Michael Shaw vs. UConn

Submitted by profitgoblue on

I was hoping that someone can shed some light on the progression of several of the running plays against UConn that went to Michael Shaw.  To me, and untrained observer, it appeared as though several of the Shaw rushes in the 1st half were broken plays of sorts, or at least some kind of misdirection plays where Shaw changed direction after handoff.  To me, it appeared as though Shaw was headed for a hole that never materialized and then changed direction.  It seemed as though Denard had a better line of attack for the run and should have kept it himself (as if he didn't do enough already).  Did I miss something?  Were these runs some kind of veer or misdirection play?  Regardless, they each went for positive yardage.

I apologize in advance for not knowing enough to link the video footage.  I refer everyone to the previous Board poster that posted video of every offensive play a few days ago.

Hannibal.

September 8th, 2010 at 1:09 PM ^

I think that you are right about some of the plays.  Denard made a couple of incorrect reads (that's scary to think that he actually should have run the ball more than 29 times).  I thought Shaw gave a very underrated performance.  He was successful on short yardage and on 2nd and goal from the 4 he rumbled through traffic and barreled into the end zone.  What a huge difference from the Carlos Brown 2.0 that everyone thought he was.

jg2112

September 8th, 2010 at 1:09 PM ^

How about we wait for the guy who spends hours trying to figure this out and read his analysis?

Better yet, without knowing the play call, you're never going to do anything better than guess what was supposed to happen, as opposed to what actually happened.

30-10 is all that matters man.

evenyoubrutus

September 8th, 2010 at 1:24 PM ^

Dude, you're talking to people on a blog where half the readers sit at their desks at work and hit refresh every five to ten minutes waiting for something - anything - to be posted about ANYTHING relating to Michigan football and you're asking people to wait? Who do you think you are? That's like telling a junkie that his pusher is running behind and he's gonna have to just take a chill pill and wait it out. It's just not that simple...

evenyoubrutus

September 8th, 2010 at 1:18 PM ^

As far as I could tell (I've rewatched the game 2 times now plus every offensive snap Youtube series) Denard made quite a few poor reads where he handed it off to the rb while the DE was crashing. Now, I'm also an untrained observer but my guess is that this is a form of the scrape exchange where the LB picks up the QB while the DE goes after the RB. Either way it looked like Michigan was having a difficult time getting their backs into the open.

Brhino

September 8th, 2010 at 1:20 PM ^

I was a lot more impressed with Shaw after watching the replays.  From the 96th row my impression was just "oh, we just ran for four yards.  Good deal.", but on the replay he broke a lot of arm tackles and wiggled just out of the reach of a lot of defenders.  His yards did not come easy.

Magnum P.I.

September 8th, 2010 at 1:30 PM ^

I don't know why there's a negative aura on this site around Shaw. I thought he played really well his true freshman year--better than McGuffie--and didn't really get a lot of chances last year. He's not Carlos Brown; he runs much tougher. I thought he made some great cuts in the UConn game, too, and the explosiveness was palpable when he and Denard were in the backfield together. He had a couple disappointing games last year and has struggled with injuries, but the guy was a four-star back out of high school, has made some nice plays in limited time as an underclassman, has great speed, and has some shiftiness, as well. What's not to like?

Optimus Hart

September 8th, 2010 at 1:53 PM ^

I've really liked Shaw.  My only question is if after 4 years of Hart I developed a Pavlovian response to seeing the number 20 carry the ball.  I think Shaw finally got enough carries in a game for UFR to definitively confirm or deny that bias, so we'll see.

Needs

September 8th, 2010 at 3:35 PM ^

I think people are negative for two reasons.

1. He danced a lot at the line of scrimmage, something that apparantly soured RichRod tremendously on Mike Cox.

2. He had that one really bad run on our 15 where he cut back, gave up ground, and got tackled for a 10 yard loss. That was the only truly bad run that he had, and it was in a very bad place, leaving us 2d or 3d and 15 at the 5.

Bodogblog

September 8th, 2010 at 2:05 PM ^

Tough back who is going to break some runs this year.  Really liked him Sat.  I assume he only came out because Vincent Smith played well also? 

We'll see on the UFR - unfortunately, I don't think any of our 3 superstar QB's are naturals for the read option.  But with an OL this good, great backs, DROB (and Tate/DG), and an offense capable of strategically calling plays and manipulating a Defense (because now we have the ability to execute), it may not matter as much

UM Fan NY

September 8th, 2010 at 3:16 PM ^

the way shaw runs. too much dancing around. it takes him forever to get to the LOS because he jukes when he doesn't have to. i'd much prefer cox and/or hopkins splitting with vincent.

icefins26

September 8th, 2010 at 3:23 PM ^

So you would prefer two guys who haven't proven anything?  Hopkins is a load but has only shown us what he can do in the Spring Game and Cox, while talented, has only shown us what he can do late in the 4th quarter vs. Delware State.  I trust the coaching staff.

Buzz Your Girlfriend

September 8th, 2010 at 3:17 PM ^

Question about what ND's defense should do with Denard.

 

Common logic would assume they would want to limit his touches because he will be the most dangerous player on the field. However, what about crashing the DE to force Denard to run every draw play.  This may work against them, however they have more of an opportunity to lay a lick on him.

TheOracle6

September 8th, 2010 at 3:30 PM ^

The beauty of the zone blocking scheme is that even when it appears a play is going nowhere, a simple cutback can yield positive yardage.  Shaw did this several times and was mostly successful.  He had a very solid day against UConn except for the one run where he was dancing around and then went backward for a 10 yard loss and got chewed out by RR.  He will continue to get better as the year goes on which is a scary thing for opposing defenses.

Hannibal.

September 8th, 2010 at 3:37 PM ^

Even on that one play where he lost ten yards, a great RB probably loses at least five. That play was horribly doomed from the beginning.  Other than that, I though Shaw got the most out of his opportunities.