First Down Plays
There's been a little chatter on here about Michigan needing to mixup their first down plays a little more (as if this is a new complaint - haven't Michigan fans bitched about this since the dawn of Lloyd?). Anyways, I watched the tape!
I watched every 1st down play all the way through the 3rd quarter. By the end of the 3rd Michigan was down 31-14 and obviously they were getting into hurry up mode, so they were definately moving away from their offensive game plan by then. The last offense play of the 3rd was the Shaw fumble. Someone suggested earlier that that ended the game......you might be onto something there. That particular drive was looking good. At that point Michigan was only down 24-14.
First Down Runs:
- Michigan ran on first down 17 times out of the 23 first downs in the first 3 quarters. They gained 41 yards on those runs which is 2.41 yards per attempt. Ouch. On a good note, McGuffie scored a TD on a first down run, but on a bad note the Shaw fumble was a first down run.
First Down Passes:
- To flip that coin Michigan passed on 6 out of their first 23 first downs with 4 completions. On those plays they gained 64 yards which is 10.67 per attempt. Much nicer. However, two of those plays were to Odoms for 27 yards and 24 yards each. That kind of skews the numbers. The other two were for 7 and 6 yards.
So What?
It's hard to give a definite answer on this age-old Michigan fan bitch. The fact that Michigan ran on 74% of those first downs tells you many things:
- Pehaps they were more successful passing those few times BECAUSEof all of the 1st down runs? Illinois defense was ready for the zone-read and were selling out to stop it. Those 6 passes caught them out of position and made it easier to complete a pass.
- Is it better to gain, on average, 2.41 yards on first down than to risk an incompletion, which gives you 2nd and 10 instead of 2nd and 7 or 8?
- Not only that, Threet has been wildly inaccurate thus far (under 50% competion) and at times he likes to throw the ball at A) Tacopants or B) guys wearing the other jersey. What is the risk/reward here? Obviously the coaching staff feels it is more risky to put the ball in Threet's hands on first down then to give it to McGuffie (thou shalt not fumble).
- The O-Line. As we know they are green and it shows. You're risking getting Threet killed the more you drop him back to pass. Not only that, you're looking at fumbles and sacks, too, further handicapping yourself.
- Keep in mind that Stonum and Hemingway were out yesterday. Those are your 2nd and 3rd outside receivers, by a wide margin, I think. When you are trying to stick Savoy (horrible dropped pass in the first half, BTW) and Zion Babb into Stonum and Hemingway's shoes you are asking for trouble. Imagine Chad Henne without Matthews and Arrington last year?? Not good. And he's Chad Henne for F sake!!
- Rodriguez's offense has historically been run-first, so, hey guess what? They are running first! I don't think you can blame him, he's got some good talent in McGuffie, Shaw, Minor and Grady, they just need more help from the O-Line.
October 5th, 2008 at 4:47 PM ^
Of course, you've read the clinical breakdown I did in the "heroe and goats' forum thread, and those numbers dont tell a story any different that what you have said above. Therefore, I will sprinkle some of my own analysis into this.
I think its pretty obvious on first downs that its likely going to be a run to McGuffie. The defense's are keying on him and unless there is a lead blocker ahead of him from the backfield, these plays are going nowhere.
Michigan had been doing OK on first downs until the play calling got "cute" like that stupid option play to Sam that has not worked all season (dear Calvin, lose that page of the playbook) or when the coaches changed the formation (like just Sam in the backfield.....or Shaw as lead blocker, as two examples).
Again, things were working with Moundros and/or Minor serving as a lead blocker for Sam (or moundros blocking for minor). When Michigan went away from not having at least two of those three backs on the field and involved in the play, the running game went nowhere.
I am becoming convinved that the starting backfield should be Sam and Moundros. And let #44 flatten folks. That was there all day yesterday (in a couple different formations to boot) and then it disappeared from the play calling repetoire.
October 5th, 2008 at 7:26 PM ^
It is obvious to me that we need to mix in more pass plays on first down. I understand that Threet is not a very accurate quarterback at the moment, but that does not mean that we should run the ball everytime on a predictable run down (1st down) behind a horrible run blocking offensive line. When we do this, we put ourselves in 2nd and 9 and even 2nd and 12 or 14 territory on a consitent basis.
I am not suggesting that we have to throw the ball deep on first down. I simply think that it would be beneficial for us to mix in some quick slants and short passing routes on first down that will get us five or so yards consistently. We also have the kind of athletes (like Odoms and Shaw) who can make something big happen out of a short route. I dont think that this would be asking too much out of Threet (I think he can throw a five yard pass). Think about Ohio State's scheme against us two years ago--they spread our defense out and ran short passing routes. If we did this, it would nullify our weaknesses on the offensive line and give Threet opportunities to make throws that he can make on a consistent basis.
Two years from now we will be able to get away with running on first down consistently. In fact, in two years we can probably run the ball on every down and be just fine--overall our offense is going to be amazing. However, this year we just do not have the talent on the offensive line to run on a predictable run down and consistently gain yards, it is just not going to happen (maybe against Toledo).
October 5th, 2008 at 9:23 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 9:25 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 9:34 PM ^
In before some asshole rips apart your calling MIKE Martin "Max Martin" and then points out how Max Martin was actually a huge fumbler and kicked off the team for being a giant douchebag or something.
Oh wait, I just did it myself. Damn. I agree with your point though, that the entitlement mentality is bullshit and you gotta earn everything.
October 5th, 2008 at 10:03 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 5:04 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 5:37 PM ^
....in your post there. We're talking first down play calling here and the overall run/pass ratio. To that end, I disagree that you cant be critical of play calling here.
Things were working in the looks where Sam carried and followed Moundros blocking....it worked even with Minor running...and this is for the running game on all downs, not just first. It had some big plays and provided enough efficiency that play fakes actually worked opening up passing lanes for Threet.
Right now running plays not out of those sets aren't working, so when they get called from the sideline, you can indeed question it.
Why does he keep doing that option play as an example....they've been flirting with disaster on that play all season and not gaining a thing out of it. When the team is moving the chains with Moundros blocking and setting a physical tone, why do you then go with running sets that dont involve that look.
I thought the offense played well in spots. For the first time all season, it did not put the defense up against the wall with turnovers. It was on the verge on a season high output and at 31-20, I actually had some confidence if the D could get a stop that they could march down the field.
Certain plays and looks are working. There are plenty that are not, have not all season and at this point probably wont work all season. I question why the coaches continue with the latter and not modify gameplans geared towards the former.
However, play calling did not doom us yesterday. Nope it was constant breakdowns on the defensive side of the ball that lead to way too many big plays.
October 5th, 2008 at 9:16 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 7:11 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 9:15 PM ^
- I'd rather have a guy who goes down on initial contact and does not fumble the ball versus having a guy who fumbles every third or fourth play.
- You have to play all these freshman so they can get experience, but you pay a price when you do.
- Shaw may be quick but he's wiry and prone to injury and fumbles. He has two for the year now. McGuffie has none.
- McGuffie is also a freshman and has no line. The guy was recruited by USC, if he was there he'd see gaping holes and be the hype of the PAC-10. Cmon buddy relax on the Guff.
October 5th, 2008 at 9:22 PM ^
First, paragraphs please.
Second:"Even with a solid O-Line, he's still vulnerable to DL/DE/LB who are blocked but who get an arm or a shoulder out there to disrupt the RB. Normally, a RB would just run through that, but McGuffie GOES DOWN ON ANY INITIAL CONTACT."
Do you actually, I don't know, watch the games?
October 5th, 2008 at 7:47 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 9:25 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 9:42 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 9:53 PM ^
October 5th, 2008 at 10:23 PM ^
Comments