The pounding that Denard took was disconcerting.  I thought it was foolish of Borges to be calling QB power runs late in the 4th quarter up 28-3.  Also wanted to see Devin get a full series and gain some experience.

The mattison touch on the D can not be denied thus far.  The first an second half were like deja vu for the past 3 seasons. I love the mid-game adjustments

EMU only attempted 6 passes and the rest were runs. I'll take given up 246 total yards, besides, we have played the most explosive O we're going to see all year in ND so we will get better especially knowing all the kids are still learning

If we are sinking and swimming on the O's output then we are in for a long season. I think we will sink or swim on our ability to get timely defensive stops. We know we wont be dominant (maybe next year), but timing is everything.

And oh yeah, Gallon is not faster than Odom. Odom beat Denard in a race last year remember?

I think it's not so much the defense being bad as the coaches are simply not preparing for the scripted plays that other coaches are putting against us.

Eastern ran a jet-sweep series only once the whole day and it was in the first series and you could tell we were obviously not ready for it at ALL. The first series also saw them using a flea-flicker QB option for a first down and various other wacky formations that they never used again later in the game. They also ran the MAC staple diamond stack left trick pass (I've seen Toledo do it too). Temple also tried something similar if I remember right. But you can really on script so many plays...

When Eastern settled into their normal formations, they got NOTHING. This is from a team that was 3rd in the nation rushing (yes, I know that this was against FCS schools, but at this point in time, most everybody has played just FCS schools/lower FBS schools). Their offensive line is around the same size as many other B1G offensive lines but seriously lacking technique (and were holding our rushers multiple times), as was evidenced by the number of times Gillet would do play action and see 4 D-linemen charging at him unblocked.

As for the offense, it was really frustrating me. Our tailbacks were having a lot of success on the ground, but they continued to run Denard power out of the shotgun. Our tailbacks were doing very well from the I-form carries and the only TFLs that came from running the backs were on shotgun plays where a person coming on a blitz was left unguarded and came around. Why stop doing something even though it's working really well?

You guys would be lamenting about how terrible the Michigan defense is even if we shut them out today.

So far I have learned that Denard's shoes are not being stripped off as much as last year.  I don't remember him losing a shoe yet.

I'm still in wait and see mode on everything else.  Looking at the schedule, I don't see any sure thing one way or the other (although Purdue is awful).  I do think there is overall improvement and that is encouraging.

I was at the game with my wife and kids and I kept muttering to myself throughout the entire first half, "This isn't working, Brady."

"This" referred to the pro style offensive scheme he and Al would obviously prefer to run, and tried (mostly unsuccessfully) to varying degrees in the first half. It may be that Denard's feet are simply too "happy" to stand in the pocket, set his feet, and fire. Hoke himself mentioned in the presser the work that will have to go into getting Denard more settled in the pocket as a drop-back passer.

But, as I watched the game, it occurred to me that - just perhaps - the actual plan for this season isn't (and never was) to win by re-making Denard into John Navarre. But, rather to begin mixing pro set and under-center play calling into the scheme in preparation for next year and the year after, with little expectation that it will be wildly successful. However, as this team is built to win when Denard is Denard, Brady and Al always intended to keep most of the Rich Rod playbook, but begin incorporating some of the pro style fundamentals.

What still scares me more than the offense (which, when it's on, is really f-ckin' ON) is the defense. It gave up more than 200 yds rushing yesterday, and most of that was in the first half. Frankly, the EMU play calling seemed to become more conservative as the game wore on, which was self-defeating. We seemed to have few answers for the QB keeper or the jet sweep, and their RBs were pretty effective against our front four.

If EMU had more of a passing game (and we didn't have Thomas Gordon making one-handed interceptions at the goal line) and EMU had someone other than Ron English calling plays, I might have actually been mildly worried about the game's outcome.

the only running plays I saw that ever got more than 2 yards were from the run option, or QB power.  On the drive for the FG they tried an I-formation run that got strung out and tackled for maybe 1 yard.  They cut to Hoke in time to see him shaking his head at the outcome.  I've only watched the game once, but I watched it from DVR pausing and repeating several plays, and I didn't come away with the conclusion that the I-formation was working and Al Borges went away from it to pound on Denard.  What I remember was that the offense couldn't sustain any drive until Borges gave up and called a run option that Denard kept and went for 52 yards.  Then I watched as that success started to open up for Vincent Smith and he got a couple of run option keeps.  And of course Denard's running opened up the QB Oh Noe to the tight end and one to the slot for TD's.

That was what I remembered from the game.  I think Fitz Toussaints total yardage bears that out.

The coordinators are feeling out things for later in the season.  Don't you think it's better to iron out the kinks now than implement a simple but effective scheme now only to have it stuffed when we play in the Big 10?

Obviously we'll see if that bears out when we get to conference play, but the last two years should show that what look like well-oiled offensive juggernauts in the early weeks of play are often paper tigers in conference play.  That is exactly what the coaching staff was brought in to change, and maybe--just maybe--trying out a bunch of stuff and giving Denard practice running plays other than zone-read and QB-iso will pay off when we have defenses that can contain him out of the spread-option.

Give it time.  

Everone knows Big Ten defenses want to stop the run first. And this means shutting down Denard. This will definetly pose a problem for Denard if his passing doesn't improve.  I really thought he'd be farther along than he at this point with his passing.  I didn't ike the play calling yesterday either, unless they were hiding some plays when they got ahead.  And I reallly thought Devin should have got more playing time.  We knew with the coaching change this would be a work in progress and it is.

What's interesting is that there are no really scary opponents on our schedule until Nebraska (although Illinois looks legit).  Still, it is impossible to believe that we won't lose some games playing the way we are at present.  Yet, if Hoke & Co can duct tape wins together we might have a record that is better than our actual team.  Here's hoping while we are still 3-0.

Part of the problem is way too many long vertical passes. This is not DR's strength. Need more drag routes, screens, bubble screens, and dumps to TE's. These passes open up run routes because they force LB's to look elsewhere than for the run. Also I don't think the WR's are running very good routes. Not coming out of breaks fast enough. DR has not hit a WR in stride since last year. Everything is either a jump ball or a hook pattern where the rec is not moving away from a defender.
<br>
<br>The running game MAY have found a every down back in Vincent Smith. Not bruising but shifty and gutsy. Start him and see what happens. Can't get any worse. Fitz and Shaw not showing enough though a little banged up.

Hoke knows how to beat the defense he created, and the offense players he has coached for two years...