Best: Timebox

This will not come as a surprise to anyone who continues to recognize the pedantic, both-side-ism style I've adopted here at MGoBlog, but I was once a lawyer and am now a software developer. Don't ask why I did it, only understand that law school made it VERY clear you'll have a bear of a time discharging student loans once you've got them. In that sense, they're a lot like bed bugs, various STDs, and Scott Bell in MSU fans' heads. But one of the tenets of software development is a (at times slavish) focus on quantifying work and scheduling it so that an engineer's time is used most efficiently. There are a ton of different software development paradigms out there, but the one I've most often used is Agile. That methodology, in turn, employs a cornucopia of terms for what are, in the end, pretty benign ideas. But one in particular I've decided will be very applicable to this week's column.

Taken out of context, Timeboxing sounds like a bad Sci-Fi movie about time travel. But in this reality, it's just a term of specifying a limited amount of time to either fix a problem or better identify its complexity and plan future work accordingly. Basically, it lets you set aside some part of your time (usually a half or a full day) to determine if a problem can be fixed quickly (in which case you do it) or that it's a more complex undertaking and, with this knowledge, you can go back to your team to figure out how to proceed. Maybe you decide it's worth the hassle and dedicate more time and resources to it or, conversely, the cost is not worth the gain and you shunt it off for some time in the future when you've got some free time or it becomes more urgent.

For a brief look behind the curtain I will let you know that I usually write these columns Sunday afternoon/evening. My wife and kids have come to accept that I'm a weirdo about college sports and don't want to totally stunt what clearly keeps me somewhat sane during the fall, but they aren't inclined to let me spend hours doing so. As a result, I'm usually writing these in fits and spurts until night, at which point I'll hunker down for a couple of hours. If it was a particularly interesting or exciting game, or if some larger narrative discussion feels relevant, I'll spend a decent chunk of time on it; if it's Rutgers, less so. This game sorta feels like both but, I'll be honest, it's more the latter. Other than a 3rd quarter where Michigan sorta lost their minds on both sides of the ball, they played like a very good (but not elite) team on the road. There are things worthy of discussion but, honestly, a lot of it is simply superfluous chatter about Jim Harbaugh Experience or redundant hand-wringing about the state of the offense. So I'm time-boxing this diary to 2 hours; if I can't highlight something within that timeframe it probably isn't worth discussing.

Worst: Pre-Written Narrative

For most people, the only two possible narratives after this game were "it doesn't matter" (in the case of a blowout) or "life is awful so let's over-analyze everything" (anything else). The fact the game sorta occupied a middle ground of rote domination sprinkled with 15 minutes of bad play and bad luck muddies the water a bit, but I'd say the general response has been the latter. And while I get that everyone's breaking point is different, it has gotten somewhat exhausting to read the sheer number of "UNACCEPTABLE!" responses to 17-point wins. I'm sure someone will trot out that Michigan has failed to cover yet another spread (except the past two), or how the offense still moves in fits and starts, or how Shea Patterson missed someone who was open somewhere, and all the rest. It's all very interesting if you're trying to draw attention to your personal flavor of ennui, but otherwise it just feels like you'd wish Michigan had just simmed through the first 6 games so we can watch them play the games that "matter". Because there really isn't any winning for Michigan anymore; the minute they didn't set the world on fire offensively the knives were out and looking for heads to lop off. It's mostly the worst people saying it publicly, but they serve as the voice for a particular brand of disgruntled fans, and that acidity has permeated the broader consumption of the team.

Michigan is not a truly elite team; apparently Wisconsin and LSU are, Georgia is not, and the jury is still out on PSU and ND. They're better than they looked against Wisconsin but probably not much better than they did against Iowa. They still turn the ball over too much, they can't consistently throw AND run the ball at the same time, and their defense is aggressive and creative but still seems to have an A- ceiling, which comes as a noticeable downturn when compared to recent vintages. It is what it is, and while I do believe the offense has made some strides and the defense has shown a gear I didn't think they had as guys like Cam McGrone and Kwity Paye have emerged, it's unlikely that there's a phoenix about to rise up from Ann Arbor. But writing a team's eulogy halfway through the year just feels like an impossibly morose way to follow sports.

Best: The Contrarian Strikes Again

Last week I did that thing where I said Shea Patterson had a perfectly serviceable, bordering on sorta-good game, and that was definitely in the minority of viewpoints. I would never claim to know a ton about the intricacies of football; my brain has just enough space and processing power to remember basic food groups and which ones won't kill me, important dates, some phone numbers, and about half of the options of the Wheel of Morality. Trying to figure out if the right guard failed to properly handle a slanting defensive tackle on 2nd-and-6 is something I leave to the professionals. But I watched this game and, again, came away with the feeling that Patterson had a perfectly fine day given the conditions and overall game flow. Maybe I just have lowered expectations.

Top-line numbers weren't great; Patterson finished the day 11/22 for 194 yards and 3 TDs, plus 17 on the ground and a 1-yard TD that should have been Carlo Kemp's. 71 of his yards came on a nice Bell YAC, and he had a couple of nice throws to Eubanks, Schoonmaker, and DPJ. At the same time, he threw a ball to Black that was behind him, lost the ball a couple of times to Bell and Peoples-Jones, and undoubtedly missed someone downfield that I'm sure will be pointed out by others. At the same time, it sure seemed windy out there and, save for an underthrown ball to Imatorbhebhe that hung up and should have been picked by Metellus, nobody was really trying to push the ball downfield in the air. That's why I'm not inclined to ding him for "overthrowing" DPJ in the endzone; that's a tough ball to place in good weather, harder when it's windy enough that multiple pieces of trash and debris fly in and out of the frame throughout the afternoon.

But when Michigan needed Patterson to mount a scoring drive and put the game out of reach he did so. He was 3/4 for 35 yards (including the TD) and also picked up 20 yards on the ground on the first scoring drive of the 4th quarter, including a key 4th-down conversion when it sure seemed like somebody missed a block up front. And even some of his misses were pretty good; he looked off a safety and threaded a nice ball to DPJ in the endzone that was defended at the last moment. Again, if you thought he was a Heisman trophy finalist then this is yet another disappointing outing, but given what we've seen from this offense all year it felt markedly more coherent save for the seemingly-inevitable fumbles that submarined a couple of drives. But a Shea Patterson willing and able to run the ball a bit and who can hit guys in coverage has emerged these past couple of weeks, and considering how he looked to start the year this feels like a marked improvement.

Best: They Sorta Figured It Out

Michigan had 13 functional drives in this game (ignoring the end of both halves). They scored TDs on 6 of them, missed a FG on another, failed to convert on 4th down deep in Illinois territory, and fumbled two other times. Both fumbles were sort of inexplicable; Zach Charbonnet was definitely tripped on his one but otherwise seemed to have decent control of the ball; Tru Wilson picked up a first down and then the ball sorta just squirted out. I wish I could tell you there was some clear difference in how they team handles the ball this season but, to my eye, I don't see it. The recovered handoff by Patterson seemed like a dropped handoff by the back, as Patterson definitely looked surprised the ball was out and, frankly, he hasn't been pulling the ball a ton thus far. Turner was clearly down and it was sorta crazy the refs took multiple minutes to figure that out.

Otherwise, it was a pretty good showing by the offense. The picked up 310 yards rushing on 46 carries; that's a tidy 6.7 ypc. Both Charbonnet and Haskins cracked 100 yards, and showed the type of shiftiness and power we sort of expected both possessed. Tru Wilson also ran hard through contact, and it's nice to have him as an option in the passing game. And when called upon, Patterson showed the shiftiness and acceleration past defenders we saw last season; he's not as dynamic a runner as some QBs but he's good enough to keep defenses honest.

As noted above the passing game had some struggles but was pretty diverse, especially with Nico Collins out. I know people complain about guys like Bell and Eubanks getting so many balls their way, but they're getting open and, especially Bell, are making those opportunities count. And again, there were a couple of throws that absolutely hit guys in the hands and were dropped, though they were less egregious than in earlier games.

Still, that first half was about as coherent an offensive performance as the team has shown all season. If that carries over these next couple of weeks and the rate of inexplicable turnovers slows down (if not ceases), I don't see why they can't put some points up against the next couple of teams on the schedule.

Meh: Closing Time

On paper, the defense seemingly kept it's resurrection since Wisconsin apace; they picked up 12 TFLs, including 4 sacks, forced two fumbles and held Illinois to 3.6 ypp. Josh Uche absolutely dominated anyone he was matched up against, picking up 3 sacks as part of a 5 TFL game, and both Cam McGrone and Khaleke Hudson were blowing up numerous plays before they got going. And considering the team was without both Paye and Lavert Hill, it's hard to ask for much else.

And yet, four Illinois drives spanning the end of the half plus the 3rd quarter happened. For those 37 plays, Illinois did just enough mixing and matching of play calls, temp, and some luck to score 25 points. Everything that could go right for them seemingly did; guys who had been flying to the ball and swallowing up plays in the backfield all of a sudden couldn't tackle in space or cover a guy to save his life. A couple of times the Illini were able to get to the line quick enough to catch Michigan a bit off-guard, but more times than not they'd do the typical "run to the line, they pause and look at the sideline" routine most offenses do now. Illinois was called for 4 holding calls in this game but probably were guilty of a dozen more. Matt Robinson broke the pocket a number of times to find acres of field to run through; guys would just run themselves out of plays. It was, overall, a rough patch we haven't really seen from this team since Wisconsin.

Michigan fixed those deficiencies and compensated accordingly in that 4th quarter, but still it was a bit troubling to see those cracks in the armor. A decent chunk of it was likely focus; being up 28-0 and cruising along likely introduced a bit of complacency, as did being down a couple of starters. I'm not one to worry too much because neither PSU nor ND seem like teams expertly equipped to expose those weaknesses, but still a little jarring. That said, don't look now but Michigan is back up to top-20 nationally in sacks and sack rate, and have double-digit TFLs in back-to-back weeks. If they're going to have any luck slowing down PSU's and ND's offenses these next couple of games, getting consistent pressure is going to be huge.

Worst: Making Mistakes & Wasting Drives

Mason picking up a personal foul, plus a series of late hits out of bounds (one on Uche that was called, another on Gray that wasn't) were the types of plays you just can't make against better teams. I don't understand the desire to integrate Mason into te offense at this point; if the DT experiment is a flop (which it seems like), either bulk him up or wait until next year for him to transition back to the offense. Throwing some a pass to him after you've been gashing the Illini on the ground is a waste of a down, even if you think it'll put it on tape some opponents will need to plan for it. But I can accept a bad play not working out; Mason's decision to just smash a corner 4-5 steps away from the play was inexplicable. That turned a whatever play into a drive-killer.

The fumbles were the definition of random but both had significantly negative consequences. Turner's fumble gave Illinois a short field to get it within 1 score, while Charbonnet's turnover stymied a promising drive in Illinois territory. Again, random and all that, but still plays with amplified impacts on the game.

Quick Hits

• People wanting to complain about that final drive of the game can if they want; I read it as a team comfortable with being up 21, knowing they'll get the ball to start the half, and not wanting to risk anything deep in their own endzone and wind swirling. I'm sure if they had cracked a big run they'd have tried to push it, but much like last weekend I thought the playcalls were appropriate for the situation.
• The referees weren't particularly bad this game, but missing 12 men on the field by Illinois on their last scoring drive was annoying. How any referees can miss that almost immediately seems crazy to me.
• Cam McGrone is going to be a really good LB at Michigan, but he's still got that exuberance and blind reactions that teams can take advantage of. It felt like Illinois picked on him a bit in that 3rd quarter when they started to nickle-and-dime their way down the field. The good definitely outweighed the bad, but it'll be interesting to see how offenses try to goad him into bad decisions going forward.
• Glasgow showed some quickness and decisiveness tackling a couple of Illini players in space before plays could get started. Yes he's a liability against slot receivers (if you see KJ Hamler anywhere near him it's probably not a good thing), but I think a lot of people are overlooking his solid play because Blackshear made him look bad.

Next Week: PSU

PSU is undefeated and playing a night game at home. We all remember how that went the last time. But Michigan is better and PSU is worse than that year's squads, so my guess is it'll be closer. Michigan is and should be the underdog, but PSU's offense feels less diverse than in years past (Clifford isn't the passer McSorley was and Hamler is their only real gamebreaker). Their defense is stout and will trip up Michigan, especially if Patterson is inaccurate and/or unwilling to run. Still, it feels like a close-ish game, and I'll be honest I wouldn't be all that surprised if Michigan emerges the victor.