“We were losing a bunch of one-goal games, and now we’re able to pull these games out,” Hunwick said. “It’s huge in the second half to know you can play in games like that.”
Couple points about latest post
Just a couple of things i want to say about the latest post from Brian.
- I agree about the blame for the defense this year not being squarely on the coaches on the field right now. I kinda agree with the lack of recruiting in the last years of Lloyd, but i also think it has something to do with the lack of individula technique coaching going on by position coaches during the last few years of Lloyd's tenure. There were times we got burned rushing three and their were times we got burned rushing more. There were times we got stops rushing three and were times we got stops rushig more. The last thing that is causing problems is the schemes right now.
- The biggest difference from the defense this year and last year is the offense. Many of the same weaknesses are showing their faces this year, the difference is now the offense can respond. Points per game are about the same (totally off the top of my head, and im sure they could be wrong)
- Also, Van Bergen was the backside defensive tackle… it's hard to imagine what his assignment was that could have prevented Indiana from running outside the other OT.
This is EXACTLY why i try to harp on the fact that without knowing the particular play call, responsibility, coaching point etc. its impossible to assign blame, or praise for most players on most plays. Its fun to do so, but its just impossible to do. I cant even rate my own calls and players without refering to our call sheets from the game.`
anyway just soem observations from the latest post. Im excited about the future for michigan, i still love the music and the atmosphere that seems to be pretty wild from the couch i enjoy from. Perhaps if i was season ticket holder, i would think differently...
Later,
G
September 28th, 2009 at 12:12 PM | 
Van Burgen's error was in
Van Burgen's error was in
September 28th, 2009 at 12:59 PM |
Van Bergen
Van Bergen
OK, he made a bad judgement call and we got burned for a long run. Van Bergen is a convenient scapegoat but focusing on the DL for our woes in stopping the opposing running game will help to solve less than half of the problem. Based on my admittedly novice review of the video, probably 7 times out of 10 it's really the linebackers (Ezeh, Leach and to a lesser degree, Mouton) that should be shouldering the blame. It appears that the linebackers are selling out too quickly between the tackles. By the time they realize the mistake they are a couple steps behind and the RB or WR ends up with space to turn the corner up field.
I'm gonna take two weeks off, and then quit.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:03 PM |
Yes
Yes
i agree, that lb is a problem, and has been. Which makes it even more important that the Dl makes the play at the los, when they have the chance too.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:09 PM |
I was wondering about that...
I was wondering about that...
There seemed to be an awful lot of confusion on the DL on that play. As with most big plays - pre-snap confusion yields a great result for the opposing team.
If we cut out the pre-snap and snap issues I think this game ends up being much less painful to watch. I mean, IU hadn't scored the entire second half so maybe all the talk of the defense being dead awful isn't quite as warranted. (Yeah, I know, the first half was rough but they made them kick a lot of field goals and, IIRC, tOSU won a national championship forcing people to kick field goals - I'm not saying we're going to win the MNC I'm just saying there's a decent historical corollary for "bend but don't break" defenses)
September 28th, 2009 at 1:13 PM |
read Van Bergen's quote
read Van Bergen's quote
the line readjusted because Van Bergen made a check, he switched the players. Read his quote!!! That's why he's blaming himself for the call.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:22 PM |
Umm
Umm
I did, that was more a post of "ah, I was wondering about that" and having read his quote I see why there was confusion. I wasn't asking a question - I was saying his comment explains the confusion.
September 28th, 2009 at 12:15 PM |
One Question
One Question
Why wasn't this a reply to his post, instead of a diary topic?
MGoGTI
September 28th, 2009 at 12:45 PM |
gsimmons
gsimmons
Because that's how gsimmons rolls, when he talks, we listen.
More seriously, I understand the point but maybe he just wanted to make sure everyone saw it. I think most posters on here respect him as one of the best defensive minds/coaches on MGoBlog so I'm more than willing to let him post diaries when he wishes (in fact, I wish that he'd post more but I understand that he's busy with his own team right now).
September 28th, 2009 at 1:05 PM |
Yeah i was
Yeah i was
orginally just going to respond. But i just decided to do this instead, perhaps i shouldnt have.
I try not to post too much...
September 28th, 2009 at 12:22 PM |
Question
Question
You say:
"The biggest difference from the defense this year and last year is the offense. Many of the same weaknesses are showing their faces this year, the difference is now the offense can respond."
I think that's correct, but I wonder whether we can take that analysis one step further. Perhaps the fact that we have an offense that can score points, and that opponents know can score points, is causing (or will cause) the opponents to game-plan more aggressively or at least to open things up much sooner than they had to vs. Michigan last year. The defense is going to look more porous - even if it's relatively equal in effectiveness to last year's defense - if they're facing offenses that realize they can't grind things out or play conservatively until Michigan's offense self-destructs.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:10 PM |
rlew
rlew
sure i think that could probably play out as well. There have been some great plays run against michigan. But it seems (like last year) that most of the times we are in position to make plays, or should be in position to make plays, its just a matter of execution...
September 28th, 2009 at 12:20 PM |
Bad technique
Bad technique
GSimmons - When you say there's bad technique, what in particular are you seeing?
thanks
It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future. -- Yogi Berra
September 28th, 2009 at 1:13 PM |
Like last year
Like last year
i asses part of the blamn for mistackles, missed assignemnts, etc. on position coaches that didnt harp on the fundamentals of these kids when they were freshmen and sophmores. thus we have juniors and seniors, that still are making freshmen mistakes. But again, i really dont know. I just know that fundamentals at every level have to be repd non stop...
bill williams is asked to come to nfl camps all the time to teach tackling progressions...
September 28th, 2009 at 1:15 PM |
This one's so easy
This one's so easy
even a bricklayer can answer it:
pad level. It's all about pad level.
September 28th, 2009 at 12:35 PM |
well, kudo's at least to RVB
well, kudo's at least to RVB
well, kudo's at least to RVB for picking up that sack. at least something positive for UFR.
'my head take's a lickin' but it keeps on tickin' just the same'
September 28th, 2009 at 1:37 PM |
The D
The D
The D sure does seem to force a lot of three and outs, however. As mnay yards and points they allow, they still force the punter on the field and have been decent on third downs this year.
The D's goal this year: Break serve as many times as possible. Do that and the O will put up more than enough points.
And, sorry to GSimms for including a tennis reference in his post. I deserve to be skull cracked for that.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:49 PM |
jmac
jmac
yea you are right, its a hit or miss thing....
that can be a biproduct of fundamentals being drilled that arent yet second nature...
September 28th, 2009 at 1:54 PM |
Gsimm
Gsimm
I think the Van Bergen deal was a case of RVB misalligning the defensive front against what IU showed..at least, that's what it looks like to me and I think that is what RVB said himself.
When you look at that play, IU has the Michigan defense severely outnumbered on that side of the ball, AND the defense slants away from the play, making matters worse.
My opinion of the defense is this...they suffer from a severe lack of competition. I.E, the defense is so thin, that most of these players don't have to compete with anyone in order to get playing time...you can be awful in your technique, and flat-out disregard what you are being taught and still play. If the competition was keener, I think some of these guys would come around a bit. Combine that with a new defensive scheme (which has much less to do with it IMHO) and you get what we have ATM.
Van Burgen's error was in making the incorrect adjustment to the formation IU was getting into. He set up the DL incorrectly. There was and article in the Freep about this issue (http://www.freep.com/article/20090927/SPORTS06/909270573/1054/SPORTS06/W...)
The heart of the story:
""I messed up," Van Bergen said. "Coach (Greg) Robinson trusts me to make a lot of the checks on the defensive line. It doesn't happen very often, but I made the wrong check. And it almost cost the team a big loss."
Because of Van Bergen's audible, half the defense was playing one formation and half the team was playing another. "
Go Blue!! Viva La Revolucion!!
www.wolverineliberationarmy.com