Spring Game Extrapolations: Defense
Yesterday we hit the offense; this is the other side of the ball.
Campbell Or Someone Else, Except There Isn't Anyone Else
All eyes not locked on Denard Robinson Saturday will be interpreting any signs of life from Will Campbell as prophecy of opposing offensive lines' impending doom. The facts are these: Michigan has three lock starters on the line, a big hole at three-technique, and a very big man who was a very big former recruit on his way to being a very big bust who is getting personal attention from no fewer than three Michigan coaches.
Michigan has put all their eggs in Campbell's basket. Quinton Washington is backing up Mike Martin—and doing so unevenly—and the only other options there are redshirt freshmen like Richard Ash (also probably an NT if he's anything) and Terry Talbott (probably another year away from being physically ready).
There's almost no way he's not going to start. This makes me nervous because it makes me think about Pat Massey. Massey was 6'8" and never should have been anywhere near DT, but he had a good amount of starting experience when he was inadvisably thrust inside after Michigan ended their one-year experiment with the 3-4. He still ended most plays in a crumpled mess several yards downfield. He was the three-tech next to Gabe Watson; hopefully Campbell doesn't go down as Martin's Massey.
Looking for: my skepticism about Campbell ever performing well is established. If the guy just holds his own and doesn't get blown up on the regular that will be major progress.
Fearing: The third string center getting under his pads and depositing him in Kovacs's lap.
Will only believe three games into the season: That Michigan's previous defensive coaches were even more incompetent than we already believe them to be.
Edge Terror: Yes, Please
Craig Roh is entering his junior year, and the clock has started ticking faster. As a freshman he was incredibly undersized; as a sophomore he was incredibly miscast. Now he's in an upperclassman in an under front as the weakside defensive end—this is his time and place. On a defense wholly devoid of established playmakers other than Martin he is the player most likely to blow up. Michigan needs him to or it's going to be another year in which opposing quarterbacks can finish their crumpets in the pocket before leisurely surveying to see which receiver is open by yards.
Here Michigan actually seems to have a decent second option: Jibreel Black was a complete disaster against the run as a true freshman but flashed disruptive ability when teams didn't run right at him. Like virtually everyone else on the team he should have redshirted; if he had everyone would be talking him up as the next coming because they hadn't seen his shortcomings. As it is a big post-frosh bump in performance can be expected.
Looking for: one-on-one pass rush from Roh against Schofield/Huyge/walk-on. He has to be able to beat those guys if he's going to take on the Big Ten this fall.
Fearing: Here I don't think we'll be too disappointed. There are two good options.
Will only believe three games into the season: That they can't get production out of this spot.
Jonas Newton
/nantz'd
Michigan's veteran linebackers have shuffled off to their futures. Since Obi Ezeh was replaced at midseason by immediately obvious upgrade Kenny Demens, middle linebacker is set. Ready or not, Cam Gordon will be the strongside LB. That leaves Jonas Mouton's old spot as the only other in the front seven up for grabs. Despite collecting all manner of safety/LB tweeners answers are few. Candidates:
- Mike Jones. Jones was the primary backup to Mouton last spring and was getting hyped up as a playmaker; one season-ending injury later there are grumbles he is too small and does not fit the position in a 4-3 under.
- Brandin Hawthorne. Yeah… so… Brandin Hawthorne hasn't seen the field in any capacity other than special teams yet and seemed destined for a Darnell Hood sort of career and now he's kind of the only option other than Jones because all the rest of the guys are participating in a pitched battle elsewhere. Speaking of…
- Safety war losers. Carvin Johnson, Marvin Robinson, and Josh Furman all spent part of last year at linebacker and part at safety; this spring they're all trying to fill Michigan's perpetually gaping hole next to Jordan Kovacs. While they won't be playing WLB saturday, if someone establishes themselves as the guy they will probably throw one of these three back in the linebacker pool.
- Oh, and Thomas Gordon. Some reports put Gordon in the WLB battle while others think he's in a distinctly separate boat of guys playing a dedicated nickelback spot. Gordon was a pleasant surprise as the starting spur earlier in the year and if there are few other options at WLB he might inherit that spot by default, flexing out into the nickel when other teams go spread. That would have some obvious downsides—dude is not linebacker-sized—but Larry Foote is not walking through that door.
- Oh, and… um… Marell Evans? Apparently he's back on the team after not playing at Hampton, and while he's getting some practice buzz that's so far-fetched I'm not even going to list it under things I don't believe because obviously.
Hypothetically, the WLB is the best-protected linebacker in an under front and can be a little fast guy who pursues guys all over the field. More realistically you can shield him a bit but offenses will find ways to make your tiny guy go facemask to facemask with much larger folks, especially if the three-tech spot supposed to shield him is iffy.
Looking for: A weakside linebacker that does not blow outside contain constantly. If I had to guess right now I would say Gordon gets virtually all of the time against spread teams and eventually ends up dragged into the lineup against the coaches' better judgment simply because he can play.
Fearing: A major downgrade—Mouton also turned in his fair share of great individual plays.
Will only believe three games into the season: That having Hawthorne in the two-deep is not an ominous sign.
Squinting In The General Direction Of Safety
Well… at least they've got some athlete type substances. They're weakside linebackers mostly but they'd be really fast WLBs. As mentioned, Johnson, Robinson, and Furman are all fighting to be Michigan's scapegoat this fall; there is no clarity as to who will come out on top. Johnson has the initial edge since he's seen the field, but most of that was at linebacker and last year when he moved to safety he ended up behind the leetle tiny Vinopal despite his tendency to look like Jerry attempting to tackle Tom.
As per usual, brace yourselves.
Looking for: Johnson to be as reputed: a bit slow but reliable and an excellent tackler. Basically a scholarship version of Kovacs.
Fearing: Fear? There is no fear, only the cold hard certainty Michigan's safeties will suck.
Will only believe three games into the season: There are no hopes out there to deflate, so we can take a pass on this one.
Oh And Bonus
AAAAARGH KICKERS
Looking for: Ball through uprights; more realistically, the matriculation of Matt Wile.
Fearing: Not through uprights.
Will only believe three games into the season: that I can watch a field goal attempt without throwing up.
Dileo isn't dropping jack. I say just give him the job knowing that he handles punts with the soft hands of a fireman catching a baby. Any positive yardage is pure gravy.
Comparing Will Campbell to Pat Massey *and* Carvin Johnson to Jordan Kovacs in the same column? You clearly didn't get the memo outlining rules about player comparisons.
/s
"Fear? There is no fear, only the cold hard certainty Michigan's safeties will suck."
although the D sucked last year, some of the blame has to be attributed to the scheme even though we lacked fundamentals. Put mid-tier players in bad defense = 2008-2010
when it comes to the LB's. demens and gordon are locks and i think one of jones, ryan, jb fitz or herron steps up and plays reasonably well. we have more options this year.
isn't Tom the cat? actually, that kind of makes sense now...
WHOOSH!!!
This is insane. We've had a perpetually worse defense since 2007 with only a few glimmers of hope sprinkled therein and people want Brian to be all sunshine and daisies about the possibilities of this defense. Let me write a secondary "Spring Game Extrapolation: Defense" post for everyone who either A) hasn't watched a Michigan football game in three years or B) didn't pay attention to anything other than OOH FAST SHOELACE IS FAST:
D-Line: We will MURDER IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS HOLY WITH BWC MURDERIZING THE B10.
LBs: We lost all of our experience and have no highly regarded replacements on the roster but FUCK THAT. We inevitably will FUCK. SHIT. UP.
Saftey: This has been the weakest link in Michigan defenses since FOREVER but I see things turning around this year. A guy who wasn't recruited until the tail end of the recruiting cycle will bust out like REGGIE NELSON AND OWN SHIT.
Cornerback: We aren't even fielding corners this year because our Safeties will be THAT GOOD.
Kickers: Imagine if Nate Kaeding at Iowa and Adam Vinatieri circa the Patriots dynasty and Zolton Mesko were involved in a nasty car crash into a nuclear waste facility and out emerged just one kicker amalgamation from the wreckage. This is our kicking game.
/SCENE BITCHES, SCENE.
seriously...Our D will likely be bad. If its not then AWESOME but I wouldn't expect for much with this many question marks abound.
Go Blue.
of the defensive struggles had to do with coaching or the defensive scheme right? But you know what your right, screw having any optimism before the season starts about how a new scheme, more experience for younger players, and signifcantly better coaching might benefit the players on defense.
All people like myself are saying is let's see what some of these guys can do given those variables, before we make assumptions that they will suck.
hope is warranted. optimism is not.
I assure you 100x out of 100x that IF the players are crappy and the scheme is crappy it will suck. And if the players are crappy and the the scheme is good it will suck a little less. I hope we have a few great players in our midst and frankly, I'd wager on Carvin being good and BWC turning into SOMETHING reasonable but you can't be optimistic about it...there's no basis for that.
"you can't be optimistic about it...there's no basis for that"
This is hilarious. Do you have any more pronouncements about how we are allowed to feel?
yes. you have to hate pickles. they are disgusting. and dislike gingers they have no soul. Unless they are hot females. with green eyes.
large....tracts of land.
April 14th, 2011 at 10:41 AM ^
(Completely permissible under Brian's rule exception)
I like your defensive preview better, especially our kicking game...I mean a Kaeding, Vinatieri, Mesko hybrid? Doesn't get much better. I want your preview up on the front page instead, yours calms my nightmares of missed tackles, nonexistant corners, and wheel routes of death.
I'm pretty sure Massey wasn't a 5-star recruit, and their physical stature couldn't be more different. Massey was a 6-8 beanpole who didn't come close to 300lb, while WC is three inches shorter and fighting to stay below 315. Given the nature of our defensive coaching the last two seasons, I don't think it's fair to consign Campbell to "5-Star Bust Bucket" just yet.
I think Brian's bias against Hoke having any sort of smarts when it comes to coaching is skewing his assessment of what's possible in the upcoming season. Every year somewhere in D1A football a new defensive staff comes in and achieves a pretty significant upgrade in that team's defense. There's no reason it can't happen here. This is sort of the mirror image of those who seem to be convinced we're going to play for the conference championship—that's just as unreasonable in the opposite direction—but as bad as our D has been, there's literally no place to go but up. If we're just average with flashes of good, that will be a huge improvement.
I've watched WC struggle to match up against even average centers, so saying he might be a bust after two years is not crazy. The otter should improve, but huge kids with bad technique can go either way - learn the position or continue to try to out-talent guys and lose.
fixed with coaching. If the coaching is better like we all think it is, than I am sure they have been working non-stop on his technique.
My point was more that he has to want to learn better technique, not just coast on size/talent. I do think he'll push himself, but I also think that the UM fanbase is whitewashing every under-achieving defensive player's failures with the trope of "the old coaches didn't teach them." There are definitely issues that can be corrected with coaching, but motivation and talent deficiencies are harder to correct, no matter how great of a coach Mattison may be.
April 13th, 2011 at 10:16 PM ^
Ding ding ding-- we have a winner.
You can't blame the old staff for every ill in the world and expect this defense to turn into world beaters because of a new staff. We still have the same players. Let's keep our expectations in check.
Another thing people forget is that most of the hype coming out of spring practices is just that, hype. Mike Cox and Will Campbell are getting a lot of it. Even if you assume that the last staff is a bunch of idiots, we've seen these two play a little. It wasn't some sort of display of raw athleticism. It was usually something along the lines of, for Cox, "run through the hole, stupid!!" or for Campbell, "get lower, stupid!!"
Bad technique can be fixed, but it takes a lot longer than 15 days of practice. He played with bad technique for four years in high school and then two years of poor coaching his first two years of college. That's six years of doing something poorly. It would be like asking you to do everything with the opposite side of your body (writing, throwing, catching, kicking). Oh, and you only get to two hours a day for 15 days to work on it. Think about how hard it would be to basically change the entire way that you do everything. (That is where he is at with his technique, the only thing he does well is be big. He plays to high, no real hand play or placement, and doesn't move his feet) Could you do it? Absolutely. With the good coaching now and all of the attention being thrown his way he could improve enough to be a average starter this year. If people think he will live up to his five-star ranking this year they are going to be disappointed. Can he still live up to it? Yes, but it is going to take a lot of work.
Was that in 2010 or 2009? You do realize that most of his snaps have come on special teams, and he played part of career as an O-lineman, right?
Campbell saw the field on goalline situations as well as a number of other snaps throughout both seasons and definitely struggled. Plus, despite having virtually nobody with his same combination of size and speed on one of the worst lines in UM history, he couldn't snag siginficant playing time. Unless RR totally flubbed player positioning and roster management - and that may well be the case - WC couldn't perform well enough in practice to see the field, and that is troubling for a 5* kid.
I've watched WC struggle to match up against even average centers, so saying he might be a bust after two years is not crazy. The otter should improve, but huge kids with bad technique can go either way - learn the position or continue to try to out-talent guys and lose.
Both coaches seemed to imply, or state, repeatedly that WC just doesn't grasp the concepts.
I have been wondering for a while now if he wasn't just so much bigger than any high school competition that he could move them at will and seem like a beast, but that he really doesn't have a football IQ,
This has been glaringly obvious since Brian predicted there was no way Hoke would be the next coach at Michigan. Then all the M-Love Hoke has recieved has not helped to smooth this over.
I love this blog and Brian is talented but Brian has been anything but objective with Hoke. Can't wait for Brian's 9 win expectation article.
you say lack of objectivity, I say having an opinion people disagree with. I don't care who coaches this defense, getting to average will be an amazing accomplishment.
Objectivity is fine, and can be found in Brian's realistically tempered expectations for improvement. Bias, however, is not fine with me (and apparently many of us), and can be found in the heaping doses of snark found in the banner and every post since Hoke was hired. Catchphrases like "MANBALL" and "HOKE UBER ALLES" are smirking oversimplifications on what's going on around the program and potshots at those excited for the return of what Brian once deemed stale and provincial. It's become pretty clear that things got personal for him and while I can't begrudge him his feelings and his right to post what he wants, the tone of his posts has taken on the characteristics of a Debbie Downer sketch as of late. I am excited, within reason, because when you think about it, how could things get any worse than they were last three years?
Catchphrases, potshots, and oversimplifications which, you will note, were not used in the above post. Snark has been a staple of Brian's writing since I've been reading, which has been a couple years, and is hardly limited to his coverage of Hoke, or even of football.
In the words of so many of Hoke's Angels to Brian, GET OVER IT.
No, they weren't used, and for that I applaud him, but it's been a steady diet of negativity in much greater than usual helpings (I too have been reading for years and recognize that snark and emo is a big part of Brian's repertoire). It's just funny how one can find some shred of optimism to cling to when it serves your publicly stated opinions at 5-7 and 7-5 and so little when almost the entire team is returning with competent coaching. I've seen you yelling "Weeve Bwian Awone" at other posters recently. Maybe you and Brian's Boosters want to meet me and Hoke's Angels (HOKE UBER ALLES) at the spring game to find out who can type GET OVER IT more persuasively in ALL CAPS?!
Well done indeed.
But I still don't think Brian's two preview posts were all that snarky, if pretty negative. I'll save my rebuttals for when he actual say something over the top, than for what he's said but is not saying. But if you create a pattern, seeing things that aren't there is to be expected.
April 13th, 2011 at 10:48 PM ^
Give it a rest.
April 14th, 2011 at 10:39 AM ^
When you haven't trolled so much you can get out of negative points...
April 13th, 2011 at 10:19 PM ^
Winning 8 games a year and losing two in September was stale. Let's hope we are not returning to that bullshit.
April 14th, 2011 at 10:18 AM ^
And losing 3 in November was even more stale. Let's hope we're not doing that anymore.
April 13th, 2011 at 11:01 PM ^
The thing is, I don't disagree that Brian was negative about Hoke, but I don't think it came from some deep-seated hatred or ill-will toward the man. But the entire RR experience was poisoned from the beginning, by the media, influential alums, and a Carr era that left a bad taste in everyone's mouth toward the end and was bereft of talent and depth at key positions across the team. But guess what, it didn't work out and even though I agree with Brian that RR was dumped too early, he didn't win enough and I can totally understand why he was let go.
But what I never agreed with, and what I think people misidentify as some grudge, is the whitewashing that has been going on in the fanbase that Hoke was some prize coach who is going to win multiple MNCs here. I think he is a fine coordinator of other coaches, but he will live or die by how Borges and Mattison coach up their sides, and outside of Mattison being awesome I'm not sold that we'll see anything better than a return to 8-9 wins and a decent NYD bowl game. That's fine, but it isn't inspiring to me compared to the future you see with other programs, and it troubles me because UM is trending dangerously close to the trite mentality we bemon in ND - a program that has isn't elite anymore but holds on tightly to past records and wins to justify why they are still relevant instead of, you know, winning and being on the cutting edge. I'm not saying RR would have done that at UM, but the only reason I see legitimate excitement surrounding the Hoke hire is due to Mattison coming along, and I much rather have RR over Borges coaching the offense. So no, I get that Brian and co.'s snark grows old at times, but so is the parroting of talking points and "UM is awesome and Hoke gets that" trope that some people spin around a meh hire.
First off, I agree that RR was set up to lose from the very beginning and some of Brian's negativity is aimed directly at those who "won" the war and are celebrating now that their way has been restored. I too had visions of MNCs under a modernized Michigan program. I plead Rich's case to my Bo-loving, Power-I Dad and members of his age group many times. I can't imagine staking as much on it as Brian has in a public forum, so I can understand the reluctance to jump on board with the old way- especially when your sworn enemies are writing complete garbage that frankly is insulting to the intelligence of most Mgobloggers (the whitewashing "he gets Michigan" aspect you speak of).
I know he doesn't have any personal grudge against Hoke. It's just sad to see the hopeless, almost spiteful tone of his writing since the new regime was brought in. I was aghast when Hoke's name was being thrown around early in Brandon's awful "process," but the more I learned about him the more I liked. He won me over as he has seemingly everybody he has come into contact with, including- and most importantly- the current players. I feel like there are just as many reasons to believe in him as there are to doubt him (especially when no games have been played yet), and hiring Mattison has only strengthened that conviction. Hoke is more qualified than some if not most of the hotshot coordinators with no head coaching experience or midwest ties that Brian was championing. It's way too early to tell if it was a "meh" hire. In comparison to Harbaugh, sure, but what wouldn't be? I would just like to see Hoke get the same leeway when the transition has gone almost perfectly that Rodriguez got when the transition was a freaking tire fire. I don't like feeling like I'm some moustachio'd fogey for liking traditional Big Ten football predicated on defense over gaudy offensive numbers. Carr and his style came just as close to the MNC game in '06 as Rodriguez did in '07, and his assistants at the time had nowhere near the cachet that the current ones do, hence my current preference for a patiently optimistic tone rather than today's everything sucks/I hate everything vibe. Speaking of, I hate the Hoke Uber Alles meme and everything it implies.
Nice string of posts, that. One quibble, though. You get that "Hoke Uber Alles" has nothing, nothing, nothing to do with Brady Hoke, right? It has everything to do with the MGoJuggalos who couldn't believe that Brian would dare question whether it was a good idea to hire a coach with a losing record who, if he hadn't spent a few years as a Michigan position coach, would never have even made the super duper long long list of replacement candidates.
Clearly, the hires of Mattison and Borges have softened the blow somewhat. In the end, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. Hoke will get 5 years at a minimum, as all college football coaches should, IMO. If he returns M to the modal 8-4 or 9-3 season, points a lot, and talks about toughness and downhill running, then he will get a fat contract extension. If he turns in 5-7 seasons, he will lose the support of the fickle and be fired.
Thanks for the response. I don't disagree with anything you said, but I guess I never sensed the same spite in Brian's writing as others did. Disappointment, yes. Annoyance that RR was hung out to dry by Brandon and Hoke was, at best, the 3rd candidate interviewed, certainly. But Brian clearly cares about UM sports - it is his financial lifeblood at this moment. So unlike lots of people who follow the team with maize-colored glasses, he held an unpopular opinion of Hoke that is slowly changing as we learn more about the guy, yet still with a healthy bit of reluctance to annoint him as anything more than a stopgap. That I don't blame him, but I had the same reluctance when Tommy Amaker was named coach even though everyone around me seemed to drink the kool-aid. I truly believe Hoke wants to win here at UM and cares about the program deeply, but like Tommy he has an underwhelming record at earlier stops and there are legitimate questions about how good he is as an actual coach and (maybe) recruiter, in spite of the passion and determination he clearly brings to the position. I'm not going to bag on Hoke before we give him at least a year, and I agree he deserves the same shakes as RR received in the beginning. But I do believe that RR's style would have won at UM at least as well as Hoke's more traditional mindset with the right talent and coordinators, but unfortunately I fear that RR's early struggles with mismatched talent will be read by some as a referendum on change and the reluctance to make it if an opportunity arises in the future, and as a fan and alum from a school known for its intellectual innovation, that scares me.
April 14th, 2011 at 10:28 AM ^
What gave you any confidence of matching the offense with talent and coordinators on defense? 3rd try's the charm?
April 14th, 2011 at 10:34 AM ^
Considering everyone is estatic about Mattison taking over as the 3rd DC in 4 years, I think having someone with some backbone and established history as a DC would have worked under RR. The reason RR liked Casteel was because he knew what he was doing and, I suspect, told RR to back off when needed. Schaffer was either too young or deferential to do that, and GERG was beyond his peak and clearly was just happy to have a job. RR might have been hardheaded at times on defense, but I honestly think that if a strong DC had been in place it would have worked out.
April 14th, 2011 at 10:43 AM ^
But what made you think Rich was going to find that guy? And get the players for that guy to use?
April 14th, 2011 at 10:51 AM ^
Is what people are hoping and expecting to get. Not blind optimism, but not an ignoring of the good things that have come with the question marks. (And yes, there are more than "we hired Mattison").
And I'd +1 a second time for "tire fire" if I could.
April 14th, 2011 at 10:47 AM ^
That we had crossed the point of no return. Disappointed in the conclusion, yes, but didn't say he should be retained. So the problem lied in WHO they got to replace him. Which is why people think Brian has a problem with Hoke, and not the firing per se. Though really, it's more a problem with the system, because any spread assistant coordinator guy would have had roses thrown at his feet, and not the man.
And the Carr era didn't leave a bad taste in "everyone's mouth"....in fact, the last 3 years illustrated, quite the opposite. That it was treated like that by many, including to some extent Rich, probably helped contribute to the downfall.
I'm confused, a nine win expectation is going to be bad?
The guy was poorly coached, moved to the o-line and now back to the d-line. Some may be his fault, I also think some of it is not. Part of player development is just that, putting the talent to use in a way to make that person successful. Maybe he should be a guard, but Mattison has a pretty good track record with defensive lineman and I imagine he sees something.
If we are stuck in this line of reasoning, we might as well get on Roh for his own lack of improvement with his numbers, but his is an obvious case of egregious misuse of his talents by putting him in the wrong spots. This problem sat on the shoulders of the previous staff. We are not required to have confidence in the new staff to get more out of our players, but I can have some optimism when I consider the collective experience of the new coaches on the defensive side of the ball. They will not make a top 10 unit this year, but I do not anticipate the horror shows of the last two years because of this upgrade.
I'd certainly agree that Massey differs physically from BWC, but he was definitely a 5-star recruit. Back then, all the experts assumed that his 6'8" 245# frame would wind up something like John Henderson (with the All-America honors and eventual NFL career). I remember watching a "pick six" clip where he easily outran the opposing team's offense (in the other direction).
Do you have a source to back that up on Massey? I checked Scout and Rivals, and their rankings don't extend further back than 2003, and I think Massey was a 2000 or 2001 recruit. I really doubt he was a 5-star, but I can't back that up with any hard info myself.
Comments