Michigan: Slow starters or good finishers?

Submitted by Noleverine on

First off, YAY!  6-0 feels so good, and is quite redeeming after how difficult things have been as of late.  

I know this has been hased out before, but it's late at night and there isn't much else going on, and we have one more game to add to the knowledge database and to discuss.

So 6 weeks into the season, patterns are becoming more noticable with a larger sample size.  Aside from against Minnesota, Michigan has struggled in the first half, both putting up points and stopping other teams from doing so.  The second half has been a different story.

I love Mattison and Borges, and their ability to make in-game adjustments.  In my opinion this is one of the biggest differences from the previous regime (please, no bashing the previous staff.  Not trying to start a flamewar here).  My question is, though: what is causing this disparity between halves?  

My personal opinion is that our coordinators are learning about these teams for the first time in a long time, and that may be leading to our slow starts. They are not as familiar with personnel and coaches as someone who has been around the league longer.  I know that both Hoke and Mattison have played all of these teams before, but they were different teams with different coaches and different players.  However, once they become more comfortable with an opponent's gameplan, they are able to change theirs around it.

 

What does the board think?  Are we slow starters or good finishers?

BlockM

October 9th, 2011 at 12:21 AM ^

Denard just needs to cool his jets a bit, calm down, and let the game come to him. When we've stalled in the first halves of games, it's been because he's forcing throws he shouldn't and getting them picked off. I think the playcalling has been just fine in the first halves, but obviously the adjustments are working.

Also, the D wouldn't have started slow this game if the offense hadn't given the ball up three times. Led directly to a lot of points.

Noleverine

October 9th, 2011 at 12:23 AM ^

that Denard has to chill out a bit, their running game was gashing us throughout the first half.  I can't find exact figures, but we did significantly better against the run in the second half.  You can put some blame on the offense for the D's struggles in the first half, but not all of it.  They were still moving on us even when we weren't turning it over.

JCM26

October 9th, 2011 at 9:10 AM ^

You noticed that too?  As you described NW would get a huge 3 to 6 yard gain while similar gains by Michigan were described in more ho-hum terms. I also noticed Gerry DiNardo was stonefaced and emotionless in his commentary after the game.  Of course we have come to expect this from Lou Holtz after a Michigan win.  I dunno - maybe DiNardo was just a bit tired, so I'll just write it off as a long night on the job - this time!

elhead

October 9th, 2011 at 1:11 AM ^

NU had 292 net yds in the 1st half, and 155 in the 2nd. 78 came on that last drive, which didn't do much more than pump up their stats. They didn't have much of a running game, period, in the 2nd half - 8 yds, something like that. Meanwhile, NU's offense didn't have the ball in the 3rd Qtr save for 3 minutes. So it was a combination of things. Our D being on the field so much in the first half due to turnovers along with the hurry up they were running much of the time allowed them to make their run game work a lot better in the first half - about 100 yards first half rushing.

m_go_blue

October 9th, 2011 at 12:27 AM ^

its how you finish.

Michigan and Nebraska both did the same thing tonight.

Poor first halfs, great second halfs.

6-0 for the Maize and Blue!

BRING ON LITTLE BROTHER!!!!!

Marley Nowell

October 9th, 2011 at 12:34 AM ^

I think Offense and Defense are separate stories here. 

Denard is somewhat streaky as a passer...when he's hot he'll complete everything and when he's cold he can miss guys by 10 yards.  The good thing is his legs and hopefully a RB can keep the Offense going in the cold times.

The Defense is definitely making excellent adjustments throughout the game.  NW was gashing us on the triple-option play in the first half but Michigan did stop it the last time they pulled it out.

UMfan21

October 9th, 2011 at 12:45 AM ^

What amazes me is how Denard can have plays that are SO BAD, and yet at the end of the day, his numbers are dazzling.

I just looked at the box score and saw he ended with 400 total yards and 4 TDs.  That's just amazing to me.  Watching him play, it didn't feel like he was racking up those numbers.

dieseljr32

October 9th, 2011 at 1:26 AM ^

I think they are a team of great resiliance.  They keep answering pre-season questions with conviction.  2 games in to the conference season, they are still undefeated.  They keep winning ball games.  Borges is increasingly improving his playcalling by modeling it around Denard and not what the regime truly wants.  Greg Mattison has done a spectacular job putting out a blazing tire fire.  Guys, Michigan's D gave up 24 points in the first half and pitched a shutout in the second half. 

Progress = 34,000,000 * infinity from the past couple of years.

Bring on MSU.

bziegs99

October 9th, 2011 at 1:39 AM ^

In Michigan history. His in game adjustments are worth every penny of that gold plated contract. There is so much coaching going on, it makes you wonder how top recruits could walk away from an opportunity to play for him.

bziegs99

October 9th, 2011 at 1:42 AM ^

The best 30 minutes of football in the last several years--both sides of the ball. I was cautiously optimistic till the second half tonight. Now I'm starting to believe this is a pretty good team. With the current state of the big 10, anything is possible this year.

CLord

October 9th, 2011 at 2:23 AM ^

I cannot figure this team out, and cannot figure Denard out.  Never seen a more Jekyll/Hyde QB.  Sometimes he looks like he's just outta highschool with how bad his reads and throws are, then he's magical.  Same for the D this game.  First half was painful, second half it was like a new team.  I just don't get it other than coordinator half time magic.

 

Either way, they crushed it in the second half, and now we're 6-0.  I thought 8-4 would be great for Hoke's first year, so this looks awesome.

Wisconsin Wolverine

October 9th, 2011 at 3:02 AM ^

When Denard goes to throw the ball, you can tell a lot of the times right away if it's going to be a good pass or not.  If he steps into it confidently, he's usually quite accurate ... If he throws off his back foot, it just looks uncomfortable, & the ball goes who knows where.  Hopefully he can just keep calm at the start of games & take care of those decision-making issues.

BobBlueMass

October 9th, 2011 at 7:59 AM ^

Better this than being crappy finishers. Making adjustments is a sign of a very good coaching staff. And a sign of a team with talents and smarts to understand and make the adjustments. Also a sign of a team that respects its coaches.

South Bend Wolverine

October 9th, 2011 at 8:38 AM ^

Definitely a bit of both.  I would like to see the offense hop to it a little quicker.  The good news from last night is that we were moving the ball well in the first half, it was just the TOs that slowed us down, so it was more a Denard focus issue than a gameplan one (and I think we all pretty much agree that Denard does need to calm down a bit at times).

Favorite stat of the year so far, though: we have outscored our opponents 114-21 in the 2nd half.  That's closing.