Defensive Improvement Expectations
We've all discussed the issues we've seen through on the defensive side of the ball during the first five weeks of the season, as well as the 3-3-5 scheme that's been used. The defense is currently 73rd in scoring defense and ranked 102 in total defense (37th in rushing, and dead last at 120 in passing, http://statistics.ncaafootball.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=ncaa-football&p…). Not good.
Understandably, the defense is very young and inexperienced, particularly in the secondary. I'm willing to accept this for now. However, at some point this season I think it's reasonable to expect to see some improvement from the defense and some better play. Aside from "just enough defense to win", how much improvement is reasonable to expect? And, at what point can we expect to see this?
Given the numbers the offense has put up, it seems that if they play just average, middle of the pack defense (scoring and yardage), it could make the difference between 8-4 and a better record, like 11-1.
October 5th, 2010 at 5:36 PM ^
i think we need more of these topics.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:36 PM ^
A Millen topic or two. Doesnt anyone want to talk about Millen announcing the UM/MSU game?
October 5th, 2010 at 8:03 PM ^
And I bet we both agree with our optimism to give RR and GERG time on the D. However, for some reason with this thread finally something clicked in me that hasn't in all the other threads/talk radio comments: Michigan is ranked 120th in Pass Defense. Not Eastern Michigan University, or BGSU, but the maize n blue. Maybe this stat reveals the angst apparent even in GERG and RR pic from the end of IU game that Brian linked...
October 5th, 2010 at 5:39 PM ^
With each passing week, opposing offensive coordinators get more and more information to determine how to successfully attack the other team's defense.
The Ball State game in 2006 was disastrous because it exposed Michigan's weak nickel package. OSU and USC torched Michigan by forcing us to play our weakest defensive package.
By the latter part of the season teams will know right where to go to exploit our weakest defensive links.
October 5th, 2010 at 5:45 PM ^
News to me.
October 5th, 2010 at 5:47 PM ^
Yes, IU exposed some new weaknesses. If ND played us again they would run different passing patterns for sure.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:26 PM ^
You don't need to be a Mensa candidate to know how to attack this defense; even JayPa could figure it out.
I think these threads could be limited; it's not like that defense didn't make stops against Indiana for example.
October 5th, 2010 at 5:48 PM ^
With each passing week, opposing offensive coordinators get more and more information to determine how to successfully attack the other team's defense.
The Ball State game in 2006 was disastrous because it exposed Michigan's weak nickel package. OSU and USC torched Michigan by forcing us to play our weakest defensive package.
Excellent comment and something everyone should keep in mind.
A slight counter to this would be that with our young secondary we can expect players to learn and improve as the season develops. That said I do think it's going to be an increasingly difficult season.
Success for me would be limiting teams to scoring on less then half their possessions and a slight improvement (one or two instances a game) at keeping teams out of the endzone and forcing field goals.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:11 PM ^
I agree with your thoughts and think your expectations, while hopeful, are realistic.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:11 PM ^
The other counter is that in 2006, we played the only two teams really capable of spreading us out and torching our secondary in the last two weeks of the season. OSU preferred the spread passing game with that bastard Smith, and USC was suffering from their post Bush/White RB deficiency and were using their stable of explosive wide receivers all season.
Notre Dame, Northwestern and Indiana had 48, 42 and 33 pass attempts respectively against us in 2006. There was plenty of chances for teams to examine our nickel package before Ball State, it's just that most teams couldn't attack the obviously weaker part of our team.
This year, Indiana didn't "expose" our weakness. Everyone already knew what it was (it = almost everything). I don't expect anyone to replicate Indiana's plan of attack because the rest of the schedule either doesn't have the tools or doesn't play that style.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:25 PM ^
I don't expect anyone to replicate Indiana's plan of attack because the rest of the schedule either doesn't have the tools or doesn't play that style.
I think people would be a lot less panicky if they actually looked at the remainder of the schedule and gave Indiana a shred of respect. They had a veteran QB with some weapons to throw to and were one of the worst matchups for the defense on the entire schedule. I'm glad the Chappellbombing post hit today so the GERG SUX crowd can look at opponents more in depth rather than just assume that because it's Indiana it's a guaranteed curb-stomping.
October 5th, 2010 at 8:12 PM ^
holy crap. Never seen that movie before, is the rest of the flick good ?
October 5th, 2010 at 11:55 PM ^
Most definitely. Not so black and white.
October 5th, 2010 at 7:50 PM ^
October 5th, 2010 at 9:36 PM ^
Success for me would be limiting teams to scoring on less then half their possessions
Indiana scored on five of thirteen possessions.
October 5th, 2010 at 8:13 PM ^
I don't know that Ball State exposed anything in '06. We were up 31-12 and tried to clear our bench, at which point they abused Johnny Sears (then a backup CB) with a couple long passes and made the game closer than it needed to be.
Sears didn't play much, if at all, against OSU and USC. They abused our first-string D. The big thing they did was protect their passer better than any of our first 11 opponents did, which put a lot more pressure on a secondary that wasn't that great other than Leon Hall.
October 5th, 2010 at 8:22 PM ^
Sears didn't play much
I don't know about that.... I remember him being in the game, according to the stat page he had 4 tackles. Might have been on special teams...
October 5th, 2010 at 9:55 PM ^
Okay, but he wasn't necessarily the target of their gameplans. They went after our whole secondary with impunity. The front seven had given them cover for 11 games, but Smith was able to dodge the rush and SC rolled the pocket.
October 5th, 2010 at 5:57 PM ^
hmmmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:07 PM ^
Let go and learn to love it--life will be easier this way: But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Michigan's Defense.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:10 PM ^
I took a look at how often teams with terrible defenses early in the season improve to be somewhat better than terrible. It was easiest to compare Aug/Sept rankings to final rankings, so I looked at how many teams ranked 90th or below in total defense at the end of Sept improved to be at least 70th or above by the end of the year. Michigan was 92nd at the end of Sept (and is currently 102).
2004: 14%
2005: 23%
2006: 20%
2007: 17%
2008: 13%
2009: 16%
If instead you look at how many of the teams 90th and below after September improve at least 15 ranks by the end of the year, you get the following:
2004: 34%
2005: 44%
2006: 23%
2007: 30%
2008: 26%
2009: 32%
So, there's a small chance we can get "slightly below average" or better, and a reasonable chance we can improve somewhat.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:15 PM ^
then you did a great job extracting this information. It probably took a decent amount of time to do this!
Very useful, and since it gives us a sliver of hope...nice work man!!
October 5th, 2010 at 6:22 PM ^
diary worthy.
October 5th, 2010 at 7:40 PM ^
The raw numbers are interesting, but we need more for a diary. You would need to compare BCS to non-BCS teams.
It's likely that non-BCS teams that played BCS schedules in the non-conference would be the teams moving up the rankings. The BCS teams that played only cupcakes (Indiana.. SEC) are likely to be the ones that move down.
October 5th, 2010 at 7:59 PM ^
October 5th, 2010 at 8:10 PM ^
I left the spreadsheet that had all the data at work, so I won't be able to check until tomorrow. I do have a list I was working on of all the teams that increased by at least 40 ranks. Of the 16 teams that did so, 8 were from AQ conferences.
In 2009, Syracuse went from 96 to 37, and Colorado went from 101 to 57.
In 2008, UCLA went from 102 to 47, and Purdue went from 109 to 61.
In 2006, Boston College went from 92 to 34.
In 2005, Oregon went from 90 to 44, LSU went from 102 to 3, and Arkansas went from 103 to 34.
October 5th, 2010 at 8:13 PM ^
"left the spreadsheet that had all the data at work"
+1 for football research at "work"
Wish I could do that.
October 6th, 2010 at 9:35 AM ^
So things actually look a bit better when I redo the analysis only for AQ conference teams.
| Year | End 70th or better | End +15 | Avg Incr |
| 2004 | 12.5% | 12.5% | 4.6 |
| 2005 | 37.5% | 37.5% | 26.6 |
| 2006 | 20.0% | 30.0% | 6.9 |
| 2007 | 22.2% | 44.4% | 11.2 |
| 2008 | 40.0% | 40.0% | 24.4 |
| 2009 | 33.3% | 44.4% | 18.0 |
So, just based on historical averages, we have something like a 30% chance to improve enough to end up 70th or better in total defense, and something like a 40% chance to improve by at least 15 ranks.
October 5th, 2010 at 6:44 PM ^
Sure thing OCs will study tapes of the first 5 games to find ways to expolit our struggling defense. However, I'm sure RR and GERG are aware of this and will plan to tweak the defense accordingly. Let's not assume our defense has been cast in concrete for the remaining 7 or 8 games - and no changes are forthcoming. I can see us going to a different formation (as has happened) on some plays or maybe even using variations of our staple formation as needed. Maybe, just maybe, our coaches have been experimenting with personnel given our inexperienced bodies on defense. Let's see...there's an old adage about pounding square pegs that might apply here. Who's to say a Bill Campbell won't wake up and jump into the lineup and make a significant difference before very long - I sure have my fingers crossed!
October 5th, 2010 at 7:27 PM ^
The other variables in to degree of improvement would be talent and coaching. It will be interesting on how this defense will develop. Hopefully at the end of the season or next year we could be an average b10 defense. In the future years with better recruits this defense may become top notch!
October 5th, 2010 at 8:36 PM ^
Michigan is 120th in pass defense. The Db's Better be ready and The D-line Better put some Pressure on cousin's.Go Blue
October 5th, 2010 at 8:49 PM ^
Its gonna be hard putting pressure on the QB when you only rush 3 people. I put the blame on the Defensive schemes. Why are the cushons for CB so deep? its not the player deciding the cushons its the coaching and the play calling. The players are doing what they are told to do. The zone coverage is no different than last year. You have this umbrella zone coverage where the WR is in front of the zone and it just gets picked apart. How many times have you seen a wide open WR with 3 or 4 people circled around him? or where you have the safety 12 yards off of the inside WR and he just runs to the flat wide open? or how many times did we see that RB flare play from indiana where no one was even covering the RB because the LB has that assignment but he is way out of position to make a play. The player just lines up where he is told to. You think the players are just lining up where ever they want? I doubt that... I would really like to see a little man mixed in with some pressure from the LBs.
How many times are we gonna see the WR flare screen this saturday? that play killed us last year. But you will still see the safety playing 12 yards off that inside WR...and by the time the safety gets to the WR its already an 8-10 yard gain.
Do you see any defensive adjustments going on during the gm? i really dont.
October 5th, 2010 at 8:55 PM ^
I mentioned this in one of the diaries the other day, but as a witness to a few practices in the spring as I was, this whole rush 3 drop 8 stuff was not the intended plan of attack as far as I can tell. They were practicing in a lot of different fronts, but in the spring when they were in a 3-3-5 type set, they were very aggressive out of it, and came with a lot of different blitzes, and showed a lot of different looks out of it. They were not solely in a 3 man front the entire practice. They would run a ton of 4 man stuff as well.
In my opinion based on what I saw in practice, and what I see they are running in the game, is that they were hoping Will Campbell to be further along in his development at this point, and have a better grasp of proper technique,and of course they didn't plan on Troy not being available to them.
From some of the things that I saw that they would like to run, they need to get a corner developed not named James Rogers ( God bless the kid, he is doing is best in a shitty situation) as well as get Ash or Campbell ASAP. Taking that into account, I think we are forced to watch them patchwork something together with what they have, and try to get to next year.
Also, Mike Jones and Brandon Herron being hurt really hindered some of the flexibility that they wanted to have with Roh. With Herron coming back, hopefully we can see a little more of that flixibility.
They have other stuff in the arsenal though, this whole rush 3, drop 8 stuff, wasn't the intended the plan to me anyway.
October 5th, 2010 at 9:01 PM ^
and OC's are there to maximaize (typo - but I liked it !) their teams chances to score. Just because our pass defense is ..er... poor - doesn't directly relate to what plays our opponents will run. Would Air Force totally change if they played us ??? No way - they run, that's what they do.
The comparison to Ball State ... wha .... Nate Davis (QB) was Ball State - period. He's in the NFL now ... so what's the point - that was eons ago.
Point is - MSU is run oriented first and then uses play action. If the Maize and Blue starts fast - say gets a 14 - 17 point lead - then MSU will be forced to change their game plan and become a passing team - which is not their strength. Plus if we do start fast this also means that MSU has NO answer to our offense - at which point I will become giddy !!
Go Blue !
October 5th, 2010 at 9:47 PM ^
All the effort everyone has put into researching past teams (not sarcastic) but I think given the fact that last year we all said it couldn't get worse than ND since we would gain experience and ND had a pro qb, 2 pro WRS, and a huge o-line and then it got worse or at least stayed bad i am just taking a wait and see approach and not assuming we are going to see much improvement.
Unless we start rushing 4 more consistently and try tighter coverage umass has already shown that teams can consistently hit 6 yard passes and move the sticks on us. I'm not saying those changes will do anything, I'm sure the reason we drop 3 and rush 8 is the fact that the coaches are terrified of the huge plays that wil be given up otherwise, but at a certain point you have to make the other team hit one or two over the top with increased pressure on the qb as opposed to running the same thing and expecting different results.
Praying for michigan to upset sparty saturday (don't care what the line is msu is a more complete team), then take care of business against ill and pu and have a shot at 1 out of iowa, wisc, and psu, and then get to next year with a stacked offense and hopefully more bodies on defense.
go blue
October 6th, 2010 at 12:19 AM ^
But I also think our offense will improve. Against Indiana, we left 21 points on the field (fumble and two overthrown passes.) If we score on half of those, another 10 points, it makes a huge difference for our defense. If we are up 3 scores, we can afford to be more aggressive on defense.
Regarding improvement on the defense, I believe that we will improve more than many teams, because of the high number of freshmen we have.
With no improvement on either side, I believe we still end up 8 - 4. With improvement of offense, 9 - 3. With improvement of offense AND defense, 10 - 2.
I also believe that our conditioning under Barwis will pay moe dividends come November.