Upon Further Review still has a sponsor.

I was going to tell a story about how Matt invented the mortgage in 1745 but given the persnickety legal details that come with being a broker I think that might actually be heinously illegal, so I'll have to skip it. When Matt talks to lawyers about running within the bounds of the law it seems like he gets tossed a dusty 500-page tome and is told to memorize it. So our story dies before it can even live. But at least you can be secure in your decisions when it comes to owning a home, amirite?

Matt's got a ticket offer going for a Michigan football or basketball game. If you're buying a home or refinancing, he's the right guy to call. (No pants required.)

FORMATION NOTES: Michigan didn't do much that was out of the ordinary for them. Indiana was very aggressive.

They had a standup end similar to the buck spot; I still interpreted him as a DE.

PERSONNEL NOTES: Pretty standard at this point. Smith, Houma, and Johnson got the only tailback snaps. Bunting has fallen out of the TE rotation. When they need a third guy they go with Hill or Poggi. Newsome only on goal line plays.

Ways got a few snaps but it was almost all Darboh and Chesson plus Perry in three wide sets.

[After THE JUMP: Rudock does okay-ish.]

EXPLOSIONS

ppsssssssshewwwww

YES LIKE THAT DEEP PASSES WILL ALWAYS BE COMPLETE FOREVER

Hm. I'm not sure they will always be so available.

As mentioned at the top, Indiana entered with a game plan to stack the box and never really deviated from that even after Rudock started carving them up. At one point I took a screenshot titled "Indiana what are you doing.jpg" and in the process reminded myself that I already had "I mean seriously Indiana.jpg" in my folder.

Third and fourth quarter here so no illusions about how well Jake Rudock is playing; in both shots every Hoosier is within seven yards of the line of scrimmage. Since three of those guys in the secondary are freshmen, passing plays often felt like free candy.

I mean, it could be part of Wilson's diabolical plan to keep Michigan's defense on the field the whole game by playing super-aggressive and either giving up a quick TD or forcing a punt. Or they've decided they're not very good either way so they might as well be not good in a way that could lead to being good in the future. I dunno.

In any case Michigan looked at a lot of jammed boxes with soft coverage, which helps explain the relative efficiency of run vs pass in this game. But also Rudock had a second consecutive game in which he looked like a new man. The

highly accurate CHART

aw, thanks

I'm not really praising you, I'm praising Jake

Why do I even talk to you?

You need someone to pretend to be the internet so you can argue against them.

Ah right. Anyway, unleash the Rudocken:

Jake Rudock 2014

Jake Rudock 2015

Wilton Speight 2015

Very, very accurate day with bad events mostly benign save for the INT and a missed opportunity for a TD at the end of the first half. A couple of BRs are covered dumpoffs, one of the TAs is a three yard scramble, the sole IN was in fact an underthrown deep ball Michigan got a PI call on, etc. Rudock carried Michigan and under more pressure than you probably remember—he had guys in his face a lot.

But surely we should file this under "just Rutgers and Indiana" and not change our expectation levels?

Not so fast, my friend. While it's true that Rudock's numbers were buffed by a number of Indiana biffs, shooting is shooting is shooting. And finally we saw Rudock hit the full repertoire of throws he displayed in 2014.

This was Michigan's first touchdown. Every single Michigan fan in existence exhaled "finally" when Chesson brought that in. Your author did that, too, but perhaps a bit more specifically. Because I saw that exact throw before:

Rudock's inability to replicate those kind of throws at all drove me crazy all year, but whether it's familiarity with the offense or comfort with his receivers or a good night's sleep or whatever it is really really nice to see a version of Good Iowa Jake Rudock in a winged helmet. For one, without him Michigan loses this game. For two, I feel way less insane.

That was not an isolated incident. He nailed Darboh on a 55-yard post that only popped out when Darboh hit the ground. This one is a hitch in a tight space on which he has to adjust since Chesson gets chucked effectively:

Accuracy is one thing. Rudock's increasing comfort level with the offense is equally clear. He has found the #buttzone consistently over the last few weeks and has faith in it to the point where he doesn't really worry how open Butt is or is not. Four guys more or less surrounding him? Eh, #buttzone.

Man coverage against a corner? Eh, (possibly unintentional) back shoulder #buttzone.

First play of your death-or-OT drive deep in the fourth quarter? Eh, #buttzone. Fourth and goal from the five? Eh, #buttzone that even if it's at Chesson.

"Cover that, you red-clad midgets," is something I hope Rudock exclaims immediately after, and possibly while sleeping.

We've been hoping for Good Iowa Rudock for most of the year in vain, and suddenly he blew right past that. My main problem with Rudock at Iowa was his near-total aversion to throwing at guys so they could make a play. Harbaugh has finally beat that tendency out of him. In virtually all situations where you get one on one coverage just chucking it at your dude is a better outcome than an intentional incompletion, let alone a sack, and Rudock let fly in this game.

He ate a pass rusher on Michigan's final drive; it was third and three; Rudock was just like I ATE THE DRAGON I'M GOING DEEP

This, on third and three in this situation, is good. You'd like him to put it on his guy on a pinpoint throw. The go-find-it punt is a much better option than anything else he's got, and Chesson makes it pay.

Meanwhile, this is a completion against anybody, and YAC against approximately everybody. This is the platonic ideal of a dig route.

Ain't nothin' nobody does about that. I declared that "bad ass" on twitter in the immediate aftermath and repeated viewings only reinforce that. I'm not sure any version of Rudock prior to yesterday's has the confidence to nail that one in there.

There were errors, as there always are. The interception should never have been thrown. This is not news. Also, the Mallett-esque play from the four at the tail end of the first half was a missed opportunity. Michigan ran a little angle route with Perry that was open for the TD, and Rudock lacked conviction:

I can only assume this is a reaction to to the fact that approximately half of his throws at Perry have been intercepted this year. But he had him.

But, like, man. By 20 minutes into this game I was angry at runs and when Rudock took the first snap of the second OT and let it fly that felt like all the anger and message board posts in the world bowing down.

I don't know if that's going to last but finally we saw the combination of Jake Rudock, Accurate Boring Person, with Jim Harbaugh, Lunatic Screaming Person. And lo, it was good.

I'll tell you what was not good: running the football.

Nice segue.

Thanks.

I'm not praising you, I'm praising Jake Rudock.

That doesn't make any sense.

Neither does this chart.

So… this chart really really emphasizes how Rudock, Darboh, Chesson, and Butt pulled the rest of the offense's ass out of the fire. Michigan's line false started a half-dozen times and blocked poorly. Braden screwed up stunts on four of five plays in the second quarter; Glasgow got Rudock blown up by blowing a stunt of his own, and the runners not named Rudock left more yards on the field than they added themselves.

Well… crap.

Yeah. The aggression of the IU defense was not mainly responsible for the grimness of the offense on the ground. Michigan did not play well.

It takes me some time to develop opinions about offensive linemen, especially when most of them end up in a zone where they're neither great nor terrible. All of M's linemen are now in that zone unless Cole is heading towards great.

I do think the right side is clearly weaker than the left. The coaches seem to think so too, as almost every week the amplitude for Cole is greater than that for Magnuson. Cole is very good in space and physical enough. Magnuson I don't know about. He got crumpled to the ground on a trap play:

I don't want to make too much of any one play but when I saw that I can't say I was too surprised. Magnuson has been pretty good in pass protection. As a run blocker he doesn't bring much oomph.

I've been mostly pleased by Ben Braden's transformation into a guy I basically never think about, but there was a period in this game where he got burned on the same stunt over and over. Example:

I still think he's come a vast distance; I will be looking out for this kind of thing in the future. He was not alone on this third down where Rudock got destroyed:

Targeting remains an issue. OL will leave guys early, and sometimes two guys go after the same linebacker. Here Kerridge hits a guy Chesson is already after, which changes the equation considerably:

Kerridge hits the other LB and then it's a CB trying to tackle Smith, which is a profitable situation for Michigan.

Why is Houma playing tailback?

He's a powerful runner and he probably makes the coaches want to set things on fire a bit less. Compare this decisive cut to the gap with some of the other runs we've seen:

That's a cut I expect to happen but other backs don't do it too often. Smith had a very similar opportunity to put a foot in the ground and cut off the backside of one of his OL. While he does make the cut it is in two parts, allowing a defender to recover:

A later play would also see Smith's cut to the backside end up a slow, uncertain one. He'd actually rip off a big run with a backside cut that was better but even then it was a two-cut run:

You hear about "one-cut" runners that the Broncos made popular with Terrell Davis back in the day. One cut is what Houma did. He read the play and changed direction once, efficiently using the space and time allotted. Nobody else does that. I mean, Houma isn't immune to two-cut stuff. Also he is a fullback. But in this game he made those cuts more quickly than the actual tailbacks.

Meanwhile Smith had an impressive run on which he spun off a tackle, but, like…

That tackle attempt and spin move forced him to cut to the wide open backside of the play he should have been attacking much sooner. (I'm going to get a person saying that the DT on the backside is gong to close it down. Yes, if Magnuson wasn't there this would be a problem but he is, so a good zone back can pick a side on that guy and burst.)

Meanwhile, Drake Johnson saw a play on which Williams blew an end downfield. This…

…turned into two yards as Johnson flung himself anywhere but the hole.

I'm all out of hope for the tailbacks this year. Michigan has two five stars on the roster plus a four star and some other guys and nobody can see in front of their face. Smith was +2, yes, but RB is a MAKE PLAYS spot like DL on which being even is losing.

I should point out that Smith has been a terrific pass blocker. One of Rudock's downfield bursts got sprung thanks to Smith's ability to locate and clubberate a blitzing linebacker:

I usually assume everyone's going all out all the time and dismiss motivation stuff, but this week I got frustrated with a couple players for a lack of want-to. Smith never lacks that. Smith wants to end you. Even if he's slow and his vision is lacking, that's something.

Was the second and twenty play action dumb?

There's a board thread about this. That gets under my collar a bit.

I stated my opinion that it was, because on second and twenty run action doesn't have the same je ne sais quoi, you know? Yes, Indiana did tend to sell out on downs like second and seven. I'm totally down with this.

That play action eliminated everyone past five yards except the one guy. The interception saw a safety do the opposite of that because it was second and twenty. Given the game context—Rudock tearing Indiana up—and the nature of the play it was doubly unfortunate, as the Williams PA was likely to work on a standard down. When a safety does not bite and runs directly under the primary read of a play, I am going to say that was unwise.

Stanfordizations of the week?

For the second straight week most of the cool tweaks are things that may or may not have happened offscreen as Michigan used its run game to keep the opposition honest while Rudock set them on fire. When Michigan did try various bits of frippery, Indiana had it down. This freeze screen was one guy away from working big time, but that one guy turned it into a ten yard loss:

Notably, the dude who figured it out is the guy who believed Butt was blocking him. Maybe in the future activate also the TE.

I did catch one zone play that seemed to be a designed counter, but with Michigan mostly passing this was not a game for little run tweaks.

Peppers should be our tailback next year.

Nah. For one, his ability on defense is game-changing and irreplaceable. For two, he demonstrated a certain high school tendency on the end-around he got, which he turned from 0 yards into –10.

Flipping him to offense might fix that, but your nickel next year is…? And this affects the need for linebackers how?  Peppers mitigates next year's biggest positional question mark and can contribute on offense as well. Let's not fix what isn't broken. This isn't Toys R Us.

Receivers?

[0 = uncatchable, 1 = circus catch, 2 = moderate difficulty, 3 = routine]

ROUTES: Butt ++-, Chesson +-, Darboh ++-

Darboh caught the ball well, sold the DB on the winning touchdown, and also ground out a couple of mansome third down conversions on which he dragged defensive backs across the line to make.

Those showed up as run game positives. I may have been a little harsh on the post route that he almost brought in, which I graded as a routine catch.

I did think this throw from Rudock deserved a better adjustment from Darboh:

And you do want him to catch that long post. Darboh let that get into his body and then pinned it, which contributed to the drop once he hit the ground.

Butt, meanwhile, is one catch away from perfect on the year and has an enormous catching radius. Chesson was terrific, catching everything that came his way. I did think one third down conversion attempt that got batted away could have been better from him. He didn't drive back to the ball.

What in the everliving pants is targeting?

I do not know. I asked Ace to grab a gif of this Smith run since it is so unbelievably egregious:

That is a completely stationary, defenseless tailback getting a running headbutt from a defensive lineman and nothing.

Speaking of, should you slide as a quarterback?

No. I don't think this should be a penalty, and that's the whole problem:

Giving yourself is an unnatural act and people hit you in the head hard all the time when you do it, often because they assumed you would act like a football player instead of a magical QB gnome.

Heroes?

Rudock, Chesson, Darboh, and Butt. The passing corps in this game was absolutely terrific.

Maybe not so heroic?

The run game as a whole. Braden's pass protection was weak; Glasgow had a very bad game by his standards.

What does it mean for Penn State and beyond?

The offensive line had better get it together. Backsliding against Indiana the week before the PSU and OSU DL is not an encouraging thing. At this point I'd be really surprised if Michigan can crease anybody up front with any consistency.

Rudock and his three main guys are clicking. Took a long time to get here but now that we've had two straight games of it you wonder if he can keep it going against much tougher defenses. I think much of what we saw on Saturday is opponent-invariant. Shooting is shooting is shooting.

Chesson put it all together. Great routes, no drops, really fast dude. In the Rudock bin where we're a couple games away from upgrading him to major asset, except in Chesson's case he's got anoth

Running backs… eh. Other than Smith's pass protection there's not much to be happy about.