Offensive Playcalling
I know this may not be a popular thought. I know plenty of people will thing "who cares? we won the game!"
However, I just rewatched the EMU game and haven't been more upset at the offensive playcalling, especially in a blowout win in...well, maybe in my lifetime.
I was critical of Borges after the ND game, saying that he has not called plays to get Denard in a rhythm all season. Particularly early in the game. He's been BRILLIANT at figuring out the defense and calling plays later in games. I think the numbers prove this thought.
Now I'm going to discredit any plays called inside your own 5 yardline, there is only so much you can do there. But where are the quick slants? the bubble screens? the short rhythm throws to get the QB in sync and the WRs involved. Where are the throws that Oklahoma have been making a living off of for YEARS?! Now do we run that offense or have that personnel? Heck no. But that doesn't mean you can't run some of the same plays.
To me it just seems so obvious because it's two-fold. Not only do you get Denard and the WRs involved and in rhythm...you also loosen up the middle of the defense so that your RBs get more space to operate (or Denard in the run game). As much of a genius as Borges is claimed to be, what is the reasoning for not doing this?
The most frustrating drive for me was actually our first touchdown drive. Denard has a beautiful long run to flip field position, and then we run him like 5-6 times in the next 6-7 plays! #1 let the kid get a breather, #2 don't get the kid hurt, #3 get others involved, #4 this is EMU! why are we wearing down our QB vs. EMU!? and #5 they have 8 guys in the box!
So I ask, was anyone else disappointed and frustrated? Was anyone else hoping to establish a short passing game against EMU and SDSU that we could combine with the deep throws from ND? I'm not saying we need to be the Air Raid offense, I would've just liked to have seen Denard get the "Lloyd Carr - he's a freshman QB treatment" and have a bunch of short throws that gets the ball in the hands of the playmakers and allows them to get involved and make plays early.
September 18th, 2011 at 5:55 PM ^
I think EMU is one of the few games that Borges can experiment with, and I don't fault him for trying to see what Denard is capable of.
OTOH those runs in the fourth were baffling. Seeing Denard get blasted by some DE multiple times at the LOS with a twenty point lead in the fourth was beyond stupid, IMO.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:01 PM ^
Conspiracy theorists would say he's not concerned with being overly cautious with Denard because he belives Devin is a better fit for his offense anyway
September 18th, 2011 at 6:07 PM ^
If that was the case why would AB have waited so long to put Devin in?
September 18th, 2011 at 6:23 PM ^
probably because that's hoke's call, not borges's
September 18th, 2011 at 11:05 PM ^
Borges said in the post game interview it was hoke's call. Hoke's comment was somthing like i dont feel safe about a lead until the clock is :00. Reguardless, it was a 20+ point lead I think gadner should have been in.
September 19th, 2011 at 9:32 AM ^
The fact that Hoke would feel that uncomfortable with Gardner in finishing the game off in the 4th quarter disturbs me..
Devin has a great arm and can obviously run, even though he isn't denard, but still. Let him get some time and throw some passes.
September 18th, 2011 at 9:11 PM ^
If I thought for a second Al Borges didn't care about the health of a student athlete because he was trying to replace him anyway, I'd be the head of the "Fire Al Borges" movement.
September 19th, 2011 at 1:32 PM ^
I don't think he doesn't care about Denard's health.
But it's possible that he doesn't view the prospect of Denard having to come due to injury as "Oh noes! Our offense is doomed!", especially with a talented backup like Devin who seems to be a pretty pure passer.
September 18th, 2011 at 5:59 PM ^
For all we know, they WILL do what you are saying, just not yet. They'll probably pull that stuff out when we really need it.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:01 PM ^
"True" and "false" need to be moderating options going forward.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:30 PM ^
September 18th, 2011 at 11:08 PM ^
I would also like to see an up/down vote button on comments, something similar to reddit
September 19th, 2011 at 1:43 PM ^
Everyone would, but I think it is some programming thing that is holding Brian back from making the changes. Or, he doesn't care right now because we are in-season and he has lots of his plate.
There are usually changes to format and design once things slow down. Basically after signing day we might get it back, but I doubt it.
September 18th, 2011 at 9:02 PM ^
the playcalling. While I am one of those that is in the "Denard should always be in shotgun" camp, and have little problem with running him quite a bit, it seems foolish to run him 25 times against Eastern Michigan. That is a game that should have featured major focus on the running game from the backs IMO, as it is a perfect time to really work on the blocking scheme that will be critical against better teams.
September 18th, 2011 at 10:06 PM ^
I agree with everything you say as it relates to the second half. However, Borges's insistence that Denard play out of the I-Form and running that silly QB off-tackle (or whatever it is called) are killing me. If he's in the shotgun, let him run the zone read. He knows how to do it and does it well. Limit his carries by calling for more passing plays out of that formation. The I-Form with Denard is going to be the end of me - it just does not fit his style and skill set. Plus, Michigan can't run the ball out of it either.
September 18th, 2011 at 10:40 PM ^
I am totally in that camp as well. But it's clear that they will not abandon I-Form, and if that's the case, then we'd better work on it a lot--which means teams like Eastern are the perfect opponent to do so. I do think we can feature the backs more out of the shotgun, and I wish we did.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:01 PM ^
The playcalling was extremely boring and vanilla, and I don't have a problem with that so long as Denard isn't the one running between the tackles play after play after play its the fourth quarter and we're up by 25 stop it stop it.
While we haven't run any bubble screens, there were a few quick slants. Also, it seems like Denard it going for it all on every designed pass play. I don't know if this is per instruction or if he's just a little too excited early in the season.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:03 PM ^
Many of those QB runs were zone reads. If the defense plays a different way, those are RB runs instead of QB runs.
That said, when EMU kept loading the box, I would have loved to see a little more rolling of the pocket. IMO, this is such an obvious thing with a 6' tall QB that saving it for later really doesn't gain anything and it could have eliminated some of the QB hits.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:11 PM ^
I realize that, but it was basically garbage time. The chance of Denard getting hurt running something he doesn't (or at least shouldn't) need a ton of practice with just isn't something I'd be willing to risk. I'd rather see Devin throwing deep balls or perfecting a play action fake or something he needs to work on. This was one of a precious few times where he could have gotten in the game, and its worrying to think about him needing to come in for an injury with eight career pass attempts.
If they had Denard doing something else it would be more understandable to keep him in the game, IMO.
September 18th, 2011 at 9:51 PM ^
Another great point.
If you're going to keep Denard in, why not run things that we need to work on? We know Denard can run the read-option and QB power plays. What about the short throws? If you can't throw because you're up too much, why not work on running with your RBs?
Don't call the read-option, Denard can make a bad read and still get a first down with his skills vs. a bad MAC team, that's not teaching him anything...in fact, it's counterproductive in the long run.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:05 PM ^
very stange indeed... I thought DG should have came in earlier in the next to last drive. If DR would gotten hurt the coaching staff would never have heard the end to it. This is EMU not OSU, there was no need for him to play basically that whole game.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:05 PM ^
I think the offensive staff is trying to figure out what they have and what they can do with it within the framework of their playbook, making adjustments as needed. Because Borges has Denard, I think he's adjusting his vision to accommodate the QB we have inasmuch as he can. That's what I would expect him to do, and really, we're short on games during which he can experiment with the offense as much as he clearly did with EMU.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:07 PM ^
September 18th, 2011 at 11:20 PM ^
Other than that, they can't do what Oklahoma is doing primarily because of one simple reason: opponents have to respect Oklahoma's deep passing game. Against Michigan, opponents don't have to press coverage to disrupt routes, they can sit 5-7 yards off the LOS and jump any short routes. They can do this because they don't sense the threat that Denard can beat them deep, which has been a pretty accurate assumption so far.
So the reason you aren't seeing those routes is 2-fold:
- Because of the defensive alignment and the technique the DBs are taking against our offense isn't allowing for intermediate routes.
- Denard isn't going through his reads well enough to check to the intermediate routes, which have often been crossing routes (which is a relatively easy check for a QB to make as it simply involves shifting your eyes one level) that have been open. Denard learning to go through his progression and understanding and believing in his reads is essential. He has made some ok reads (one on one coverage, etc, where you want to give your WR a chance) and simply missed the pass. Other times he has totally missed the reads.
September 19th, 2011 at 2:54 AM ^
I'm still wondering ho those short routes worked last year. Through the first three games he was deadly accurate last year and that was mostly with short and middle stuff. We're talking about middling MAC teams here.
September 18th, 2011 at 6:16 PM ^
The play calling wasn't poor. Denard just couldn't hit his throws early on so they began to adjust and run him more. It wasn't a great game for the offense but I'd place more blame on Denard than Borges.
September 18th, 2011 at 9:37 PM ^
goes so far. It has legitimacy of course, but it doesn't explain all of the playcalling. There are certain throws and routes that can maximize DR's accuracy, and IMO we are running few of them. And it also doesn't explain the running game choices, sopecifically the late drive referenced above after Denard's loing run, with him going into the line another 5 times.
September 18th, 2011 at 9:59 PM ^
How many of those throws were easy throws?
I'd treat Denard like Russell Bellomy when it comes to the passing game. You couldn't have Russell come in and start making pro-style reads. Wouldn't want him throwing deep routes early in the game. At least I wouldn't.
I'd throw a lot of screens, I'd throw quick passes and let the play makers make the plays. I'd use the TE early and OFTEN.
A poster said the DBs are playing off the line. If that's the case, hike the ball and snap it out there to the WRs and let them wiggle for 5-6 yards. Do it until you get those safeties out of the box. That'll give you more space up the middle to do the "power play" that you want to do anyway.
I'd love to see Denard with a first half of 8 of 11 for 80-90 yards and 1 TD. It also keeps your WRs involved late in the game too. And when you miss a wide open Hemingway you don't still him dejected because he already has a few touches. He's still involved and blocking.
September 19th, 2011 at 2:55 AM ^
I do think I remember a tunnel screen that got blown up in the second half. That was was right out of last year's playbook.
September 19th, 2011 at 6:45 AM ^
They tried one screen in the first Q and EMU blew it up, Denard saw the RB covered and took off running. Just saying they did try a screen.
September 18th, 2011 at 7:42 PM ^
Borges is the OC now, and I'm going to say the same thing I said about RR: I am willing to trust his judgment and not bitch about his playcalling. I know the team on the other side of the ball was EMU, but their players have schollies, too, and Ron English is still a decent defensive coach as long as he isn't playing against a pure spread offense.
Do you think EMU's coaches weren't fired up to play Michigan? Do you think their team didn't give every last ounce of effort out there? I'm happy with the score, happy the team got out healthy, and looking forward to watching this team grow.
September 18th, 2011 at 7:48 PM ^
I'm pretty sure Borges kept the playcalling bland so that future teams didn't have much to see when they tried to watch film on the UM offense. We will see more interesting stuff in the future.
September 18th, 2011 at 10:00 PM ^
just sayin...
September 18th, 2011 at 9:31 PM ^
I bet the OP could make a lot of money being a Division 1 or NFL offensive coordinator.
September 18th, 2011 at 9:43 PM ^
is our scheme itself. By Borges' own words we are running a "hybrid" style between his own system and the remants of RR's. While I understand why, and to a certain point applaud his flexibility and judgement, I don't recall many instances of hybrid offensive systems being ultimately successful, when they are between such radically different styles.
September 18th, 2011 at 10:11 PM ^
It's MUCH better than blowing up the system all together. Rich Rod did that and we won 3 games.
Borges is a successful OC, I commend him for putting his ego aside and basically stealing plays from the guy before him that the players already know.
My thread has to do with the passing plays be handled like Denard is Tom Brady for the most part. Yes we still have the Fake QB dive, flip to the slot. We've seen some spring rollout, which I love.
But Denard is very raw as a passer. I'd love to see more screens, more quick snap'n'fire type passes to the WRs, a few bubble screens, some quick slants, A LOT more usage of Koger. Loved the easy read to McColgan vs. ND. Just simple throws, confidence throws. Stuff where maybe you see your WR break a tackle or two and take it to the house.
See 0:58 and 1:45
September 19th, 2011 at 2:52 AM ^
Agreed. If we run under center in 08, we win the B10 and get to 10 wins.
Wait, what?
September 19th, 2011 at 3:00 AM ^
If Henne had had one more year and Manningham and Arrington had decided to come back for year.
September 18th, 2011 at 10:01 PM ^
Why does a post like this get negged? The OP was completely respectful and intelligently laid out why he disliked what he did.
The Nazi-like discipline and mob mentality here has to stop. There is nothing wrong with playing armchair OC on a message board. A forum of pom-pom waving would be pretty damn boring to read.
September 18th, 2011 at 10:25 PM ^
BRCE, I don't always agree with everything you say or how you say it, but you are spot on here. A person can't criticize Denard's consistency as a passer without getting negged to hell. It needs to stop.
September 19th, 2011 at 8:34 AM ^
There is a reason Denard only complete 45% of his passes in HS including 43.3% as a senior. Last year's passing scheme was perfected suited for Denard and played a lot off of the opponents fear of him running. We finally saw the fake run throw to the wide open slot down the seam against EMU. It's passes like that made and a variety of quick throws that made Denard's completion % look really good last year. He wasn't required to frequently go through his progressions while sitting in the pocket.
September 19th, 2011 at 9:40 AM ^
I wonder why our coaches do not realize this yet. Denard has clearly regressed as a passer at the precise point (moving from sophomore to junior) that he should be improving. There is no other explanation for this IMO than the obvious one--last year's passing scheme maximized Denard's limited passing strengths and did not ask him to do things he was not good at. This year's passing scheme does the opposite--it asks him to do things that he has never demonstrated an ability to do.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:27 PM ^
The common sense being displayed right now in this chain of posts is blowing my mind! What the hell is going on?
September 19th, 2011 at 12:45 AM ^
It might have been the inflamatory (and profoundly ignorant) first sentence.
September 19th, 2011 at 6:39 AM ^
Where did the 2010 offense go, right?
Well, it went out the window along with RR. Not immediately, obviously, but Hoke & Borges are going to transition away from the spread O over the next couple of years.
Denard threw some passes in the 1st half. I'm re-watching it now. He just overthrew Koger (but there should have been PI against EMU). Now on 3rd & 11 he overthrew again.
Denard isn't a good dropback passer yet, he throws behind his WR's a lot, watch the INT he threw against EMU, he threw behind Hemingway. I wonder if this has led Borges to be more restrictive about what passes he asks DRob to throw.
EDIT: and to answer your concerns about running DRob - he's our best runner. He's going to get the ball every game. Our OL/RB's haven't become a force unto themselves, so DRob it is.
And everyone needs to stop with "THIS IS EMU". Please keep in mind we were 7-6 last year with one of the worst defenses in the country. We haven't had a powerful squad since '06. Hopefully Hoke will be able to restore UM back to a top team but right now we're very average at best, even with DRob.
September 19th, 2011 at 8:39 AM ^
Could anyone shed light on this series from the WMU game? I remember being dumbstruck why Borges would run DR twice after the long gain. So predictable it becomes sneaky? From the WMU UFR:
Ln Dn Ds O Form RB TE WR D Form Type Play Player Yards
M10 1 10 Shotgun 2TE 1 2 2 Nickel 4-3 Run Zone read keeper Robinson 39
M49 1 10 Shotgun 2TE 1 2 2 Base 3-4 Run Zone read keeper Robinson 4
O47 2 6 Shotgun 3-wide 1 1 3 Base 3-4 Run QB draw Robinson -6
O48 3 7 Shotgun 4-wide 1 0 4 Nickel Pass Hitch Hemingway Inc
September 19th, 2011 at 12:32 PM ^
First TD Drive.
Denard breaks the long run. And then we go back to him 4-5 more times in the next 5-6 plays. It was mindblowing. Especially after hearing them talk about 10 runs a game, 5 read-options and 5 run/pass options.
September 19th, 2011 at 9:10 AM ^
and none of us have any real idea of what the coaching staff is trying to accomplish--but i am pretty sure its more than just please the fans and scoare points.
try to chill and enjoy the winning.
September 19th, 2011 at 10:01 AM ^
Agree...
It takes time to learn what they are asking Denard to learn (and time for Borges to learn what Denard can do.) A win is a win.
September 19th, 2011 at 2:49 PM ^
...but the fans who took off the maize and blue glasses and saw that the team was extremely flawed even in the wins all knew that we'd struggle come B1G season.
This team so far is a middle of the road B1G team...HOWEVER, unlike the past, they have a very solid core, they're getting better, they're much better coached and they're playing some resemblance of defense.
With that said, the "shut up, we won!" arguement is the worst argument you can make...especially against one of the worst teams in the MAC.
In short, if we played EMU 12 times this year...no one would be saying anything. We don't.