Max protect with two backs and use a few screens to keep them honest? MSU DLine tends to be aggressive, so we should find ways to use that against them.
Max protect with two backs and use a few screens to keep them honest? MSU DLine tends to be aggressive, so we should find ways to use that against them.
Any thoughts on the game time's for these next two games??
There have been two games where Gardner has looked like an All American. In both cases Gallon has a million receptions for a trillion yards. Is it reasonable to assume that unless up against a shutdown corner that UCONN, Arkon, and PSU do not have Gallon will be open. I know Gallon is only five feet eight and thus an abomination to Borges. However, it seems like taking advantage of his openess will introduce vulnerabilities if teams concentrate their defenses on Gallon or a lesser extend Funches. If you cannot run the ball, what is wrong with setting up the run with the pass?
I understand our coaching staff is all about domination, asserting will, power football, etc. However football is also about deception, misdirection and generating matchup advantages. The former works great when you have a dominant team. But the later is how you beat a team of equal or superior talent.
It almost seems like the Michigan staff is beating their heads in the wall just to prove a point.
Darqueze Dennard on Gallon. Dennard is one of the better CB in the country and will provide a big test for Gallon. If MSU can shut down Gallon, I would expect MSU to concentrate on shutting down their running game with their tough front 7.
I honestly don't think there's a corner in college that can shut down Gallon. I saw him embarass the Alabama secondary last year with a double move (the only good thing in a horrible game), jump over much taller corners to catch jumpballs and break ridiculous tackles against ND. The only time I've seen Gallon not have a huge impact is when Gardner can't find him or we seem to not call plays in his direction.
If the pass rush doesn't get to Gardner, there's no reason Gallon can't have a great game.
the refs swallow their whistles/eat their flags. All of the attention Gallon's garnering/Gardnering right now cannot hurt in that regard. Will be very interesting to watch.
EDIT: In some recent games we have been flat-out intimidated in EL. The early going will set the tone.
Super agree regarding our hesitancy against MSU. I really hope that was due more to Denard getting jarred by the blitzing but Gardner hasn't looked as good at handling pressure this year.
Gardner's deep pass accuracy should convince Borges to call a way more aggressive game and punish them for blitzing.
The refs seem to ignore obvious penalties and violence from MSU so it wouldn't surprise me if they let Gallon get held on every play. Another guy who gets away with everything is Roby on OSU. I was very unimpressed when Abberdeis (wisconsin) owned him. PI was Roby's only chance at stopping him and the refs let it happen.
as a WR. If he's uncoverable, we'd be talking about him as a 1st rounder but he's not. He's a very good WR, but not elite.
I'll bet Tom Brady already has him on his list -- they'll probably pick him up in the 2nd or 3rd round. He'll be a good fit in New England I think.
in Amendola and Edelman.
2nd/3rd round is too high for Gallon. I bet he goes 4th round.
What more does the guy have to do?
Frankly, I'd much rather have Gallon and his crazy numbers than a less-productive 6'2" guy headed for the NFL.
in the draft like Sammy Watkins, Marquise Lee, Brandin Cooks, Jordan Matthews, etc. who are all better prospects than Gallon.
Gallon is short and lacks the speed to run away defenders. His hands is a bit inconsistent and doesn't always separate from DBs which is important in the NFL. You can get away with lack of separation if you're a bigger WR but Gallon is 5'8"(maybe 5'7") and that will hurt him as a prospect.
The point is, Gallon is an elite college receiver. Michigan is a college team that plays college football against other college teams, so that's all that really matters right now.
I freely acknowledge that Gallon doesn't have the NFL measurables. Maybe he will be drafted, maybe he won't. Maybe he will have a successful NFL career, maybe he won't. But right now, in the college game, Gallon gets open and puts up huge numbers. That makes him "elite" AFAIC. I kind of view Gallon similarly to Mike Hart, who was unquestionably an "elite" college RB, even though he didn't do much in the pros.
He's a very good college WR, but not on elite level. You're overrating Gallon as a WR.
The guy who ran the offense that made Gallon the leading Big Ten single game receiver of all time is hating him? What?
we actually have fans who would post that two days after the Indiana game.
I seriously doubt that Hoke is just some clueless oaf standing on the sideline with zero input on the offensive philosophy. I'm pretty sure Hoke has a gameplan for each game that includes offense, defense, and special teams. In a game in front of a hostile crowd against a defense that sometimes scores as many points as the offense, I'm guessing Hoke will move more towards the Penn St. game plan: minimize risk on offense and depend on your defense to win. I really think if Michigan opens up the offense they could score in the mid 20s or higher against State, but I suspect that won't be the case, and the game will end up something like 17-14 or 14-10.
I don't think many give Borges enough credit. He is trying to establish a downhill running game. It didn't work, and won't work, this year with the current personnel, and he sees that now. Still, I don't blame him for continuing with the scheme as long as he didn't have any losses. When you're trying to establish something new, you expect that it won't work that well until you've done it a lot and have all the kinks out. After the PSU debacle, it was clear there had to be a change (go back to the recent past and abandon power.)
While power probably won't work against MSU, I'm sure that Borges has to do something different than the plan against Indiana. I don't have mathlete's charts in fronty of me, but iirc, Michigan State is the best team in the conference defensively, and Indiana is the worst. Some of the things that worked against Indiana aren't going to work against MSU.
If there is anything that is going to work, it probably will be for Michigan NOT to be predictable. I have horrible memories of MSU timing our snap count, for instance. (too predictable.) I think that the more Borges can surprise and catch MSU unprepared for a play, the better. For instance, I'd imagine that MSU will blanket Gallon and Funchess, because they are proven threats. That in itself will be hard to do. But perhaps that means that passing more to Dileo or Chesson will work. Maybe Borges sets up the run with the pass, catching MSU unawares on an "obvious" passing down. (Borges calls for 5 passes in a row, then a run.) Regardless of the details, the less predictable Michigan's offense, the better.
We're supposed to give Al Borges credit just for being a functioning human being? I sort of see what you're trying to say, but maybe that wasn't the best way to word it.
We're not going for 751 yards against State, but thematically, the Indiana game plan emphasized our strengths. Scoring early will be a key to success.
I get your point, but your last sentence struck me as funny. Obviously, the goal is not to maximize randomness, otherwise you'd do stupid stuff like punt on first down and run off tackle on 2nd and long deep in your own zone during the two minute drill.
play close to the vest and grind out a win with field position(using our Iform RB running weakness). Or play to our offensive strength (shotgun, gardner, make plays).
btw,you can't blanket funchess and gallon as well as commit #s to the run (which is what MSU does). Not enough players on the field.
Given the gallon explosion they will shade a safety to his side, load the box to stop the run, and let the dice roll on our other WRs. This IS EXACTLY what they are going to do. We know it, coaches know it, my gf probably knows it. How Borges attacks this will determine the game.
When they are not doing the above, they will rush less and player quarters behind it.
They will switch between both hopping to catch gardner offguard and get a INT or 2.
When the power game failed against both akron and uconn (and we nearly lost both games) it should have been evident change was needed. There was no reason to think it would work against PSU. btw, our young o line is still young next year as we lose our two best and most experienced blockers. Don't look for power to work until at least 2015.
a running play on an obvious passing down, I predict the play after that will be a PUNT.
Your point about the snap count is interesting though. At the end of last year, Devin was drawing opposing defenses offsides using varied snap counts. Why haven't we seen any of that? MSU should be good for at least two free first downs if it's done right.
but we've already switched centers before half the season is over. Devin and (fill-in-the-blank) need some experience/chemistry to be truly effective doing that.
They also need more than 2 seconds left on the play clock.
I'm sure that Borges has to do something different than the plan against Indiana
Once Borges finds something that works he seems to use it until it fails horribly. Then he concocts something new which works great until someone shows emphatically that it no longer works.
That was a lot of writing to say that Manball is not ready, MSU isn't Indiana, and Borges needs to be more creative against State because they have such a good defense.
we are now doomed...........thank you
What's the proper punctuation for possessive Borges?
Either Borges' or Borges's, but the latter looks a bit clunky to me.
Thanks for the knowledge!
Borges' is plural, as in "Borges' family values." Borges's is singular, as in "Borges's favorite play."
I fully expect Borges and Hoke to go conservative and play into MSU's hands by doing I form runs up the gut. Hoping to manage field position with our D and score on a short field vs. MSU (and minimize turnovers).
That all sounds good in theory BUT...
it's asking the UM O to play to its own weakness. Undercenter RB carries vs good DLs. MSU is more PSU then it is MINN. We should have learned from that game but I'm sure we did not. Now MSU secondary is >>>> than IU but IMO playing our weakness against MSU strength (UM RB carries vs MSU run D) is a mistake.
Now I HOPE Borges decides to spread the field more and let Gardner operate out of the shotgun.We turn to this when the shit hits the fan and we have to score anwyays. A nugget from ESPN:
-Gardner’s completion percent out of the gun against Indiana was 16 percent higher than it was when he was under center.
-Gardner completed 9 of 14 passes when he was under center and averaged 35.7 yards per completion.
-All four of running back Fitzgerald Toussaint's touchdowns came while Gardner was under center, though his personal average per carry under center is nearly half of what it is when Michigan runs the shotgun.
-Michigan rushed the ball 23 times for 118 yards (5.1 yards per carry) out of shotgun.
What do those stats tell me? Gardner is more comfortable passing in shotgun and we stand a better chance to move the change (esp against a team committed to stopping the run) via shotgun passing.
Use our offenses "change up" effectively like we did vs. IU. By that I mean:
1] Use i form packages for PA, especially on 1st down. These are where the homerun plays to Funchess and Gallon will come. These are how we flip the field. Now this does not mean go PA every I form, but we HAVE to use pa passing on 1st down. 1 out of every 3 1st downs should be a pass IMO. Some for quick dinks to 5 yds. 4-5 bombs to funchess/gallon. Hoke should express "concern" to the media about the amount of PI MSU does as well. plant the seed with the refs early and often in the game too.
2] If we have committed to consistent use of shotgun to move the chains (via short passing), Now is a good time to run the delayed draws, inverted veers, or simply 4 wide with a QB keeper. IE use shotgun to run the ball. Pref on 3rd down on their side of the 40.
Gibbons has been shaky so 40+yd FGs should be a no go. this means more 4th down calls for us in and around their 30-40yd line. knowing this we should run a couple times on 3rd and medium knowing that we have 2 plays.
I think it's pretty clear that the run game does better from shotgun, but what is it about 35 yards per pass attempt that leads you to believe Gardner isn't comfortable enough passing from under center?
this despite having TONS of time to throw since most of these were off PA in the IU game. also gallon was WIDE WIDE open. niether of those to will happen vs MSU on a consistent basis.
now gardners lower % can be attributed to the length of these passes (further throw, lower comp%) but we know he will not have this amount of time vs MSU like he did IU. hence my aprehension to go to the iform "PA go DEEP" well toooo much. don't get me wrong, we have to do it several times... 5-6 bombs at least. I'd say once we approach mid field the bomb should be firmly in the 1st down playbook. also, IMO it seems like gardner does worse in the short passing game on drop back passing. perhaps sees the field less.
Also, his 16% higher comp% in shotgun vs IU tells me he is more comfortable there. as well as the entire ND game.
The MSU game has to be all about moving the chains. I actually agree with the coaches that it will be about field position and points will be a premium. I just know that we cannot move the chains and get goof field position, or flip the field after an MSU drive by running under center with the RB. this will directly lead to TFLs, 3rd and longs, and INTs. at this point its a fact IMO.
shotgun, dink and dunk. 1st down PA bomb 5-6 times is the way to go. that will move the chains and loosen it up for Tousiant runs. Garder will have 10-15 carries hopefully to move the chains on critical 3rd downs or get to the endzone in the redzone.
TOTALS - 21-29, 503 yyds 2 TD.
So, if he was 9-14 for 322 under center, he was 12-15 for 181.
Ignoring the tiny sample size, those numbers look way better under center. I don't know why people keep trying to pretend we passed better out of the gun. We did run better, but the old I-form was the key to the Indiana win.
one out of every three first downs should be a RUN. We should pass far more often than not on 1st down, especially against MSU. I would honestly like to see about 15-20 run plays all day, not counting scrambles.
In case you missed it, our run game sucks against not Indiana.
Would like to see a bit of no-huddle or hurry up offense. Even though the coaches seem allergic to it, I think it could be advantageous. Continue to pass more frequently on first downs (as we did last week) because it keeps the defense off-balance, IMO.
You have to give him credit for being able to do that with 2 weeks to prepare for State. I would expect to see more of an open style than we saw against Penn State. If he can't run, I don't think he will try to do it 27 times more.
it to rain and be windy, as it has been in east lansing the last two trips there. i think this makes for some ball control issues.
I see it like this: With no turnovers, it'll take 14-17 points to win this game. With 2-3 turnovers, it's going to take 24-27 points. Hoke/Borges will think that spreading the field and cutting Gardner loose = 2 to 3 TO's, while the Penn St. game plan could = 0 TO's. The question becomes, are you more confident in the IU gameplan generating 24-27 points or the PSU gameplan generating 14-17 points. I'd say the former, but I think the coaching staff will lean towards the latter.
The Penn State gameplan DID result in 2 turnovers from Gardner (but none when they took off the handcuffs in the 3rd quarter) while the IU plan generated 2 of a different (fluky) variety, neither of which was really Gardner's fault.
Don't disagree with you, just trying to think like the coaching staff. We sort of had all been working under the assumption that Hoke/Borges reined in Gardner and the spread passing look due to Gardner TO concerns. I don't think the coaching staff is going to look at the Indiana game and think its solved, even though the last two games would indicate that Gardner is more comfortable with shotgun/spread looks.
Execution of the game plan is on the players. The crappy game plan is on Borges. You can't blame the coaches when the players do not execute it. No matter how bad it is.
The lesson is that going with a conservative gameplan doesn't seem to prevent turnovers, and I think (read: hope) the coaches realize this.
You can execute perfectly on every play, but if the coaches tell you to run into 8-9 man fronts, even perfect execution will fail.
WE WILL RUN DAMMIT will fail against MSU. You think more rushing = less turnovers, but I disagree. I say a poor rushing game leads to MORE turnovers when the QB faces 3rd and long all day and has to press to make plays.
Edit: didn't see Zok's post below where he basically says the same exact thing.
I think this is exactly how the coaches feel.
I happen to think its wishful thinking to believe that this team will go on the road and have zero turnovers vs an aggressive D. conservative gameplan or not. What some are missing is that two safe runs for a total of 2 yds on 1st and 2nd down leads to a 3rd and long. prob more like 3rd and 14 with our OL and running game. There is NOTHING safe about 3rd and longs. Those generate TOs... Not first down passing.
To your point, I am confident that if UM scores 24-27 points they will win the game. so long as TOs are under 3 and none of them go for pick six or sack-fumble-TDs. big IF but I really don't see MSU scoring 28pts without at least 1 defensive Touchdown. so IMO, our goal should be get to 24 pts...
so to me, the answer is play it safe inside our own 40. Open it up once we approach midfield. Hopefully our D and the special teams will be good enough to limit our O plays inside our own 20.
about being a tad conservative inside our 40. The problem is that we need to make first downs so our D doesn't get too tired. We might actually make MSU's offense look good if we don't at least move the chains once or twice before punting.
MSU brings pressure and they play man-to-man.
Mix the IU gameplan with the ND gameplan.
Short quick throws, back shoulder fades, screens, max protected double moves, some shotgun PA pass to freeze the LB.
MOAR spread, LESS MANBALL.
No naked bootlegs. No stretch runs.
...seems pretty cut and dry to me!
They play a lot of Cover 3 scheme whether if it's straight Cover 3 or Cover 3 Buzz/Sky/cloud. They like to play press coverage. You think they're aggressive, but in reality, they're pretty conservative and doesn't like to take a lot of risk in terms of playcall. MSU defense plays disciplined and does a good job of having defenders reading proper keys.