How does Borges decide the positions in the Diamond of Doom?
I realize Brian has covered this formation extensively on the front page, but I didn't see anything about the strategy behind picking positions in the diamond. Obviously you need a QB under center to threaten a quick outside pass, so Devin Gardner or Denard needs to be there. I guess what I dont understand is why Fitz is deep with Denard either on the left or right.
To me it seems like if Fitz were on one side and Vincent Smith were on the other with Denard in the deep spot (where Fitz is in the actual formation) that there would still be the easy pitch option to the outside if Devin rolls out either direction but if it goes to the deep man (Robinson) there would still be a solid lead block from Fitz or Smith regardless of the direction of the play. Obviously Denard can block for Fitz if the play shifted his direction but I would assume this is not something the coaches would have him do in an ideal situation.
I've probably rambled a bit so here is the TL;DR version: What are the advantages to having Fitz deep instead of Denard in the Diamond formation?
October 6th, 2011 at 7:40 PM ^
We mortals can't comprehend the infinite complexities of Borges's thinkin' parts.
October 6th, 2011 at 7:45 PM ^
The Borg' will assimilate?
October 6th, 2011 at 9:31 PM ^
Chicken bones and goat teeth.
October 6th, 2011 at 7:41 PM ^
You have someone who can receive a handoff who is used to receiving handoffs for a traditional dive play. While not a sexy option, it provides some restrain for the defense not to go nuts to the outside.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:20 PM ^
I asked the same question as the OP during the game to the folks around me in the crowd. We came to the conclusion that to keep the defense kind of honest we may need to pound Fitz every once in awhile, which is easier when you can use Smith as a lead blocker
October 7th, 2011 at 10:16 AM ^
You want someone who is used to pitching it (ie Denard) being the pitch man, and someone who is used to receiving the pitch(Fitz or Smith)
October 6th, 2011 at 7:42 PM ^
It's like sex positions. You just kind of end up in certain ones on certain days.
October 6th, 2011 at 7:45 PM ^
Well...
Think about it this way.
You put Denard at the outside and you immediately have to cheat the outside on that edge for a speed option.
You put Fitz in the back, you can run that option and turn it into a triple option without taking away either runnrers best abilitys (fitz betweent he Ts and Denard.. well. everywhere)
Incidentally, when you run the fake denard off tackle, on top of the quick pitch you can then run a reverse option with Fitz... plus if you do run Denard you have a lead blocker whos not named Tacopants.
The issue it seems is that the deep back as denard probably runs alot of the slow developing stuff and...
The idea is to make the defense go HOLYSHITDENARDISLOOSEEVERYBODYPANICANDBALLHAWK.. Not
OKrbfakedenardisstayingstilldenardisgoingtheotherwayHOLYSHITDENARDLOOSEVERYBODYPANICANDBALLHAWK.. except that Denard actually has the ball.
October 6th, 2011 at 7:45 PM ^
To me, the benefit of having Denard on the wing is two-fold, and we saw both on Saturday:
1. You can run the option. When Denard as a wingback, there is a deeper back who then can become the pitch man on the speed option.
2. You bring the jet sweep into play, and that forces defenses to freak out about getting the corner and thus opens up both the fake-sweep-to-pitch thing we saw to Toussaint as well as the bootleg for Gardner.
October 7th, 2011 at 8:44 AM ^
If you run the pitch to Fitz a couple times, and the defense starts to key on his movement to determine which way the play is going, you could have Fitz start left like he's going to get the pitch, drawing defenders that way, and then just have Denard run a jet sweep.
I'm still hoping for a Mad Magicians-type play with run fakes to both Denard and Fitz, followed by a long pass down the middle to a wide open TE. The possibilities out of this formation are ridiculous.
October 6th, 2011 at 7:48 PM ^
October 6th, 2011 at 8:02 PM ^
Another uninformed opinion, but my first reaction was "EEEEEEE" followed by thinking that Denard will rarely get the ball from that option set. Any defense is going to have to key on Denard every time, so the misdirection we saw is the way they have to run it. Still, as long as Devin or one of the backs can get good yardage, you don't have to rely on Denard to do anything other than scare the hell out of a defense. I'd love to see them have to key on Devin or Fitz after a big play and leave Denard less accounted for, because at that point he's taking it a loooong way downfield.
October 6th, 2011 at 7:49 PM ^
To confuse them further they should start with Devin under center and have Denard at one of the wing positions. Then pre-snap you rotate the two and then get creative from there. I hope that will make Dantonio's head asplode.
October 6th, 2011 at 7:58 PM ^
I beleive Denard can still get an easy pitch if he is in motion. I've been playing NCAA 12 recently and am running some wishbone option formations and I have Devin at QB, Denard at Right Wingback, and I bring him in motion and do some pitches or sweeps and it is absolutely deadly.
I know it's just a game, but you can still do the same plays and everything. Just different variations.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:12 PM ^
I wonder to what extent this formation is personally catered to those four particular players. Does it *have* to be dual-QB with both Denard and Devin in the game?
Are Shaw and Rawls in consideration or is Toussaint the permanent deep back and Smith an upback?
Could a more prototypical fullback (McColgan) be effective? I could see a fullback taking a dive as an upback or perhaps functioning as a lead block on a sweep or counter.
Could a slot receiver (my mind went to Kelvin Grady) occupy a wing spot?
i.e. would this be effective?
Denard
Smith/Grady
Shaw
October 7th, 2011 at 2:38 AM ^
rotate the others with the wing and the deep back, but the dual QB's force the defense to focus on them, when you but 3 non-throwing backs deep, it takes away 1 more big threat, if teams just sell out on the run and cram the box when they see this formation it opens up the "garder gives to robinson, robison steps back and hits koger down the seam with nobody around him, hes gonna take this one to the house"
OR like what happened last week. EVERYBODY followed denard, and he didnt have the ball.
Would Thomas Rawls get that same treatment? Doubtful.
The best thing that could happen is teams staying home when we fake to Denard from that formation, the next time we run that play, he will get it and it will be even numbers to the side he runs on, ADVANTAGE Denard.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:06 PM ^
I think it makes sense to have Denard as the left wing. When he's there, he can threaten the edge, he can threaten downfield, and any option/sweep looks to the right bring the fact that he's a right-handed thrower into play. If he were on the right or the deep man, I think that would limit the opportunities for him to throw out of the formation.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:14 PM ^
Didn't Brian say the flip Denard to keep him on the short side of the field? I would think this is preferable because letting him run to the wide side will give him the greatest chance of outrunning bad angles or finding a cutback.
October 6th, 2011 at 9:20 PM ^
Even if you take a good angle are more beatable when you're super fast and there's a greater distance to the sideline. This seems like a marginal consideration though, considering the alternative forces second level defenders to respect the pass.
October 7th, 2011 at 1:07 AM ^
I'm not sure what you mean, to me, you want Denard in space, you run him to where there is the most space. If he's running parallell to LOS, someone is going to have to take a great angle to get there because of his speed. That angle should allow for a cutback because Denard is denard. I think it would be easier to contain Denard on the short side of the field where his space is limited.
October 9th, 2011 at 6:15 AM ^
It's too simplistic to say Denard has the most space when lined up on the long side of the field because if he's in a position to throw that threat creates a lot of space even if he's on the short side.
October 6th, 2011 at 11:26 PM ^
I think what they actually do is put Denard to the short side. This is because they want to attack the wide side edge with his speed (ie with the option). Smith, being the better blocker, lines up to the wide side. Being the best receiver this also allows him to attack across the field on the play action to the short side flat (something Borges likes to do).
Obviously you have Fitz in the back because he is the best downfield rushing attack. He also isn't as good of a receiver so it makes sense to have him there as your traditional TB (speed to attack the edge and power to run the power).
As for the TE/WR position. I'm guessing they want the WR on the short side in to clear the zone for Smith, to clear the edge for DG on his boot, and to push the CB with the WR for the DR fake to pitch. I also think they want the TE to help seal the edge in hopes of getting a 1 on 2 match up with a lot of grass with Denard on the option.
I think it's interesting to note with how Smith and DR are aligned they can easily become receivers on a drop back from DG, though I'm not sure we'll ever see that, but it has to be respected.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:19 PM ^
He just rolls a tetrahedral die and snaps his fingers.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:22 PM ^
True story.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:35 PM ^
Borges is the Purple Haze man in the box for Michigan.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:44 PM ^
Al Borges, all in my brain;
With Denard, it just a'int the same,
Actin' funny, and I know why
Sorr-y to the Buckeyes
Denard is, all around,
Don't know if he's runnin, up or down
Am I happy or in misery?
Depends if there's red, on this jersey
October 6th, 2011 at 8:57 PM ^
Not bad. Incorporates two legends I love - Michigan football and Jimi Hendrix.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:26 PM ^
I prefer the Fritz formation... It harkens back to a time when MANBALL was all there was.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:27 PM ^
Double post.
October 6th, 2011 at 8:34 PM ^
Its our version of 'THE FOUR HORSEMEN" OF Notre Dame, or Sorry our current version of "The Mad Magicians".
Thats cool, way cool. I'd love to see this run as the only play for an entire drive with rotating blocking schemes and mixed personel assingments. GO AL, GO AL
October 6th, 2011 at 8:50 PM ^
During the summer, I thought the Wildcat could be amazing with DG & DR. The Diamond went way beyond my imagination. However, after much consideration, I just do not want to see it used very often. Please save it for the end of the season. Maybe run it once or twice a game to keep upcoming opponents nervous. My big fear is that by having both QB's out there at the same time, you increase the opportunity for one of them to get injured.
October 6th, 2011 at 10:44 PM ^
The other thing Gorgeous showed was that Smith can pass, which makes the Fritz even more difficult to defend.
October 6th, 2011 at 11:52 PM ^
He and Hoke play rock-paper-scissors. Winner puts Denard where he wants.
October 7th, 2011 at 1:03 AM ^
October 7th, 2011 at 7:47 AM ^
The defense keys on Denard.
The misdirection is easier to sell when Denard can simulate moving with a sweep or option to the wide side of the field, rather than coming downfield from the deep back spot. The other two are perfect fits, as Fitz runs better downhill with a lot of burst, and Vincent is a jack of all trades who can roll out on the sweep to run or pass or put a helmet on the LB/S coming down on the edge on sweeps.
Ultimately, I think going forward, if we are to see this lineup more often, Fitz power to the wide side with Vincent lead blocker would be your base, and I think Borges really wants to get an offense going that operate around the QB power.
That may all be completely off-base, but that is what I would guess.
October 7th, 2011 at 8:50 AM ^
He used the Magic 8-ball. I would be willing to bet, from a few offhand sentences in last week's interviews from both Hoke and Borges, that we haven't seen the only version or versions of the formation yet.
October 7th, 2011 at 9:18 AM ^
Anyone else concerned about Denard getting blown up while he's blocking out of the Diamond?
October 7th, 2011 at 9:54 AM ^
I move that we adopt "Diamond of Doom" as the e-fficial nomenclature. I get the theory behind "Fritz," and I know that Brian has already declared that to be his name of choice. But Diamond of Doom is (a) much more fun to say, (b) catchier, (c) applicable in a more obvious and direct fashion, and (d) seems more tailord to this segment of the fanbase (and by that I mean the same people who use the terms "Tacopants," "OMG shirtless," etc.).