September 10th, 2019 at 7:45 AM ^
I’m not sure I have the stomach for this yet.
September 10th, 2019 at 7:47 AM ^
It wasn't bad. It was more thought out and fair than most of our posters. I found this most interesting:
It means that Michigan was a 50-yard Army field goal at the end of regulation away from a disastrous and devastating loss.
But Oklahoma was in a similar situation last year.
In 2009, Ohio State needed to intercept a 2-point conversion attempt late in the game by Navy and return it 100 yards for two points in order to win by four.
Hell, Notre Dame built an entire industry on beating the Service Academies by smaller scores than they should have.
It’s fine. It happens. Moving on is usually pretty easy because everything from this past week will get thrown out. Michigan hits the shores of Madison, Wisconsin in two weeks and somebody’s Big Ten title hopes are going to take a significant hit.
It also means that the Michigan offense is still a work in progress, which might be a problem.
Why is it that the longer a quarterback plays under Jim Harbaugh at Michigan the worse that quarterback gets?
The Shea Patterson we are seeing now has shades of John O’Korn, and I don’t get it.
I’m afraid by the time Dylan McCaffrey is a senior, he’s just going to be a rigid mass of tissue and confusion.
Jake Rudock knew what the hell he was doing by only playing for Harbaugh for one year.
Michigan was very fortunate to get out of this game with a win, which is something that almost every championship team says at least once in a season.
If they don’t kick it up a few notches against Wisconsin in two weeks, however, this win won’t be one of those games that championship teams are remembered for. It will be one of those games where people first realized there was a very real problem
September 10th, 2019 at 7:51 AM ^
Excellent stuff, thank you for the excerpt. I guess I’ll get another large cup of coffee and make my way over.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:21 AM ^
I also thought the piece was fair. Of the part quoted above, this, to me, was the most concerning:
Why is it that the longer a quarterback plays under Jim Harbaugh at Michigan the worse that quarterback gets?
The Shea Patterson we are seeing now has shades of John O’Korn, and I don’t get it.
I’m afraid by the time Dylan McCaffrey is a senior, he’s just going to be a rigid mass of tissue and confusion.
Jake Rudock knew what the hell he was doing by only playing for Harbaugh for one year.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:18 AM ^
not nearly as scathing as I thought he’d be. After OSU’s 38-7 win versus Army in 2017,from the fan reaction you would have thought we had lost lol. I believe the angst was about armies rushing yardage against Ohio State’s defense . Fortunately those are our future leaders of our military. They never quit against us, same tenacious effort in their last drive as in their opening drive. Those kids are amazing. Having said that,to say they keep it competitive with all top 10 opponents isn’t totally accurate, at least score wise, is there anything else? They may have had 300 yards rushing against us, don’t remember, just always impressed with their non stop effort.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:30 AM ^
We did hold Army to their lowest rushing output since 2015 - and sans turnovers, they probably wouldn't have scored a point at all, but the offense still has a lot of improvement to do.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:32 AM ^
the only reason i clicked on the link is because of your comment. thank you.
September 10th, 2019 at 10:12 AM ^
"It will be one of those games where people first realized there was a very real problem"
In other words, does Army 2019 = Akron 2013? Obviously Army is a vastly better program right now than Akron has ever been, but our offensive output in both games was putrid in spite of the fact that in both instances our pure talent was light-years ahead of the opposition's.
September 10th, 2019 at 11:50 AM ^
Well worth the read. Not the usual snark that I like, but, as you stated, more metered a response than I had to Saturday.
September 10th, 2019 at 7:50 AM ^
It's honest and fair. As usual.
September 10th, 2019 at 7:52 AM ^
Gerdeman always does a great job with these.
September 10th, 2019 at 5:54 PM ^
More than our own fanbase.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:05 AM ^
Fair and reasonable, as always.
The next two weeks will be telling re: the team. How serious is Patterson's injury, how quickly can McCaffery get up to speed with his reads and passing.
Speight was fine until he broke his collar bone at Iowa. Patterson played hurt. Hurt players playing hurt try not to get further injured. No surprises there. It's a reasonable question to ask whether QBs regress at UM, but I don't think the evidence bears that out. A more interesting question might be why Michigan QBs appear to suffer an unreasonably high rate of injury. There, you can look to the line's inability to pass protect, the inability to recruit a serviceable OL, or the inability to coach up the OL.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:37 AM ^
Is it that unreasonable about our injury luck at QB? OSU has had there fair share of injuries at the position. Lewerke was banged up most of last season. Purdue’s QB was injured last week and NW lost one of their QB’s for the season already. I just chalk it up to football, guys are going to get their fair share of bumps and bruises.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:01 AM ^
I don't think it's unreasonable that we've been unlucky with injuries at QB. And I think it accounts for down QB play during Harbaugh's tenure rather than the sizzling takes about QBs regressing . Speight played out of his mind until he got injured at Iowa. O'Korn didn't pan out, and Peters transferred for playing time. Now Patterson is dinged. Hopefully we don't see the same kind of fear of injury that plagued Speight. And hopefully we see some life back in the OL.
September 10th, 2019 at 10:56 AM ^
Recruiting plays a part, also. This team was so lacking in talent when JH got here that we're still amazed it was that bad. The QB position wasn't immune to that. We love Speight for the effort he gave, but that generic 3-star that Hoke brought in really had no place being recruited to a high functioning Michigan program. But Hoke's program wasn't high functioning... Peters also didn't pan out, despite being a 4-star 'croot heading for Texas (who was vastly underperforming at that time, as well). The QB room wasn't exactly stocked with high level talent - similar to every position group, sans DL and DB...
September 10th, 2019 at 11:16 AM ^
Also related is poor OL recruiting, although if Shea did get injured on the first play of the season, that wouldn't be on the OL. His continued fear in the face of pressure may be affecting his accuracy...? *shrug*
September 10th, 2019 at 12:41 PM ^
lol what? Id argue our most talented team was the 2016 squad, all Hoke players.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:11 AM ^
It's sad when a Buckeye has more thought and nuance about Michigan than Michigan fans do.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:54 AM ^
Shea is nothing like O’Korn...very nuanced analysis (rolls eyes)
September 10th, 2019 at 11:54 AM ^
Are you suggesting O'Korn never overthrew wide open receivers by 10 feet?
September 10th, 2019 at 8:19 AM ^
The consistent regression of the quarterbacks is concerning. Hasn't Tom Brady won enough super bowls yet? We could use a quarterback's coach right about now that would also be the heir apparent.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:44 AM ^
Being totally honest, has he regressed, or is he what he always has been? he hasn't played that well when the pressure is at it's peak, except the Wisconsin game, and even that game he has missed open receivers. He didn't play well against ND. We blamed that on the pressure, but he fumbled and missed open receivers.He played OK against MSU. We didn't really utilize him agains PSU, and he played OK against OSU. Not great, not horrible.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:54 AM ^
I don’t buy the “consistent regression” narrative just yet.
1. Rudock — the antithesis of regression. Somehow that is getting thrown out the window in the current discourse.
2. Speight — Harbaugh kind of his own worst enemy in the narrative here bc he went out and made the Heisman candidate comments after we bombed PSU at home in ‘16 ... against a PSU D that was missing (mostly due to injuries) just about every meaningful starter. Wilton almost immediately fell off that perch (even before his injury). If Harbaugh was to blame there, where was Wilton’s bounce-back effort when he was at UCLA? Didn’t happen ... bc Speight just wasn’t that good.
3. O’Korn — great kid, but his freshman flash (which his first set of coaches correctly identified) was the unsustainable outlier. Again, did not have the talent. Harbaugh can’t make chicken salad out of chicken ____.
4. Shea — we all saw where he was last year: high talent kid with very good athleticism and great accuracy/catchability (throws a nice ball) who has a major area of need, namely growing between the ears. When he’s settled in the pocket he often waits that split second too long in his release on downfield shots (even when he makes the completion it’s usually suboptimal relative to the receiver’s position, stride and opponent’s coverage) and when he gets flustered, the gunslinger thing of making a play is just too tempting for him to resist. It’s those last two points where I hope we see Rudock-like improvement this year. In my mind it’s unfair to judge where that stands while he’s playing hurt.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:25 AM ^
Agreed. Ruddock is evidence against the assertion. I'll go so far as to blame Speight and Patterson '19 on injury, leaving just O'Korn. Hardly evidence of a pattern of regression.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:37 AM ^
And if you look at how Harbaugh used and developed QBs at Stanford and the 49ers as well, Harbaugh has a really good record of developing QBs. As you mentioned, Rudock was an Iowa cast off, and Harbaugh was ridiculed for taking Iowa's backup as a transfer. Over the course of the season Rudock developed substantially. As you pointed out, so did Speight, until his injury.
September 10th, 2019 at 10:09 AM ^
The credit Michigan fans give Harbaugh for Jake Rudock being the same thing at Michigan that he was at Iowa is baffling to me.
Player A:
12 games, 2,577 yards, 14 TDs, 8 INTs, 63% completions, 7.5 YPA
Player B:
12 games, 2,436 yards, 16 TDs, 5 INTs, 62% completions, 7.1 YPA
Who's better?
Player A is Rudock at Michigan minus that wild outlier Indiana game where Rudock had 6 TDs and 440 passing yards. Player B is Rudock's last year at Iowa. I don't get it. Rudock was always Rudock. Even at Michigan. Rudock wasn't benched at Iowa for sucking. He was benched at Iowa because his backup was younger and better and Ferentz had to start him or he would lose him. And by the way, that backup, CJ Bethard, was all-B1G in 2015, was drafted 3 rounds earlier than Rudock, and is still in the NFL. Ferentz made the right call. Harbaugh inherited Iowa's scraps because he was desperate, and Rudock put up basically the same stat line you'd expect a third year starter to produce.
Why Patterson isn't any better in year 2, and why McCaffrey can't see the field over him, in year 3 no less, are fair questions to ask. Especially if Patterson is hurt and McCaffrey can't see the field over him.
September 10th, 2019 at 11:49 AM ^
Everyone knows Rudock had no chance of starting a game while CJ Beatherd was there, so that's kind of a straw man to say that Michigan fans are claiming Rudock wasn't a decent QB. Also you are basically agreeing that Rudock did not regress at Michigan, and had a developed and consistent career at Michigan. Thank you.
September 10th, 2019 at 12:01 PM ^
I think you missed his point... he was simply saying he doesn’t get why our fan base thinks Rudock did anything special, other than be himself that season.
September 10th, 2019 at 12:09 PM ^
I didn't miss his point, I just think the point is fuzzy at best. Harbaugh did take a transfer QB for which people criticized him, who had a good career here.
September 10th, 2019 at 2:20 PM ^
That's not my point at all. My point is that Michigan fans act like Harbaugh QB Whispered Iowa's backup into a really good QB at Michigan. And that's not what happened. Rudock was not a bum at Iowa. He wasn't a career backup. He was not an unmolded piece of clay waiting to be a sculpture. He was a decent QB that got replaced at Iowa after two above average years because his backup was younger and more talented and needed to play. And once Rudock got to Michigan, he didn't get QB Whispered by Harbaugh into anything more than what he was at Iowa for two years--an above average B1G starting QB. Look I get it, Rudock lit Indiana on fire, they of 2015's 109th ranked defense according to S&P, which then skewed his season stat line away from a carbon copy of his 2014 at Iowa. Rudock was always pretty good. Not great. He was pretty good at Michigan. But not great. Harbaugh got really, really lucky CJ Bethard existed, otherwise Michigan's 2015 would have been 2017 grisly at the QB position.
September 10th, 2019 at 11:55 AM ^
Funny that you toss out a chunk of his yards in his Michigan season to fit your point. Anybody who watched Michigan throughout the season in 2015 could see his improvement unfold. At the start of the season he missed every single throw of 20+ yards, and that's not really hyperbole. He genuinely couldn't connect on long passes. By the end of the season he was fitting windows, making reads, and completing downfield throws that start of the season Rudock couldn't dream of completing.
Bill Burr said it best when he said people like to go to I'mRight.com for their stats, adjust them to their own narrative, and then regurgitate them to further their argument. But in this case that doesn't work because the eye test is equally important.
On the Shea and McCaffrey note i agree, Patterson has not yet shown that he has improved from last year. Two games in though is way too early to say that Shea hasn't improved at all. If we get to midseason and Shea still hasn't shown any improvement, then I will agree with any Harbaugh criticism that unfolds. But for now I'm in a cautiously optimistic wait-and-see mode.
September 10th, 2019 at 2:31 PM ^
It's not funny. I adjusted for the clear outlier. Indiana had the 109th ranked S&P defense in 2015, and Rudock amassed 30% of his TDs and 15% of his yards for the season in that single game.
I agree that Rudock's transition into an entirely new offense took some time, and that's probably reflected in some of the early games of 2015, but how can anyone say for certain what parts of Rudock's 2015 are attributable to Harbaugh's 8 months of coaching, or Rudock's third year as a starter in the B1G, and the expected linear progression that follows that experience. The idea that Rudock was a bum until the light switched on--thanks solely to Harbaugh--for, like, the final 5 of his 37 career starts is actually funny to me.
If Rudock would have sucked in 2013 and 2014, I'd entertain the argument that Harbaugh was a major contributor to Rudock's 2015. However, that's not the case. At all.
September 10th, 2019 at 12:13 PM ^
You can say what you want about similar stats, if you watched every game that year, Rudock clearly went from new guy with poise but a weak arm to the leading captain of the offense carving up good defenses (he torched a Florida team whose defense was very stout). And why exclude the game against Indiana? That was a sign of his development. Early season Rudock does not save us that day. Rudock is our only 3000 yard passer since the mid 00's. He visibly improved, even from his Iowa days.
And all the chatter out of Iowa wasn't that Ferentz wanted to keep Beathard. It was that Rudock was holding them back from being a better team on offense (because clearly it wasn't god damn Greg Davis as they like to say). Rudock was viewed as an okay, expendable player and Harbaugh put him into the NFL. The jury is still out on Shea this year because he's clearly dealing with some injuries that nobody wants to publicly discuss.
September 10th, 2019 at 2:37 PM ^
Look if one of the arguments in your favor is that Rudock torched a "very stout" Florida defense in the Citrus Bowl, then you also have to agree Michigan tried their hardest in the Peach Bowl and Felipe Franks torched a "very stout" Michigan defense there as well. Can't have it both ways.
Also, Rudock being Michigan's only 3,000 yard passer since ~2000 is a reflection on Michigan that makes a point that I don't think you really want to make.
September 10th, 2019 at 7:46 PM ^
Yeesh. Terrible posting.
Ruddocks QB rating went from 133 passer rating to 141. Completion percentage went from 61% to 64%. Yards went from 2436 to 3017. 203 completions to 249. 7.1 yards an attempt to 7.8.
Quite clearly Rudddock improved. More obvious later in the season.
Your mother shouldve swallowed you buckeye.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:28 AM ^
Tom Brady isn't coming to coach at Michigan. He's stated he has no interest in coaching on several occasions. So let's drop this already.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:27 AM ^
This quote made me laugh, sadly:
"This wasn’t speed in space, it was speed in place."
September 10th, 2019 at 8:31 AM ^
I am so tired of the "SeRvIcE aCaDeMy!" take.
Is the triple option different? Yup. Is it hard to defend? Don Brown says so.
Is allowing 243 yards, 14 points, and allowing them to possess the ball a completely average 51% of the game the reason that game was hard?
Absolutely not.
This had nothing to do with the option. It had nothing to do with them being a "service academy". It had everything to do with us looking like a high school team trying to run our offense. Army's DEFENSE is just a defense. If we were competent in any way on that side of the ball, which again has absolutely zero to do with them being a service academy, then this would have been a blowout.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:52 AM ^
Well put. Lost in the knashing of teeth over the option offense bullshit is that their defense is nothing special and is definitely undersized relative to the rest of the teams on our schedule. What the defense is however is very well coached - both from a scheme standpoint as well as a tackling standpoint. Players are not caught out of position and they seldom miss tackles when they have a chance to make one.
My biggest takeaway from the article was the line that basically said if we lose this game it's the first sign that something is very wrong. There is a lot riding on this one and we've got two full weeks to get Shea healthy and figure things out.
We definitely need it.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:29 AM ^
Dare to say that everything rides on getting Patterson healthy and getting McCaffery up to speed on his reads and throws in those two weeks.
Honestly, though, and I'm not conceding that we should give up on Wisconsin, but D-Day for getting things sorted, for me, is Iowa at the beginning of October. If it meant a healthy Patterson for the rest of the season, I'd be willing to roll McCaffery/Milton for Wisconsin and Rutgers.
September 10th, 2019 at 10:15 AM ^
All current BPONE takes are are wrong until we play Wisconsin. If this occurs then, we can can talk about something being very wrong. Until then it's one bad game
September 10th, 2019 at 8:34 AM ^
It's nice to look at what happened to Oklahoma last year and hand-wave away what happened on Saturday, but we hardly had the same problems. Army had 75% of the possession against Oklahoma. Oklahoma couldn't stop them if their life depended on it. Their defense also continued on being hot garbage for the rest of the year.
We had no problem with the triple option offense. There's nothing gimmicky about Army's defense, but we struggled mightily against them all the same. The team has a lot to figure out over the next two weeks if they plan on winning in Madison.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:41 AM ^
Most ppl look at our stats at the end of regulation and compare it to Oklahoma and say they were comparable. However, when you see that Oklahoma only ran 39 plays to our 75+ you see the big difference in the 2 offenses.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:55 AM ^
Oklahoma scored Zero points in the 3rd and 4th quarter.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:09 AM ^
We scored 14 in 4 quarters...what’s your point?
September 10th, 2019 at 8:53 AM ^
Oklahoma had the ball for 15 minutes and scored 21 points. We had it for 28 minutes and scored 14. These were not the same games. If Oklahoma had our D the game would have been a blowout.
September 10th, 2019 at 8:55 AM ^
The offense was hot garbage. They have 81 days to fix it.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:10 AM ^
you spelled 12 wrong, Hatter. We won't beat Wisconsin with a half-functional, turnover-prone, penalty-laced offensive performance. I don't expect Wisconsin will hang a ton of points on us but they have looked good enough to score consistently assuming Chryst doesn't inexplicably forget he has Jonathan Taylor again.
September 10th, 2019 at 9:23 AM ^
I don't care if we beat Wisconsin. Or ND. We can lose to either or both and still win the conference. All I care about this year is beating OSU. Literally nothing else matters to me.