Upon Further Review: Defense vs Indiana

The play that was described as "Crazy" looked like an A-11 formation (All 11). It's fairly common high school formation / offense in some places. Florida ran it on LSU a couple years ago without any success.

From the summary of rules changes (http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/rules/football/2009/2009RulesCmteChanges.doc):

"7-1-3-b-1 Offensive Team Formation
b. When the snap starts: The offensive team must be in a formation that meets these requirements:
1. All players must be either on their scrimmage line or legally positioned as a back. At least five players wearing jerseys numbered 50 through 79 must be legally on their scrimmage line, and no more than four players may be in the backfield.

RATIONALE: Ease of officiating in counting players. Also eliminates penalizing Team A for only 10 players: six on the line and four in the backfield."

From the rules explanation by Rogers Reedding, Rules Committee Secretary - Rules Editor:

"Offensive Scrimmage Formation (Rules 1-1-1-b-2 and 7-1-3-b) The requirement for having at least seven offensive players on the line of scrimmage has been re-stated to allow no more than four players in the backfield. This is not a rule change but merely a different way of writing the same requirement. It does eliminate the foul for a team having ten players when there are only six on the line of scrimmage. Otherwise, the requirements for scrimmage formations remain the same." (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/college+football+officiating/ru...)

Definition of a back appears in Rule 2-27-4-b: "A back is any Team A player whose head or body does not break the
plane of the line drawn through the rear-most part, other than the legs or feet, of the nearest Team A player (except the snapper) on the line of scrimmage when the ball is snapped. A lineman becomes a back before the snap when he moves to a position as a back and stops." (http://www.ncaapublications.com/Uploads/PDF/Football_Rules_5_2204c0005d-...)

I assume that this has become a point of emphasis because of the rule change, either directed (I can't access the videos on the CFO central hub to verify) or unintentionally (addressed in the rules changes at referee annual certification, so they are more aware of the rule).

It looked to me like Woolfolk was going to catch him if Warren didn't cut him off. He might be as fast as his teammates have been hyping him up to be.

I'm not sure that pro-rating stats by possessions per game is the best way to evaluate it. I would compare yards per possession. The Big Twelve might have fewer possessions per game because they average much longer, more time consuming possessions.

There is something interesting here. RR talks about wanting to get at least three 3 and outs per game from the defense. Against Indiana they easily did that. There's also the weird stat that Indiana had 23 points but was 0-9 on third down at one point. And then one has to wonder why Indiana had so many possessions.

Michigan is doing something that many of us are unaccustomed to seeing. They hurry each play and use very little of the play clock. This is a point of emphasis. This helps explain why both teams have so many possessions. If Michigan was unhappy with this they could change it easily--just hike the ball with less time on the play clock. But Michigan continues to do this and not 'protect their defense' unlike the previous coaches. What we see is both offenses out preforming expectation (according Mathlete's voodoo) but Michigan outpreforming more than the opponent. Michigan's advantage being especially evident as the game progresses.

One hopes that soon the defense will catch up with the offense with regards to handling the higher tempo. However, we may still see large yardage numbers and probably scores because Michigan is using its offense to exhaust the other team at the 'expense' of the defense.

If he's too slow for Safety, and we have a need at LB, might he wind up taking over for Brown at the hybrid spot next season?
[edit]Sorry if this was brought up before, just now finished reading through the comments

Jonas Mouton had a very bad game. If the charts don't show it, then we may have found a hole in the UFR Charting services. He somehow avoided a minus for the second play of the game, with the explanation that the RB cut past him. I think the RB ran straight, and that Mouton had a perfect angle to tackle in the hole there.

I didn't go very far in organized football (complete and utter lack of talent), but I did do plenty of sports, and I think the one thing that every sport has in common is that bad play is cumulative. You make an error early, it gets inside you, and it's hard to shake off.

We see this played out in sailing all the time. Competitive sailing (we race an Express 27 on St. Clair) is a sport in which you have to make a ton of small adjustments all the time. At the start, when your class is all bunched up going for the same exact spot at the same exact time, this is in hyperdrive.

However, and I've found this very telling about sports psychology, for some reason whoever ends up with the best start usually wins or comes close to winning the entire race.

How is it that decisions made in a 5 minute period can affect a 3-hour competition? Because if you start well, you're feeling good. You're trusting your instincts. You're more inclined to get in that groove.

When you start badly, you're questioning yourself. What's more, you're fighting to get it back by making high-risk moves, like sailing to the opposite side of the course from everyone else during a Tacking leg to see if you can discover better wind (you never do).

I saw this all game from Mouton. He was trying to MAKE PLAYS rather than follow the program. This is how you end up with this. Mouton feels like he's in the doghouse. He's trying to Van Bergen his way back. But linebacking is much more assignment-based than defensive lining, where a dose of pure BRRRRAAAH!!! can get the job done.

Linebacking is instinctive, and requires a cool head. Remember David Harris: read, react, make the play. He was always in control. He would see the play, go to his spot, do his job. Great linebackers are workmanlike. Even Ray Lewis is a positional rock star first -- he makes those crushing plays only when they're available.

Jonas plays very young. You realize this guy is the same age as Brandon Graham, Steve Brown, Carlos Brown, Greg Mathews, Steve Schilling, and Brandon Minor? He plays like a true sophomore, doesn't he? He was a defensive back in high school, but that was a long time ago. This guy is a redshirt junior. He is way behind.

My hope is that he's just getting bad starts, and that this is leading to games of overcompensation thinking, rather than looking for his groove.

As for the cornerback position -- Cissoko made some dumb plays early, but I'm sticking with the Todd Howard thing. Howard did come around to serviceability eventually, but we would have to make it to 2011 first (God I pray Warren sticks around next year!!!) Floyd doesn't have the stakes. Turner came in behind, and even though it's an instinctive position, you gotta trust the coaches to know what they're doing there. So it's Cissoko. He's the guy with the talent. He, like Mouton, needs to get his head in the game.

When you're facing a bad Big Ten team in miserable drizzle, and they're beating you, of course, this is easier said than done. But a crisp fall day in a stadium full of people who hate you isn't much better.

whoever has contain has to take the pitch man. It's a bigger sin to let that speedy guy go uncovered than to let the QB take it up and get killed by a safety. Ideally the LB is playing the QB on an inside out technique and can help close on the pitchman after he forces the QB to pitch.

If you're undermanned on that side, it kind of sucks, you have to split the difference between the qb and pitchman and hope you don't get caught in the middle of nowhere. But you should be aware of who the bigger threat is from film study and take away that guy first (in this case, doss)

So now we're getting sort of optimistic about the defense?

This is too weird....

I don't have time to read the rest of the responses right now so I apologize if this has been answered already, but IME the hybrid defense in the first picture looks like a modification of the old 5-3 monster defense. Or possibly an even easier explanation is that it is just a 3-4 variant with everyone in man coverage.

Great word. Glad to see it used in connection with RVB's drive of atonement.

I'm more in favor of him missing a check in the pre-game warm-ups than during the first quarter.

I re-watched the game last night and studied those two sweeps for touchdowns.

I believe the mistake was boubacar's. He didn't have WR on his side either play and got caught up in the middle on both sweeps for a touchdown.

If you notice that is when he is benched. I believe Boubacar was pulled not for his coverage skills (he did give up a long pass) but for his play against those two sweeps and leaving the left side wide open.

Watch those plays and let me know what you think.

"Won't be thrown at the rest of the year. Bring a book, kid."

aaand lets hope he has such a boring uneventful year that he wants to come back for his Senior year to pad his stats and improve his draft stock. Please?

(warning: WWL'esque nonsensical hyperbole forthcoming) Warren looks like a pro out there. I find myself checking to see what he is up to before every snap, dude is usually telling the safety or linebacker where to go and lining up calm and collected.

I thought the D improved in the Indiana game. 1 td allowed after the first quarter, and that on an 85 yard run. Many of our defensive players are seeing things at game speed for the first time. I expect to see more improvement come Saturday.

Players learning a new system, players learning each other, players getting their first taste of big time college football, patience please.

One problem with the defense against Indiana is that when mistakes were made, they were big. The 85 yard TD was the biggest example of this, but the first TD and the second TD were also pretty bad. Four plays (first TD, second TD drive, and final TD) accounted for 21 points (out of 33) and 178 yards (out of 472). Each of these plays were terrible, and the first two were the fault of Cissoko.

RVB should have an incorrect check next game in the first quarter. Then he could atone for his "mistake" the rest of the game. Wouldn't it be sweet?

Throwing it out there:

It seems like Tandon Doss was Indiana's #1 WR. We can agree that Michael Floyd was ND's. It seems like Juan Nunez was WMU's top receiver. Whoever was EMU's seems to be irrelevant.

Why were all these players largely being covered by our #2 CB instead of Warren?

Stevie Brown should always have been a linebacker.

But I for one am glad to see him still contributing on special teams too, where he has consistently excelled since his earliest games at UM. He made a difference in that area against IU.

I think it has been advanced before, but who's for "Special Teams UFR?" As Brian has already explained elsewhere, STs were a big part of the story on Saturday, for field position and hidden yardage.

It does not look like Woolfolk (or any other safety) is giving much help to the "two-headed non-Warren cornerback". Why not?

compared to the average B10 corner?

In your first sentence below the first screencap (the "4-4 under" one), you have an "it's" where it should be "its."

Aargh, the defense is so frustrating. We fix several of our problems from last year, and new ones pop right up. It's just like in a cartoon where every time you plug a leak, another one pops up...

as always

they seem to make adjustments during the game and play better during the second half; only 3 pts given up in 2nd half (ignoring the 85 TD yd run).

It's discouraging that 467 yds were given up, but the red zone D was pretty good, 1 TD and 4 FGs in 6 trips.

has anyone else ever been given a -4 on a play?

i'm not sure what to call that, but it's not an under front. the d tackle is strongside of the nose and the slb is off the line

I only watched replays of these plays a few times, but:

On the first option that went for the TD, it seemed like Michigan lacked 1 person in order to effectively defend the option - Kovacs helped force the pitch, but there should have been someone outside of him - right? Considering that Cissoko was "covering" Doss on the play, and Doss scored, it seems like you rightly blame Cissoko for not getting all the way over - but I wonder why Mouton and Kovacs pick up minuses on the play? It seems like they did what they should have.

On the second option, it again seemed like we were missing a player - Mouton was out there with the QB and pitch-man by himself. I thought that keeping that situation (him to guard 2 guys by himself) to under 10 yards was a relative success - he forced the QB to pitch AND made the tackle on the pitch-man.

On the 85 yard touchdown, I'm not sure Kovacs even took a bad angle - I'm not sure the angle exists that would have allowed him to catch Willis before the end-zone. I think he's just physically limited (freshman walk-on, no off-season S&C program yet probably doesn't help this).

23 points allowed on ZERO successful third down conversions in the first half. (OK, so IU converted a fourth and short.) That is a bit... unsettling. Maybe the source of a new "getting gashed" metric?!