Defense a Strength, Special Teams on the way
Michigan's defense is a strength. Period. Admittedly, Minnesota was awful. And a freshman QB is a deer in the headlights. Having said that, there is no denying the dominance and strength of Michigan's defense. And it isn't done getting better.
- With the score run up, Mattison was able to get lots of backups plenty of playing time and experience, and see what they could do. This builds morale, keeps the starters fresh, and pays big dividends.
- On the DL, we now have seven solid contributors (Martin, VanBergen, Roh, Campbell, Black, Washington, Heininger.) This keeps them fresh, and means less disaster if any one is out. With three and outs, they just stay strong and get stronger.
- In the secondary, we have four solid CB's (Woolfolk, Floyd, Avery, & Countess.) Countess is still making mistakes, but he will be a good one. At safety, Kovacs and Gordon are being freed up to do what they should be doing, and Johnson and Robinson have time to improve. Kovacs continues to do a great job, but doesn't have to bail out everyone else.
- I'd like to see more depth at LB. But so do the coaches, with four 4-star LB recruits already in the fold for next year. This year, Hawthorne, Demens, and Ryan are doing a fine job, with Cam Gordon finally healing up. I'm not as confident in Fitzgerald, Morgan, Beyer, & Herron, but they haven't been exposed . . . yet.
- The whole defense seems to be very opportunistic in causing and recovering fumbles. VanBergen's strip of a RB vs. SDSU was awesome, and seemingly a direct result of coaching. While Avery & Herron were more lucky than good in their scoring TD's, they still seized the opportunity and ran with it.
- Assuming Michigan's defense last year had a failing grade, they have room for huge improvement over the course of this season, up to say, a B+ or A-. If a defense begins the year at B+ or A-, there just isn't as much room (or need, I suppose) to improve.
Special teams is still a work in process, and yet:
- 3 field goals, 7 extra points, one game. That's more points than Vincent Smith scored! Gibbons is heading in the right direction. At the very least, this isn't a liability.
- No fumbled punts or kickoffs this year. And Gallon is going to break some big returns. I would bet on this.
- With Hagerup back, there will be competition at punter, and this will only get better.
- Kickoff coverage is still subpar, but I have to believe after last week, this will be a major point of emphasis in practice. Punt coverage isn't quite as bad, but also a place where there is room for improvement.
The point is, our defense is keeping us in games, and giving the offense the opportunity to shine. I can't quantify it, but I have to believe that there was a heavy psychological weight on the offense last year, knowing that if they didn't score, they were going to lose. (exhibit A: Illinois game.) As we play teams with a staunch defense (MSU, Nebraska, even Ohio,) the offense can play with a different mindset. They can do all they can to gain yards and score, but the game isn't lost if they DON'T score. Really, both defense and offense have the other's back. This balance strengthens both.
I'm going to the game this Saturday, and honestly, I hope Persa plays, and plays well. I still think the defense will shut Northwestern down, but I think our D needs the challenge more than another tomato can, as they prepare for MSU. I want to see what our secondary can do against a real passing threat. And I am salivating about our DL going against Michigan State's OL. Cousins better have on a flak jacket.
At this point, I have lost all reason. I believe, looking at our schedule, that we will go 12 - 0, lose to Wisconsin, and win a decent bowl game (having a month to prepare!) for a final record of 13 - 1. The most challenging games remaining are Nebraska and Illinois, and I still think we win both. I could never have predicted this at the beginning of the season.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:36 AM ^
Why be such a Debbie Downer, you really don't think we can get by Wisconsin in the conference championship?
October 4th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^
I don't really get why people are saying automatic loss if we get to the B1G championship game. If we get there, and it is still a big "if", we have the talent and coaching to at the very least compete with them. A lot of people on here are speaking like their goal is to win the division only to get curbstomped by Wisconsin, and if we're 12-0 like the OP thinks we'll be (not saying everybody feels this way, including myself), we've got ourselves a damn fine football team..
October 4th, 2011 at 1:26 PM ^
Mostly because I see thier OL averages about 320 and their TE is 260.
Using BWC, our D-line goes across the board at about 295-300 average. I dont care who you are, standing up to that much beef is going to be tough. If our front 4 cant at the very least stalemate their front 5, we are going to get treadmarks on our face as they roll over us.
Not to mention, they have a Denardish QB with a quick hit/power combo running game.
Now, their DL is small, but hot damn those kids are quick.
October 4th, 2011 at 3:34 PM ^
That is all.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:27 PM ^
but Wisconsin outrushed them 226 to 80 something and averaged about 7 yards a carry.. how Wiscy didnt just come out and smahs them in the mouth every single play I have no idea.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:37 AM ^
I agree with your analysis for the most part, but still think the defense is vulernable in the passing game! Watching the Minnesota game, when the freshman QB wasnt running for his life he was able to find some open recievers against our corners, Im not sure if its lack of speed on the outside or positioning but it is something that needs to improve before we play better recievers like Cunningham and Jenkins.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:44 AM ^
I love the positive attitude, but I'm still worried about the secondary overall. Countess will be really good, but he's still learning. The thing that encourages me the most is the in game adjustments, and also seeing how they improve week to week. I think we step into conference play very well. We had our easy game, now it steps up a bit with NW and gets tougher next week with State. That game will be a good measurement of our progression.
<br>
<br>Sooner or later, we're bound to have a letdown. Right? I'm just trying to keep my hopes in check. I don't want to get my heart broken again...it's been a long three years. Through and through.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:47 AM ^
OP clearly delusional.... and I love it!
October 4th, 2011 at 9:53 AM ^
but if we go 12-0, the BIG 10 has much bigger problems that I thought.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:38 AM ^
Well, the Big Ten does have pretty big problems this year, which is the only reason that talk of 12-1 is even sane. And our conference couldn't have picked a better year to stink -- giving us a major bounce at a crucial time of transition. Yet, while each game left on the schedule is very winnable for us, I do think the OP underestimates how hard it is to win all the games that you should win. I admit, that I think it is possible -- that alone is incredible! -- but it will be a lot harder than folks think.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:54 AM ^
Let's wait 'til we see a good offense we can stop without them having a large number of turnovers. At that point I'll be very happy with our D. They've got a chance to prove they're actually good in the next couple weeks.
October 4th, 2011 at 11:54 AM ^
...or lets not and just keep forcing turnovers
October 4th, 2011 at 9:57 AM ^
on the defense being a strength.
I love Mattison and what he has done for this defense. It is in such stark contrast to what we have seen the last few years it almost seems too good to be true. I know we still have some very good teams left on the schedule, but there isn't a doubt in my mind that if we still had the same defensive staff as last year, we would have given up way more points thus far. That gives me hope for this team.
We also see that this staff has helped this defense improve each game so far. The last few years it seemed that improvements were only being made in the offseason, and even those weren't very noticable. This year we make adjustments and improve as the game progresses which is awesome to see.
My main concern is how much longer Mattison is going to want to coach. The guy isn't a spring chicken and I think he is a one in a million type of DC. I am praying that he is taking Montgomery under his wing and grooming him (as a youngster on the staff) to be his replacement once he leaves and teaching him everything he knows so that there will be a seemless transition when the big guy decides to hang it up.
October 4th, 2011 at 1:07 PM ^
Not sure where I saw it, but I think I read that Mattison plans on coaching for 4 more years (this and 3 after) and then hanging it up. We should be stable if not a very good defense by that point and I could see Mallory taking over, as he has been a co-dc in the past. I like the idea of Montgomery, as he is young and energetic, but I see Mallory with more experience and think he may get the first look. Hopefully I am wrong and Mattison stays even longer, but I can't see much more than 4 years.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:17 AM ^
first double post ever.
Since it is here I might as well say that I agree with your assessment of the special teams as well pretty much. Gibbons has looked pretty good and maybe it was simply a confidence issue with him. All coaches say that kickers are a special breed.
Punting should take an uptick as well as Hagerup has all the tools to be Mesko 2.0 if he can keep his nose clean. Returning seems to be much better this year because we are at least hanging on to the damn ball so far.
I think, like you, my main concern is the coverage teams. If they can show some improvement over the next few games I think they (special teams as a whole) could be considered a strength of this team as well.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:59 AM ^
You have lost all reason. We could win all those games; we also could lose any one of them. Yes, the team is a lot better, but check back after we play NW and MSU and see how we do against (1) a really good offense, and (2) a really good defense, both on the road. If we win 9 games (and beat the Bucks), we should all be happy. Make it 10, and we should be ecstatic. Countess is the real deal--I think he is as good as Avery already and will be starting the next three years at one corner.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:13 AM ^
I am delusional. However, I believe the offense is extremely strong, and the balance of a strong defense will make all the winnable games a win.
Yes, I would be very happy with 10 wins. However,
Northwestern: I want to see our secondary challenged. And I don't think their defense can stop Denard. I'd love to see the triple option and plays out of a 2 QB set.
MSU: Michigan wants blood. This is for pride. In our house. I want to see Denard challenged. And I believe our defense is going to destroy them.
Purdue: Tomato can.
Iowa: If they lost to ISU, how are they going to beat Michigan?
Illinois & Nebraska: two toughest games, as said already. Maybe we lose these, go 10 - 2. Personally, worst case scenario: we split.
OSU: Herron and Posey are gone. They have a freshman QB. Their offense is in a shambles. And this is personal for Hoke: he will take no prisoners.
I am deferring on the offense to others, but I also believe that Borges is extremely creative, and that he will have plays to spring on MSU, Nebraska, and OSU, that will stun them and lead to scores.
Even if we adjust down to 11 - 1, we are not out of the running to be in the inaugural Big 10 Championship game. Nebraska already has one loss, one more, and we could get in even losing to them. Assuming a loss to Wiscosin, this would be 11 - 2, with a bowl win for a final record of 12 - 2.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:19 AM ^
the MSU game was in East Lansing this year? I could be wrong, but I thought it was.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:23 AM ^
Stand corrected
October 4th, 2011 at 10:28 AM ^
It is.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:48 AM ^
Here's the delusionally pessimistic version, just for karmic balance
NU: Their defense shut down Illinois's option based rushing attack. Illinois got almost all of their yards with an aggressive downfield passing game. Minnesota's so bad that our passing success against them is meaningless. If they slow our rushing game down and keep us behind the chains, our passing game will continue to struggle. Persa and his WRs present the most talented passing game we've seen to date (not just reliant on a single receiver). It's our first road game and we're historically awful at those.
MSU: Dantonio spends all offseason game planning for this one game. It's at East Lansing. Their line is bad but is giving Cousins enough time to get the ball off and Cunningham is probably the best receiver in the league this year (pick 'em with Toon). Their defense looks like the real deal and stopped Denard and the running game last year.
Purdue: ACL/sob
Iowa: Always tough in Kinnick. Vandenburg is developing into a dangerous QB, has a great deal of confidence in the wake of the Pitt comeback. ISU game was due to a young defense that's getting better with experience. [Honestly, this is probably the one team on our schedule whose season is as uncertain as UM's. They could be anywhere from 7-1 to 3-5 in the B1G).
Illinois: Dangerous downfield passing attack combined with solid rushing. Defense looked good until NU game. Champaign smells like cows, distracting offense.
Nebraska: They can't be as bad as they looked in Madison. Their defense has a lot of experience playing against a lesser version of Denard.
Ohio: Fired up to salvage their season. Tough aggressive defense combined with shock from UM players at the sheer number of tatoos on Ohio players lead to Earl Bruce last game/Tressel first game type situation.
That was mainly to balance out the universe, but I do think you're completely underrating MSU as a tough game. That defensive front is going to cause problems for our rushing game (you know they've been prepping for it for months ... though maybe the switch away from the I causes all of that prep to go out the window). Cunningham is a seriously legit wideout. They might win simply based on our end of ND game strategy.
On the plus side, I don't think there's a game that we won't be competitive in. From there, it just goes down to small breaks and the general bloody mindedness of the universe.
October 4th, 2011 at 11:37 AM ^
What makes you so sure that Herron and Posey are gone for our game? Did I miss something?
October 4th, 2011 at 11:44 AM ^
Iowa: If they lost to ISU, how are they going to beat Michigan?
Although true, Iowa has always been one of those teams that scares me most. Vandenberg has been effective, but I have high hopes that our D is only going to get better as the season progresses.
October 4th, 2011 at 12:51 PM ^
I presume the OP was half-joking with the line. Because those sorts of results are the essence of college football. I mean, "this team lost to Appalachian State. How are they going to beat Florida?"
October 4th, 2011 at 10:08 AM ^
I'll be the first person to say that I hate it when people only post on a thread to make the intial writer feel bad and themselves feel better, and that is not what I am doing here. I just wanted to point out that you are calling Avery solid and then going on to note that Countess is making mistakes but getting better.
I know he's just a true freshman, but I, like many in the MGoCommunity have not missed a minute of live Michigan football this season (On television or in the Big House). And many many times coverage was blown or a huge mistake was made, that #5 (Avery) was standing there, looking lost. On the other hand, every play #18 has been in on, he has not only done his job, but done it in a way that a true freshman hardly ever does in the BIG TEN.
Don't get me wrong, there are still 7-9 games left in the year, and he has plenty of time to remind us he's still a freshman. But I don't understand the juxtaposition of criticizing Countess right after you just called Avery "solid".
-----
In other news, I look at our schedule and see the same thing too. As a whole, I don't see us running the table. It's the Big Ten fer god sakes. However, when I look at each game individually, I see the major possibility of a win, so long as we don't beat ourselves. I think that's the major problem. We're so used to the past few years being full of mistakes and moments in which we literally "beat ourselves" that we can't help but remain wary of them.
Let's not take our pants off yet.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:20 AM ^
I will defer regarding Countess until looking more carefully at the last two week's UFR.
I believe it is true that Countess led the team in tackles the last two weeks. However, as Gerdeman noted over at Michigan Monday (see theozone.net) "the reason he is leading the team in tackles is because he keeps giving up completions." Yes, he has pass break ups the last two weeks, but I want to see more. I think it will come, but he's not all that just yet. Seeing him and the others against Persa will help figure it out.
I'll reluctantly agree there is probably a loss somewhere in our remaining schedule. Having said that, every game (excepting Wisconsin) is "winnable."
I do think "those who stayed" are hungry, and want to go out as champions. You can see that Martin and Van Bergen and Woolfolk can "will" the team to some victories, along with Denard and Koger et al on the offensive side.
October 4th, 2011 at 11:10 AM ^
I'm with you on that. Every game does seem "winnable". Regardless of what happens i really do bet that we end up finishing a little better than the "8-4" most people (including myself) called for originally. Luckily, the Big Ten is not very good this year, and the only killer the conference has is actually not on our schedule this year.
October 4th, 2011 at 12:55 PM ^
I totally agree with hailtothe on this. There may be plenty of obscuring factors that make Countess appear better than Avery, but from what I've seen it looks like opposing receivers are generally getting separation from Avery whereas Countess is up in the WR's grill every time the ball comes his way. I think with Woolfolk slowed by injuries, our two best CBs right now are JT Floyd and Countess, and that teams will start picking on Avery.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:09 AM ^
In my opinion, the jury is still out on the defense. Against the best offense we've faced all year, we gave up 31 points and 513 yards. Granted, we forced 5 turnovers that game, but that game still gives me cause for concern. Every other offense we've played has a lot of "We played well, but..." Now, I agree that our defense has done what they need to do. They've dominated the teams they were supposed to dominate, and against ND they were able to come up with big plays to keep us in the game (ND's last scoring drive aside). It's because of this that I'm really looking forward to NW, and I'm with you in hoping that Persa plays the whole game. He's a great QB and NW definitely has the potential to beat us, and it will be up to the defense to really prove they can step up and dominate.
October 4th, 2011 at 11:10 AM ^
So we forced Rees to drop the ball as he attempted a pass with no one around him and caused their running back to fumble without touching him. We must have brain control because it is stronger than mind control.
I expect the D to continue to improve, but wouldn't go so far as to call them a strength. Then again, I'm not so sure I would call MSU or Nebraska's D good at this point. Sparty has loaded up on offensive cupcakes and the blackshirts aren't playing very good period.
October 4th, 2011 at 12:24 PM ^
So we forced Rees to drop the ball as he attempted a pass with no one around him and caused their running back to fumble without touching him.
Yes, that is precisely what I am suggesting. If you re-watch the replay close enough, you can see that Hoke points at Rees just as he is about to throw.
HOKE UBER ALLES
October 4th, 2011 at 1:03 PM ^
These are good points. My hopes are (a) that ND is not just a good offense but an extremely good offense, and that (b) our defense has improved substantially since week 2 and that we would not give up 31 points if we played them again now.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:18 AM ^
Vincent smith scored 18 points field goals/XPs only total 16. Amirite?
October 4th, 2011 at 10:21 AM ^
I only gave him 12, one rushing, one receiving.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:32 AM ^
Yeah, I gave him credit for pass TD, why not? QBs get credit for pass TDs
October 4th, 2011 at 10:40 AM ^
as points though.
Whoever crosses the goal line gets the points.
October 4th, 2011 at 12:57 PM ^
Not true in fantasy football. The 2008 combo of Brady/Moss (which someone in my league had) racked up mega-points.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:19 AM ^
Let's see how we do at NW on the road against a good QB and a good offense. Meanwhile, the key is the combination and improvement that our team continues to exhibit on a week to week basis. They appear to be getting better, and that will be the key to this year.
Borges continues to tweak and innovate our offense and bring in more plays and options as defenses adjust and we can do this because we have experienced lineman, running backs, and a 2nd year QB who can absorb this.
Mattison continues to tweak and innovate our defense and brings in more schemes and options and we can do this because we have more experience on defense this year than last.
Couple all this with an incoming recruiting crop that looks to be in the top 5 at least, and I think we are on our way back to being continual B1G contenders each year for our first step back.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:28 AM ^
While I may not be totally confident in Herron and Fitzgerald, I haven't really seen anything to make me think that they are liabilities as reserves. I can't say that I am really sure what other B10 LB depth looks like, but I find it hard to believe that many teams in the conference would beat a Gordon/Hawthorne, Fitzgerald, Herron as second team core of linebackers.
Herron may be slow to read and react, but he is an extremely athletic linebacker who has shown he can at least make plays when they present themselves. Fitzgerald seems a capable "just a guy". And if Cam doesn't reclaim his starting spot, he would make for a reserve linebacker that was by and large consider a strength of the team at the start of the year.
Meanwhile, the DL is looking like a solid rotation with at least five guys (Martin, Campbell, Roh, Black, and RVB) who have the talent to be disruptive against any team in the conference, even if the consistency hasn't been established yet.
And those two groups are far from the most improved unit on this defense.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:33 AM ^
I'll chime in with the Mattison love as well, and I'm wondering about something in particular - in my mind both safeties are hugely responsible for any success the defense is having. I'm only talking about my personal observations and have no data to confirm, but we don't seem to be giving up as many patterns across the middle (with the exception of Michael Floyd). Both safeties seem to actually be of Big Ten quality, and they're in the right position when needed.
Contain also seems to be less of an issue. Ryan aggression aside, Gordon and Kovacs seem to often be in position to turn plays back inside on runs. It's wild to see defense actually played as it should (with the obvious caveat that the secondary is much more experienced than it has been).
Personally, I'll be happy with even eight wins, esp. if at least one of them is over MSU/tOSU...
October 4th, 2011 at 10:53 AM ^
This is a great point. The safety play might be the biggest difference in the defense. We haven't yet given up the big, back-breaking play, and the excellent play of Kovacs and Gordon have covered for any shortcomings in the LB corps. Gordon taking over for Marvin Robinson after the ND game may be a big defensive turning point (or it may just be a big step down in competition, time will tell).
October 4th, 2011 at 10:37 AM ^
I am cautiously optimistic...emphasis on cautious. The only real team that we've played with more than one superior player was ND...and Rees/Floyd/Wood had their way on our D. Granted we have gotten better while shuting down EM, SDSU and Minn. I am still kind of wondering how we do against Persa (if healthy), MSU, Illinois and the obviously better teams in the coming weeks.
October 4th, 2011 at 10:46 AM ^
I keep trying to play the schedule game and figure out how this season will unfold but I just can't get any kind of barometer on this team until I see the D against NW with a healthy Persa, and then see the O against MSU. I need to see more of NEB against the B1G also. Then I might bump us up from the 9-3 territory. (the only factor that changed my mind from 8-4 at the beginning of the season was the W vs ND.)
October 4th, 2011 at 5:08 PM ^
Win these next two weeks, both on the road, and with MSU coming off a bye, I'll adjust my expectations up accordingly.
I see the D not as a strength so much as not a liabilitiy (finally).
October 4th, 2011 at 10:54 AM ^
... and still go to the conference championship game, and a good bowl.
October 4th, 2011 at 11:07 AM ^
I know 3 and outs help build morale, but it also got me thinking about how much experience a team needs.
The starters on this team played about as long Satruday (against Minny) as they did against WMU a month ago. Is that a good thing?
Don't young guys need "live action" reps to get better and don't our starters need to get better?
Obviously it helps with injuries, but is rest important at this point of the season?
I am NOT advocating keeping in starters, but I am trying to figure out if the fact the starters have really only played about four games (minus time vs. WMU, Minny, EMU) is a net benefit or disadvantage.
This is also a question that can be asked about MSU's young OL and youngish defense. Is the bye week good for them, or does it just give them less experience heading into the UM game?
October 4th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^
You're right that our starters need reps, however keep in mind:
Our starters have limited experience. Their replacements have even less. So if we keep the starters in that means zero experience for the backups. This makes an injury catastrophically bad (escpially deep in the B10 schedule when the backup lacks the ability to kind of tune himself up playing say Minnesota). Also keeping the starters in, increasings the snaps they see and thus their odds for injury.
So it's a fine line to walk really. I personally am glad to see the second string appear in the second half.
October 4th, 2011 at 12:48 PM ^
If UM goes 12-0 in the regular season, they're going to much more than a 'decent bowl game'. They'll be in the BCS even with a loss to Wisky.