A Contrarian View of the Defense
After the spectacular play of the defense on Saturday the praise has been overwhelming from everyone including Brian, but I got to thinking of all the fortune blessed upon this defense and put together this post to point out some information that might give you some pause to take Mattison from Deity to simply a great D Coordinator.
1. Tempo- "Enjoy Life" just put together a terrific diary explaining how offensive tempo changes defensive stats. So I thought as a baseline to determine the defenses improvement we should look at per play stats because that would eliminate the offenses effect and turnovers effect on the defensive performance which we have learned the last few years has been massive. So last year we were 98th and this year we are 40th. Fantastic, but not as ridiculous as the 110th to 5th jump I've seen reported.
2. Players-
a. Returning Starters-From last years team to this year we have 6 returning players who we we can all assume would be better to varying degrees. RVB, Martin(plus injury), Roh, Demens, Kovacs, Floyd(half year)
b. Not Returning but Weird Circumstances Upgrade- Heininger missed most of last year with an injury and he has been a push to an upgrade over Banks, Patterson. Woolfolk was supposed to be a huge upgrade over J. Rogers but due to injuries and play he has actually moved over to Saftey where he has filled in as an upgrade over Cam and Vinopal.
c. More Freshmen WTF They are Killing Us!!!.... Wait What They are Good?- That leaves 3 more starters Ryan, Countess and Morgan. While Morgan/Ryan is a downgrade over Mouton these freshmen have actually upgraded their position because they had to beat out actual scholarship players and not air. Each man had to beat out at least 2 scholarship guys that weren't freshmen to earn their playing time.
This isn't exact because of the scheme difference and personal opinion being what it is, but I would say Michigan has a talent upgrade at every position save Mouton's LB spot that has nothing to do with coaching.
3. Schedule- When I was discussing this with my buddy yesterday it seemed like a big factor, but when you look at the numbers they don't seem to tell you a whole bunch. It's one of those situations where you could make your numbers fit your argument either way so I'll just leave it to you guys to discuss. It's pretty clear that in Big Ten play the offenses have been worse from last year..MSU, Ill, Iowa have all taken big steps back, Ind with Chapell was much better than Minn and NW and Pur were better than Penn St last year and Purdue last year. So it's 4-2 in BT play. One other note of how bad the BT is this year. Mich is currently 15th in total defense but 6th in the Big Ten. A lot of Big Ten defenses getting fat off of these offenses.
4. Trash Tornado- Not sure of the exact weather of every game last year, but the wind this year has been ridiculous. 4 games have been effected pretty significantly by the wind. Last year I can recall 2 Trash Tornado like games. Uconn(not bad but wind helped) and the d looked good and Purdue(which was a disaster from all accounts) and the d looked good as well. These tornado games timed well as they were against some of the better offenses if we can actually say that vs Minn and Purdue which were nice weather.
So in conclusion I'm not sure how to quantify the effect Mattison has had on this d from last year to this year, but it's definitely been positive and I would say it was far less than 102 spots from 107th to 5th in scoring defense and a little less than 58 spots in the yards per play of 40th vs 98th. It feels like to me like an upgrade of about 20 spots fro having Mattison. Last year a perfect storm of shit and this year a little friendlier storm with a big upgrade at D Coordinator, but not that big*
* Yes that is what she said. 98 98 lklgfh. se
November 17th, 2011 at 11:49 PM ^
Not to be a buzzkill, but a global flood would have destroyed the foodweb, not to mention mixing freshwater and saltwater in every case, so if Noah wanted to save the aquatic species he really would have needed to bring them onto the ark (not that keeping them alive on the ark could have been any easier, but we're assuming the ark was magical, I guess).
November 17th, 2011 at 1:56 PM ^
There are a lot of great, evidence supported analyses on this blog. This isn't one of those.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:56 PM ^
time to put the pipe down, open the curtains and windows and get some fresh air. This is obviously entirely too many keystrokes for a subject that simply isn't true.
This defense AND its players are finally being coached ... and it shows.
Go Blue!
November 17th, 2011 at 3:49 PM ^
This was the last line of my post. How is it different from yours minus the mocking?
Last year a perfect storm of shit and this year a little friendlier storm with a big upgrade at D Coordinator, but not that big*
November 17th, 2011 at 3:16 PM ^
Argue the guy's points. I always like a little splash of cold water, myself, keeps those homer wrinkles at bay.
November 17th, 2011 at 4:22 PM ^
My biggest thing that I took from Ziff's argument is that he thought that Mouton was actually good...I think there was a lot of look at his play over the last two years and it wasn't very good. We have a couple of freshmen (with good coaching) that are doing much better.
Other than that, I don't mind reading what he had to say.
Go Blue Go Mattison.
November 17th, 2011 at 4:37 PM ^
I didn't think Jonas was that much better than the kids playing now, but I think most would agree that he played at a higher level than D. Morgan has.
If you want to say all 11 players are better and help my argument go ahead.
November 17th, 2011 at 5:23 PM ^
The guy made a ton of positive plays, was 2nd team all-conference, and got drafted in the 2nd round. If he was playing on this year's defense or swapped out for a guy like Prescott Burgess in 2006 I think people would remember him as an awesome playmaker and overlook a lot of his weaknesses. As it stood, the rest of the team couldn't cover up for him if/when he was overly aggressive or made a poor decision and so people noticed his shortcomings a lot more than I think they would have otherwise.
The freshmen this year benefit from playing behind, next to, and in front of better players than Mouton got to last year. Especially early in the year they were not good at all (as should be expected from any freshman linebacker), but the rest of the team was able to cover their mistakes.
November 17th, 2011 at 9:20 PM ^
He'd have been a first round pick.
November 17th, 2011 at 1:56 PM ^
Change your Mgoname to buzzkill lightyear or something that would adequately describe what you are doing with this post.
<br>But really, your points are for the most part valid. But to think that our defensive numbers would be even close to what they are now with Gerg around or even an average defensive coordinator is a funny thought. Please let us keep drinking the GMatt koolaid until there is concrete evidence to make us spit it out.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:00 PM ^
Two things:
1) Why? Let's enjoy the ride here and not analyze to death.
2) Eyeball test. I know this goes against that statisticians on the blog, whom I TOTALLY appreciate, but just watching the defense this year, from a schematic perspective, is so far beyond what was possible with GERG/our last set of coaches (not trying to incite a riot, here - I liked RR and supported him.) Mattison/Hoke know defense, and can clearly teach well.
November 17th, 2011 at 3:52 PM ^
1. Why do you come to this blog? Do you read Brian's UFR's? Do you only read the blog after wins? I thought it was interesting to dig inside the numbers.
2. I agree the eyeballs tell you they are in much better postion. Which is why I said Mattison is a huge upgrade at DC.
November 17th, 2011 at 3:59 PM ^
Where exactly did you "dig inside the numbers"? All you did was regurgitate the numbers and then throw out your own arbitrary guesstimate of their true value.
November 17th, 2011 at 4:45 PM ^
Everyone has their opinion but I think the general consensus from analysts looking at more meaningful stats is that yards per play is more important than scoring defense or total yards because those stats are more effected by other factors besides the actual defense.
Brian brings this up all the time in basketball when he references Kenpom.
When you see that we are 40th in this stat that is much different from when people throw out Top 10 defense. 40th is much different than 5th in scoring defense. I would guess this is one of the bigger differences in the country.
Going from 108th in the country to 5th is completely insane. From your eyes you can see that GMat has done a great job with these guys, but I still think player development and some good fortune have contributed as well.
November 17th, 2011 at 5:41 PM ^
to measure those two contributions. And from separating "GMat has done a great job" from "player development and some good fortune" I'm thinking the first is the game by game play calling, because the player development is from coaching, which is also GMat. If you are trying to say that the effects from returning players is equal to the coaching change improvements then you don't have any analysis to support that. Which doesn't give anyone anything to discuss, and that's why it's turning into comments of "you are a buzz kill"
November 17th, 2011 at 2:02 PM ^
Whenth I wath coathing at Minnethota, I hadth the thame problemth.I tellth youth whath, it'th a headth scratcherth
November 17th, 2011 at 2:03 PM ^
my buzz
November 17th, 2011 at 2:03 PM ^
If not for Mattison, the Countess/Ryan/Morgan freshman excuse for the defense playing poorly would be flying all around this joint. Are these players so much better than previous freshman? Possible but unlikely. Personal problems aside, I'd be really curious to see how a freshman Big Will and a guy like Cissoko, who we all wrote off as a bust, would have developed as football player under the tutelage of GMAT.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:27 PM ^
Are these freshmen better than other freshmen? Uh Yes
Avery started last year as a true forsh and he was beat out despite having a year of experience.
Cam Gordon lost his job to a true frosh and he was one of our top players last year.
If people can not accept the fact that a freshmen beating out 2 scholarship players ahead of him is much better than a freshmen being told "good luck you are all we got" then there is no point to further discussion.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:33 PM ^
Avery started last year because Floyd and Woolfolk got hurt. This year Floyd and Woolfolk returned. Now Avery plays a backup role. It's not that hard to figure out.
Cam Gordon didn't get beaten out by a true freshman. And he would have been the starter early in the year if not for an injury. Now he's relegated to a backup role because (redshirt freshman) Jake Ryan played well when he got the opportunity early in the year.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:39 PM ^
Avery lost his job to Countess. Are you seriously trying to say the talent in the secondary isn't a massive upgrade from last year?
Where did I say Ryan was a true freshmen? Gordon was a starter last year. He's not playing because he got hurt and lost his job. That is an upgrade.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:55 PM ^
Rarrrr (catfight noise)
You're entitled to your opinion but as you state in the title of your post, you're defending a contrarian viewpoint.
Don't get defensive when people don't agree with what you've already resigned to as a fact in the title of your post.
November 17th, 2011 at 3:20 PM ^
Well then what about Woolfolk? He got beat out by Countess as well, and he's supposed to be the great senior corner. And you can't use injury as a reason, otherwise you would be contradicting yourself
November 17th, 2011 at 3:36 PM ^
TW and JT were better starting corners than Rogers and JT last year.
Countess beats out TW midyear so..
Countess and JT are much better than JT and Rogers.
TW moves to safety who was manned by Gordon who won the job over 2 other scholarship guys.
So Now Kovacs and TW are much better than Kovacs and Gorgon/Vinopal last year.
To say the defensive of backfield would not improve massively just based on number of bodies/health and experience is just flat wrong.
The fact that JT Floyd has turned in such a great performancecompared to his previous work is a testament to the kid's hard work and what would appear good coaching.
November 17th, 2011 at 3:35 PM ^
"Cam Gordon lost his job to a true frosh and he was one of our top players last year."
There you go. There's a direct quote from your above post. Cam Gordon DIDN'T lose his job to a true freshman. Fact.
And Avery was a backup last year. You do realize that, don't you? Our starters at the beginning of the year were Floyd and Woolfolk. Then Woolfolk got hurt and Rogers stepped in. Then Floyd got hurt and Avery stepped in. Sure, he started some games...but he wasn't really a starter.
November 17th, 2011 at 3:43 PM ^
I was referring to Morgan not Ryan, while Cam has not seen the field I think you are right that he is playing Ryan's position not Morgan's so you win.
Avery was the starter to end the season. Nearly everyone had him slotted to start opposite Woolfolk coming into the year.
My point is that he was playing because there was nobody else. For Countess to come in and beat out everyone in front of him is not the same as having someone hand you the position because of lack of bodies.
What Countess has done is what Marlin Jackson and C. Woodson did. Come in and beat out upper classmen so clearly that you can't keep them off the field. That is impressive.
November 17th, 2011 at 3:11 PM ^
These freshman ARE PLAYING BETTER than previous freshman, there is no arguing that point. But are they more talented, I don't think so - I attribute their ability to step into starting roles and succeed to putting in hard work under an amazing coach.
Players that have been here for the carnage of the last three seasons are probably at a disadvantage, having to unlearn bad technique and fundamentals. The frosh can step in with no stuffed beaver diseases and play the right way.
November 17th, 2011 at 3:57 PM ^
This got upvoted?
Blake Countess is not more talented than the freshmen forced into playing time the last 3 years such as Vinopal, Avery, Talbott, Christian, Kovacs, Gordon, Johnson etc.?
Does this really need to be argued?
If you really think the coaches were teaching bad fundamentals and technique you really need to take off the tinfoil hat. It sounds cool to say on the internet, but it's just wrong.
November 17th, 2011 at 4:06 PM ^
If they weren't teaching poor fundamentals and technique, the defense probably wouldn't have sucked for the past three seasons.
November 17th, 2011 at 4:54 PM ^
I give up Magnus, so please level with me and be honest. I can't detect internet sarcasm and hyperbole from reality anymore.
Do you really think that the coaches on Michigan last year have worked their way all the way thru high school and college and in some cases the NFL and came to Michigan and taught people the incorrect way to tackle and take on blocks and fit gaps? Somehow they had so much talent at WV they could overcome this complete lack of fundamental play to take out teams like Oklahoma, Georgia, Georgia Tech etc.
I'm not talking about calling blitzes at the wrong time or not utilizing your players properly we're just talking about basics. They went to camps, visited camps and just stuck with their guns and were teaching poor technique?
November 17th, 2011 at 5:06 PM ^
Maybe. I didn't sit in on all their practices. But look, some teams have bad tackling and other teams have good tackling. Are you simply going to rely on your theory that "Well, good athletes are good tacklers and bad athletes are bad tacklers"? That seems like kind of a lazy theory to me.
There are multiple ways to teach tackling. Some coaches stress different things. Some coaches do different drills. Some coaches practice tackling more often than others. It's not like every college coach puts on the same instructional video, lets it play, and then never addresses tackling again.
Were we good tacklers under Rodriguez? No. So you can either say that Desmond Morgan is a significantly better athlete than Obi Ezeh, Thomas Gordon is a significantly better athlete than Ray Vinopal, etc. . . . or you can assume that those are relatively equal athletes (all four players were 3-stars) but some of them have received different levels of coaching.
Here's something I know for sure: Brandin Hawthorne made some very lazy efforts to tackle during the MSU game. Guess who hasn't played much since the MSU game? Brandin Hawthorne. Despite repeatedly poor efforts to tackle from guys like Jonas Mouton, J.T. Floyd, and Obi Ezeh, all of them got chance after chance after chance; the only one that eventually lost his job was Ezeh, and even that was a long time coming.
Part of teaching fundamentals is correcting players - or yanking them - when they're doing it wrong. This staff does it. The other staff...not so much.
November 17th, 2011 at 5:24 PM ^
Do you think Northwestern tackles as well as LSU?
Do you think if one team knew the secret to tackling better than other teams the other teams would not steal their ideas or the coach would not teach those ideas to a team when he left or they would teach it in s seminar?
Go watch the 08 Fiesta Bowl and tell me if the WV defense tackles well. That was RR's defense with T. Gibson coaching the db's against the best offense in the country.
Explain R. Mundy to me.
Coaching is important but way overrated by fans.
November 17th, 2011 at 5:38 PM ^
No, I don't think Northwestern tackles as well as LSU. You got me there! Since the nation's #1 team tackles better than a 5-5 Big Ten team, that's clear evidence that athletes are the only thing that matters. Northwestern hires the best damn coaches in the land, but they're no match for those retarded coaches in Baton Rouge who can't spell their own names but have good athletes...
Speaking of West Virginia, they had a certain guy named Pat White who wasn't very highly recruited coming out of high school and was a flop in the NFL. But when he was at WVU, he set all kinds of records. Was that because he was the country's best athlete? Or was it perhaps because he was coached extremely well and took his good - but not great - athleticism and executed what his coaches wanted...?
I can't explain Ryan Mundy to you. I paid practically zero attention to WVU before Rodriguez was hired.
But I'll take your one example of Ryan Mundy, and I'll raise you Boubacar Cissoko, J.T. Floyd, Charles Stewart, Steve Brown circa '08, Cullen Christian, etc., etc.
November 17th, 2011 at 4:11 PM ^
I wonder how all of those guys would have done if they had stepped onto campus and immediately begun learning the proper ways to play high level football? Conversely, I wonder how Countess would have looked if he didn't have this staff helping him.
I suggest you read the article posted earlier on Demar Dorsey to see that players need coaching to see their raw talent manifest itself into playing ability. And Dorsey was a 5 star, Countess only a 4 star!!!
Why you can't attribute success of players to coaching is a mystery to me.
November 17th, 2011 at 4:20 PM ^
I feel bad for JT Turner.
November 17th, 2011 at 4:21 PM ^
I don't. He was lazy.
November 17th, 2011 at 5:00 PM ^
More plausibly disillusioned IMO. I think a case can be made that things could have worked out favorably for JT under the new regime. He currently holds 3 offers after spending this past season at Scottsdale JC. I am not a scout member but it looks as if Mississippi State, Arizona, and Hawaii have offered.
November 17th, 2011 at 5:10 PM ^
Well, he couldn't get on the field as a true freshman in 2009, and he really wouldn't have had any reason to be "disillusioned" in 2009.
And prior to the 2010 season, he lost a conditioning challenge to 47-year-old Rich Rodriguez, which is detailed in "Three and Out."
I call it lazy. You call it disillusioned. Either way he didn't put in the work or the effort to stick with the team.
November 17th, 2011 at 5:16 PM ^
The guy had multiple chances and at the time was just not mentally/physically ready for division one college football.
November 17th, 2011 at 4:18 PM ^
Blake Countess is not more talented that Ray Vinopal? Good gravy, man.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:37 PM ^
Yes. Countess (at least) is that much better.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:04 PM ^
I'm happy with that.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:05 PM ^
Oh, so that's why the players suddenly know how to tackle in open space.
huh.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:08 PM ^
Nope.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:08 PM ^
You're neglecting the effect of last year's flat-out incompetent defensive coaching staff (I find it curious that you didn't even mention GERG once in your entire post). From dropping Craig Roh into pass coverage to playing Obi Ezeh over Kenny Demens to constantly tinkering with the scheme, there wasn't a single thing that last year's coaches didn't screw up on defense at some point. Trying to use a 3-man front to mount a goal line stand in the Penn State game should tell you how clueless GERG and RichRod were about defense. Now it's true that any halfway decent defensive coordinator (paired with a head coach that lets him do his job) wouldn't have screwed things up so badly, let alone Mattison. But coaching makes a big difference, and not screwing up the easy decisions counts for a lot.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:13 PM ^
and if he doesn't, Martin or some other DL frequently does.
GERG sucks, but his blame for last year can be overstated. That was going to be a horrible defense even if Mattison coached it.
November 17th, 2011 at 2:25 PM ^
Yes but when Mike Martin drops back Mattison has someone else come up from a different spot to create pressure and confusion. It is not just having Martin stand up and get no pressure on the opposing offense.
Also how would the CBs have progressed under last year's coaching? Would Floyd have approached the level he has reached of being a serviceable corner. Would Countess even be sniffing the field as a freshman, win the starting job and providing hope that he can cover his side of the field for the next 2-3 years?
November 17th, 2011 at 2:33 PM ^
Are my answers to your questions. I don't think me or the OP are saying GERG=Mattison, we're just saying you can overstate how much credit he deserves. Like anything else it's been a team effort.
I firmly believe Floyd is solid evidence that Mallory>Gibson. But Mallory doesn't get a ton of pub.
If you're going to talk about DBs, who I agree are WAY better, you have to consider the fact that Woolfolk is healthy, Countess is here, Avery isn't a freshman, Gordon and Kovacs are a year older/wiser. I feel confident that Countess would start over Avery, Talbott, Christian, and anyone else we threw out at CB last year (including Rogers). Remember, ANY AND EVERY FRESHMAN sniffed the field last year, as did a bunch of walk-ons.