Best and Worst: MSU

Submitted by bronxblue on

For various reasons, this diary is going to be low on game-specific commentary.  The box score tells a pretty complete tale already; I don't think you need me to supplement the numbers to get the drift.  Plus, I need a little R&R.

Worst:  Our Place in the Dirt

Few lines have gotten me this excited about a movie more than Mr. Dirk Pitt intoning about the plight of the human civilization as we look to the heavens for a way to escape a dying planet before the last embers of humanity as extinguished.  From what I've read about the movie, it is all about scientists discovering a wormhole that (apparently) would allow faster-than-light space travel, Earth no longer being capable of sustaining life due to the effects of cataclysmic climate change, and Dr. Larch calling upon Rust Cohle and Fantine to travel beyond the solar system in search of new, habitable planets.  Throw in Christopher Nolan and some cool cinematic effects, and I am already making triple-redundant babysitter plans for opening weekend.  Doesn't look like I'll be missing much in the way of relevant football then.

For decades, Michigan fans looked at every season not just with hope, but with expectations.  They expected to compete for conference titles and bowl wins, to beat rivals and stay atop the college wins list.  To being, for lack of a better word, good.  The stars didn't always align themselves (and let's be frank, more times than not goals were equal parts hubris and idealization), but Michigan fans always had their heads up, dreaming big.

But since 2006, that hasn't been the case.  Sure, there have been glimmers here and there (most of 2011, the starts of 2009, 2010, and pre-Akron 2013), but they've all been mirages, pockets of air escaping a dying husk of a collective fantasy.  Michigan the football program isn't "dead", of course; it will rebuild (with a new administration and a new coach) and undoubtedly return to competitiveness on a national stage.  You don't post decades of winning seasons without being able to adapt and reform, and this fallow period will most likely be an historical outlier (and not a trend) when my kids look back 32 years from now.

But I'm talking about the future, of a generation of fans who are still figuring out what "Michigan football" means to them.  They'll know it for this period of struggling, but as the team improves these memories will fade away, and one day they'll look back and wonder what the hell was happening in Ann Arbor in the late 00's and early 10's, much like my generation wonders about Bump Elliott and the 60's.  But this generation, the current era of fans who only know Bo and Carr and "the Streak" and spoiling OSU's perfect seasons and consistently pants-ing MSU, those memories are being buried deeper and deeper under each blowout loss and non-competitive game, under every good coaching hire in Columbus and East Lansing, and every "great" alum chiming in with his #HOTTAKE about the current team.  This is our first taste of failure, and its one that will linger for years.

I'll be there cheering on Michigan in 2019 or whenever they are "legitimately" good again.  When they are beating MSU and OSU, winning 9-10 games consistently, and celebrating your first touchdown in nearly 3 games doesn't break Ace.  But right now I'm staring at the ground, powerless to effect change and just hoping that someone, anyone can make sense of what has happened these past 7 years and make it stop.  And yeah, I'm sure they will, but it will be hard to wipe away this much dirt, this much grime with a couple more wins against Sparty and a couple of shiny TV games.  It's going to take something truly significant.

Or maybe none of this matters.  Maybe this is just a cycle ever team goes through, the karmic payoff for 40+ years of bowl games and #1 selling merchandise.  Maybe Michigan's Circadian rhythm is just longer than everyone else's, its death and rebirth on a different timeframe than most others, and thus what feels unfortunate and untimely is right on cosmic schedule.

Worst:  11 Points

Michigan scored an offensive touchdown against MSU for the first time in 3 games, or to put into perspective, for the first time since before the world had 7 billion people on it.  Excuse me for a moment.

Best (I Guess):  No Hell in a Cell

You know how I know you know something about professional wrestling, dear reader?  Because you've heard good Ol' J.R. announce epic dunks, huge hits, and internet fails for years now.  And chances are you probably watched the original video of the Undertaker vs. Mankind in Hell in a Cell.  If you haven't, here's that memorable scene.

What made this match so memorable wasn't the novelty of the cage; it had been around in a similar form for some time, most prominently as part of WCW's WarGames gimmick match.  And the violence that is so easily lent to the caged environment had become far less jarring with the continued evolution and prominence of lesser-known federations such as ECW, which had co-opted the "hardcore" style previously found in Japan and (to a lesser extent) Mexico and Latin America.  No, what made these early Hell in a Cell matches iconic was the escalating brutality they displayed.  In the first, Shawn Michaels took a for-then rough bump to the floor, but it was still pretty controlled and "safe", basically Michaels jumping from the cage onto a free-cut table.  But when the Undertaker battled Mankind, any reservations or sense of self-preservations were thrown out the window.  Watch the video again, and see Mick Foley dive off that cage onto the floor.  When Ross cried out that Foley was likely dead, you could hear real concern in his voice.  We were still a year away from Owen Hart's tragic death during a pay-per-view making this kayfabe fear a reality, but this was still a grown fan flying off the top of a 20+ foot cage onto the concrete floor of an arena.  It was both terrific theatre and terrifying spectacle, and the fact Mick Foley continues to show the lasting effects of this and other, similarly-brutal matches cannot be forgotten.

Last year's game felt like Gardner was flung from the top of the cage.  We semi-joke around here about his ribs being crushed by MSU and that "breaking" him, but it was terrifying to watch and made me legitimately question whether or not referees should be allowed to pull a player for his safety.  The fact Gardner kept getting up was courageous in a sense, but at some point you just wished he had stayed down and everyone just go home.  But in a sad testament to the season thus far, I didn't think Gardner suffered nearly as much against a ferocious MSU front.  Yes he was sacked twice and hit a half-dozen more times, but it looked like a normal 2014 game, not a life-changing evisceration on national TV.  It was your typical slobberknocker between these two teams, and if we are looking for a silver lining at all, everybody seemed to leave the game with all of their bones and organs in the same general place.

Worst:  So Close

This is Michigan's gameplan in a single gif.  They had halfway-decent field position on a couple of drives, and moved the ball in fits and spurts.  But every time they had the hint of momentum, they'd go for an ill-fated flea-flicker, or fail to execute a simple bubble screen, or just run the damn ball on 2nd-and-9 for 1 yard and waste any opportunity to keep the game close.  It was infuriating, it was depressing, it was par the course for the year.

Worst:  Running Gardner

I saw a number of people arguing for Gardner to be more involved in the running game, the logical argument being that while his passing wasn't working well against MSU's stout defense (13/28 for 121 with 2 picks - including on pick-6), he likely would have been more effective running the ball compared to the rest of the team (which if you squint kinda came within the ballpark of 100 yards total).  And maybe in another world, with actual QB depth and a coherent offensive plan, I'd agree with you.

But we've seen the backups for UM at the QB position - Morris isn't close to running this team, and Bellomy has looked lost every time he's been asked to do anything with this team.  This game was lost as soon as the two teams had the coin flip, but (in theory) Michigan has a chance to finish 6-6 and make a bowl game with very winnable games against NW, IU, and Maryland coming up.  But if Gardner goes down and is replaced by either of his most-likely backups, the team might as well not get off the bus.  And though I'm absolutely of the belief that Hoke should be gone, he's still being paid to win games for the University of Michigan, and he is going to make decisions that will maximize his ability to do so.  That means keeping Devin Gardner as healthy as possible, and in a game where MSU was going to be teeing off on him at every opportunity, exposing Gardner to any more damage in a lost game didn't make a whole lot of sense.

Worst:  Saving Timeouts

It was beyond infuriating to watch Brady Hoke allow MSU to run a good 40 seconds off the gameclock to end the half before scoring their second TD to push the game to 14-3.  With MSU needing about a quarter of a yard on 3rd down, Hoke allowed MSU to run the play clock down before plunging forward for a score.  Even if UM stops MSU at that point and the Spartans kick a FG, a couple TOs used there conserves clock and gives UM a chance to at least get within long FG range.  But with a full complement of TOs, Hoke let the clock burn down, ran for a couple of yards on the last play of the half, and went into halftime with three timeouts and nothing to show for them.

I guess you could argue Hoke wanted to see if his defense could hold MSU without giving the Spartans a chance to consult on 3rd down, or that he didn't want to expose his beleaguered offense to another set of downs that could lead to a turnover or some other misfortune.  Those are all theories with merit in a vacuum.  But this is Brady Hoke and Michigan in 2014, and that this point try to win the F*CKING GAME and squeeze one more possession out of the game.  You'd already gotten a couple of gifts in that first half; any shred of confidence you could hang your hat on went out the window when you basically told your offense you'd rather regroup than try to matriculate the ball down the field in a minute.  Still...

Worst:  Hoke is the Worst A.I. Ever

This might be semantics, but I don't think Hoke is a quitter.  He's (sadly) calling the game the same way in the 1st quarter as he is in the 4th quarter.  He's like the worst movie version of artificial intelligence.  He doesn't learn from the past, he doesn't integrate new information into his plans, he isn't becoming sentient, and he sure as hell isn't turning the world's electronics against the humans.  He's a mediocre football coach who seems unwilling to break out of his gameplan to any meaningful degree, and that's why all of these losses feel the same.  With a lead he's maybe willing to take a couple of chances, but when he's down its all huddling, predictable pass plays, and punting for field position.  He's not trying to "look good" for his bosses or nab a "moral" victory; he's just coaching like Brady Hoke at Michigan.  Now, the fact that this style resembles a guy who is over his head and failed to install anything resembling a consistent, sustainable identity is another matter.

Meh:  Defense

They gave up 446 yards, 4.8 yards a rush, busted on a 70-yard TD pass, and never made life too uncomfortable for Connor Cook.  At the same time, they played 29 minutes of the first half, forced a couple of turnovers to keep the game close, stopped MSU on 4th down, and for long stretches of the game looked competent despite missing a number of rotation/starters.  I know the raw numbers say otherwise, but it did feel like the defense was up to the challenge of today's game, and had the offense been able to sustain anything in that first half the game might have been a bit closer.  I'm not saying there would have been an upset, but for a defense that hasn't caught a break all year, the turnovers in particular were a welcome reprieve from the muck and, had they been capitalized on better, might have kept the game more competitive.

Longer-term, it doesn't really matter what Mattison and his coordinators do going forward.  Like Hoke, they are gone in a couple of weeks, so complaints about coverages, line play, RPS, etc. are kinda irrelevant.  I could see a world in which Nussmeier is retained due to his relative newness to the program and the expertise of the coach coming in, but Mattison is going to ride into the sunset with Hoke.  He'll leave having improved Michigan's defense significantly from RR's time, but not to the level people expected after 2011 and, frankly, what was needed to keep this team competitive.

[EDIT:  Put this in comments section below, figured I'd add it here for completeness]

Best:  Showing Some Heart
 
I have 0 problems with Bolden planting that stupid spike into the ground before the team took the field.  It's a cheap motivational ploy, but honestly teams do way worse before and during games.  Any arguments about it "disrespecting" MSU, especially coming from a program that planted the MSU flag in the middle of Notre Dame's stadium after the game is the height of hypocrisy.  Dantonio wasn't there in 2005, but he has shown little class in the intervening years as it relates to UM, whether it be getting into a verbal fight with Mike Hart in front of the media, pulling guys from lockup to play against UM before sending them back, encouraging (or at the least not punishing) consistent "violence" toward Michigan players that results in helmets being yanked sideways and cheap shots on downed players, and generally being an asshole.  He's a good coach, but I haven't liked him since the day he arrived in East Lansing and that hasn't changed one bit in the intervening years.
 
This is a rivalry game, and I expect players on both sides to get amped up over it.  Bolden didn't leave the stake in the middle of the field during the national anthem, Michigan didn't take shots at MSU players deep on the sidelines, and they didn't really taunt or otherwise disrespect MSU (and to their credit, MSU largely kept it clean as well).  MSU players trying to justify running up the score by talking about respect is stupid and shows an inability to accept the fact you scored again because you wanted to, because you like to win and rub in the victory against your biggest rival.  It's the same reason Izzo was throwing alley-oops up a billion against Michigan in basketball, and why Morris told MSu to get the fuck off his court after they vanquished them.  
 
It's all a show by MSU at this point, this faux outrage at what happened.  They won the game handily, and look to be one of the better teams in the country.  The fact they continue to have a hard-on about really trivial stuff like gives fuel the overblown-but-still-existing inferiority complex that fans of both sides attach to this rivalry.  But for the record, I hope Bolden puts one of these down in the field the next time they play.

Best:  IU Defense  - The Best Gift a Sport Could Give

So my daughter is celebrating her first birthday next week.  Since she's been born, Michigan has basically lost every meaningful game and looked like a steaming crater of tires covered in bird shit.  So that's not a good thing.  But what IS a good thing is that they are playing Indiana, and with all due respect to Jamie Mac, I'm pretty excited to see Michigan get a chance to put the spurs to a bad defense for once.  It won't make up for the past 12 months, but it will give me something else to smile about, and would be a perfect gift for this little Wolverine-in-training.

Comments

Sparty123

October 26th, 2014 at 11:31 AM ^

respect is decided by the coaches and teams.  Every program does it, so I don't know why you're picking on Dantonio there.

And you're right about the yanking the helmet thing, it's the same story for Lewan too, and I can see a little bit of leeway for players in the heat of an emotionally-charged game.  It's not like it's a regular occurence for either program, so I'm not sure it really proves anything.

and he didn't run to the media, he answered a question.  You just don't like that it's getting shoved back in your face.

"respect" as a concept in sports is dumb when it comes to things like words and silly antics.  I totally agree there.  But every team references it and knows what the hot buttons are.  That's why both teams were so quiet all week - no bulletin board material for teh other team to focus on.  So when something finally comes out that can be considered "disrespectful", don't be surprised when the other team latches on and uses it as motivation to push back.  Is it childish?  Of course it is, but EVERY TEAM DOES IT.

All that said, I don't even think Dantonio is trying to take teh moral high ground here.  He's made no secret of why he scored at the end.  If you don't like it, don't do things that you know the other team will get fired up about.

bronxblue

October 26th, 2014 at 11:49 AM ^

I'm not picking on Dantonio for having his definition of respect; I just don't think every team should ascribe to his definition of it.

Lewan had his helmet yanking, but overall it has been a more physical MSU team compared to Michigan when it comes to this extracurriculars.  But I will absolutely agree it is part of the heat of the game, and I don't much care about it except to point out that some could view that type of potentially-injurious behavior far more disrepectful of the other team than a stake in the ground before the game.

He was asked about it because the players were talking about it.  His decision to then go off about how it reflected poorly on the culture, to bring up the "little brother" quip from nearly a decade ago, all of that was unnecessary.  Say you heard about it happening and you weren't happy.  But don't go off justifying an extra TD because you wanted to "put a stake in them" or prove a point.  I mean, 

You might as well just come out and say what you're feeling at some point in time, because I can only be diplomatic for so long," Dantonio continued. "The little brother stuff, all the disrespect, it doesn't have to go in that direction. We've tried to handle ourself with composure. That doesn't come from the coach. It comes from the program. And throwing the stake down in our backyard out here, and coming out there like they're all that, it got … shoved, the last minute and a half. We were not gonna pull off of that.

I'm not pissed that it is being thrown back in my face; I never denied Bolden did it once I saw the video.  But questioning the culture of another program, especially after your own sordid past, is idiotic to me.  Take your win, say you are happy to beat them, and move on.  But trying to make this a referrendum on Michigan sports and the team's culture isn't something Dantonio is remotely qualified to talk about, especially for a guy who claims to want to keep this stuff inside the lockerroom.

Also, why would MSU need to be motivated to play UM?  What, they can't just get up for beating their big rival and continue having a great season?  They need to look for stakes in the ground to play hard?  They scored the last TD because they wanted to rub it in; they earned that right be beating UM for 4 quarters.  But you dealt with the "disrepect" by nearly shutting out UM and basically beating them up and down the field for 3 hours.  That isn't motivation; that is rationalization.

Sparty123

October 26th, 2014 at 1:44 PM ^

<blockquote>Also, why would MSU need to be motivated to play UM?  What, they can't just get up for beating their big rival and continue having a great season?  They need to look for stakes in the ground to play hard?</blockquote>

Um, let's examine the other side of that.  Why does UM need to plant a stake in the ground to get fired up to play MSU?  Can't they just get up for reversing a trend against their big rival?  Dantonio only has the information he sees to draw inferences about the culture of any program, and it's the way they are behaving today.  Their actions, their words.  What conclusions would you draw about MSU if the roles were reversed here?

As far as the late TD, it was pretty clear UM was still playing hard (as they should be).  They went for two after their TD.  They attempted an onside kick.  And Dantonio is supposed to roll over?  

You want respect?  Start by showing some.  When we play OSU, PSU and everyone else in the conference we go out and try to beat them for 4 quarters.  Then we shake their hands and move on.  It's not our fault UM players haven't figured out that they can just play football and not say things like "little brother", stomp the logo, refuse to shake hands (alleged after last year's game), plant a stake, and otherwise try to belittle your opponent..  Dantonio will be more than happy to give that lesson until it sinks in.

Sparty123

October 26th, 2014 at 1:45 PM ^

"Also, why would MSU need to be motivated to play UM?  What, they can't just get up for beating their big rival and continue having a great season?  They need to look for stakes in the ground to play hard?"

Um, let's examine the other side of that.  Why does UM need to plant a stake in the ground to get fired up to play MSU?  Can't they just get up for reversing a trend against their big rival?  Dantonio only has the information he sees to draw inferences about the culture of any program, and it's the way they are behaving today.  Their actions, their words.  What conclusions would you draw about MSU if the roles were reversed here?

As far as the late TD, it was pretty clear UM was still playing hard (as they should be).  They went for two after their TD.  They attempted an onside kick.  And Dantonio is supposed to roll over?  

You want respect?  Start by showing some.  When we play OSU, PSU and everyone else in the conference we go out and try to beat them for 4 quarters.  Then we shake their hands and move on.  It's not our fault UM players haven't figured out that they can just play football and not say things like "little brother", stomp the logo, refuse to shake hands (alleged after last year's game), plant a stake, and otherwise try to belittle your opponent..  Dantonio will be more than happy to give that lesson until it sinks in.

bronxblue

October 26th, 2014 at 2:22 PM ^

This is the most circular argument right now.  I can walk through each of these arguments again and counter them, but you aren't interested in my arguments and I'm not buying yours.

 Yes, Michigan going for 2 and trying an onside kick absolutely meant they were playing hard, and Dantonio having the ball and just needing to kneel down to win but deciding to run the ball into the endzone with under a minute to go are equal.  

Also, we can all draw LOTS of inferences about MSU's program from what we see reported elsewhere, and some of those are pretty unsavory.  I remember all those times RR and Hoke went out and talked up the failings of MSU, or how Beilein brought up questions regarding Izzo's character playing a couple of players who were accused of some pretty grievous transgressions.  

And my gawd, get over "little brother".  It was dumb, and said by a player who hasn't played at the school in 7 years.  It happened almost a decade ago.  Yet every MSU fan I know keeps complaining about it as if it was yesterday.  If you are still deriving motivation from a phrase that describes you as second-rate this much later, you might be missing the point.

And can you drop the condescending tone about "teaching Michigan a lesson?"  Dantonio isn't trying to teach Michigan a lesson; he's trying to win football games and convince a bunch of pollsters that the fact his team got beaten rather handily by the only really good team they played all year shouldn't be held against them.  He's doing his job.  But Dantonio trying to teach another program about class and "correcting" them for things they do during a rivalry game is assinine for you to suggest and even more assinine for believing is his motiviation.

 

Sparty123

October 26th, 2014 at 2:03 PM ^

and this is my own wild-ass speculation, but I think Dantonio genuinely likes Hoke and didn't want to call him out on this.  Dantonio didn't like the behavior and wouldn't let it slide but didn't want to pile on Hoke during what is obviously a very rough season.

Take that with a giant grain of salt though, because I am 100% speculating.

Your point about Brandon and the skywriting is valid also.  It's not just one guy (Hoke, or Brandon) it's a philosophy of sorts.

bronxblue

October 26th, 2014 at 2:26 PM ^

I guess it could have been the skywriting, and if so, yeah that was pretty dumb.  You aren't going to find much support for Brandon around these parts for stuff like that.

But no, I think Dantonio is always walking around with a little chip on his shoulder about UM.  It's why he yelled at the coaching clinic, why he kept bitching about Mike Hart's comments, why he always acts so put-upon whenever UM is brought up in a context he can't control.  He doesn't like UM - that's good because he coaches a rival.  But this torch be carries against ever perceived slight just feels so petty after a while.

KBLOW

October 26th, 2014 at 12:18 PM ^

Classic! Sparty123 exactly embodies the psyche of a stereoypical MSU fan. Whines and cries even in victory, relates everything back to Michigan, and is unwilling to let go of his  identity of being constantly "disrepsected." Thanks for the laughs.

Sparty123

October 26th, 2014 at 2:16 PM ^

If he really wanted to run up the score, he would haev thrown more than 5 times in the entire second half.  But he didn't.  He scored the last TD to prove a point - when you treat us with good sportsmanship, we'll do the same.  Until then, don't expect it.

Sparty123

October 26th, 2014 at 3:47 PM ^

says the person that posted a screed above about some claim I apparently made about M being a cesspool of athletics and some circle-jerk that may be happening on another board.

Here's my position on this whole thing:

1) It's dumb.  All of it.  Both sides using silly motivational ploys is nonsense, but every team does it, so whatever.

2) I have no problem with M planting a stake.  I have no problem with MSU responding with a late TD.  M should not expect to do things that they know any other team will seize upon as a motivational tool and not got some retaliation in return.

3) No one has any moral high ground here and I never claimed such.

4) Brady's apology wasn't needed (at least not publicly).  In my mind it was settled on the field as it should have been.

5) It's dumb.  All of it.

 

bronxblue

October 26th, 2014 at 5:39 PM ^

You can't say you don't care about the moral high ground and then post about how Dantonio needs to teach Michigan a lesson.  It doesn't work that way.

As for the "screed", read it again.  I was referring to the general tone you've taken in this conversation, with a dash of hyperbole.  Send Mark over to my place next time he's in New York to teach me a lesson about rough language if you want.

Honestly, I've enjoyed this conversation, since you've been respectful even if I don't particularly agree with anything you are saying.

markusr2007

October 26th, 2014 at 1:26 PM ^

The team is fucking 3-4. If the players and coaches put in half the prep and thought and effort into this publicity stunt as they did to picking up blitzes, not dropping passes, not turning the ball over and not blowing assignments in coverage, then I would have less of an issue. Now is not the time to pull a Lamar Thomas Show. It makes Michigan football all the more a punchline.

jim48315

October 27th, 2014 at 10:17 AM ^

and doesn't act like he cares what other people think.  He went to MSU to make a winning football team and he's done it with what looks like sound football knowledge and a real understanding of how to get his players  to succeed.  Part of his schtick is the "no respect" line and twisting the knife when he gets the chance, and his players and fans eat it up and holler for more.  MSU had Izzo for basketball and found the nearest thing they could to coach football after they lost Nick Saban, who was and is Dantonio in spades.  What really goes on in Dantonio's head, I don't know, but what he's doing seems to work.  Why should he try to act nobly when intimidation and bombast work so well?  .  

 

RockinLoud

October 26th, 2014 at 9:15 AM ^

Even with IU's defense being "terrible", have you watched our offense? Do you really believe we're going to "take the spurs" to them? Because I don't. They'll maybe do enough to win, but to expect anything beyond borderline ineptitude seems to be wishful thinking.

Its me Dave

October 26th, 2014 at 9:47 AM ^

"It's a cheap motivational ploy"
It's not only cheap, it's yoo rah rah bullshit and it's always ineffective and declasse. I can deal with high school performance, but not high school behavior. The coaches and players damn well better learn to maintain dignity in defeat. It's the only part of this season that remains under their control.

bronxblue

October 26th, 2014 at 11:25 AM ^

What dignity was lost by UM?  It was (a) before the game was played, and (b) only became a big deal because a bunch of MSU players and coaches made a point of talking about it after the game to "justify" scoring a late TD.  If anything, I thought they handled the day reasonably well considering how tough it must be to lose to those jokers year after year.  Trust me, had MSU been on the receiving end of another beatdown I'm guessing they wouldn't have handled it well.

You Only Live Twice

October 26th, 2014 at 9:48 AM ^

Worst for me was the drops.  Can someone work with the receivers on this before we head to Cbus...

Eye of the Tiger

October 26th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^

Mattison and his position coaches deserve accolades for pulling us up from the dregs of 2009/2010 to respectability, but for the past 2 seasons we haven't been good enough on defense to account for the problems on the offense (which I guess is just 2010 in reverse, isn't it).

We have come far since 2010, but we should be farther along right now than we are. Hopefully the next coach can take our B defense and turn it into A-/A.

 

BlowGoo

October 26th, 2014 at 1:18 PM ^

The formula for beating Michigan is simple, reproducible, obvious, and executable without much talent by an opposing team.  No matter how elaborate the plan by our OC, like a Tyson punch to the head, it goes out the window once the other team gets to DG.

 

Sad but true.

 

"Spike-gate" is a nonstory that reeks of desperation from a team that wants to win, but has run out of things behind which to rally.  All the causes are lost.

 

Defensive progress is unfortunately getting lost in the shuffle.  A few more turnovers our way would help a bit.  But the offense is not worth a damn due to poor coaching and QB with focused talents being given conflicting instructions over his career.  But the poor coaching comes first, as the play from the backup QBs clearly demonstrate.  And WRs.  And of course the OL.

The most effective play we have is the draw for 7 yards whenever we are in a third and 10+ yards situation.

m1jjb00

October 26th, 2014 at 2:10 PM ^

Both of my arguments are predicated on the idea that Michigan needed/needs a lot of things to go right for them to have beaten MSU and to win going forward.  We might as well assume that those things are going to happen because otherwise, Michigan loses regardless.

1.  Run Gardner.  Yes, he may get hurt in which case our chances of winning are diminished severely.  But, we're unlikely to have beaten MSU or win going forward (IU possibly accepted but that's just one win) unless we develop a much better offense immediately.  The only way I see that happening is running Gardner.  Yes, even then it's not guaranteed, but I don't see how the offense is going to be any better doing the same thing we've done all year, which includes not running him.  So, we might as well assume that he's not going to get hurt.  

2.  No timeout at the end of the half.  I was and still am of the opinion that our only reasonable chance of winning that game was to stop MSU at the goalline.  With that in mind, what one wants to do is to assume that we stop them and then ask given that, what do we want conditions at the end of the half to look like.  Suppose we stop them on third down.  If you think Dantonio kicks a field goal, then you want some extra time, though I don't think having 30 seconds left and receiving the ball on the 25 does much to win.  Moreover, I'm of the opinion that the more likely thing to happen is that Dantonio goes for it on 4th down.  In that case do you want the extra time?  If he scores the TD, then it doesn't matter much as we're very unlikely to win.  So, we might as well assume in our decision making that we stop them on 4th down.  So, do you want the extra 30 seconds then with the ball on the 1/2 yard line?  Hell no.

bronxblue

October 26th, 2014 at 2:33 PM ^

1)  I suspect Gardner will be run more against the rest of the teams on the schedule because none of them pose the same defensive capabilities save maybe OSU.  But against MSU, getting Gardner killed running the ball didn't seem worth the risk, and so that's probably why they made that call.  I could be way off.

2)  If memory serves me right, MSU had a TO as well.  So they were absolutely going for it on 4 downs.  So you might as well concede a TD/conserve some time and try to make some plays and maybe luck into a PI/broken coverage and get a long FG attempt in.  Wasting 40 seconds on what was basically an inevitability didn't seem worthwhile.  Michigan was NOT stopping MSU twice within a yard.

m1jjb00

October 26th, 2014 at 4:22 PM ^

Let's stay with the spirit of the thread and reiterate my ponts.

1.  I don't really get the argument about running Garnder.  If your argument reflects the coaches' thinking, then they severely reduced their chance to win the game.  Do you think Meyer is irresponsible running his QB?  You think Cardale Jones is any good?

That said, I don't have any confidence that they're going to change the gameplan to run Gardner much the rest of the year.  Hoke doesn't believe in that stuff, and he doesn't have a flexible enoguh mind to easily change views given the empirical evidence 

2.  My point wasn't that I harbored any illusions that MSU was going to run out of time.  I just don't want the ball on the 1/2 yard line.  It's only downside.  Getting to halftime to work on adjustments isn't the worse thing in the world, and I wouldn't think of it as giving up.  You say there's no chance that Michigan could stop MSU twice.  I say there was very little chance Michigan was going to do something productive at the end of the half.  We saw that neither of those things happens, so who knows.

bronxblue

October 26th, 2014 at 5:44 PM ^

1)  They may not change the gameplan, but if they are it feels like you might as well do so in a game you can win.  I also think, more generally, Gardner will have a better chance of success against IU's line on designed/option runs than MSU.  This staff will never treat Gardner as a running asset because it goes against their philosophy, just like I don't think Meyer would ask Cardale Jones to throw 30 times if he was the last option.  And sadly, Meyer's system seems far better suited for the plug-and-play players at QB compared to whatever offense UM wants to run.

My bigger point was that Gardner is still walking and reasonably healthy; him running the ball 15-20 times might not have led to the same result.

2)  I'll agree to that.  I guess I'm a bit more optimistic in a decent return that could have set them up.  Heck, maybe they'd even let Gardner throw deep to Funchess simply because of the time.  But yeah, it wasn't a great situation in either case.

Papochronopolis

October 26th, 2014 at 5:01 PM ^

<blockquote>This might be semantics, but I don't think Hoke is a quitter.  He's (sadly) calling the game the same way in the 1st quarter as he is in the 4th quarter.  He's like the worst movie version of artificial intelligence.  He doesn't learn from the past, he doesn't integrate new information into his plans, he isn't becoming sentient, and he sure as hell isn't turning the world's electronics against the humans.</blockquote>

 

I was thinking during the game that Hoke was acting a lot like the AI in a Madden '07 game.  The punt is a perfect example.  So is his weird decision to start running the hurry up with 10 min left in the 4th, but not earlier even when we were down 3+ TDs.  I could also probably say his lack of timeouts at the end of the 2nd quarter as well.  And most of all, what we saw on the football field - that Madden AI was easy to beat most of the time.

You Only Live Twice

October 28th, 2014 at 9:52 PM ^

Isn't really a summary.  It's an oversimplification.  And for the record, no one here was trolling a Sparty message board to start pointless argument.  Sparty123 came here.  His posts are gone so I'm guessing a moderator got wind of him early. 

I thought Bronx was being admirably courteous and patient with 123.  Much more so than I would have been.