Could this team be better with same players?

Submitted by hazardc on

Does it not seem like our defense has really been just getting better all season? Does it not seem like we are doing better in the trenches even on offense? 

 

Now, does it not seem like all the "skill players" (offense especially) have totally regressed to shit? 

 

Obviously a lot of it centers around the QB, and I'm hoping this bye week gives his bones some much needed rest... but  if funchess and gardner actually played up to their potential again for a couple games with the way teh defense has been holding teams up, wouldn't this team have a ton more potential to win. (I.E. points)

 

Does it look like that young OL has been actually getting better?

 

 

I don't want to suggest we don't go balls out for Harbaugh, I wanted him back in A2 when he was coaching stanford....  Just some observations I've seen lately.


When people were comparing that NW vs ND game, I think some people forgot what the box score actually looked like when we had a goose egg on the scoreboard....  

 

Am I crazy in thinking that SOME of this team is developing a little bit?  

 

I wonder what the spread will be in columbus... 

MGoBoard
Football

raleighwood

November 17th, 2014 at 11:09 PM ^

Always great to see Ian Hunter!

To answer the OP's question.....yes, this team could be better.  Last year's team could at least score points (when they weren't going backwards) with the same personnel.  This team, with the level of talent (and experience) that it has should be 7-3 at worst.  Losses to ND and MSU are justifiable.  I'll throw in one other loss "just because".......but you can't explain away five losses.

 

Joined: 11/26/2008

MGoPoints: 4710

Class of 1817

November 17th, 2014 at 6:51 PM ^

Absolutely.

No doubt.

We don't have a team full of a bunch of no-talent kids. They're largely undeveloped, unfocused, and seem to play sluggishly and without a sense of fearsome motivation necessary to dominate in football.

Much of this falls on the coaching and conditioning staff.

Joined: 06/23/2011

MGoPoints: 4419

DFW_Michigan_Man

November 17th, 2014 at 6:56 PM ^

Most of the players on Team 135 were highly recruited so I don't see why not. The biggest issue in my mind and why Gardner has regressed is the constant turnover of offensive philosophy and not putting him in a position to succeed. He simply isn't a drop back passer and can't read defenses, which is why we have seen him regress.

Joined: 09/20/2013

MGoPoints: 1568

WichitanWolverine

November 17th, 2014 at 7:03 PM ^

My thoughts:

-The only unit that really seems to be improving to me is the OLine, and maybe the LBs.

-The DLine has been stout this year, especially against the run. I think they've been playing near their ceiling most of the year.

-The corners have looked horrible against decent competition and good/OK against weak teams. I don't think them holding their own against NU and IU is an indicator of improvement.

-We've seen some good production from the RBs, but again, Drake racking up 100yds against Indiana is not necessarily improvement. Smith gained some tough yards after contact last week, but against a weak NU team.

-Who knows how good the WRs are with Gardner playing QB. I do agree that Funchess has pretty much given up on the season.

-QB play has killed the season. Even though Devin was untouched the entire game against NU, he still had one of the worst days of his career. I feel bad for the kid but we cannot win with him at QB, and obviously Shane didn't fare any better against Minnesota.

 

But to answer your question, absolutely. With better coaching, I believe this squad could win the B1G.

Joined: 09/30/2009

MGoPoints: 34351

UMxWolverines

November 17th, 2014 at 7:03 PM ^

Why could Devin play like this in 2012:

 

But look the way he does this year? There is no way you can tell me that Gardner ''isn't a a good QB''. These coaches ruined him.

Joined: 03/01/2009

MGoPoints: 65366

funkywolve

November 17th, 2014 at 7:11 PM ^

Agree that he's always had bad plays sprinkled in with good ones, it just seems like there hasn't really been any good plays this year. 

Injuries have taken a toll on his mobility.  Watching the South Carolina video, Gardner looks like a totally different player running the ball compared to what we've seen this year.

Joined: 10/08/2008

MGoPoints: 20184

Vengeful Barbarian

November 17th, 2014 at 7:55 PM ^

I think the offensive play calling has changed a lot going from Borges to Nuss. I know people here criticized Al Borges's play calling a lot, but Al's play calling, particularly in the run game, was intended to set up big passing plays downfield, not necessarily maximize our running game. Nuss on the other hand is more focused on the running game, at the expense of the passing game. We've seen great improvement in the running game from last year, but it's cost us in the passing game. 
 
Last year, Devin Gardner threw for the second most passing yards in the season by a Michigan QB, with one of the worst offensive lines in Michigan history. I'm not sure why Borges was the problem here, his playcalling seemed to work out ok in the passing game, but everyone was hung up on the 27 for 27 against Penn State.

Joined: 02/12/2014

MGoPoints: 5391

lilpenny1316

November 17th, 2014 at 10:37 PM ^

That was us scoring 28 on South Carolina.  We also did not have trouble scoring against ND or OSU with Borges.  And while people want to complain about 27 for 27, we put up 34 points in regulation against PSU.  Plus if Gibbons makes an FG in OT or if our D makes a stop at the end of regulation in that game, no one complains about Borges.  

Borges was not the problem.  Funk and that awful offensive line play was the problem.  

Joined: 11/19/2009

MGoPoints: 61787

GoBlueInNYC

November 18th, 2014 at 6:38 AM ^

Just because this year's offense is bad doesn't somehow retroactively make last year's offense good. It is possible, I dare say probable, that both offenses are bad, and that just because Nussmeier has overseen an even more ineffective unit does not mean that Borges didn't deserve to be fired.

Joined: 03/23/2010

MGoPoints: 8773

westwardwolverine

November 18th, 2014 at 9:07 AM ^

Sure. Because Devin Gardner wasn't completely broken last year. 

Its about 80% down to the QB this year and part of the reason Devin is broke goes back to Borges getting him killed last year. 

Joined: 11/26/2013

MGoPoints: 9007

GoBLUinTX

November 17th, 2014 at 8:42 PM ^

I agree that the switch from Borges to Nussmeier had a deletorious effect on Gardner.  However, it isn't that the running game was emphasised at the expense of the passing game, though that does seem to be the case.  I think what has hurt is that while Nussmeier purported to making the game simpler for the skill players, the change has been far greater than anticipated and to make things worse, he has filled Gardner's head with all manner of new minutia he must process before acting. 

Joined: 12/02/2013

MGoPoints: 5895

westwardwolverine

November 18th, 2014 at 9:06 AM ^

Right. Because as Hoke stated earlier in the year, they are trying to save him so he doesn't get injured. 

So imagine Borges trying to scheme last year only he can't use Devin's legs. Then ask yourself: Do we beat Notre Dame, Akron, UConn or Indiana? 

Joined: 11/26/2013

MGoPoints: 9007

shallowcal

November 17th, 2014 at 7:34 PM ^

he is able to push the ball down the field.  he is able to find receivers and hit them with well timed and accurate throws.  this season, he is not doing that.  he cant stand in the pocket and unleash a 20 yard strike down the seam.  he just cant get it there.  im more inclined to say that is because he is injured and thats why his for has regressed so far from his previous form.  one simply does not just forget mechanics

Joined: 04/14/2014

MGoPoints: 936

Vengeful Barbarian

November 17th, 2014 at 8:12 PM ^

A lot was made early in the season about how Nuss gave Devin the responsibility of calling out the Mike linebacker and setting up protection before the play began. Borges was criticised for not having Devin do this, (he instead relied on the Center to make the call). I wonder if this added responsibility, as well as the difference in play calling, has led to some of the regression we are seeing in Devin as a passer.

Joined: 02/12/2014

MGoPoints: 5391

tolmichfan

November 18th, 2014 at 12:04 AM ^

Wow.... Someone with an intelligent thought on Gardner....the guy spent half the offseason with one broken foot, I don't know how that couldn't affect a DUAL threat QB. Plus do you remeber way back to the app state game? He had that really wonky shot put type throw to funchess for a TD. It sure didn't look like he had full motion of his arm. Then he sprains his other ankle in the Penn State game. Again when half your game is the threat to run the ball, and it's not there usually it makes playing defense a lot easier to play.

Joined: 11/26/2010

MGoPoints: 1433

Wolverinefan84

November 17th, 2014 at 7:50 PM ^

I agree Devin looked a heck of a lot more comfortable in the pocket and running the football (granted the O line was much better and more consistent then). But I haven't seen any Michigan receivers this year go get the ball like Gallon did. Gardner's regression shows how much Gallon helped last year especially.

Joined: 04/05/2011

MGoPoints: 2052

Tater

November 17th, 2014 at 7:54 PM ^

It's the coaching, not Devin.  In particular, this year's scheme is terrible.  Opponents know where the players are going to be before Devin does in some instances.  When your offense is that predictable, your players are going to "underachieve."

This staff has "Lionized" half of the team.  I just hope they can be "detoxed" by the new coach.

Joined: 08/13/2008

MGoPoints: 30584

Reader71

November 18th, 2014 at 12:01 AM ^

You can say that you believe the coaches should bear the brunt of the blame, but you can't say that it is all on them and not on the player. The player is the one actually doing the thing. His brain. His synapses. His muscles, tendons, bones. He throws the ball. Players are not chess pieces, even though we like to think of them that way. I agree that the coaches have to take a lot of blame. But the players play.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

westwardwolverine

November 18th, 2014 at 9:10 AM ^

Actually its mostly on Devin this year. Watch him try to throw a deep ball to an open man and he can't even get it close. He misses open receivers all the time. When he does hit one, they drop the ball. 

If Nuss was working with the guy who played against Notre Dame - especially the one who could use his legs - we'd be fine. 

Instead, he gets the guy who Borges broke by instructing him to hold onto the ball so that he could get utterly annhilated over the back half of the season. 

So yeah, you can blame coaches, but its tough to throw it on Nussmeier when the damage was already done. 

Joined: 11/26/2013

MGoPoints: 9007

SFBlue

November 17th, 2014 at 7:05 PM ^

It could absolutely be better.  But I think the team's fortunes would still ride on a young offensive line, with no veteran stars; Devin Gardner, who has his good and bad days; and the lack of a true wideout who can get separation and be a game-changer.  I would expect more out of the line and less variance with better coaching, but this is not a top 10 team on talent alone, the way I see it.

Joined: 11/02/2009

MGoPoints: 15699

StephenRKass

November 17th, 2014 at 7:10 PM ^

I think the team is much better than given credit for. Imhe, Michigan has improved an awful lot over the course of the season. I really expected that to happen, largely because of the OL.

I think the defense has done remarkably well, particularly given the loss of Peppers.

The skill positions haven't been as good as we want, but part of that was the OL developing, part of it injuries (Green and Gardner.)

I think that Minnesota is much better than given credit for, and don't call that a bad loss. The single game I really wish we would have won is Rutgers. I am incredibly depressed when I think about Michigan football, because I think it is a foregone conclusion Hoke will be fired, and I think that is not the solution.

I do think we will beat Maryland, and I think that Michigan will play OSU much better and tighter than hardly anyone expects.

Oh, and I actually think that in terms of player personnel, Michigan is pretty well set for the coming year. While I'd dearly love to see Hoke get another year, I'm assuming that the Mongol hordes won't allow that to happen.

Joined: 07/15/2008

MGoPoints: 22997

blueinbelfast

November 17th, 2014 at 7:35 PM ^

I'm not sure how you can make a serious argument for Hoke at this point.  I was a fan of the hire at the time and at the start of the season would have said that if we went 7-5 or better he deserved one more year.  But the issues that we've seen in player development, team cohesion, lack of spirit or competitiveness and questionable decision-making all tend to come back to the coaching staff.  

I'm not sure that RR could have survived the egg the team laid against Miss. St., but (while I was no supporter of RR), you could (and many did) make the case that we had one of the top offenses in the country and the right DC and a few good recruits could have made us a powerhouse for years to come.  Right now, on the other hand, we're not particularly good at anything.  The defense is a bright spot, and may well even get much better next year, but even then there are glaring holes.  

The problem is that the progress you point to has come in fits and starts, at best.  The firing of RR could be chalked up to lots of things, and it might well be said that it was a premature firing of a coach who was never really given a fair chance.  Whatever your feelings are about Coach Hoke (and he certainly is a likeable guy), four years is an entirely reasonable period in which to expect visible progress and a modicum of real success, and we're just not seeing it.  He wouldn't survive beyond this year at any place that took themselves seriously.

Joined: 11/28/2012

MGoPoints: 514