copied response from DC thread

you use there will always be those who want to fire the coaches no matter what the facts say. In my line of work, I use the phrase "Manage by the facts" which means to take the facts and make your decision based upon what you know and what your experience has taught you. Shafer's schemes were not flawed, but the execution was lacking. The Purdue game, as I have said on here a 1000 times, was a RR call all the way. It is not insane to run a 3 man line on 3rd and long and drop 8 into coverage, but when you can't take the proper drops and squeez down your zone after 8 games, you've got problems.

I think getting rid of Shafer would be a huge mistake as I actually liked his defensive Philosophy a lot. If we were to apply the logic people spout off about when talking about the defense, take a look at the 109th ranked offense. Do you think the talent issues at QB are any less critical at a position like LB and Safety?

GSimmons, I know you try to argue with the masses, but you've got to understand that 90% of these people have no idea what they are looking at on an analytical level when they watch the games. I read a post on Rivals today where a guy said he swore he saw Helmuth line up at DE in the Purdue game and then he said that Helmuth played the 5 technique which he explained was playing directly over the tackle...I always was in the 4 technique when I went right over the tackle, but maybe they call their shades diffferently. You see, I agree with you, but you fighting a heroic but losing battle with most of these folks.

If you look at the best statistical defenses in the country this year there is one thing in common with them all irregardless of 3-4, 4-3, 3-3-5, or okies or 4-2-5; the men in charge have been at that school for several years. The defensive coaches have had the time to install their defenses, recruit players for their defense, and time to teach the kids the fundamentals. Any kind of evaluation on Shafer at this point is premature and based on a small sample when the guy has an entire career of success.

If we treated RR like we do Shafer, then why not fire RR? Come on, people, Shafer needs more time and can build something great, he just needs the time.

I've played and coached football for almost 25 years now and while I love the wolverines, I get frustrated by some of the fans who just can't enjoy the experience of being a fan of the greatest college football program in the history of college football. I never try to judge players or coaches because you have to be on that stage to appreciate what they have to do to perform at the highest levels. If RR makes a move at DC, I will really question the move, but I doubt he makes the change. I wouldn't be surprised if Shafer quits if he can't operate his defense with his own position coaches without someone wanting to try some 3-3-5.

you know i agree with you. but as an educator and teacher of the game, i bring that same attitude here. I feel like if i can help 1 or 2 people enjoy the game better than my frustration is warrented. Untill of course it effects my happiness and enjoyment, but that then is my problem. About your tech talk. Wing t guys use a lot different nnumber of thier shades, and i was forced a few years ago to change my shade numbering to fit the offensive coaches, becasue we had so many kids going both ways. talk about confusing, it sucked trying to teach a kid a 2i or 3i, and have to think about what number it was now called.. haha.. we use a straight, 1-10 numbering now... i miss the confusing 7 6 9 on the TE numbers...

and i've won 2 national champs in a row! michigan should switch to it!!

/sarcasm

Your perspective is invaluable, gsimmons. Some have played in college; many have played in high school; even more play on the Xbox or Sony; but none of it compares to actually implementing schemes on the field and running a team. And so, thanks for providing a voice of legitimate expertise.

I think that if something was going to happen, it probably would have by now. If Shafer is still recruiting, I'd guess he's staying. I can't see them letting him go out recruiting if they were planning on replacing him after the bowl games. I figure they would let him go now and replace him later.

Great stuff gsimms as usual..agree 100%! keep it up!

This isn't something that just popped up this year. Poor tackling and bad pursuit angles have been a problem for the defense for a while now.

I am by no means as knowledgeable about the schemes and such as some here but I would think solid improvement in tackling and pursuit angles would go a long way in improving the defense no matter what type of scheme is being run.

Where do you think Steve Brown belongs on this defense? I have a hard time believing that he CAN'T be successful, but something's obviously not clicking for him. I don't think he belongs at free safety because he's too undisciplined in his deep zones and at tackling in open space.

I think he'd be a better fit as a SS in the 3-3-5 or even like an OLB in the 3-4. If we continue running a 4-3, I think Shafer should play him in the box more and send him on more blitzes.

I really hope the Shafer thing works, but with upperclassmen OR talented young players (Warren, Ezeh) all over the place last year, it didn't. That makes me skeptical. It's one thing to implement new schemes that fail with a bunch of freshmen and sophomores. It's another when a bunch of those guys are seniors. Perhaps it was just a matter of those guys being unwilling to change... I don't know.

Is this guy the most underrated position coach in the country or what?

Straight from the horses mouth you are defending.I give you this.

Shafer explained his defensive philosophy this way: "Scheme is overrated, I've always believed that. What's not overrated is getting your kids to play with great effort, great attitude and great enthusiasm. Those are things we can control on a daily basis, and that will be my primary goal. . . . The philosophy of our defense is attack-oriented, attack and react. We want to be a defense this is multiple, that is always putting pressure and forcing the hand of the offense. We want to be a penetrating defense. If you're going to (ask) what our objectives are? The one thing we want to do is stop the run, force them to throw the ball on first down, create negative plays on first down . . . and get ourselves in position to force them to throw the ball. Get them one-dimensional. We don't want to be a defense that sits back. We want to be a defense that creates turnovers and scores touchdowns."[11]

Similarly, he told the Detroit Free Press: "We're an attack defense; scheme is overrated. All schemes can work if you tackle and keep the ball in front. We're an aggressive defense, force the offense's hand. We're going to stop the run on early downs and force the pass. We'll get situations where when we are forcing the pass, we hit the quarterback, forcing him to throw the ball into coverage."[14]

Speaking to the Toledo Blade, Shafer said three goals are paramount in his defensive game plan: stopping the run, pressuring the quarterback and "creating on defense." Shafer said: "Our primary goal is always stop the run, lead the conference in sacks, lead the conference in interceptions and defensive scores. That's the way it's always been everywhere I've been, and that's the way it'll be here at Michigan."[13]

Sounds to me like he is a Turnover, Sack, TD guy. He doesn't care about okie, nickel,4-3,3-4,3-3-5 orany other Scheme.

"We don't want to be a defense that sits back" WE DID. Cushion after Cushion on third down.

When he was hired thats all I read, was his blitz mentality, I didn't see the aggressive "attack" mode he wants. I saw more of a bend, but don't break mentality.

In all sincerity, You DO know your stuff Gsimmons, and sound like a damn good Defensive coach, but to Shafer, all that is overated.

You keep typing stuff like this and my next Diary will be...

MY THOUGHTS ON GSIMMONS FOR DC.

First, great post, and I always enjoy your input. Interesting theory re: why we went so much 3-3-5 v purdue, that it wasn’t the product of discord within the coaching staff but rather (what was perceived at the time as) a low risk experiment.

I have read all your posts on Shafer’s defense. I was more excited about the Shafer hire than RR, as I’m of the school that would prefer to see M’s identity be built around defense. Shafer’s resume speaks for itself and if given time, he likely build an aggressive, attacking defense that great athletes will want to play in and which he will make successful.

I also loved the fact that RR seemingly handed the reigns to Shaf. I think a common denominator among great defensive teams and consistently great defensive programs is a D coordinator who has a lot of freedom and runs his defense almost as a 1a. head coach (or the HC is a defensive guy who leads the D and allows his OC to handle lots of the O). You don’t want a fractured team, but defense is a different breed and different mentality, and I don’t think its an accident that many great defenses are like a team unto themselves.

I also agree that Shaf didn’t have ideal personal for his system, and that defensive systems take time. But let me make the following observations:

1. Most DC’s may use a variation of the nickle against spread teams, as we should have.
Where I disagree with Shaf is that given our personal where M’s 5 man DL rotation contained arguably 5 of our top 7 defenders, I don’t think you lift a DL for an extra man in the secondary. You lift a LB and go 4-2-5. This limits your blitz options on third and long and from what you have said, Shaf loves the blitz. But again, you have to face facts about your personal. The only two players who could reg blitz worth a crap were Harrison and Mouton, and Mouton didn’t emerge until 1/3 of the way in.

2. I don’t “blame” our poor third down D on the 3-3-5. Theoretically, any defense which is
executed will stop the play. But I think UFR demonstrated that 3 DL in those situations made it too easy for a spread team to execute in 3rd and short, and that we couldn’t generate much pass rush out of it in 3rd and long. Had our LB’s picked the correct gaps more often and maintained leverage, and had our secondary covered better and been more sure tacklers, there would have been more success in stopping 3rd down. That is on the players. But there comes a point where a coach must recognize that while a certain scheme is better against a certain offense, that if the players aren’t executing the scheme, they’re better off playing a scheme not as well suited but which can be executed better.

3. The best way to blitz may be out of a 3 man front, but blitzing is not always the best way
to get pressure. Mouton certainly improved as the season went on as a blitzer, and Harrison has long been a great blitzer for a secondary guy. But aside from those guys, there are no two players on M’s team who I would trade blitzing for either a Jamison or Graham with single blocking on the outside. It’s a misconception that rushing three automatically means that both outside DE’s get doubled, usually its only one guy. But I’d have rather forced OL’s pre-snap forced to figure out how the 5 of them would handle the 4 of Jamison-Martin-Taylor-Graham, then have to watch out for one of Mouton/Harrison coming on the blitz. I would guess that most OL’s M faced would tell you there were more comfortable lining up against M’s 3 man front and then dealing with the blitz.

All that being said, these criticisms are leveled and the defense as a whole, not Shaf exclusively. As you point out, M ran a ton of different schemes and coverages this season trying to find something. While they spent all this time searching, the fundamentals never improved. There was a lot of pressure on Shaf and the defense to carry a situation they were not equipt to carry. I have a feeling that if you asked him, Shaf would say his biggest regret was not simply sticking to his guns and what he knows, and taking his lumps along the way.

I just hope M gives him an opportunity to learn from this year.

gsims, always great to hear from you. I trust your breakdown more than the other comments on this thread, although many were well done.

Here's my question, asked before, but I want your honest answer: What do you think 2009 holds on the defensive side of the ball? With Graham/Martin/VanBergen on the the line in a 3-4, who the hell plays LB and will the safeties improve? Is Mouton/Ezeh/Evans + RS freshman at LB not a disaster? Warren and Cissoko seem fine, but what about Brown/Williams/Smith at S?

Given your analysis, I don't see how we aren't worse in 2009. Help me, gsim.

About defense getting worse as the year progressed. Their is an old saying in defensive football circles. The best way to tell wheather or not you are doing the right things as a defensive coach, is how many long drives are there against you. I thought as the season progressed there were less and less long drives. As a defensive coach i can handle giving up an occasion big play, becasue usually that is becasue of a mental breakdown, that can easily be idnetified. I did that all season long for you guys. Or the offense out executed your defense. I can handle that much better, as can all defensive coaches. Fans may see it different, but its MUCH easier to deal with big play problems, than it is on giving up 5 yards a play. Michigan fundamentaly must imporve to illiminate big plays, and weather or not we have the players that will, remains to be seen. BUt i am confident that we have a man that knows how to eliminate those fundamental mistakes, over the course of several seasons...

our Offense really good, and then you don't even need Defense, ala the Big 12.

Well coach, it looks like RR disagreed with you about Shafer. I'll take his word over yours.

I'm sure it wasn't voluntary.

agree with your last paragraph. I've been reading that Coach Rod looks at the players attitude and this is a big factor in his recruiting. Michigan's defensive players at times had no desire to tackle forget about technique-the secondary at times made me want to vomit. While technique and position can be coached, the desire to hit can't. I'd take a 4 star player with desire over any 5 star player with an attitude. In college baseball recruiting you rank on speed and get 1-4 points, same for power(hitting), throwing ability, lateral movement and attitude. I remember Sam Mele scouting Barry Larkin for the Boston Red Sox and He was going to mark Him lower for attitude because He walked on His toes(Sam thought that was attitude) I convinced Him it that it wasn't. The point is that attitude and desire come from within a player not the coach.