Decimated Defense, Part 39
This has been covered many, many times here on MGoBlog but Jonathan Chait gives his take on what went wrong defensively in 2009 and how we will improve in 2010.
http://michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1103220
I thought Chait's discussion of T-Wolf's move from safety to corner was pretty interesting.
I pray we can be an average defense this season. The secondary still scares the heck out of me.
For some reason I am not as skeptical as I was last year. I like the youth on defense and while they aren't experienced, they sure as hell aren't lacking talent. I like the Gordon's (Cam and Thomas) and Vlad, in particular. I think they can make some plays for us, among others.
I wish I was still optimistic about Vlad. Unfortunately I haven't seen him do much other than get torched in spring games. Hopefully he will shut me up this fall.
Sadly, I agree re: Vlad. UM took a chance on him after OSU basically stopped recruiting him because of his knee injury. At this point (and it COULD change in the future, obviously) it looks like OSU may have made the right call. Vlad looked incredibly slow in that 97-yard TD catch and run by Roundtree, who is NOT a burner by any means.
To be fair, I believe that Vlad's knee issue in the spring game was actually from the opposite knee being sprained in practice. I could be wrong, but that's what I recall from April.
I don't guarantee he's going to set the world on fire at safety, but I generally think it's folly to lose faith in anyone named Vlad.
Well, in the 2009 spring game his "torching" was actually Kevin Leach's fault.
And in the 2010 spring game, he was playing on a sprained knee that he suffered early during spring practices.
So I don't think we've seen everything Vlad Emilien can do just yet. I think we should reserve judgment.
This line sums up the problem with the defense last year:
"also forced Michael Williams back into the lineup by default, and Williams had a hellishly bad year"
I just hope that the secondary spots are decided through competition and not just because there is no one at the spot to play.
"Let me repeat a point I made at the end of last season. The mid-season move of Troy Woolfolk from deep safety to cornerback was responsible for the collapse of the defense. With Woolfolk patrolling the middle, Michigan had an average defense. With Kovacs in the middle, the defense was horrendous. Michigan played six games with Woolfolk deep and gave up 23 points a game. Michigan played five games with Kovacs deep - I'm excluding Delaware State - and gave up 37 points a game. The offenses in the Woolfolk game were statistically almost identical to those in the Kovacs games. The mere switch of the safety lineup from Woolfolk deep and Kovacs in the box to Kovacs deep and Williams in the box resulted in a two touchdown per game difference."
Yeah, this basically confirms what we all knew: Kovacs is a smart, hard-hitting, run-stopping safety but just doesn't have the speed to play deep. If we can keep him in the box and put someone more athletic (I'm guessing the Cammissioner) deep, we should be much better in the backfield.
The offenses in the Woolfolk game were statistically almost identical to those in the Kovacs games.
That is a bogus statement, the offenses in the second half of the year were WAY better than most of those in the first half; ND and MSU were good the rest were pretty terrible.
- First Half : Western Mich, Notre Dame, Eastern Mich, Indiana, MSU, Iowa
- Second Half: Penn State., Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin, Ohio State
but have you compared them statistically? Maybe EMU and WMU put up big numbers against their MAC opponents.
Ohio State was the "worst" offense we faced after Delaware State.
| Half | Rank | Name | Ydspgm |
| 1 | 8 | Notre Dame | 451.75 |
| 1 | 38 | Michigan St. | 406.23 |
| 1 | 56 | Western Mich. | 387.83 |
| 1 | 72 | Indiana | 365 |
| 1 | 89 | Iowa | 336.31 |
| 1 | 116 | Eastern Mich. | 278.33 |
| 2 | 30 | Wisconsin | 416.92 |
| 2 | 37 | Penn St. | 406.92 |
| 2 | 47 | Illinois | 393.5 |
| 2 | 53 | Purdue | 391.33 |
| 2 | 68 | Ohio St. | 369 |
Except Iowa and Indiana.
We played them before DSU. If Ohio State wanted to score points, they could. The statement from the article is just flat out wrong.
If Ohio State wanted to score points, they could.
Let me re-phrase that for you since I think I know what you're getting at: OSU didn't show their full offensive potential.
There were plenty of times that game when JT Floyd was beat deep, but they couldn't connect. The Bucs' offense was mostly coming from beating at the interior of our line, and exploiting Pryor's running ability above humans.
Michigan went into that game with a stack defense, but it was a box stack in which Kovacs served as a linebacker -- that 8th man hardly left. It contained the running back okay, so our weaknesses were basically down to a.) Floyd was 1-on-1 with an NFL-bound receiver, and b.) RVB or Roh were 1-on-1 on contain for Pryor. We won enough of those mismatches, however (mostly thanks to Pryor's deep accuracy issues) battles to put the offense in a position to win the game. It was an excellent game-plan, and as well-executed by the talent on hand as you could expect.
Over the season, Ohio State's offense wasn't worse than other opponents -- in that singular case, our defense played at the peak of its capabilities, while only beating us consistently in one of the two mismatches they could exploit all day.
That may be able to add some depth, perhaps in the second half of the season, to the cornerback position? It sounds like if we add depth here, then we can definately become competitive defense. Makes the loss of Dorsey sting still, but I have some hope in this defense. Also hope our offense has a leadfoot and never lets up.
People seem to have given up on him pretty quickly (considering none of his eligibility has expired yet). I've also heard plenty of positives about his play/practice to counter the popular sentiment that he has disappointed so far. He seems like he would be the first guy off the bench and I can't see him being any worse than our options were last year (basically Floyd or nothing).
Given the numbers (three guys), the ability to play early at that position, and their recruiting rankings/hype, I don't think it is crazy to expect at least one of the freshmen corners to be able to contribute in nickle or emergency situations.
but I think it's not so much giving up on him as the realization that he's already physically grown out of the CB position into maybe a box safety (or LB at this rate). He is where he is because of the howling need for bodies at corner, but my JT excitement level will return to a place commensurate with his recruiting hype as soon as they find the right place for him on the field (after the red sirens indicating "CB Depth Code Red" stop wailing). At least he's going to startle the piss out of the first WR he lines up on top of. "Um, why is that large man lining up where I need to run my route?"
How do we know JT Turner has, "physically outgrown the cornerback position"?
which seemed to be pretty consistent in that interpretation. There's nothing wrong with a big corner per se if he can swivel, switch directions on a dime, etc., but it doesn't sound like that's the case with JT. If he does stay at CB, I can't think of a truly big corner like that for UM since way back in the Lance Dottin days (at least that's how I remember him-- much bigger than the Ty Laws, Chuck Woods and Marlin Jacksons that came after)
With Teric Jones moving to safety in the spring and JT Turner remaining at corner, I'm assuming the coaches think Turner is a better fit at corner than Jones. Jones actually got some PT at the corner last year while Turner redshirted.
JT Turner is 6'2" 197 lbs, not 6'2" 220 lbs.
6'2" 197, that sounds like perfect cover corner size to me. What do some of you guys want a cb to be, 5'8" 165 lbs??
Christian Cullen. But he didn't enroll early, so it probably wouldn't be until the second half of the season for depth. Brian has him as lock to play this year
Edit: I think that part of the article discounts Cullen's potential to beef up the sky-falling angle. We of course are dangerously thin at CB, but he could just have easily said "highly touted recruit Christian Cullen arrives on campus with a chance to contribute immediately".
4 star, #8 CB for Rivals. 4 star, #3 CB Scout. 4 star, #18 CB ESPN. If a freshman can contribute, this would be him
Cullen Christian.
Thanks.
but you get my point
for the upcoming season go like this:
1. Woolfolk
2. Floyd (NEVER thought I'd be saying that...)
3. Molk
and for honorable mentions, I'd put Martin and Death Roh in the next two spots. But seriously, if I see so much as a limp from our starting CBs, I'm gonna go "KHANNNNNN! KHAAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!"
(slightly more hilarious version here)
Otherwise, I agree. We are scary thin at CB, but we are a different team with Molk at center.
...shock the world. I have a good feeling 'bout this year.
I agree. Michigan's going to surprise this year - in a good way. I''m thinking 10-2 or.....dare I say, 11-1...or double dare i say 12-0? Yes!
Hail to the victors!!
I am definitely excited for the possibilities. Anyone else feel like last season didn't really happen? Even outside of Michigan Football everything seemed really standard and lacked any interesting stories that I can remember. Here's to a new decade.
I've seen outside of MGoBlog or HTTV. Most MGoBloggers know this, but to echo the sentiment in other posts, casual-to-interested fans do not. Those fans likely don't read Rivals either, but this will catch a few and bring them to the gospel
Agreed, John Chait's analyses are easily the best-written and best-researched on the web at-large.
It's annoying that he offers no explanation of the reason for Woolfolk's move. The meltdown by Cissoko meant TW had to be moved or opponents would have exploited that weakness. Readers who are unaware of this might conclude that coaching stupidity, rather than neccessity, lead to the move.
is that he pointed out that in 2009 the defense performed quite a bit worse with Woolfolk at corner as it did with him at safety. But yet, later on he says that Woolfolk and Floyd are entrenched at the corner spots. I sure as heck hope whoever mans Woolfolk's spot at safety hits the ground running. It's probably going to be either Williams or someone who has not played much at the college level.
This is one of the best articles I have read re: Michigan football all offseason.
Suddenly I am not as skeptical as I was before.
He makes a great point on Woolfolk moving to CB (wouldn't it be great if we still had DW and added Dorsey, so TWolf could play safety again this year? OK, time to stop dreaming, f***).
I also enjoy the point on GERG coaching Roh and Stevie last year, and how hopefully him coaching the LBs this year will lead to some improvement.
Still skeptical of our DBs though. If Floyd can be a serviceable #2 CB and either Gordon or Vlad step up - the skepticism will be removed. But until that happens, it will remain.
If we can bring the ppg average for opposing teams down to the low 20's like he says, we could win 9 games this year.
Woolfolk's (seemingly) permanent move to cornerback is an indicator to me that the defense is going to look significantly different in 2010. If Michigan were going to run a 1-high defense or Cover 2 frequently, then they would need Woolfolk at safety. He's the only one with the speed, tackling ability, and awareness to make the plays necessary at such an important position.
The fact that he's at cornerback while Cam Gordon/Vlad Emilien are going to play free safety tells me that we're going to be running a lot of Cover 3 this year. In a Cover 3, that free safety only has to cover 1/3 of the field rather than 1/2 or the whole deep zone.
If Michigan were going to play the same style of defense as in 2009, Cam Gordon would be a disaster at deep safety akin to Jordan Kovacs back there. Things are a-changin'.
I foresee lots of "bend, but don't break" defense as well. I think the staff has a lot confidence that the offense will be solid and that they'll want to keep the defense conservative and basically play to win in the 31-24 range again solid teams. Field goals aren't necessarily a bad thing to give up this season.
Base Cover 3 defenses are typically "bend but don't break" types, in my opinion. So yeah, I expect that type of defense. I'd be glad to give up a field goal on just about every possession, since I think we'll be scoring 35 points per game.