The Verdict Is, Unfortunately, In Comment Count

Brian

10/24/2009 – Michigan 10, Penn State 35 – 5-3, 1-3 Big Ten

kevin-koger-drop

In my memory I have one hazy previous version of that thing from Saturday: I remember James Whitley was returning punts. He'd put a few on the turf here and there already but people were still in the "that's not enough data" phase and willing to give him a chance. On this day, whatever day it was, it was a little wet and Whitley fumbled. And fumbled again. And fumbled again. He finally got yanked and I think his replacement fumbled. I don't remember the opponent or the final score but I do remember that Michigan fumbled 12 times on the day and the stadium had 110,000 people in it who would have set a world record for most eye-rolls at an event if only someone was tracking it.

I don't know if it's a self-preservation technique for my brain, but Saturday's game is almost as hazy as that decade-old debacle. I have to squint to remember anything more specific than a single play on which a tight end drops a pass that Denard Robinson fumbles to a Penn State player who throws to a ridiculously wide open player that a linebacker is attempting, and failing, to cover. On the extra point, David Moosman snaps it through the endzone or something. I think the brain is attempting to prevent itself from getting bashed against the wall. I think the brain is wise to do this.

As the man says, mama said there'd be days like this.

--------------------------------------------------------------

When Michigan had just beaten Notre Dame and it seemed like the Irish were a team destined for an easy BCS bid instead of one that will win or lose on the last play against anyone except Nevada, hopes bloomed across the Wolverine diaspora. Personally, I remember contemplating an Alamo or Outback with Tim on the giggly post-Notre Dame podcast, and that was an explicitly keep-your-pants on sort of prediction.

How are everyone's pants now? Firmly adhered to various bits of your anatomy, I'm guessing. Stayin' there for at least two weeks. Waiting for Michigan to outgain an opponent in a conference featuring letters other than M, A, and C before relaxing to non-tourniquet levels.

So, yeah, Penn State was kind of a comedown. At this point it's undeniable: Michigan isn't good. Though well removed from the nuclear apocalypse they were last year, this is probably the second- or third-worst team at Michigan in 40 years, give or take a 2005 or 1984. That's disappointing after the mirage of the first few games, but it's not surprising. The reasons why have been detailed in this space and many others, before the season and during it: freshman quarterbacks, new defensive coordinator, terrifying defensive depth chart. Preseason predictions of 7-5 factored in the idea that Rodriguez was a good coach in a big hole.

And though Michigan's on pace to meet those expectations, it was the sort of weekend where I studiously avoid the internet for a day afterwards and am then immediately, repeatedly reminded of why when I break the boycott the day after. Many caps, much emotion, etc.  I've got a few emails in the inbox from folks who annoyed the commentariat and got neg-banged under the 20-point threshold at which you can start your own threads, most of which say I can kiss the ass of the user in question*. You've been on the internet. You know. It's always the last thing that happened that will always keep happening forever.

Your personal level of outrage depends on how much blame you apportion to Rodriguez, Carr, Bill Martin (for handing a Carr team to Rodriguez), and/or general bloody-minded fate, and how quickly you think 3-9 turns into a good football team. Ugh. Isn't it tedious to go through this again? Anyone who's read this blog for a while knows it falls—or at least attempts to fall—on the ruthlessly logical side of things, adds this latest game to the pile of data, shifts its opinion a little bit, and continues believing that Rich Rodriguez is a good coach put in a really tough situation.

As Michigan progresses further into the Rodriguez era the amount of blame that can be laid at the feet of people other than the head coach decreases. It's not to the point where much of it is Rodriguez's fault, in my e-pinion. There are many teams that have looked bad with freshman quarterbacks and many more that have looked atrocious starting five underclassmen, one of them a walk-on, on defense. Michigan is in the middle part of the curve here, and if you're pointing to extreme outliers like Paul Johnson and complaining you are purposefully shutting out data that disagrees with your thesis and—well, and here we go again. I argue against the legions of people on the internet who don't like it when Michigan loses and have poor impulse control, the reader agrees for a bit and then gets annoyed that this column is wasting its time on that sort of thing, etc etc etc. We did this last year. A lot.

This is the first time we've done it in 2009, eight games in, and that represents progress of a sort. The progress on the field is equally obvious: hack out the game against Baby Seal U and Michigan is averaging 80 more yards per game than they did last year; they've only gotten throttled once. They haven't lost to a 3-9 MAC team. They beat a team with a winning record. They aren't going to be 3-9 themselves. By the standards of Michigan past this is a disaster of a year, but the only relevant team in relation to this one is 2008. This year is not evidence Rodriguez is a bad coach.

*(Seriously, multiple negbang victims have deployed "kiss my ass" in their emails. Does this signify that most of the victims are of a certain age? I can't imagine anyone under 30 telling someone to do that; the kids these days are more likely to break out the heavy artillery. One very tenuous suggestion that the older you are, the less patience you have. Which, obviously.)

BULLETS

  • Rodriguez bitches, I've got a few:

    I'm fine with deploying Robinson, but Michigan has to be more flexible with him. The difference between second and nine, when a Robinson run is still a plausible threat, and third and nine, when it isn't, is obvious: second down is an open seam that Koger (argh) drops; third down is a horrible interception. Bringing Robinson in is fine—he was effective, the third and long was the result of a penalty and a drop—but once it's a passing down, Forcier's got to come in.

    Aigh spike. I thought the running plays that got Michigan down to first and goal were plausible; I was iffy about the call on first and goal, and disliked the second-down call, but understand that at that point you're really operating at speed and split-second decisions aren't always correct. From the three with the clock running and no timeouts my instinct is to pass because one way or the other the clock stops afterwards. After fumbling, though, a spike with 13 seconds left is pretty maddening. If you're going to run the ball, you have to have a pass play ready to go that you can just call.

    I still think that Rodriguez's game theory stuff is pretty good, far better than Carr's; at least the mistakes he makes are of the quick-decision, (usually) slightly-too-aggressive variety. He didn't punt from the freakin' 33, as JoePa did Saturday and Carr did plenty.
  • Did anyone else have a strangely positive impression of the run game after it was all over? The box score is illuminating: Brown, Minor, and Robinson combine to average 4.3 YPC; Forcier ends up with ten yards on 14 carries because of a lot of sacks. Brown also had a 20 yard run called back for an illegal formation. I'll take that against Penn State; the main problem with the run game this year has been an inability to get Minor and Brown more carries. They should be combining for 35 carries, not 20.
  • Bonus: that was accomplished with Molk missing all but three plays.
  • Meanwhile, Royster had 100 yards but averaged just 3.1 YPC after his 41-yard opener, which I'm pretty sure will be a huge screwup by Jonas Mouton. That's the defense's MO: pretty good physically, doesn't get pushed around consistently, prone to massive breakdowns.
  • I don't think Forcier was nearly as bad as the numbers. He got crushed by drops, which were legion and extremely important. Third and long conversions clattered to the turf after bouncing through people's arms. Those are something close to turnovers in terms of overall negative impact on the game.
  • Also close to turnovers: turnovers. Note that this site's suggested that turnovers are largely random but there are two things that consistently cause them: pressure and inexperienced quarterbacks. Michigan's got plenty of the latter. I expected Michigan to move towards the middle this year but remain somewhat negative. They've not done the former. They're 105th in turnover margin at almost –1 per game.
  • Obi Ezeh's job might be coming under threat. Multiple times in the second half he was pulled for Fitzgerald, first for just one play and then for a few; each time Hopson pulled him aside and explained various things to him. I don't really blame him for the Quarless touchdown; what the hell was Michigan doing send him in man coverage on Quarless without safety help? Was there supposed to be safety help? I don't know.
  • Robinson's tendency to send six or even seven guys on third down is catching up to Michigan. There was the first Moeaki touchdown, on which Iowa had a playcall specifically designed to burn an all-hands blitz, and then there were a couple instances against Penn State where an all-hands blitz was easily anticipated and exploited; Graham Zug was the main beneficiary. That was the main thing that got him open. Careful what you wish for, I guess.
  • What in the hell is with Donovan Warren playing ten yards off the line of scrimmage? Penn State had eight free yards whenever they ran a long. I was iffy on Robinson when he was hired. While I'm willing to give them a chance and it's obvious that there's almost no way this defense could be good, stuff like that and the bubble screen mania against Michigan State are really disturbing. I have no idea what you could be running in which it's a good idea to play your top cornerback so far off the LOS that you're giving Penn State second and two.
  • Not that anyone affiliated with Penn State will notice, but they were the recipient of some questionable calls. Didn't matter, obviously.
  • Cissoko returned and Michigan showed its first semblance of a situational substitution all year: on obvious passing downs he would replace Williams and Woolfolk would drop back to safety.
  • Speaking of Williams: he's basically the only scholarship player left at safety, and I know he was a four-star but you can't just point to one high-rated recruit and claim things should be better; recruits don't always pan out. To really be assured of talent at a position you need two or three high-rated guys, or at least veterans.
  • The play on which Donovan Warren was shoved into Junior Hemingway needs to be a penalty. As we saw, it's dangerous as hell. Kick catch interference should extend to people you're blocking into the returner.

Comments

STW P. Brabbs

October 26th, 2009 at 3:14 PM ^

Brandon Smith was pretty awful at kick coverage yesterday. I'm not sure how he's been the rest of the year, because it's much easier to tell when you're looking from the end zone ... but I don' think his overall ungainliness when changing direction and inability to keep outside contain bode well for his future as a linebacker. Anyone with more educated thoughts about this?

mgovictors23

October 26th, 2009 at 3:43 PM ^

We need to ride the running game a lot more than we are doing. Minor and Brown were for the most part really good yesterday, they just need to get the ball a lot more than they are getting.

Bellanca1

October 26th, 2009 at 6:27 PM ^

You made Clark look good.

Michigan is an idea in search of a subject.

At some point this blog might start studying what makes a football team good, and it's not doing really, really well against Connecticut.

Bellanca1

October 26th, 2009 at 6:29 PM ^

Ferentz would have been a disaster. Too much emphasis on discipline, strength, composure, and control. Remember? It was all entirely clear, how bad a coach he is, here.

El Jeffe

October 26th, 2009 at 6:52 PM ^

Did you honestly come on another team's blog to chide its bloggers for not serving a more productive purpose? Yikes.

Also, what on earth does your second point mean?

Despite these things, I am glad you're here. Your avatar reminds me that I haven't skullfucked an Italian in a while.

Bellanca1

October 26th, 2009 at 7:07 PM ^

You assert national relevance and sports-commentary brilliance -- and then say, "Leave us alone, you mean person." Note: UM says it's important and unique, and it's bloggers go on, and on, and on, about how it's unique.

Anyway, your program is under NCAA investigation, the coach (with a 7-figure W-2) has a negative net worth, a pending bank fraud case, you got beat by 25 by PSU at home, and you're still trying to play a 175 lb. QB in an option-run game. So you get huffy and aggressive about unsupportive comments. Sure.

El Jeffe

October 26th, 2009 at 7:57 PM ^

This is getting less understandable by the minute. What, in your view, ought we do, given the facts you present in your second paragraph?

By the way, I never told you to leave. I just mocked you for coming here, which isn't even the blog of the team your team just played. You're an Iowa fan, right?

Anyway, you're a curiosity. What is it you're looking for? Iowa is having a great year and has already done two things UM couldn't--beat PSU and MSU. You should be happy and proud.

Hail2Victors

October 26th, 2009 at 10:34 PM ^

I totally agree with the comment that it needs to be a penalty to block a player into the kick returner on a punt. I really thought it was a penalty. At first, i thought Warren and Hemingway were toast. This alrady has enough defensive holes to fill.

I may get totally bashed on this, but I think DRob needs to sit and watch the remainder of the season, or at least be in for only a very certain set of running plays. As much as people seem to dislike Nick Sheridan, I think he at least knows the offense and could manage a game if needed.

If my memory serves me right, the turning point of this game WAS NOT the safety. It was DRob's stupid read on the inteception. I sat in the endzone behind him on Saturday (Section 12, row 13. I saw the PSU player and wondered how he didn't. Anyway, that was the turning point. The Michigan D actually stopped PSU and JoePa punted. I would have punted there too -- got a great defense and you pin a young offense in the hole. Plus, no one talks about the weather. The weather sucked. That whole series was a disaster waiting to happen.

I thought if they scored 7 instead of 3 right before half, thing may have turned around. But alas, no.

Let's just hope they can pull one out against the Illini. Illinois has to be thinking this is their "get well week".

WanderingWolve

October 27th, 2009 at 8:58 AM ^

I thought we were all hoping for/predicting a 6-6 to 8-4 record for this year. I think we're still on pace for that. There really haven't been any surprises--the D probably isn't going to be very good and we are young on O. There's a reason teams don't like to start true frosh QB's (we all knew that here) and we're being reminded of it. I was very disappointed with Sat because I thought it would be RichRod's signature B10 win. I don't like that we've lost our last 3 B10 games but we are still in process of a young team learning about competing in this conference. The coaches aren't idiots and see these guys practice everyday. Can we just enjoy the last 4 (hopefully 5 with a bowl game) games and look forward to a good recruiting class?

M1EK

October 27th, 2009 at 2:02 PM ^

I was actually coming here because I really like Brian's football analysis and was hoping to see some serious discussion of the game (got SOME, just not as much as usual) and also an opinion about where PSU was good and where they weren't. You see, getting opinions on your own performance from your own fans is kind of stupid - leading to base homerism. I'd rather hear what the other guys have to say - and in this case, I got nothing but "we beat ourselves" which was very disappointing.

So, no, not looking for validation, but you guys are, in this one way, pretty darn special - in that you seemingly can't give credit at all when you got your ass thoroughly whooped, unlike even the ridiculous homers at BSD who for the most part credited Iowa when they took it to us.

chitownblue2

October 27th, 2009 at 3:20 PM ^

Mike, coming from a fanbase that clings to 2 seconds in 2005, a questionable sideline call in 2002; and coming from a blog that honestly writes that PSU will "have to overcome the refs" against Michigan...you're complaining about sour grapes?

Further, you're building an enormous strawman here. Nobody said that Michigan lost because of referees - your defense pounded the shit out of us. Pointing out that the one play that caused the blocker/returner collision is a possibly dirty play doesn't invalidate the fact that PSU was the much better team. But that said - how could you watch that game and NOT think that Michigan was murdering itself? I don't think we would have won even if we hadn't, but when the team, as they've done frequently, turns the ball over like nuts, fails to make tackles, and drops 7 passes, how can Brian claim that Michigan played well with a straight face? You guys won. You outplayed us. Your defensive tackles destroyed our offensive line. Happy?

M1EK

October 27th, 2009 at 3:29 PM ^

Getting there. If in 2002 and 2005, UM had beaten PSU by a couple of touchdowns, your analogy might have some applicability here.

This is the first time in this entire thread that anybody has said PSU was the much better team. How many comments in now? Brian still hasn't said it, and obviously doesn't believe it either (unless it's by subtraction, i.e. "PSU is the much better team because of how bad I now know we are").

Again, compare/contrast to how the inveterate homers at BSD handled the Iowa loss.

OMG Shirtless

October 27th, 2009 at 3:40 PM ^

One thing you need to remember. There are a lot of very rational posters that avoid this board like the fucking plague for a few days after a loss like this because of all the dumb shit the MGoIdiots and Trolls post. I waited until Sunday night or Monday to read most of the nonsense, and even then I know which idiots are bitching to bitch and which people have valid responses and criticisms.

PSU curbstomped us. Straight up beat Michigan's ass. Is that what you want to hear? I'll admit it.

Here's a video replication of what it looked like. (Note - this is the scene from American History X, don't watch it if you get queasy over shit like this)

Just because there aren't a number of posters saying that we got flat out beat doesn't mean that people don't feel that way.

chitownblue2

October 27th, 2009 at 5:48 PM ^

Well, if you're looking for a Michigan online forum to be a beacon of rationality, or ANY college football forum, for that matter, I'd suggest you're looking in the wrong place, Mike. Your tinfoil hat readers think the evil Big 10 refs want to screw over the hated...JoPa? Ours think that Lloyd Carr is trying to flouridate our water supply. Take it with a grain of salt.

Also, Brian's immediate post-game columns often aren't nut-and-bolt break-downs, but an emotional response. I'm sure that when you read the UFR, you'll see plenty of "Odrick kicks Huyge's ass" littered all over the place.

STW P. Brabbs

October 28th, 2009 at 9:14 AM ^

Just a little weird complaining about how no one will validate your team's win? Leaving aside the debate surrounding the nature of MGoBlog's collective response to the game: why the shit do you care whether anonymous people from a blog devoted to a different college football team aren't super nice to your favorite team? Why does validation from the Michigan fan base matter to you at all?

InterM

October 28th, 2009 at 10:23 AM ^

If you truly want folks around here to acknowledge how much better PSU is or how they manhandled Michigan, you're sure going about it the wrong way. If you've been on MGoBlog for more than 5 minutes, you surely know that complaints of mistreatment or bad behavior by others (e.g., why did I get negbanged for that?!?!?) don't tend to produce the desired result. Whatever I might think about PSU's performance, I sure ain't gonna tell you now! Childish? You betcha! It's the Internet!

InterM

October 27th, 2009 at 4:20 PM ^

Why is it "stupid" for Michigan fans to seek out the thoughts and opinions of other Michigan fans about our team's performance? That's pretty much what we do around here, I think. Would you rather have us break down PSU's performance based on a sample size of 1? Also, the comments on this blog in the aftermath of this weekend's game pretty much disprove your thesis about "base homerism," don't they -- I haven't seen a lot of folks sugarcoating Michigan's performance.

Anyway, I suggest you come back for the UFR, which is likely the most discussion you'll get about PSU's performance. Even then, you might be disappointed -- we're more concerned around here with the next game on the schedule, and discussions about PSU's greatness don't really shed much light on that. See you next year.

El Jeffe

October 28th, 2009 at 1:48 PM ^

This is astounding. You went on a single thread on another team's blog and the posters on that single thread didn't spend enough time detailing all of the ways in which your team was better than the other team? You are "disappointed" to find that the posters on the other team's blog spent more time noting how their f'd up than crediting your team's brilliance?

How is this possible? Do you frequent a special corner of the internets where partisans discuss in sober terms the reasons for their lives not turning out the way they had hoped? Are you an inveterate whiner? Are you Nell?

M1EK

October 28th, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^

Just sayin'.

Compare/contrast, again, to the megahomers at PSU's BSD, who somehow manage to talk about the Iowa game while, and here's the important part, BOTH talking about what PSU did bad AND mentioning that Iowa played a hell of a game and is a much better team. Not just the one.

The last part, here, on mgoblog, you know, the blog of the guys who are supposed to be the least delusional in the Big Ten, was lacking until very recently, and produced ONLY as part of an effort to attack the messenger. Go back and read this thread, in chronological order, if you don't believe me.

Or wallow in your own crapulence. Either way.

cargo

October 28th, 2009 at 6:26 PM ^

Why does anyone have to say how much better penn state played on saturday? We watched the game everybody did. You dont see posts here saying LOLZ If Big Blue put DENARD in the WHOLE TIME he would have ran all OVER PENN STATE CAUSE they suck!!!1!!#!!#W!11!

That's a delusional post, analyzing your teams flaws isnt discrediting the other team. Nowhere has anyone said how penn state wasnt good or didnt play well.