to argue that that's the case.

4) It is completely unfair to compare Hoke to Carr. You did this when he was hired, saying "well, OF COURSE Hoke will never go for it on 4th and 2 from the opponent's 35 because Carr didn't", as if because they existed on the same staff they're the same coach, which you've since admitted you were wrong about. However, now you want to equate the ideal Hoke offense to the 1997 crap-show, just because he happened to be around then. I don't think that that's actually the case. Look at your beloved OFFENSIVE FEI statistic, and see how 2010's San Diego State squad was rated #13 under Borges/Hoke. However, we never hear about that, because they ran not-spread.

5) Perhaps I'm remembering something incorrectly, but I remember some facet of Borges's offense that was roundly criticized around here, until (Seth?, someone...) got the actual rationale from Borges and wrote about it in HTTV, upon which it became clear that it wasn't being done because "this has always been done and it is sacrosanct" but rather "this makes sense because I have a brain".

Never

November 29th, 2013 at 3:46 PM ^

"Slavish devotion?" Never saw it that way. I've seen references to comments that blew up in the staff's face; for example, the theory that teams fielding spread offenses will have inferior defenses (vs pro-style teams). We know that's incorrect. Hell, we knew it then.

I've also seen questions about the offensive coordinator's refusal to take "free yards" (bubble screen) ostensibly because bubble screens are linked to spread offenses. Why are those questions raised? Because of the offense's struggles.

There are discussions about constraints and counters. Why? Because of the offense's struggles.

There are discussions about walking up to the line of scrimmage with 8 seconds left on the play clock and not being about to check into something that will exploit what the defense is giving you. Is that a "spread" concept?

I've seen a slavish devotion to nothing more than wishing that the offense was efficient and productive - and that certain elements of other offensive philosophies COULD have increased this offense's efficiency and productivity. The thinking is that those alternatives will never be explored as a result of the staff's hidebound approach (special teams as well iirc; spread punt formation).

steve sharik

November 29th, 2013 at 4:32 PM ^

 Offense FEI Rk Team
1 Arizona State
2 LSU
3 Georgia
4 South Carolina
5 Texas A&M
6 Miami
7 Oregon
8 Ohio State
9 Washington
10 Florida State
11 Baylor
12 Notre Dame
13 Alabama
14 Central Florida
15 Arizona
16 Kansas State
17 Auburn
18 Louisville
19 Stanford
20 Indiana
21 Wisconsin
22 Navy
23 Duke
24 Texas Tech
25 Missouri

The three "MANBALL" teams are bolded and italicized.  Now think about their talent compared to the talent of the other 21 teams.

"MANBALL" only works when you have better men.  Everyone wants to cry about how RichRod's teams here never did well offensively against top defenses.  Well, what has happened when the above teams played against great defenses?  Aside from Saban's NFL team that happens to be in the NCAA, how have the other highlighted teams fared in games with top defenses?  Alabama is yielding 9.3 ppg, including holding the #2 FEI offense to 17 points.  Another program with plenty of talent that prides itself on "MANBALL," Va. Tech, put up 10 points on Alabama.  A&M put up 42 on Roll Damn Tide.  Let's see what Malzahn does against St. Nick.

When did Lloyd's teams ever put up big offensive numbers against top defenses?  When it said "F the run" and threw it all over the lot (e.g., 2000 Orange Bowl, 2007 Capital One Bowl).

Michigan Arrogance

November 29th, 2013 at 4:55 PM ^

Yeah, buddy- the reason Brian beieves the spread is more effective than manball is that there is sufficient evidence to believe so.

the only arguement you people (anti-spread-ites) can come back to is "Bama & Stanford seem to be doing OK, and Wisc"

well, Bama is hyper-talented, Stanford became hyper talented and Wisco doesn't play a serious schedule- when they do play M (of the 90s- till 2006), OSU- they lose more than they win.

 

look, if we were as talented as Bama right now, RUN MANBALL. ALL DAY LONG. the point is, if that were the case, we could run ANYTHING AT ALL and win.

Spread wins with superior and inferior talent

Manball wins with superior talent .

DelhiGoBlue

November 29th, 2013 at 5:12 PM ^

If the spread is so great, why are spread v spread teams not putting up basketball game numbers against each other?  Why wasn't the Arizona - Oregon game along the lines of 77-70 instead of 42-16?  

Last Sunday and Monday in the NFL had two night games.  Sunday night pitted two elder pocket passing QBs with each team putting up 31 points during regulation.

Monday night pitted two spread teams who managed to score a total of 33 points (27-6).  There was John Gruden in all manner of masturbatory glee at the prodigous amount of offense going on...seriously, six points was a lot of offense?  Then he said something very poignent, he said it was fun to watch, but he wasn't sure how long the QBs would last.

I'll tell you what was fun to watch, NE come storming back in the 2nd half to steal that game from Denver.

westwardwolverine

November 29th, 2013 at 5:37 PM ^

It seems you equate the spread only with running qbs. New England with Tom Brady and Denver/Indy with Peyton Manning run offenses with plenty of spread elements. 

DelhiGoBlue

November 29th, 2013 at 5:51 PM ^

You're rationalizing.  When your meme is smacked in the mouth you deflect...oh, and BTW, the Lions did a fair amount of manball against the Packers.  

When people talk "spread" they generally mean, without qualification, that the offense is based around a dual threat QB with read option being a large part of the package.  To suggest that isn't so is being at best disingenuous, at worst dishonest.

In reply to by DelhiGoBlue

westwardwolverine

November 29th, 2013 at 6:07 PM ^

How exactly did you smack my meme in the mouth? I'm just answering your question with a truthful answer. Any knowledgeable football person would agree with my post. 

Are you right that a dual threat QB is usually what the spread is associated with? Sure. It doesn't mean what I said isn't true. 

You seem like a person who is losing his mind. You're using individual games as anecdotal evidence below this post trying to somehow justify that the "SpRead SuX!!!" as if that is ever an effective tactic in logical debate. 

 

 

In reply to by DelhiGoBlue

wolverine1987

November 30th, 2013 at 10:25 AM ^

People that don't understand what the spread concept is think of it that way, but people that do know understand it is FAR more than the read option and dual threat QB's. That is a ridiculous argument and shows a certain lack of knowledge on your part.

DelhiGoBlue

November 30th, 2013 at 10:35 AM ^

However would you then say that Alabama playing Arizona pits one spread offense against another?  For Alabama does indeed spread the ball around.  

Almost without exception, until called on it, people equate spread with dual threat QBs and read option.  Don't you find it beyond amusement that somebody actually suggested Denver and NE are spread offenses?   When John Gruden said the spread offense is fun and the new wave of NFL football (so long as the QBs stay healthy), he wasn't talking about statuesqe QBs and their offenses, he was talking about dual threat QBs and read option.  So please, stop checking your intellectual honesty at the door.

wolverine1987

November 30th, 2013 at 4:23 PM ^

That the spread concept incorporates far more than dual threat QB's and the read option. that is just a fact, so I don't know what else to tell you. Passing spreads, like RR ran at Clemson, like Texas Tech ran, like many other teams run, as just one additional part of the spread concept. And um, the spread has nothing to do with "spreading the ball around." I stand by my comment that you are showing a certian lack of knowledge in your critique. 

Either offense can be successful with the right personnel and the right coaching, to be clear. But I'm pretty confident in my "intellectual honesty." You aren't showing much intellect (I assume you are a smart person) in this argument however.

DelhiGoBlue

November 29th, 2013 at 5:57 PM ^

to answer the question.  If spread is so superior to all other forms of football, why aren't the scores closer to basketball scores?  Why are the scores closer to historic average instead of being well above average?  Why did #5 Oregon only score 16 points against AZ?  Why did AZ only score 30 combined points against the state of Washington?   

Michigan Arrogance

November 29th, 2013 at 8:23 PM ^

why don't you show me the data that says spread teams score closer to the historic average. or explain why I have to demonstrate that spread teams need to score "basketball scores.'

the link I supplied from steve sharik had the top 25 FEI offenses in 2013. I'm no expert on offensive types for all those teams, but if steve is right, a grand total of 3 run manball.

Navy is still running triple option, IIRC. why don't you research the others.

Why did #5 Oregon only score 16 points against AZ?  Why did AZ only score 30 combined points against the state of Washington?  

multiple anecdotes != data. why did IU put up almost 50 on the M defense when no one else did (gulp... yet)? why did oregon put up 60 against every other team they played but stanford didn't? why did TAMU put up almost 40 vs Bama when no one else could?

look, no one is going to take you seriously around here regarding this argument b/c you don't give any DATA to support your hypothesis. you give 2-3 anecdotes. You know why everyone seems to believe Brian's opinions? because he explains them, supplies the data that allowed him to come to his conclusions and thus, we are convinced.

umumum

November 29th, 2013 at 9:48 PM ^

Why don't they score 70 every game is a nonsensical argument made worse by your sense that it is dispositive of the whole thread.  Its hardly different than arguing that because it is cloudy, it proves there is no sun.

I truly believe that those on this Board who defend or promote the spread offense, and Brian is just one--though the rest of us do patiently wait to take his cue--are more open-minded than those who oppose it under any and every circumstance.  I want an offense that uses the talent we have and works--and won't take years to get the kinda players we need to run it right.  Manball people want manball.  It is uncontroverted that virtually no one plays manball in college.  The good teams who kinda do typically have significant talent advantages. I don't believe that those advocating spread mean only RichRod's or Oregon's version.  There are many variations to the spread--and yes, Manning and Brady operate under versions, and RichRod coached a pass-first version while a coordinator at Tulane.  Many here simply want Michigan to stay current, if not progressive, in the construct of how the game is played in this day and age.  Manball-- based upon its many defenders here--is rightfully perceived as just that---football as a test of manliness between 2 teams.  Add that we were successful for over a generation playing manball makes it hard to let it go. 

I, for one, believe Hoke is entitled to 5 years to put in his system.  But if he becomes rigid in his approach --both in coaching personnel and scheme--I fear for where we will be 2 years hence.  Hoke needs to talk with Beilein.  Beilein made the coaching changes necessary to recruit at an elite level.  And while he still runs his system, he has made significant adjustments to account for his (superior) personnel and skills---Beilein essentially never ran either a point guard  or  high pick-and-roll oriented offense until Morris came along.  Recognizing that Burke is gone, we don't run it this year--as Beilein tries to tweak his offense to the personnel we have now.  That's why, in part, we will have a learning curve to start this season.

Mpfnfu Ford

November 29th, 2013 at 11:34 PM ^

Those schools you mention aren't anything like Michigan offensively. Stanford (and Wisconsin) does line up with a lot of 2 back sets, but they employ shifting on nearly every play. Unlike Michigan, which gets to the line with 8 seconds left on the clock and runs its play with no time to audible or shit or make the defense confused. The major benefit of being spread no huddle is that the defense is constantly on its heels because it doesn't have a ton of time to figure out what you're doing before the ball is snapped. Teams like Stanford and Wisconsin replicate that (while still being able to chew clock) by shifting dudes around so that the defense can't just line up and see the formation immediately. They also give their quarterback time to audible if the defense is cheating, which Michigan does not do.

Alabama doesn't shift as much, but they do NOT run 2 back sets either. They are a one back team, and thus they have the ability to release 4 guys down field if a team is playing tons of cover 3 to take away their run game. So again, they're able to do a lot of the same stuff a passing spread team would do to beat defenses, but they do it with lots of tight ends instead of slot ninjas. And again, they give their quarterback the ability to audible. And Alabama has all but abandoned power O this year BECAUSE THEIR AWESOME LINE HAD ISSUES WITH PULLING. Novel, they scouted an issue in the spring and adjusted by spending all offseason running nothing but inside and outside zone. And that's with seasoned Alabama linemen. Does that sound like Michigan to you? 

What Michigan is doing is more akin to what Virginia Tech or Florida do on offense. Line up in I sets because that's what we think is football, and when it fails because the defense is overloading the box, switch to some shotgun option-y stuff that tips off the play and ultimately only does so much because you have no counters. The basic theory of Michigan's offense is, "Ours'uns are better than your'uns, and we're not gonna disguise or do anything to confuse you. We'll just come right atcha!" There's nobody doing that and having ANY success in college football today. Nobody.

Basically, those teams you mentioned wanting to emulate are not OLD SCHOOL. Nobody in college was doing what they do in 1985. They are modern takes on how to move the ball through the air and on the ground while being able to slow the tempo down and be physical. The only thing old school about them is their use of a slower tempo and big ass linemen. 

KBLOW

November 29th, 2013 at 2:52 PM ^

Well, worse teams have certainly beaten better teams, but the problem is the way in which we're worse.  On top of that if our LB's aren't fully healed up from their injuries, the entire game could look like the 4th Q vs Iowa.  But in spite of all that, I'm optimistic.  Miracle win on Saturday.

CoachParker6

November 29th, 2013 at 3:12 PM ^

This place is the most bipolar place on the inter-webs. Seriously, Brian is in a lose- lose situation. Had Brian wrote an optimistic post with a somewhat close score, a large contingency would bash him for being overly optimistic bc BORGES or O-LINE or any other reason that has been discussed at length for the last several weeks. Instead Brian wrote exactly how he feels the game will go, right or wrong it is his blog and his own personal stance. If you feel differently about the outcome then post your score and reasons for said score instead of bitching about how "Whiney" it is.

The fact of the matter is ohio is much better then we are this year. They are miles better on offense and special teams but our defenses aren't that far apart. Ohio needs to not only win but put up style points in doing so for them to have any shot at passing fsu.

Now on senior day the emotions are high and I expect team 134 to play as hard as they have played all year long. Whether that translates to a close game will hinge upon the coaches putting the kids in the best position to succeed on every play.

Michigan can stay close in this game but it hinges on the special teams playing their best game, and Greg mattison out thinking Urbz (which he did a lot of last year, especially in the red zone), and Al Borges has to wake up and realize the game plan we've not executed over the last several weeks has no shot of putting up the kind of points necessary to beat ohio. If all of those things happen or ohio beats themselves with costly turnovers then of course we can win. I just don't see it happening.

ohio 34 Michigan 16

That score is my opinion, just as the preview is Brian's opinion. As the old saying goes : opinions are like assholes, some stink worse than others. A lot of pot calling kettle black as a lot of you are whining about Brian's whining. Just watch the damn game and cheer for this great university, unless you sold your ticket(s) to ohio then you don't deserve to root for Michigan.

Happy Corporate-giving!!!

uniqenam

November 29th, 2013 at 3:18 PM ^

To me, it's not the score that is offensive. Brian makes his points, Michigan sucks at football, Ohio doesn't, logically Ohio State will win by lots. It's the tone, and the constant "why don't we use nuclear bombs on offense instead of trebuchets", and the incessant Carr/Hoke comparisons (as if a coach with Carr's record/success at Michigan would be a bad thing), and the projection of Hoke as the crony of Brandon (as if Hoke decided to increase ticket prices and play rock music). It just gets old after awhile. Brian acts as if he's the only person in the world that is unhappy with how Michigan is playing football, and if you disagree with him then it must mean that you want Michigan to lose and suck and not run the spread.

kehnonymous

November 29th, 2013 at 3:30 PM ^

Brian acts as if he's the only person in the world that is unhappy with how Michigan is playing football, and if you disagree with him then it must mean that you want Michigan to lose and suck and not run the spread.

Yes. That is exactly what he has been doing. Keep tilting away at those straw men.

uniqenam

November 29th, 2013 at 4:30 PM ^

Yeah, I'm honestly going to stop. This site's downward spiral has been fantastic to behold. The angry, sarcastic schtick is fun for about a week, but after awhile it starts to become as plodding as the Michigan offense; this coming along with the slow descent of the commenting into MLive territory have really neutered the fun of MGoBlog of late. RR's 2008/09/10 seasons were still somehow fun, because Brian wasn't such a negative nancy all the time, but I'll leave you to try to figure out why that might be. 

MGoBlog used to be fun, but any more it's a cesspool of negativity, crowd-think, and 'new and inventive' ways to say "Fire Borges". I never really did pay much mind to Brian's analysis of play-by-play, as I came here to read his fantastic game columns and his personal takes on everything from Stretchgate to Joe Paterno. Now that Brian has decided to only write sarcastic whine-material, the last redeeming aspect of MGoBlog for me has died, so I think I'll just go elsewhere.

BlueHills

November 29th, 2013 at 5:25 PM ^

I'm going to stop reading your anti-defeatist whine-material, because the last redeeming aspect about your posts has died for me.

I'm going to go elsewhere to read interesting, fun posts making clever comments about how bad the team is.

Since you're leaving, don't feel any obligation to answer this post.

Now that Brandon has confirned that Hoke is the coach who will be with us until the NCAA outlaws football as a sport, we'll have plenty of opportunities to enjoy hand-wringing and complaining for many wonderful years to come!

Future joiners of this blog will be able to say, "Michigan was once good at football? Really? Tell us about those days, great-grandfather!"

bronxblue

November 29th, 2013 at 6:54 PM ^

Brian certainly doesn't act like the only annoyed UM fan; he shares sentiments that I think are shared by a large portion of the fanbase.  And I think his issue with the spread is that it WAS working for a time here, and the sentiment of the HC and OC to call it a gimmick after trotting out some BS off-tackle crap and one-off passing formations is the height of hypocrisy.  I agree that the sentiment can be grating, but this season has been grating, in large part because the guys at the lead of this team keep trotting out "execution" and bow down at the altar of "playmaking" without recognizing the fundamental issues exposed by a wasted season.  So no, he isn't grasping at straws or portraying fans as idiots for not supporting his mindset, but he does (rightfully IME) point out the idiocy of people here (and other places) acting like this team is a couple of plays and some grit, determination, and heart away from 10 wins and a bright future.