Indiana Snowflakes: The Coaching / Special Teams

Submitted by LSAClassOf2000 on

This will be the repository for your hot takes and thoughts about the overall coaching and special teams performance in our game against Indiana.

MGoBoard
Football

UMForLife

November 19th, 2016 at 6:55 PM ^

KENNY was just awesome. The blocked punts are amazing also. The ST have won more this year than lost for us. I will take it. That was a great field position game thanks to Kenny.

Joined: 11/04/2013

MGoPoints: 63392

1blueeye

November 19th, 2016 at 6:57 PM ^

A+++special teams today. Played on short field all day, blocked 2 kicks, hit both field goals and gave up no returns of significance. With offense playing like crap early on, defense was under a ton of pressure to keep it close, and they were able to put Indiana on long fields all day. Outstanding



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 02/13/2014

MGoPoints: 2907

kevin holt

November 19th, 2016 at 6:59 PM ^

Why don't we run on 3rd and short from their 35ish? Seems simple to me but yeah I'm not a coach. This will be blasphemous but I'm not sure if Harbaugh is a great tactician (or at least whomever has final say on playcalls)? Amazing coach but some questionable stuff.

Joined: 03/16/2010

MGoPoints: 17446

S Carolina Wolverine

November 19th, 2016 at 7:03 PM ^

Team was not prepared to play today

 

Coming off a loss as a 25 point favorite one would think they would be breathing fire @ home

 

Not a chance, lethargic

 

2nd half was better - team played with heart on defense

 

Baffling to say the least ....going back to the 2nd half of MSU this team has played like they are in a fog

 

Hope that changes next week or it will be a repeat of 2015

 

Go Blue!

Joined: 11/24/2013

MGoPoints: 764

Reader71

November 19th, 2016 at 7:07 PM ^

Last two weeks have started to move my opinion on Harbaugh from a coach with no weaknesses to a coach with a playcalling weakness. And I NEVER criticize playcalling. Ever. I think it's the stupidest thing a fan can do. Something weird going on in the last two weeks. Something that has shaken me to my core beliefs.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

YoOoBoMoLloRoHo

November 19th, 2016 at 8:39 PM ^

creative and timely with so many calls the previous 20+ games - but the last two weeks have shown zero creativity and 100% predictable. The plays for each RB are predictable; the opposition has slanted directly towards almost every run the last 2-3 weeks. Plays with Peppers mean one thing - Peppers will get the ball and run towards the flow. Seems like JH fell in the same rut last year at this point. Very unsettling.

Joined: 11/01/2012

MGoPoints: 18077

BlueRibbon

November 19th, 2016 at 8:54 PM ^

I've seen the best and worst of Harbaugh. Best being when he used Kaepernick's legs to murdalize Green Bay in the playoffs, then anticipated Atlanta's response to win the NFC championship the following week. The worst was his record against the Seahawks; the pattern was barely winning at home and getting smoked in Seattle. He's definitely not infallible, but he's still better than 95% of other coaches.

Joined: 06/26/2012

MGoPoints: 595

reshp1

November 19th, 2016 at 9:22 PM ^

Bad execution makes playcalling seem worse than it is, especially when it's consistently bad in a way that closes parts of the playbook and makes you one dimensional. Only thing I don't like is how conservative we get in kill the clock mode. You can reliably easy up the clock without running up the gut every time. It bit is in the ass last year against state, and could have again today if we didn't get that late hit penalty.

Joined: 10/31/2011

MGoPoints: 34170

Reader71

November 19th, 2016 at 10:11 PM ^

I think that's absolutely true, which is why I've never complained about it before. Whatever the coach calls, if executed properly, will succeed. Sure, some calls are harder to execute than others, but I think playcalling is overrated by most fans. To be honest, my feeling is probably more telling of something in me than something in the team. I've always been a pretty unemotional watcher of football -- I just like to watch guys block and tackle, and I don't really think in the narrative way most fans do. If someone asks me why we won or lost, I can usually point them to 5-6 plays working or failing and the individual reasons for it. I don't ever really subscribe to the things like, 'We came out flat,' or, 'They sold out to stop the run.' Those statements might be accurate, but not the real issue in most cases. A play here and a play there and the result is different, even if they still sold out to stop the run, for example. I don't know what any of this means. I'm just going through some things, man.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

ca_prophet

November 19th, 2016 at 11:02 PM ^

For reference, I give you Sports Night's rant on playcalling:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hneFiclwdpQ&spfreload=10

Starts at about 14:55.

I would likely need a UFR-level analysis before I thought Harbaugh had a playcalling weakness in either of the last two games.  

Last week, I saw our QB revert to his first-start, first-drive form, and the OL not really block anyone, both of which will kill even the very best playcall.  This week, we had a QB who was, if possible, worse than last week (albeit with considerably worse weather), but an OL who did manage to open holes.  Once we had the lead, we had a 3-and-out, but then our last drive consumed 8:49, including a 4th down conversion and running off 2:07 when that all but sealed the game.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/playbyplay?gameId=400869695

TL,DR: why do you think the playcalls the last two weeks were problematic, instead of our QB not being able to make the passes, or the OL not blocking properly?

 

Joined: 09/07/2010

MGoPoints: 7149

Reader71

November 19th, 2016 at 11:50 PM ^

I have a few specific nits to pick w/r/t play calls, particularly on third down. Most are of the coach getting too cute variety. I realize that these complaints are kind of stupid, which is why I've literally never complained before -- we judge the plays on success or failure, so if they work, coach doesn't get a 'good call' but if they fail, coach gets a 'bad call'. But some things just seem like a coach trying to playcall the team to the first down instead of calling plays that allow the team to get the first down. Against Iowa, 3rd and 2, little misdirection pitch sweep goes for a loss of 6. Even if that play works, I don't like it. We don't have the blockers out front, and even if we do, leading on the sweep isn't their strong suit. The call tries to minimize that disadvantage with the misdirection, where the QB does the reverse pitch. But why? It seems too cute to me. But again, I might be all wrong. This is new territory for me as a fan. Maybe I'm getting old, maybe I'm losing hope, maybe I don't believe in things as firmly as I used to. Weird times.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

ca_prophet

November 20th, 2016 at 4:24 PM ^

But scheming your way to the first down is exactly what the coach should do when you're losing the battle at the line (which we were last week). Brian was praising Harbaugh for this last year in The Game; knowing we were going to lose on the OL he schemed so that we could function anyway. More generally, there is one play calling sin that I think fans can identify: calling plays your team can't run even if you get the RPS advantage. Running plays that required Denard to stand in the pocket and hit tiny windows against receivers running away from him is not the best use of his talents, just as running Spreight on the read-option isn't going to work as anything other than a one-off. Everything else is going to boil down to whether or not it worked. Fans love plays that work and think they can call better plays than anything that failed, regardless of not knowing what happened in practice, not having scouting reports, access to the overhead all-22 view, or a lifetime of experience that lets you digest all that and isolate the critical elements that lead to success. And on top of that, sometimes you just get got.

Joined: 09/07/2010

MGoPoints: 7149

BellyRub

November 19th, 2016 at 7:08 PM ^

Coaching is awful. Harbaugh didn't pit O'korn in a position to succeed at all today. He better bring his A game next week and really have this team prepared

Joined: 11/16/2016

MGoPoints: 432

OC Alum91

November 19th, 2016 at 8:00 PM ^

I had different hottake. Felt like they gave O'Korn the screen passes, more read options, designated runs, waggle. Gave O'Korn the chance to connect on deep balls off of play action to keep D honest. He had to step up. My hottake was O line did not protect him well in first half. They didn't ask him to make tough throws with timing. Not a lot of fancy formations, pepcat, etc to disrupt his flow. If he connects on more plays, they give him more stuff but he doesn't so they stick with the run game to move the chains. How is that not putting him in position to succeed? To the coaches credit, they kept on letting him throw it in the third quarter when he's only 50%. At some point, QB has to step up and make the play, which O'Korn did on the long scramble, Smith did on his runs, and Darboh did on the 3rd down waggle in 4th quarter. I don't think they could have simplified things more for him.

Joined: 02/05/2015

MGoPoints: 1528

OC Alum91

November 19th, 2016 at 8:00 PM ^

I had different hottake. Felt like they gave O'Korn the screen passes, more read options, designated runs, waggle. Gave O'Korn the chance to connect on deep balls off of play action to keep D honest. He had to step up. My hottake was O line did not protect him well in first half. They didn't ask him to make tough throws with timing. Not a lot of fancy formations, pepcat, etc to disrupt his flow. If he connects on more plays, they give him more stuff but he doesn't so they stick with the run game to move the chains. How is that not putting him in position to succeed? To the coaches credit, they kept on letting him throw it in the third quarter when he's only 50%. At some point, QB has to step up and make the play, which O'Korn did on the long scramble, Smith did on his runs, and Darboh did on the 3rd down waggle in 4th quarter. I don't think they could have simplified things more for him.

Joined: 02/05/2015

MGoPoints: 1528

OC Alum91

November 19th, 2016 at 8:00 PM ^

I had different hottake. Felt like they gave O'Korn the screen passes, more read options, designated runs, waggle. Gave O'Korn the chance to connect on deep balls off of play action to keep D honest. He had to step up. My hottake was O line did not protect him well in first half. They didn't ask him to make tough throws with timing. Not a lot of fancy formations, pepcat, etc to disrupt his flow. If he connects on more plays, they give him more stuff but he doesn't so they stick with the run game to move the chains. How is that not putting him in position to succeed? To the coaches credit, they kept on letting him throw it in the third quarter when he's only 50%. At some point, QB has to step up and make the play, which O'Korn did on the long scramble, Smith did on his runs, and Darboh did on the 3rd down waggle in 4th quarter. I don't think they could have simplified things more for him.

Joined: 02/05/2015

MGoPoints: 1528

bamf16

November 19th, 2016 at 8:26 PM ^

I posted in the game thread that I think a High School DC could have called a defense to attack what (little) Michigan's offense tried to do today.  For all the talk that the offense wasn't going to change, today was Spring Game level play calling.  And unlike others, I do and will criticize play calling when I see a deficiency, and I thought today's play calling was atrocious.  I joked that I wondered if Drevno, like Durkin last year, is shitting the bed in November as he seeks a HC job somewhere.

 

A rusty QB was given nothing to get him into a rhythm after that first screen pass to Isaac that worked.  Then I think after that it was 27 runs to 10 passes.  Where was the presnap motion?  Where were the action fakes?  Where was the McDoom sweep?

 

I'm hopeful that like back in '06 when I and a lot of others were critical of UM's lack of a downfield passing attack, only to see them go to (to hell with) Notre Dame and put on the Manningham show, today was intentionally conservative with O'Korn so as to not show OSU a whole lot.  But I'm thinking that's a little too much hoping.  

 

 

Joined: 01/05/2014

MGoPoints: -100000

Sten Carlson

November 19th, 2016 at 9:24 PM ^

Snowing, gusty winds, 1st time starting QB, and an elite defense. That's your "deficiency." If you've not figured it out yet, you should pay more attention. Harbaugh, at his core, is a very conservative coach who makes every effort to NEVER have his team beat themselves. Further, with a defense like this team has, that coaching philosophy gets even more dramatic. Now, he is still aggressive -- he threw down field versus Iowa, and today -- but only in spots after he's pulled the defense in close to the LOS with the power run. Just don't beat yourself! We saw him out the lid on it versus MSU after the INT. You can call that anything you like but it's what he does, and it works almost every time with a defense like he has.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

bamf16

November 19th, 2016 at 10:27 PM ^

Blah blah blah....

 

I'm posting my opinion on the game planning & play-calling, and quite frankly, I'm pretty confident that if the two of us sat down for a complex look at the game, you'd back off your "if you've not figured it out yet, you should pay more attention" nonsense.

 

The offensive playcalling and gameplan today in my opinion was atrocious.  It was absolutely atrocious.  I don't think they did enough to put O'Korn in a micro sense or the offense as a whole in the macro in a position to do what he and they needed to do.  It took two blocked punts (off which only 3 points were scored) and two long runs & a career day from a RB who last week many were calling to be benched to get the win.  

 

Offensively, there were few/no players in motion, few shifts, no plays that seemingly set anything else up... it was bland, it was hyper-conservative to a fault (MSU was the same, but only after UM went on a 30-3 run to go up 30-10), it was "Spring Game-esque" and if not for a career day from Smith, potentially season-wrecking.  

 

Obviously happy UM got the win today, but I don't think this was one of Drevno's better days.

Joined: 01/05/2014

MGoPoints: -100000

Sten Carlson

November 19th, 2016 at 10:42 PM ^

Nonsense? Man, you guys live in a totally different world of perception than I do. Nothing I saw today surprised me concerning the offense. Harbaugh payed lip service to stilling running the offense, but if you actually believed him -- especially after seeing the weather forecast -- I don't know what to tell you. It's like Michigan fans insist upon ripping everything apart. If we decimate an opponent, we're told to pump the breaks because the opponent sucks. If we're told that an opponent sucks, and they do anything positive, our team has problems and the coaches are calling terrible plays. It's uncanny. The play calling was what I expected for a back up QB in windy conditions against an opponent who was likely never going to move the ball against our defense. You can call it whatever you want, but it worked and Michigan won.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

bamf16

November 20th, 2016 at 10:09 AM ^

Your assertion that I and seemingly now others with whom you disagree need to "pay more attention" is a borderline ad hominem that is, yes, nonsense.  Nothing on offense surprised anyone today; it was bland, it did nothing to put anyone in a better position to succeed, and it was something with which I still disagree, even after rewatching the game earlier this morning.  

It's not even that we want the same offense that Speight would have run (yes, likely lip service from Harbaugh, just as it was when he suggested Speight might play), but even a play run successfully early on, (O'Korn's first pass was a screen that was successful) wasn't run again which left IU's DL in a better position to rush upfield and pursue the first back into the line.  Window dressing of jet sweep motion (and perhaps a single jet sweep running play with McDoom) to keep DEs outside a bit more to help the inside running game doesn't complicate the game for the backup QB.  No one's calling for more combo routes in the passing game or a more "NFL style" passing gameplan.  The offense was overly simplistic, and again, in my opinion it did not put anyone on the offense in a better position to compete yesterday.  Michigan's offensive game plan and play calling helped IU more than it helped Michigan, in my opinion.

 

And normally I'd advise people that they don't need to try to exaggerate points that either I or others have made, (ripping everything apart, pump the brakes, etc....wtf?!) but rather respond to them.  In your case though, I think I'm out.  There are only so many logical fallacies I to which I think people should be subjected.

Joined: 01/05/2014

MGoPoints: -100000

Sten Carlson

November 20th, 2016 at 10:24 AM ^

Ok, well said. But, do you disagree with my assessment of many Michigan fans? Sometimes there are things going on internally with the team that we just don't see nor would we understand. I not accusing you of this, per se, but many seem to assume it's like a video game and the coaches can just adopt whatever scheme they want and their team will execute. I just find this "didn't put the team in the best position to succeed" meme to be false. Do coaches call bad games? Of course they do. But, they spend their lives trying to find the best position for their team to succeed, and I find it nearly impossible that fans can analyze "playcalling" and understand much of what is actually going on. I don't mean to come off as argumentative, I like your analysis, and agree with much of what you've said

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

Yeoman

November 19th, 2016 at 7:32 PM ^

Information About the Deceased

  • Name: Shield Punt
  • Date and Time of Death: 6:01 pm, November 19, 2016
  • Place of Death: Ann Arbor, MI
  • Age: 10
  • Place of Birth: Las Vegas, NV

Cause of Death

  • Immediate Cause: Repeated Blocks of Punt
  • Antecedent Cause: Inability of Shield to Block Oncoming Rushers

 

Joined: 06/08/2011

MGoPoints: 21391

AA Forever

November 19th, 2016 at 7:32 PM ^

performance that Harbaugh could get out of a backup QB, after all the time he's had to work with all of them.  Unless a miracle occurs and Speight is completely healthy by next Saturday, we're going to get stomped with essentially no passing game.

Joined: 08/14/2016

MGoPoints: 765

AA Forever

November 19th, 2016 at 7:55 PM ^

and is a proven winner. He's had lots and lots of good games to balance this once out, if you're trying to judge how likely he is to play really well next week.  O'Korn doesn't.  

Based on today, how much would you bet on O'Korn having a better game than Barrett next Saturday?

Joined: 08/14/2016

MGoPoints: 765

Yeoman

November 19th, 2016 at 8:08 PM ^

Against Indiana Barrett was 9-21 for 93 yards and an interception, and on a day without any weather concerns.

I don't expect either team to be able to throw worth a damn next week, to be honest. Barrett will probably have a better statistical day because he's used as a running back in a way Michigan's quarterback's aren't.

Joined: 06/08/2011

MGoPoints: 21391

AA Forever

November 19th, 2016 at 8:37 PM ^

I call it realistic.  This is about accurately and honestly evaluating our chances to win a game.  That's what we do here, dude.  Or at least what we're supposed to do. 

Which team do you expect to have better quarterbacking next week? 

 

Joined: 08/14/2016

MGoPoints: 765

Sten Carlson

November 19th, 2016 at 8:52 PM ^

Wow, ok. You might be posting your honest thoughts, but you're assuming they're accurate. You proved yourself an overly emotional, negative concern troll prior to the MSU game, and these posts confirm your status. We get it dude. Your expectations are impossibly high, and every team is better than ours, and every coach does better with what they have than Harbaugh. Ok. But don't for one second pretend you're anything resembling accurate.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

AA Forever

November 19th, 2016 at 9:54 PM ^

by more than a TD were impossibly high? Expectations to beat Iowa were impossibly high?  Expectations to have a competent backup quarterback were impossibly high?   

If you'd care to point out things I've said that are inaccurate, feel free.  And feel free to comment on the accuracy of all those many, many posters who thought we'd walk over MSU, Iowa and Indiana.  Are you going to pretend that they were anything resembling accurate?

And feel free to actually answer my question, instead of dodging it.

Joined: 08/14/2016

MGoPoints: 765

Sten Carlson

November 19th, 2016 at 10:32 PM ^

First of all, The Enlightened One said that all human suffering comes from our own expectations. Michigan beat MSU, I had no expectation of how or by how many. I don't care how bad you think they are, they're a talented and prideful team who hate Michgan more than any other team. Are you surprised that Sparty only lost to OSU by 1? I'm not! I wasnt surprised in the least that Michigan lost to Iowa. I've been a die hard Michigan fan since 1976, and I don't recall many games at Kinnick where Michigan played well. When I saw it was at night, I was hopeful that the guys could overcome the tough environment, but was sure it would what it was -- a tough fight that was there for the taking, but just bit short. A competent back up QB? Did JOK come in and turn the ball over 4 times? No! He did his job and didn't piss away the game the we see back up QB's do ALL THE TIME! Was he great? No, he wasn't. But he won his first start, and that's plenty "competent." Considering what we saw with the Bellomy debacle, I'd say this foray into back up QB'ing was pretty stellar. Further, you do realize that the wind was really causing issue with the passing game, right? I cannot speak to the many in here who expected us to walk over MSU, Iowa, and IU because I didn't expect anything of the sort. Of course I wanted big wins in every game, but this is sports, not an video game. If I give myself one expectation of Michigan football it is that they don't beat themselves. For so long under RR, and then Hoke, we watched Michigan teams turn the ball over and repeatedly beat themselves. You might not be happy with the lack of dominance, but my expectations have been met, and yours seem completely unrealistic to me. Good, well cached teams play poorly and lose or come close to losing all the time. We watched Clemson almost lose to NC St, and then lose to Pitt. We saw OSU lose to PSU and only beat MSU by 1. You never seem satisfied, and always seem to take the glass half empty stance. If that's what you call being, "realistic" ok. But, you said Michigan is going to get stomped, and pass it off as fact. That's inaccurate ... unless you know the future and if so, can you tell me when to start shorting the S&P, please?

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

Danwillhor

November 19th, 2016 at 8:47 PM ^

I'm not sure why the offense hasn't kicked it up a gear all season. By that I mean we haven't seemed to break that first barrier of plays/sets that we broke around the 8th game last year. For the 8th straight week I could see the formation and guess the play and direction with 75% accuracy. Indiana players were calling out our plays for much of the game, ala PSUvIowa.

Joined: 12/02/2008

MGoPoints: 8609

Hotroute06

November 19th, 2016 at 10:58 PM ^

Just for the people freaking out about O'korn not looking great. Keep in mind that JT barret had 10 total completions today and Tyler Oconnor had 6 completions. The weather was affecting a lot of football play today and if you can't see that then you're an idiot.

Joined: 09/24/2011

MGoPoints: 1204