A Contrarian View of the Defense

Submitted by Ziff72 on

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

 

 

 

 

Ziff72

November 17th, 2011 at 3:19 PM ^

OOC was alittle harder based on a couple of stats , but we got T. Rees against ND.   While MSU  does have a senior QB their offnes has gotten worse according to the stats.   I point out Northwestern is much better than Penn St who killed us last year so that was definitely harder. 

Maize and Blue in OH

November 17th, 2011 at 4:51 PM ^

so he was obviously better and an upgrade over Crist, so this years ND was tougher.  How could MSU's offense get worse when their QB is older, since your whole argument is players get better as they get older and more experienced.

You fail on so many levels.

El Jeffe

November 17th, 2011 at 3:04 PM ^

If you're trying to make the argument that the explanation for the improvement of the defense is more complex than

  1. Brady Hoke shits magic rainbow gold;
  2. Greg Mattison is a chicken fried pimp; and
  3. the old defensive staff were slackjawed and very probably Communist morons

you're gonna have to take that mess somewhere other than the INTERNET, brother.

RenatoDR12

November 17th, 2011 at 3:06 PM ^

Didn't Mattison say that he was surprised that the players didn't know what to look for when they were watching film? That is directly attributed to poor coaching from last year's staff.
<br>
<br>Additionally, last year the defense did not seem to improve throughout the season. Mouton was especially guilty of making the same mistakes for three straight years. This year, Jake Ryan and Countess and Morgan are all making strides and improving every game. They are learning from their mistakes. Mattison is directly responsible for that and is definitely worth more than the 20 spot improvement you arbitrarily give him

Yostbound and Down

November 17th, 2011 at 3:16 PM ^

Your points are somewhat valid, but now I think you are underrating Mattison. He's definitely not entirely responsible for the incredible change in the defense, but I'd say he's definitely done the most to contribute, with all respect due to the players themselves of course.

burtcomma

November 17th, 2011 at 3:16 PM ^

Let's see, Gerg was making about $250K or so as defensive coordinator in 2009 and 2010, and Mattison is making about $750K, so Mattison must be 3 times better than Gerg....

EASY WAY TO SEE WHAT THE FREE MARKET THINKS THE TWO GUYS ARE WORTH!

 

 

bronxblue

November 17th, 2011 at 3:18 PM ^

I don't completely disagree with some of the arguments the OP is making - the players are more experienced, and with a competent DC it definitely shows.  RVB is a great example.  And I do think the defense has been helped by some mediocre offensive competition.  But all those factors in maybe explains a jump from 110th to 80th or something; this defense is in the top 30 for virtually all major team defensive stats.  Most of that gain has to be credited to someone or something, and the one truly different factor between this year's D and the past 3 is the defensive staff, in particular Mattison.

So while the general arguments being made here - that this is an average defense with a couple of breaks - isn't completely off, it does severely discredit the work being done by the defensive staff and the last changes it will have going forward.  Of course, that said, I do expect the defense to regress a bit next year and finish in the mid-40s/50s nationally (because of depth issues on the defensive line).

turtleboy

November 17th, 2011 at 5:54 PM ^

are the same ones we were making BEFORE the season to show that things were turning in our favor, and that Hoke/Mattison Uber Allies could have a slightly easier first year to face and make a big impact. I was also making the same case to show how we could potentially make the biggest 1 year statistical jump in defense in modern NCAA history (ie: most returning starters, other teams lose most of their players, easier road schedule, plus Supercoaches.) The points are somewhat valid. The only problem I have with them is the Op is using them to take our current coaches down a peg and give credit to the previous ones who presided over the worst defense we've ever fielded. Not cool, Op. Not cool.

bo_lives

November 17th, 2011 at 3:18 PM ^

In fact, you could not be more wrong. The epitome of our previous coaching staff's defensive incompetency is the fact that they moved BWC to offensive line.

Hoke and Mattison actually know what they are doing on defense, and are extremely good at it.

Wolverine MD

November 17th, 2011 at 4:00 PM ^

Let me start off by saying, "Ummm"... "Reading comprehension"... or whatever unoriginal condescending internet know-it-all drivel you wanna throw out. Perhaps "pfft?"

While he hasn't lived up to the hype of his recruiting, he is still a serviceable rotation player who has only gotten better as the season has progressed. Whereas the previous staff was so quick to write him off (probably b/c he needs tons of coaching, which they couldn't provide),  they stuck him on offensive line with virtually no shot to see ANY action.

bo_lives

November 17th, 2011 at 5:32 PM ^

just how incompetent the last coaching staff was when it came to defense.

If you would have read "Three and Out," you'd have seen this was a common theme over the last 3 years, i.e. Rich Rod continuously asking his staff why the defense was doing so poorly. GERG was awful, but it's not all on him, as so many seem to believe. Rich Rod was the head coach, not the offensive coordinator, and he's ultimately responsible for how the team performed on both sides of the ball.

Now, I'm not saying it's ALL on him. His defenses at WV were fine, but that was probably the result of a smooth transition from Nehlen to RR's coaching staff; something that didn't happen when he came to Michigan. When RR got to WV, he already had a good defensive coordinator, and a continous string of upperclassmen teaching underclassmen how to perform on defense. Unfortunately, that didn't happen when he came to Michigan. He had to go out and find a completely new offensive coordinator (something he clearly didn't know how to do). Meanwhile, the players themselves became divided. There was no unity, no leadership, and no mentoring. This was largely due to the actions taken by one Lloyd Carr. The upperclassmen were often seen hanging out in his office, as though they didn't accept RR"s regime.

In the end, it was a perfect storm, which ended in utter disastor. GERG was hopelessly incompetent, RR didn't know how to build a defense. There is no other explanation for it. Those were the 3 worst defenses in the history of Michigan football.

What we've seen this year is a complete 180. The season isn't over, but if the trend holds up, the only possible explanation is that the new staff is heaven-sent.

MGoNukeE

November 17th, 2011 at 3:23 PM ^

Even if what you say is right and Mattison isn't the only reason why the defense is better, the point is the defense is doing well and Michigan fans are happy about it. We can dissect all the good and bad of the defense when something bad happens, like if Michigan loses a game because of poor defensive play. When the defense is playing well, it's time to feel good about it and (if anything) look to the future to see if Michigan can maintain its high level of play. This season, the defense so far has pretty much earned a pass from the MGoBlogerati.

ChasingRabbits

November 17th, 2011 at 3:24 PM ^

"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)"

NO, not if they don't have coaches that know what they are doing, who are helping and teaching them to get better.

YES, if they have good coaching that help them to improve exponetially from one year to the next.

What were we talking about again?

mGrowOld

November 17th, 2011 at 3:29 PM ^

Dear OP:

Please allow me to offer my sincere congradulations on your EXCELLENT analysis and thought-provoking ideas.  I had been up several nights trying to find something negative to say about Michigan's season so far but had come up empty - until now.  It's been a real challenge keeping my loyal readers happy this year, what with Michigan's 8-2 record and overall solid play on both sides of the ball but I knew....I mean i just KNEW there was something I was missing and you found it.  I cannot tell you how happy I am right now and don't know how I'll be able to repay the favor but I'll try.

Anyways I have to get back to work.  I have a deadline to meet and you know how editors are - they don't much like it when we don't something negative...err...I mean "insightful" to say!

Your pal,

Drew

Ziff72

November 17th, 2011 at 4:26 PM ^

How is this negative?  

My post boils down to we have a great defensive coordinator, but I give equal amount of credit for our improvement to , players developing, better schemes, slower offensive tempo and a little bit for worse weather instead of our DC walks on water.

Do you read any posts that aren't positive?   Do you just shy away from all of Brian's picture pages etc.  

Let me know at what point you'd like to get negative and we'll talk.  Is it 6 wins or 7 wins?   If we lose the next 2 do you want to get together or are you still keeping it positive at 8-4?

turtleboy

November 17th, 2011 at 6:05 PM ^

I wouldn't say you are being purely "negative," I'd use your title word to describe this post: contrary.

Contrary

Noun: The opposite

Adjective: The opposite in nature, direction, or meaning.

Synonyms:

noun: opposite, reverse, converse, contrast, antithesis

 adjective: opposite, adverse, reverse, opposed, adverse

 

We  pretty much give all of the credit to the change between last years worst ever defense to this years "Michigan" defense to the coaching. You're giving contrary credit here and it's harshing my buzz for MIchigan.

billybrown

November 18th, 2011 at 11:57 AM ^

the bit about weather is nonsense. msu ran their offense the same way they always run it in that game. unless they're in desperation mode cousins doesnt throw a ton. as for players developing as they get older fair point but they just don't automatically improve. they're helped along by the coaches and the staff. i see you throwing brandon graham's name around as a player who improved under the old d-staff. yeah he did but he was the only one. also saying you think scheme has helped improve the defense,who do you think sets the schemes for the d,mattison does. it's his job to do it. so scheme change credit goes back to mattison and staff. i don't understand the desire to try and lessen the value of what mattison and the staff have done with the defense. 

Blue boy johnson

November 17th, 2011 at 3:47 PM ^

Just bizarre. In one post Ziff acknowledges Mattison as a "great D coordinator" in another post Ziff acknowledges that Gerg was "horrid". Then Ziff wants us to minimize the effect Mattison and Co. have had on the D, because Ziff is worried Mattison "a great D coordinator", is going to get too much credit. WTF is the point of this thread?

Ziff72

November 17th, 2011 at 4:32 PM ^

Just pointing out reasons on why the stats are what they are.   If you want to believe that Mattison is simply the smartest coach in the country and we will rank as a top 5 defense every year from now until he retires be my guest. 

I thought it was interesting that when you accounted for the change in offensive tempo our stats were more in the middle of the pack. 

funkywolve

November 17th, 2011 at 6:21 PM ^

So since Alabama runs pretty much a pro style offense would you say their defensive stats should really be more middle of the pack since they aren't using the tempo that UM's offense did last year?

Ziff72

November 17th, 2011 at 10:29 PM ^

Brian has covered this before.  If you run an up tempo offense you run more plays.  More plays lead to more possessions.  More possessions=more points.   Oregon will never have the #1 defense in terms of yards because every game they play the other team gets 20-25 more plays than a game ran at a standard tempo.

That is why I looked at yards per play.

Ziff72

November 17th, 2011 at 4:33 PM ^

Just pointing out reasons on why the stats are what they are.   If you want to believe that Mattison is simply the smartest coach in the country and we will rank as a top 5 defense every year from now until he retires be my guest. 

I thought it was interesting that when you accounted for the change in offensive tempo our stats were more in the middle of the pack. 

Greg McMurtry

November 17th, 2011 at 3:53 PM ^

(to me at least) that there were various members of the 2010 defensive coaching staff who were inept.  This was evident in the constant discussions on this very board of the following topics such as: why was Ezeh playing in front of Demens (3 and Out answers this), why was Demens double filling gaps, why was Demens lining up so close to the LOS, why was Demens asking to be able to line up further from the LOS and therefore coaching himself, why was a stuffed beaver being rubbed in Demens' face, why was Roh being used as a LB when he was clearly a DE, why was Cam Gordon initially a FS, why were the corners lining up 10 yards off on 3rd and 5 and/or 4th and 5? etc.  These issues were very mind-boggling to me last year.  I don't find myself asking these questions this year and that is calming.  The offense, however, is a different story, but perhaps we'll leave that to another post.

 

InterM

November 17th, 2011 at 5:12 PM ^

This is the coaching staff we have . . . and we prefer them to the prior staff and are happy to have them . . . so, remind me again, which part of this is worth discussing, much less expressing a "contrarian" view?  If my wife is only a little bit hotter than Jessica Alba, should I be less happy to be married to her?

Gorgeous Borges

November 17th, 2011 at 5:18 PM ^

 I think we have to take some of the blame off GERG for the defense and put more of it on Rich Rod and the assistants. In 2008, the defense was not good, in spite of returning nine starters. Rich Rod hired Scott Shafer, who (unlike GERG) has been pretty successful wherever else he's been. The defense regressed considerably in 2008.

I personally blame Tony Gibson. Tony Gibson has inexplicably found a job at Pitt, and is now currently in the process of utterly destroying their seconday, which was ranked 17th last year and is now ranked 72nd. Hey, so remember that one time Iowa had that epic comeback against Pitt? Vandenberg passed for 400 yards, throwing three touchdown passes in the fourth quarter. These things happen to you when you hire Tony Gibson. Tony Gibson minus all of the points.

 

thisisme08

November 17th, 2011 at 5:54 PM ^

IMO another year older (even including the scheme change, the players still are more mentally prepared) and actual defensive coaches w/ pedigrees.

Argument solved. 

treetown

November 17th, 2011 at 7:00 PM ^

To be fair to the poster, one would expect as a team gains more experience, gets physically more mature and stronger, parts of the defense should be expected to improve. A sophomore should be better than the freshman. The junior should be better than the sophmore and the senior should be better than the junior. This is seen in many individual sports so long as the player doesn't plateau. Each year the personal best times/performances improves.

Players with an extra RS year should take that one step further. So it is not unreasonable to expect if a team starts a lot of freshmen and sophomores to see it improve the following two years.

But as others have also noted, the degree of improvement is much greater than what can be rationally expected to be attributable to this natural "aging and maturing" effect.

Likewise, it is a fair statement that some of our opposition may have taken a step backwards compared to past years. All of the numbers aren't in, but the improvement overall in terms of scoring, yards yielded and relative rank in the league and the whole of D1 can't be laid to this process. Otherwise we should see a cycling of defenses every few years as teams age and mature to their peaks. We don't see that typically happening - because coaching has an effect.

 

Charlie Chunk

November 17th, 2011 at 8:39 PM ^

Your denial of the obvious improvements is laughable.  The pass coverage alone is enough of a change to show thanks.  How about the pressure packages?

I'm sorry but we are not watching the same games!

Go Blue!

coastal blue

November 17th, 2011 at 8:59 PM ^

No matter what, I love seeing us get stops on 3rd and short instead of giving up first downs on 3rd and 20