I'm actually more concerned with the Offense than the Defense.
The Defense will improve no matter what. It literally has nowhere to go but up.
But the Offense is a cause for concern. It flat out disappears when it matters in a big game against a good Defense.
We can run up and down the field between the 20's, but in the red zone when the field is packed in tight, we don't have the power to be able to run the ball, nor the passing skills with a 5' 9" QB to attack it through the air.
Some of this is youth and inexperience, no doubt. But how much?
Can someone please talk me off the edge and give me some reassurance that what we saw today is not what we will see next year and why?
November 28th, 2010 at 12:30 AM ^
In the Rose Bowl last year, Oregon was held to 260 total yards by the OSU defense. This year with almost everyone back you've seen the results. I think another year of experience plus improved RB play will remedy this problem for us.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:48 AM ^
Next year will be the first time RR will have an upper classman at QB. The maturity and experience are key.
And before anyone says "Darron Thomas at OU is a sophomore", keep in mind he redshirted - his actual sophomore year after playing as a freshman - and got to campus in the winter semester, so he has 1.5 more years on campus than DR.
The WR drops hurt and were inexplicable the last 2 weeks. Bid farewell to only 2 starters (based on today's line-up) and get ready for next year. And as great as DR was, DG will be ready to go next year after getting his medical RS.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:57 AM ^
Or any other great defense.
November 28th, 2010 at 2:35 AM ^
Oregon's offense is a fucking blitzkrieg. I would take them over OSU this year.
November 28th, 2010 at 5:29 PM ^
You said that last year too.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:17 PM ^
What about Harbaugh's great defense? I thought that's why so many people want him in here.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:15 AM ^
I agree completely. We have Vince Smith as our #1 RB and he just doesn't have the explosiveness to be a feature back in this offense. So defenses are showing Denard looks that get him to hand off to Smith for mostly 1 and 2 yard gains. The receivers also dropped a bunch of passes yesterday that killed drives. Roy Roundtree had a really tough day yesterday. Denard's a first year starter and all first year QBs struggle with turnovers. That should be minimized next season and his conference completion percentage should shoot up over 60% which is great for the position.
I'm much more concerned about the defense as it seems obvious that 3 man fronts aren't going to work in the Big Ten. So first off a complete philosophical change needs to take place and then oh yeah we also need to recruit more talent along the DL.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:30 AM ^
5'9" QB. What?
November 28th, 2010 at 12:37 AM ^
He's slightly bigger than 5' 9".
November 28th, 2010 at 1:20 AM ^
is 6' tall. Seen him in person and he's definitely 6' tall, not 5'9"
November 28th, 2010 at 8:37 AM ^
Yeah and our Running Back is 5'3"
November 28th, 2010 at 10:39 AM ^
He hides behind our big hulking linemen and the other team can't see him....
November 28th, 2010 at 12:31 AM ^
I don't think we can sustain the same number of drops as we saw this year (at the most inopportune times mind you).
Another year in the system, another year to get stronger, another year to just flat out mature, this offense will be clicking on all cylinders next season.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:32 AM ^
lost me at "defense will improve no matter what"...even under RR?
November 28th, 2010 at 1:32 AM ^
I'm also sick of this. The defense can indeed get worse. It's not impossible. Literally everyone in August said this and guess what happened? It got worse.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:14 AM ^
The defense didn't get worse in the sense that the players' skills diminished; it got worse in the sense that some of the players who were improving were injured. This is ridiculous.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:27 AM ^
Defensive stats for points per game allowed:
2008: 29 points per game
2009: 28 points per game
2010: 34 points per game
Defensive stats for yards per game allowed:
2008: 366 yards per game
2009: 393 yards per game
2010: 448 yards per game
The defense has gotten worse every single year. If you want to nitpick you can pretend the defense got better last season in terms of PPG allowed but that's a pretty weak argument. It seems pretty obvious that the defense has only gotten worse every single year and drastic changes need to be made to try and get the defense headed in the right direction. There's simply no way we should ever rank in the 100s as far as defensive rankings go.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:31 AM ^
Yeah, and those blanket, general stats are not at all affected by our offense....
Oh wait, they are. Our defense was just as bad those years, maybe worse in '08, it was just that our offense sucked and teams didn't need to score 65 points to stay with us.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:43 AM ^
Actually our offense was terrible in 2008 but the defense kept us from getting blown out against most opponents. Last year was the perfect storm of bad defense and an offense that wasn't quite ready for prime time. Since you brought up the offense.
Points per game for Michigan
2008: 20 ppg
2009: 30 ppg
2010: 34 ppg
Yards per game for Michigan
2008: 291 ypg
2009: 385 ypg
2010: 501 ypg
Every single metric indicates the offense has improved by leaps and bounds. Please show me a single stat anywhere that indicates the defense has gotten better. You can't because it's just gotten worse over the past three seasons. I like Rich Rod but if I'm Dave Brandon my biggest goal right now is to do whatever it takes to fix the defense because that is what is keeping Michigan from beating good teams.
November 28th, 2010 at 4:01 PM ^
By "fixing the defense", you may end up hamstringing the offense. At least that is what would happen, imo, by firing Rich Rod. Responsibility for the defense falls at the feet of Rich Rod. So does responsibility for our offense, which has shown the potential to be unbelievable.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:51 PM ^
My guess is that we're either hiring Harbaugh or retaining RR for another year. Given that Harbaugh's offense averaged more than us (40 ppg), I'm not too worried about the O either way.
November 28th, 2010 at 5:29 PM ^
Denard played tremendous yesterday. Most every incompletion was right in the hands. I don't see how his future is not at QB.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:32 AM ^
Roundtree just had an offday- he doesn't hold M's single game receiving record because of 5 or w/e dropped passes
Denardd is Denardd- He was breaking off 5-10 yard runs with uncanny regularity and
he'll improve his accuracy to early 2010 levels over the spring
Vinnie smith will be complemented by BEEEF and a healthy shaw/fitz
returning all skill starters?
Ohio State has a good defense as well and the turnovers didnt really help matters
we left at least 6-13 points on the board with not attempting FG's and the like so no worries
November 28th, 2010 at 12:46 AM ^
November 28th, 2010 at 7:02 AM ^
Then you'd have to say DRob has fumbleitis too. He's dropped as many as Smith has, at least.
I'm pretty sure Smith has only put the ball on the ground twice this season, actually. I don't think he's a fumbler. I do think he's small and perhaps therefore more likely to drop the ball when taking a big hit.
But now that I think about it, Hopkins is a big back and he's fumbled twice IIRC too.
Whatever. I've now depressed myself thinking about all the fumbles. Mike Hart never fumbled. Can he come give a tutorial on holding onto the damn ball?
November 28th, 2010 at 11:38 AM ^
Problem is, the players are practicing different then they play. RR has stated Smith is not a fumbler, and Broekhuizen looked good all week in practice, but come game time for whatever reason there is a disconnect.
November 28th, 2010 at 4:10 PM ^
Yeah, it almost sounds like the players are realy young and inexperienced and get the jitters during the actual game when 1000s of people are watching them. It's a good thing they know the difference between the homefans booing their coaches and booing them or else they'd really play tight when they were in a tough game.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:56 AM ^
...do you write for the MSM? Or both?
November 28th, 2010 at 12:02 PM ^
I can't see Smith getting a ton of playing time next year if Shaw, Hart, Fitz, Hopkins, and maybe even Hayes (though I think he might redshirt given how stacked we are at the position) show up to play. Because the overall product/lessened risk of fumbles make me think Smith might end up on the outside looking in (and that's not even counting if Cox gets off the bad list).
November 28th, 2010 at 12:33 AM ^
Our WR's are kind of spotty with the drops/just off their fingertips. The big question is when do we blame the WR coach vs "Well they're sophmores." Denard is about where I'd expect for a soph QB but our WRs like to go through long periods of drops.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:33 AM ^
Well, we lacked a Running Back who could get yards on his own or who was a breakaway threat. Hopefully, Dee Hart could provide that. Outside of Denard, nobody was getting extra yardage, and Denard is obviously not a big guy.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:06 AM ^
was actually running well if he wasn't getting swallowed up in the backfield.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:35 AM ^
i'm actually more concerned with mgoblog than the MSM.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:36 AM ^
okay what is MSM?
i know it stands for men who have sex with men, but that can't be right...
November 28th, 2010 at 1:04 AM ^
(Not that there's anything wrong with that.)
November 28th, 2010 at 1:24 AM ^
MainStream Media, in a non-Limbaughian sense. Generally applied as a label to known douches (Henning) or to columnists who seem OK but then appear to attack the program/RR (Wojo comes to mind).
November 28th, 2010 at 12:43 AM ^
November 28th, 2010 at 1:09 AM ^
our expectations with an RR team are that the offense is outstanding, and if the defense is merely average, you have a winning combination.
I belive that the defense will be able to fulfill its role and move from being terrible to being average.
I have lost some faith that the offensive will be able to live up to the "outstanding" role that it needs to.
November 28th, 2010 at 2:43 AM ^
offense is outstanding vs bad teams, slightly above to above average vs good defensive teams.
It still gets in its own way more than it should, and the turnovers are putrid.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:43 AM ^
Freshmen and sophomores, even good ones, tend to choke in big games. When they're around some old hands, it tends to steady them. We don't have those around, so we see the choking. Once these guys get to be the old hands themselves, they will be much bettter.
And then they will be the ones settling down the new freshmen and sophomores, helping them to play better when they're in the game. We just need to get the pipeline reloaded and get the inter-class interactions going again, like a normal program.
There's a lot of things I expect to see next year if the main problem really has been lack of experience. If the on-field issues continue despite the improved experience, we'll have a better idea what the sources of the problems are. However, I expect many of the on-field problems will disappear, myself.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:47 AM ^
C'mon, man. The offense's issues are the kind that generally improve with experience - the QB is a first year starter and a true sophomore. He makes some bad decisions, doesn't have full confidence in his choices, occasionally reverts to bad mechanics, and can handle at best 1-2 reads. Our RBs have been injury-prone, and none of them are game breakers. Our receivers occasionally get the dropsies and apparently need to keep up on their optometry. That's pretty much it.
Compare that to the D:
Experienced D-Line getting run over by top teams. Experienced linebackers showing zero improvement from last couple years. Young backfield not only looking lost, but not improving. Serious scheme schizophrenia. Sophomore players coaching better than the coaches. The defense is at rock bottom.
The O needs polish to leap from statistical powerhouse to world-beater. The D needs a miracle to go from black hole to minor disaster.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:48 AM ^
They will be bigger, stronger, and more experienced next year. And there will be a second-year QB at the helm. This will help lessen the turnovers and finish drives. Also, even an average defense would create more opportunities for the offense, and it would take a lot of pressure off of them. It had to become pretty obvious to the offense that they would have to score almost every time down the field this year to have a chance to win.
Both units will improve and a lot of senior-laden rivals are losing a lot of good players. This makes next year look like another year of progress, and even a possible "leap" if a lot of things go right. And I look for Denard to be in the Heisman picture a lot longer than he was this year.
November 28th, 2010 at 5:17 AM ^
Without Denard, the offense simply isn't the same - we all know that. The problem is that Denard is not very big and is obviously injury prone. He has gotten hurt in almost every game this season. How much more weight can he gain without compromising his speed and agility? I've read all the diaries about spread QB's etc/ and the rate of injury. What I haven't read is how small QB's compare to bigger QB's in terms of injury. Oregon and Auburn have big QB's. Taylor Martinez is at least ten pounds heavier than Denard and taller and has had an injury shortened year.
As far as Denard and the Heisman is concerned, everyone around here looks forward to having Dee Hart on board and, Hopkins, Shaw, Smith, etc. older to ease the burden Denard faces by running so much. I'd love to see Denard with half the yardage by virtue of the RB's carrying the load of running plays, thus keeping Denard alive and on the field. We were very lucky Denard was only dinged up and did not sustain a more serious, long term injury this year or heaven knows how many games we would have won, as I just don't see Tate being able to run this team with any consistency against better teams.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:50 AM ^
Yeah I agree the offense will totally never improve. It's not like it's young or anything.
I agree that the offense has to improve in the red zone by executing better when the windows are tighter. I think it will.
Being more worried about it than the defense is just overthinking things.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:53 AM ^
November 28th, 2010 at 12:57 AM ^
last 3 games vs bucks, our offense has been outscored 100-24....concerning
November 28th, 2010 at 1:12 AM ^
This is rare, but it can not get any younger. They will get bigger and have more experience. We can only go up from here.
I can't imagine our kicking sucking as much next year either. That should improve also.
Every offense executes better with experience.
A lot of teams have gone from a 4-5 loss season to a 1-2 loss season the next year.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:58 AM ^
Im more excited for the offense to get Dee Hart's feet wet in the spring. If he can catch the ball as well as they say he can he is gonna be a force.
A healthy stable of running backs should be interesting next year. It will also be very interesting to see how a healthy V. Smith in the offseason can imrpove.
Shaw is still w/e to me cause he doesn't seem to be making any strides as a full time back.
Nice to see Toussaint get some carries in there today, and hopefully he will be healthy all next year. But i have a feeling Dee Hart is gonna be a special kind of back in our system and will play early.