DJ Durkin - Not making huge changes to the defense
At first glance, Jim Harbaugh's decision to hire D.J. Durkin as Michigan's new defensive coordinator made it seem that significant changes were on the way...
And while players have had to make adjustments this spring to Durkin's new multiple-scheme approach, they haven't exactly been blindsided -- as the installation they're going through now feels a lot like an extension of what Mattison started last spring under former coach Brady Hoke.
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2015/03/michigan_teaching_plenty_of_3-.html
I think with the right coaching and better execution, this is the right move...at least for the first year in the program.
It never felt to me like he was planning a ground up rebuild. Keeping Mattison on board was a good indication that he felt there was a solid foundation. I think he was right in that assessment.
that our defense wasn't a probem at all last season.
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:49 AM ^
March 23rd, 2015 at 11:08 AM ^
March 23rd, 2015 at 11:16 AM ^
March 23rd, 2015 at 12:48 PM ^
Wisconsin had the #1 defense in America going into the OSU game. How did that work out? You have to adjust for the conference. Outside of OSU and MSU there were not any competent QBs - your 3rd best QB in conf was Gary Nova. I think around week 8, the Big 10 had 7 of the top 25 defenses in America per the generic mainstream stats. Does that pass your smell test?
There is a reason for it - playing each other's offenses and playing some MAC schools non conf will do that. You throw most of these Big 10 defenses into the Pac 12 and they would have been LOL.
Per advanced stats (and I track it weekly) UMs defense was anywhere from 6th to 9th on almost every stat. In the conference - not the country. The best Big 10 defenses (Wisconsin and PSU last year) were around 10ish in the country. Those advanced stats adjust for how pathetic the average Big 10 offense was.
All the TV commentators point to is "total defense" which tells you nothing but the average yards given upper game. Which is a pretty useless stat when you are facing a bunch of QBs whose passing % are mid 50%s. Offenses like UM, PSU, Iowa, NW, ("middle of the pack" Big 10 teams) were a joke. A guy like Hogan from Stanford was something like 9th ranked in the Pac 12 - he'd be #3 in the Big 10.
Football Outsiders had Michigan as #41 in overall defensive efficiency last season. That's certainly not at an elite level, but it's not horrible either, especially considering that the vast majority of the defense is back and guys like Desmond Morgan and Jabrill Peppers should be able to play this season.
Also, I know FEI tries to take into account possessions and so on, but I have to think the fact that Michigan's team imploded so early in the season and the fact that they were on the field for so long every game didn't help things. If you put a halfway decent offense on the field, my gut tells me that they bump up a few spots without changing much on the defense, but that's just me guessing.
well the D could not get it done (and while the O also contributed to those losses, its a team game afterall) so should those losses be ignored?
they ranked top 25 against some pretty weak competition and the D played major roles in some terrible losses - but some metrics indicate theyre top 25 so its all good?
great defenses can win games in spite of the O or ST, something UM has rarely done lately. the O puts up 17 pts, the D needs to find ways to hold opponent to 16 - if they frequently fail to do so, i dont care what the rankings indicate
In this era of spread offenses and athleticism, no defense is going to win games by itself, especially if the offense is incapable of scoring and and can't stay on the field long enough to get them some rest. The David Brandon Offense as channeled by Hoke and Nussmeier was going to make any defense look bad.
Any defense is going to falter if the offense is going three and out as often as Michigan did last year. If Harbaugh saw enough in Mattison to keep him, I am going to trust his judgment.
I think people underestimate how much stress a bad offense put on your defense.
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:11 AM ^
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:10 AM ^
And we still gave up 30 and 31 points those years. And our offense put up enough points to beat OSU every year we played them and we still lost every year except one (and we probably lose that game if OSU completes the bomb near the end of that game).
Our issues on defense were covered up by a conference with poor QB play. Actually poor offensive play overall.
March 23rd, 2015 at 12:33 PM ^
The offense didn't play that well in 2012. 21 points isn't that much in this day and age.
The game is also over if the refs don't completely botch that Touissant TD.
You can also play the if game with a million other plays in the Michigan-Ohio State series many which would have resulted in Michigan wins.
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:32 AM ^
I agree an offense can help a defense, but a defense also needs to stand on it's own merits as well. A poor offense does not account for the paltry rate of turnovers generated or the low number of sacks when there was plenty of depth to rotate player to keep them fresh.
March 23rd, 2015 at 12:56 PM ^
Agreed. MSU's offense in 2012 sucked outside of Bell. They went 7-6. But they lost almost every game by 1-3 pts because their defense was still very very good. Some of our losses were pathetic i.e. ND. And no that was not all on the offense early - we were down 21-0 before one turnover by the offense. Then our run defense was gashed by 1 dimensional Minnesota - and that was supposed to be our strength.
If you want a more recent example look at PSU's D last year. Their 2014 offense was as bad as UM 2013. But they werent losing 31-0 out there because their D truly stepped up. They only gave up 21 pts 4x and two of those were to the only competent offenses in the league - MSU and OSU.
We had a veteren unit outside of one safety spot last year and the DTs. It was supposed to be a top 2 D in the conf. It wasn't. And wasn't close. Pass defense was very poor, run defense was decent. Except when we really needed it (Minnesota/MSU)
Last point - we had 31 minutes a game of offensive possession so the apologists about the "tired defense" can get off that meme too. That was top 40 in the nation.
the defense was the best unit on an awful team, which isn't such high praise.
Mattison was the best coach on the staff (HC included), but I think injecting some new blood in the form of Durkin will work wonders for the D. I expect them to form a fucking wall this season.
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:15 AM ^
They don't have a pass rush. Unless they can develop it, they won't be elite. Can't get there without a pass rush, even if Peppers is a substantial upgrade.
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:27 AM ^
But they were certainly a helluva lot better than the offense. 10 GD points against Northwestern.
March 23rd, 2015 at 11:17 AM ^
I never felt pass rush was really the issue. They weren't great certainly, and if you look at the stats they were pretty awful. But watching the games, it was pretty clear to me the problem was the secondary. We got dinked and dunked to death a lot. There's just not much you can do as a pass rusher when the QB does a 3 step drop and the receiver has beat the jam from the DB, or the DB is playing 10 yards off, for a easy 5-10 yard completion.
Lack of turnovers was also historically bad for that D. I think 3 INT all year and only 1 from a DB or something awful like that. And 3 fumbles forced. That's sad.
Since it's springtime, I may be wearing Maize-colored glasses, but it sure seems like having both Mattison and Durkin on board was a genius move by Harbaugh. At the start I was a bit worried about the dynamics between the two--how the players would react with their old DC still hanging around, and whether that would muddle things and/or undermine Durkin's authority.
But by all accounts so far it's a perfect blend. G-Matt stays on to smooth the transition by providing institutional knowledge of the players, and Durkin injects some fresh blood into the defense without totally shaking things up. The players don't have to completely scrap what they've been working on past few years and can build on what they've got under the watchful eye of the old school & new school coaches.
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:05 AM ^
It really seems like Mattison is happy in his new role. I assume he knows he's getting older, has accomplished pretty much everything a defensive coach could ever want, and probably enjoys a bit more time to spend with family. I really like how things have played out with the staff.
The defensive side of the ball was by far the best part of last year's team. Can't forget the old trite but true saying, the best defense is a good offense. If you have the ball, they can't score
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:35 AM ^
Didn't Michigan almost always win the time of possesion battle? It doesn't matter if you hold the ball for 8 minutes if you allow the other team to score in 2 minutes.
"If you have the ball, they can't score"
It's a cute but outdated saying. In modern offense era you dont need much time to score - ask TCU, Baylor, Oregon. Average scoring drive is 2 minutes. Many drives are 3-5 plays and 90 seconds.
You have to have a very good physical defense combined with a ball control offense. One thing lost in the love for MSU defense is how little they turn the ball over on offense and how they play ball control. They were at or near the top of the nation last year in both turnover margin AND time of possession. It's Tressel ball at its finest. And with all that in their favor they still gave up a lot of points when facing elite offenses (Baylor, OSU, Oregon). When facing normal offenses it works fine.
So it's a cute saying but not so useful unless you have the entire package working together. (i.e. how Stanford beat Oregon)
"What we're doing on defense right now is trying to fit what scheme fits the players we have the best."
So of course they would be trying the same front as last year. Hello.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sounds fine with me. I think the D just needed some tweaking and more practice against spread/tempo to put it from the 'good-very good' range to the 'elite' range. A little more age will help with the consistancy, but I don't think they needed any radical changes like after GERG. Really the problems with the D last year seemed more like a symptom of the whole team problems under Hoke: consistancy, gambles not working out, personnel identification issues, age, toughness. But all in all, the D was less prone to those than the offense or special teams.
needed a competent offense that would help them get a breather or not have to deal with sudden changes all the time. . .
disagrees. He's made his hay with some of the fastest offenses right along side of him. Quick changes are part of the game, it's all about training.
I think the back 7 also lacked elite athletes. Our corners (ex Lewis) were not elite athletes (Taylor, Countess, Hollowell). Our LB core lags when you watch it vs SEC units or even some Pac 12 teams. Ryan and Ross are plus athletes but Ross didnt play much. Bolden and Morgan are more workmanlike guys. Wilson and any other S we played outside of Thomas don't seem to be elite athletes - and Thomas is still lost so unless you know what you are doing it doesnt matter how fast you run. Lewis is probably the only guy in the DB last year (Peppers being hurt) who combined competency with athleticism.
We need more heat seeking missles in the back 7 - seems like some of Carr's teams just had a higher quality athlete. Guy like Frank Clark probably had more pure athleticism than a lot of guys in the back 7.
Durkin is a very sound defensive mind. I trust whatever he's trying to do. I just hope that he's better preparing the team to handle the up-tempo offenses and mobile QBs we'll have to be playing. I don't recall Michigan ever being able to play well on a consistent basis against good spread teams or mobile QBs.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
...when I don't see Pipkins mentioned. I know it's early though, a long way until the first game.
he's been injured for almost the entire spring
With all of the returning talent and experience, it really comes down to addressing a couple key issues: Getting the key stops in critical situations, being able to keep up with tempo teams, and shoring up some of the soft coverage. Ideally, someone would break out as a pass rush weapon as well. But the foundation of a very good defense is here. We're a few plays away, and our D will look a LOT better if the offense isn't constantly putting them in bad situations.
Fewer turnovers on offense plus more on defense would do wonders even if nothing else changed from last year.
These were comments also said last year. It was a veteran group outside of 1 S and the DTs.
Reality is we lost our best LB and our best DE. We add a guy to the S position who should be a big upgrade and we return a very good corner who at this time last year was still finding his way. But if you cant rush the QB it doesnt matter how good your corners are. You can only cover for so long. Our LB core is now very experienced but do these guys have the ability to change a play? Or are they just guys who sort of roll up stats without making the offense adjust to them at all.
So pass rush and getting some splash plays out of our LBs will be the keys this year. Being able to generate turnovers - which Durkin / Muschamp did an excellent job with Florida -is a must. And getting off the damn field on the last drive of the first half.
I have a lot of confidence in the DTs with Glasgow, Mone, Henry and whomever wins the 4th spot in that rotation (be it Wormley, Pipkins, Hurst - whoever gets to the top of the mountain should be good). DE effectiveness and ability is an open question- Poggi seems to be an offensive player now so all you are left with are Mario O and Charlton with game experience. Marshall is an unknown and after that you are talking about plugger guys like Godin. The ability to withstand injury out of the DE is also suspect - depth lacks. Which is why I would not be surprised to see a lot of 3-4.
"Twenty-four players who appeared on the final defensive two-deep of the 2014 season are back. And that doesn't include Jabrill Peppers."
How does that not FIRE you up for 2015?!!
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:02 AM ^
How is that possible?
11 x 2 = 22
Even considering the nickel corner:
12 x 2 = 24
Add in the fact that Beyer, Ryan, and Taylor are gone... I just don't see how that makes sense.
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:09 AM ^
/s
Math eludes me.. And nick baumgartner apparently
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:13 AM ^
It's possible with all the "OR's" that sprinkled Michigan's depth chart under Hoke. There might of been 3 people listed on the two-deep at multiple positions.
Reference the ND game program: http://mgoblog.com/diaries/notre-dame-miniprogram
March 23rd, 2015 at 10:44 AM ^
I can't imagine Harbaugh will using "or" on the depth chart. If you win the position for that week, you win it. Doesn't mean you will be there next week, but it will not be "or".
March 23rd, 2015 at 11:13 AM ^
March 23rd, 2015 at 12:12 PM ^
Ok. and I'll hold you to holding me.