Film Breakdown: Michigan Run Game vs MSU

Submitted by Space Coyote on November 3rd, 2020 at 4:37 PM

For the sadists out there, I took a look at Michigan's run game vs MSU in quite a few film breakdowns on twitter.

LINK

Solace for no one, but my opinion nonetheless:

After re-watch, I'm less disappointed in Michigan's plan to attack MSU. I think formationally, personnel, and play scheme given their base was mostly good.

What I disliked was how they adjusted their plan in-game. Should have used more zone (split to take advantage of MSU exchanging End/LB, and Stretch); should have attacked boundary more, especially in unbalanced; should have attacked the edge more with sweeps and swings. Those things could have opened up the run game quite a bit and really took pressure off Milton. That doesn't need to happen in the form of Run-run option, or multiple reads. You can block the end man and still execute these traditional type "old school" schemes (there are downsides to the new schemes too, which is why teams don't run them every time).

Eventually, Milton will have to prove he can hit downfield throws, but I think there are other elements of the attack that Michigan could have leaned on to get there in this game.

Teeba

November 3rd, 2020 at 4:39 PM ^

What's your opinion of Haskins vs. Charbonnet? Who should be getting the majority of the snaps, or was Charbonnet just extremely unlucky that they called a bunch of bad plays when he was in?

robpollard

November 3rd, 2020 at 5:08 PM ^

He (should) be the epitome of speed in space: he has excellent wiggle, and also great speed. That run for the TD on the edge was basically all him.

If I saw that (and it's not a surprise -- he showed this against Minn as well) I would have had at least 3-4 more plays which were him testing the edge, via either run or quick pass. But I guess that wasn't manly enough or something.

Space Coyote

November 3rd, 2020 at 4:46 PM ^

I don't really have an opinion strongly of one over the other because I'm not seeing day-to-day. Haskins has looked good in games so far, but everyone is on very limited sample size.

I do think over the course of the week and as they settle the plan they should focus more on getting 2 backs involved with maybe a 3rd as a changeup or specific package. I think you'd like to see a guy get at least 10 carries to get some feel. Can keep them fresh with that, but think there is too much in-game rotation happening right now.

Sopwith

November 3rd, 2020 at 4:45 PM ^

It sounds a lot like there weren't sufficient constraint plays to keep MSU from cheating with the most basic of keys. After Corum just out-footraced their defense to the edge on the first TD, I figured we'd have a good deal more of attacking the edge with superior speed and athleticism. I was wrong, I just don't get why.

Mgoczar

November 3rd, 2020 at 4:47 PM ^

Is this fixable? As in can Michigan take the leap in run game and install counters to the defense counters? Not a coach just wondering where coaches go from here. 

Space Coyote

November 3rd, 2020 at 4:55 PM ^

I think from an ID standpoint it's largely fixable. Focus on the types of things you're seeing up front and rep the heck out of them. I don't expect it to be great, because game speed is different, but it can improve. And Harbaugh has always had counters to pullers (and Gattis did last year as well), so I would expect that to get better.

But I don't think we'll be able to avoid the concern about losing some 1v1 battles. Relative to expectations, I thought Mayfield had a rough game. And even with that, I would fully expect Michigan to be very right hand dominant. Left side will be a weak point all year I'm afraid.

A_Maized

November 5th, 2020 at 4:40 PM ^

Schematically it is absolutely fixable.  Every defense has a weak point(s) and you attack it with the scheme which best exploits those weaknesses.   Now if your asking if OUR coaches can fix it, I’ll just say that we have not seen evidence of that to date. 

Mongo

November 3rd, 2020 at 4:49 PM ^

Agreed - like when Corum bounced it around end for a TD.  We have way more team speed and did not use it very well.  But I did like the shovel pass to Mason as a counter to the run blitz. 

MichiganStan

November 3rd, 2020 at 5:00 PM ^

Bottom line they need to pick a primary back. I personally think Charbonnet is the guy and has more potential than Haskins. Charbonnet actually has the speed to take it to the house where as Haskins always gets caught from behind

Without looking at a box score I believe haskins led with like 8 carries. Charbonnet had like 6.

How can you expect a RB to get into a rhythm and adjust to the defense when they run the ball once every 45 minutes?

 

chunkums

November 3rd, 2020 at 5:25 PM ^

I know the dude overcame a lot, but I think Chris Evans may be the first guy out. Corum gives you everything Evans gives you and he's more explosive. I'm still torn on Haskins v Charbonnet, so I don't have a problem with platooning the two of them. Hell, we can do plenty of two-back stuff. 

Space Coyote

November 3rd, 2020 at 5:22 PM ^

Given they are mostly just running their core plays, the missed ID is disturbing. It can't be the first time they have seen what the defense was doing, as they are common responses. That said, they are fixable. Get back to basics and rep it a ton in practice, because you're about to see a lot of it.

The lost 1v1 blocks to me is more concerning. They breaks down otherwise well executed plays

UMProud

November 3rd, 2020 at 5:31 PM ^

Thanks SC always love your analysis although the bottom line for me was Jim Harbaugh does another was of his face plants.

BTW was the coaching an exercise in malpractice with our staff or ??? wondering what your thoughts are.

imafreak1

November 3rd, 2020 at 5:38 PM ^

On the radio, Gattis said that the first wild cat was a walk in TD but for one missed block. I watched your break down several times and I can't figure out what block Gattis could be talking about. The play just looks terrible. 

He seemed a tad defensive about that sequence. Which maybe he should be.

crg

November 4th, 2020 at 8:46 AM ^

I actually liked the call to have Haskins throw.  It didn't work out this time (I think the receiver might have been able to get himself in better position simply by moving towards the corner a bit more - moving with Haskins), but it was really just a lucky tip that broke it.

My only complaint is that it should've been called for 2nd down, not 3rd.

jdraman

November 5th, 2020 at 10:29 AM ^

I like the call too, in theory. Teams have film on Haskins being utilized as a Wildcat in goal-line or short-yardage situations. Having Haskins throw out of that formation is a clever wrinkle. However, I think the discussion is focused on the wrong thing. Too many people are declaring the call itself as being a poor decision. I think the timing is what made the call a poor decision. Down 7, right before half-time, your young QB just led a lengthy drive, and you just utilized the Wildcat on 2nd down. Either use the Haskins-throw on 2nd down, or put it back in your pocket for later. Just poor situational football.

abertain

November 3rd, 2020 at 5:42 PM ^

Fun breakdown. It's nice to see that you agree with a casual watch of the game. As a casual fan, it seemed like they were consistently getting a ton of yards on the edge but not forcing MSU to pay enough for not defending it. I tend to think Haskins is a great 1-2 with Corium, but I don't think Charbonnet is bad or anything. I just like those two a bit more. I really hope they have a plan to make teams pay for not covering the edge in future games. 

B-Nut-GoBlue

November 3rd, 2020 at 5:48 PM ^

100% appreciate you input.  Will take a look when I can.  I have this feeling if looked at more in depth there was going be a "hey this wasn't as bad as it seemed" though the bar was set pretty stinking low to being with.  There certainly will be frustrations aimed at playcallers and play selection but I've this instinct that says "plenty of stuff was set up to be successful but as we've seen many, many times before, one thing went wrong and blew the play up".

1982kenmil

November 3rd, 2020 at 5:58 PM ^

What an embarrassment for Gattis. What’s the point of this offense if we aren’t even going to read the defense.

AlbanyBlue

November 3rd, 2020 at 6:09 PM ^

Harbaugh's offenses -- doing things the hard way since 2015.

As I have said before, I won't miss him when he's gone. If we whiff on the next coach and go 6-6 for a while, I still won't pine for Harbaugh, because his teams are painful to watch and don't accomplish anything significant. And no, I don't consider a 10-win season including 4 or 5 wins against non-conference tomato cans, Rutgers, and Maryland significant. 

AlbanyBlue

November 3rd, 2020 at 6:59 PM ^

Hey, you're right. we could do a lot worse. But we could do better. I'm all for trying to do better.

As far as "competing" - we're not competitive with OSU. Fine, I know that has a lot to do with OSU.

But I also think we are sliding with respect to Wisconsin and maybe even PSU. I suppose we'll see that one way or another this year.

But as I said in another response, this wasn't the place for this. Apologies to SC for the crappy derail.

My Name is LEGIONS

November 3rd, 2020 at 6:27 PM ^

Hayes should be at RT, but Mayfield is there. 

Filiaga to my eyes seems like he shouldn't be starting. 

Vastardis, what did you think?

How did Steuber look to you ? Can't help but notice Hudson starting at Cinci.

Double-D

November 3rd, 2020 at 8:43 PM ^

They knew where the play was going based on formation and execution.

There was virtually zero jet sweeps, reverses, counters, QB keeps, play action seem passes over top to punish LBs throwing their bodies into the hole, Swing passes and missed QB reads.

Beat your head against the wall until you split your head wide open. It was a fucking joke.

Enjoyed the breakdown SC.  Mason had a rough day. 

Mongo

November 4th, 2020 at 10:10 AM ^

Actually, that was an ID problem at the line of scrimmage - probably a bad call by Vastardis.  MSU was run blitzing all day and that LB was 3 yards in the backfield before Mason arrived.   Even if Mason hit him the play was already dead.

MGoStrength

November 3rd, 2020 at 8:03 PM ^

Appreciate the breakdown, but it's a bit too complicated for me :/  I like to keep it simple.  Who do I blame?  Talent, execution, youth, play calling?  We've been searching for answers offensively going on four years.  I don't understand why this continues to be the case.  Why can OSU, PSU, & Wiscy maintain offensive systems and we seem to struggle year after year?  Is this still growing pains moving to the spread?  What allowed OSU to transition so seamlessly from Meyer's to Day's system but we cannot?  Will UM ever develop an offensive identity that they can stick with that actually works without incredibly frustrating games against what appears to be inferior talent, at least by recruiting rankings?  I'm sure I'm asking questions that don't have easy answers, but it makes me feel better...maybe :/

Michigan9

November 3rd, 2020 at 8:35 PM ^

Couldn't agree more with your assessment on the lack of adjustments in-game.  This has plagued this program for the past few years.  We lose the chess match more than we win it.  
 

I know this is focused on the run game. The fact we showed basically no deep pass threat, it’s such an advantage for opposing D’s to load the box and challenge the run game. This has to get fixed.