Optimistic Take On the Rest of the Year
I know all of the diehard Michigan fans like myself are still coping with the fact that we lost (again) to MSU, and a lot of you are reacting in total Schadenfreude fashion, blaming the coaches for everything and wondering how long our misery will last. I'm still optimistic about this season as long as we don't collapse in John L. Smith pre-Dantonio MSU fashion.
I think if we executed properly on Saturday with nothing at all changed in the gameplan, we win. A whole lot of us (including myself) have been begging for Gerg to employ more press coverage and man to man concepts as well as playing more aggressively. He did. And the defense gave the offense every opportunity to win the game in the early going.
While Spartan fans would love to think they owned Robinson and the run game, we made as many mistakes in the run game as we did in the pass game, they just weren't as eye gouging. Denard slipped or missed a cut on several plays that could have been moderate to game breaking. There were also several runs where the backs only needed to break an arm tackle or make one guy miss, and they didn't.
I think our defense (more so than other defenses) plays much better with momentum on their side. When the offense let great opportunities go to waste the whole team seemed deflated. I think Denard and many others on the offensive side of the ball played a little amped up and when that happens it can throw the precision off that is so desperately needed against a stout defense.
And it would be wrong for me to not say that MSU is much better than I ever thought they would be. They are a scary matchup for anyone right now and they beat us on plays when we had the play well covered schematically. Gerg can't fill a gap or keep contain, and Cousins made several perfect passes.
Iowa will give us plenty of opportunity to win on Saturday. Let's just hope this year's team isn't as affected by emotion as last year's. RR's job depends on it whether we like it or not.
October 11th, 2010 at 3:28 PM ^
Just ask THE_KNOWLEDGE.
.
yes
.
October 11th, 2010 at 3:36 PM ^
You are certainly right that, “if we executed properly on Saturday with nothing at all changed in the gameplan, we win.” (Not sure why you’re saying “we” there; were you on the field?)
But isn’t most of football like that? If Notre Dame executes their game properly last month, then they win. If Ben Chappell doesn’t throw his first interception of the year, then Indiana wins.
Michigan lost a boatload of games while going 3-9 and 5-7 the last two years, when if only the game plan had been executed properly, they would have won. Realistically, that is going to keep happening to some extent, because as Rodriguez has repeatedly pointed out, “We aren’t good enough to play badly and win.”
With two teams in each game, both trying to make the other guys play badly, it isn’t always Michigan who will wind up on the winning side.
October 11th, 2010 at 3:45 PM ^
both offensively and defensively - no matter what tram is playing.
I agree that it was not just our execution. MSU was simply a better team than Michigan was on Saturday. But not as much as the score would indicate.
We're not as good as our wins would indicate, nor as bad as our losses would indicate. And its still a long season before us...
Go Blue.
October 11th, 2010 at 6:12 PM ^
So we should be 6-0 right? I hear what you're saying. Denard has proven that through 6 games, we needed him to do exactly what he's done to have the record we hold.
Once people start playing the "What If" game, people will have the same conclusion you have. If you get to around five "Ifs..." then you were simply not the better team that day, which is what happened on Saturday.
October 11th, 2010 at 6:03 PM ^
No, there's always a balance between gameplan and execution, and sometimes it tips more one way than the other. During the postgame breakdown of any loss, I'm sure there are a thousand mistakes that coaches and players think about and wish they hadn't made. I agree with the OP in that in this case, the balance tips heavily in favor of execution. Denard's two endzone interceptions and overthrowing Stonum left 21 points on the table. With those 21 points, we win.
In '08, there were really only two games we lost, Toledo and Purdue, that were actually winnable but for a small number of execution mistakes (yes we outgained Notre Dame by 120 yards but we made so many mistakes in that game that there were obviously more fundamental problems). We were a bad team playing bad football. In '09 there were at least three and maybe four games (Michigan State, Iowa, Purdue, and maybe Ohio State) that were winnable but for a few bad mistakes, and in each of those mistakes, inexperience was a huge factor (Tate Forcier's turnovers against MSU, Purdue, and OSU; Denard's game-ending INT against Iowa). Now, we're playing much more consistently on offense. Every offense will always have an off game at some point, and I just think Michigan State was ours. Inexperience was still a factor in Denard's bad throws, but less of one since he's no longer a freshman. This was the best defense he has faced so far, and his athleticism, talent, and potential are apparent no matter who he's playing.
I'm optimistic that this won't be a repeat of '09. Our offense has shown enough brilliance this year that I'm confident Denard & Co. will right the ship against Iowa.
October 11th, 2010 at 3:46 PM ^
Actually, the last two years the gameplan was legitimately called into question, especially in games where most M fans felt like Michigan should have been favored or at least was a toss up (Toledo, Illinois, Purdue, etc.). MSU was different. We had a good gameplan, especially defensively, and our execution of that gameplan was the main factor in the loss. In the past it has felt like the gameplan itself hasn't given us a leg up IMO.
October 11th, 2010 at 3:59 PM ^
a lot of you are reacting in total Schadenfreude fashion, blaming the coaches for everything and wondering how long our misery will last.
As a general rule, it's not a good idea to use a big word in a sentence if you do not know what it means.
October 11th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^
thus the capitalization of the 'S'.
At least I hope he was.
October 11th, 2010 at 4:13 PM ^
I'll help him out jm:
- gloating at somebody else's bad luck: malicious or smug pleasure taken in somebody else's misfortune
October 11th, 2010 at 4:22 PM ^
TWIS reference FWIW, but thanks for the advice. Should have clarified.
October 11th, 2010 at 4:01 PM ^
I'm not ready yet. Maybe Wednesday.
October 11th, 2010 at 4:06 PM ^
As per the depth chart (found here: http://www.michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1137697) the Mike position is going to be played by Mark Moundros OR Obi the Bear.
October 11th, 2010 at 4:07 PM ^
Double Post. Sorry.
October 11th, 2010 at 4:34 PM ^
"I think if we executed properly on Saturday with nothing at all changed in the gameplan, we win."
I couldn't DISAGREE more. Our gameplan was shit.
MSU, for the 3rd straight year, looked like they knew the plays that we were going to call, time and again. And, how about giving it to V. Smith to pick up 2 on first down over and over again? That was effective. Or giving it to V. Smith to pick up 3rd and 2 or 3? That didn't work either. Or (not to pick on Smith), not going with Hopkins when MSU clearly was selling out the handoff to cover Denard because they knew Smith couldn't hurt them? Or punting with 7 minutes to go in the 4th? Or not giving Forcier a part of the third quarter when Denard was obviously having an off game and when RR said in the post game conference that Denard was "rushing" and "pressing" all day?
Sorry, that game plan sucked. Also, how about running a few new plays? Maybe even a few trick plays? An end around? Aren't we supposed to be coached by one of the most offensivly innovative coaches of our time? This was the most vanilla playbook I have seen to date. Why?
Also, "as long as we don't collapse in John L. Smith pre-Dantonio MSU fashion"??
Sorry to be a downer, but do you remember last year? Smith never had a collapse that bad. That is exactly what those of us who are upset are worried about? Last year, we beat up on a crappy out of conference schedule, everyone got high on the team, we had a QB that was being initially mentioned for Heisman hype, and we squeeked by our first B10 game against a crappy team.
Fast forward a year - we beat up on a crappy OOC schedule (sorry, UConn and ND are not good, Umass is I-AA and BGSU is BGSU), and a very one dimensional B10 team that fields a defense that is almost as bad as . . . well, ours. We once again have a hyped QB, but that QB looked mortal against his first (and only) real test.
Again, not trying to be a downer, but I am definitely worried and I don't see the optimism.
October 11th, 2010 at 4:46 PM ^
If part of the gameplan was to have Denard overthrow a wide-open Stonum in the end zone, have Roundtree drop a TD pass, have our placeicker boot an end-of-half FG attempt into the line of scrimmage, and toss in two red-zone picks, then I agree, our offensive gamplan sucked. Otherwise, I think we woudl have been in a close game with a chance to win at the end.
I do agree with you that we are probably relying on Vincent Smith a bit too much, but I'm not going to stress over a couple debatable calls in a 60-minute game.
October 11th, 2010 at 7:00 PM ^
Yeah, you're absolutely right. John L never brought good teams into the Michigan game and then saw those teams collapse after they lost the Michigan game. Also, you should know by now that we run an offense that is basic with a ton of options. The plays were absolutely open and there, the team just didn't execute anywhere near what they are capable of. On defense, it was obvious that we knew what was coming based on the defensive scheme, which was different and gave tons of new looks (UFR will prove this), they just weren't good enough. When you play man to man, you have to have solid gap control and Michigan didn't. That was probably our best game against the pass execution wise (minus Bowling Green).
If Rod had tried to run new plays and they didn't work you would hammer him for trying to fix what wasn't broken. You also have to establish a rythm to your offense to try to run different variations off of it, especially in a spread option offense. It's ok to be disappointed but at least make sense. State was just the better team.
October 11th, 2010 at 4:41 PM ^
As I see it, we have three more games remaining that are probable wins (Illinois, Purdue, and Penn State) and three that are longshots (Iowa, Wisconsin and Ohio State). If we go 3-3 in those six we finish 8-4, which has always been considered a good year for this team (by reasonable people, at least). It sucks losing to Sparty, and if we go 8-4, it will also suck losing the other three games, but those losses should not be viewed as indications of incompetence, underachievement or looming disaster.
October 11th, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^
</sarcasm>
October 11th, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^
October 11th, 2010 at 5:15 PM ^
I would be estatic with 8-4 and a bowl, with a possible 9-4 finish going into next year..
8-4 with one of the worst pass defenses in the nation? Ill take it all day.
Imagine what the hell this team will do with even a top 50 defense once we get some depth.
It would still worry me though if we lose to Iowa going into penn state. At least we have a bye to prepare for going to Penn State, and Illinois is at home.
Purdue doesn't scare me either on the road.
October 11th, 2010 at 5:16 PM ^
Let's focus on 1-0. Their players were saying that after the game and I couldn't AGREE more. Let's focus on 1-0 as well. The MSU game is over. Now we have Iowa. That's it, if we go 1-0 this week, it's a good week. I think the game is very winnable as long as the team avoids thinking about a collapse.
October 11th, 2010 at 5:38 PM ^
As much as we all want it, and thought it would be possible after 5-0, M probably won't win the Big Ten this year. But the offense is dominant unless it stops itself, our D-line is solid and will be great by the end of the year (barring injury), linebackers are OK, and the secondary is young and depleted. So 8 wins this year and a 9th in a bowl game is great progress. Another good recruiting class and another year of experience sets up our team very well next for a run at the Big Ten and maybe more next year..
October 11th, 2010 at 5:32 PM ^
There isn't a shred of evidence that's been displayed on the field to indicate that anybody we play from here on out is a "probable win." With our defense and special teams, we can just as easily lose to Illinois, PU and PSU as beat them.
October 11th, 2010 at 7:14 PM ^
Evidently you haven' t seen Penn State play this season. They are awful. They look like 2008 Michigan.
Illinois has looked surprisingly decent, but I still think Michigan should be favored to win that game by at least a TD. Michigan should be able to score on Illinois' D and I think we can expect Scheelhaase to make some mistakes.
I haven't seen Purdue at all this year, but am aware that their QB is out for the season and also their top RB.
October 11th, 2010 at 7:50 PM ^
I'm thinking that Purdue and Penn State are probable wins, Illinois and Wisconsin are closer to 50-50, and Iowa and OSU are longshots. If that holds up, we should still be able to come out 8-4.
October 11th, 2010 at 5:44 PM ^
I thought 8 wins would be nice with a possible 9th in the bowl game. 8-4 with one of the worst defenses in the country? I'll take it.
October 11th, 2010 at 6:03 PM ^
Ferentz's record at Iowa after a bye week (2-5) would indicate that last week's bye week isn't necessarily an advantage (copied from the Iowa board):
2009-No BYE
2008-Lost @ Illinois following BYE week.
2007-NO BYE
2006-NO BYE
2005-Lost @ Northwestern following BYE week.
2004-Beat Ohio State following BYE week.
2003-Lost @ Ohio State following BYE week.
2002-NO BYE
2001-Beat Penn State following BYE Week(Had 2 weeks off, ISU game postponed due to 9/11)
2000-Lost to Western Michigan following BYE week
1999-Lost @ Michigan State following BYE
October 11th, 2010 at 6:57 PM ^
I'm still sticking with my Gator Bowl prediction in the HTTV roundtable
Not accusing foks in this thread this, but I think there is a large contingent of our fanbase who refuse to accept the notion that MSU is a talented program right now. Their entire two-deep at LB is better than ours top guy practically. This is a unit worthy of best in nation discussion, not just in the Big 10. Worthy and Martin might be a wash on the DL, but I'll take everyone at MSU over the rest of MICH's DL. Johnny Adams might be the best cornerback in the Big 10.
To put it blunty: MSU is supposed to beat us right now.
I think the Maize and Blue go 3-1 in their next four games.
October 11th, 2010 at 7:58 PM ^
If we would of just executed like usual, we would have won. This sounds simple enouhg. Maybe MSU just had a better defense? I think that is the case. I dislike MSU, but I remember the same kind of thing happening last year. We fail to execute once we play better defenses.
Can we beat Iowa. Absolutely. Do I think we will. Proabbaly not.
I am hoping we can try out some new defenders and maybe get some expereince. Treat this more like a leanring opportunity since Iowa is freaking good. Then we will have a buy week. Penn State is shaping up to be our playoff game. The deciding factor for the season(on whetehr we get to a bowl). We need to treat that week like our national championship!
October 11th, 2010 at 8:39 PM ^
I concur with Jamiemac on the strength of the spartans currently. They are a good, hard nosed, veteran team with a very solid coaching staff. This isn't to detract from our kids or program. It is more of an assertion that MSU has solid depth across the board and program stability. We should hate the fact that we lost to any team, but I believe losing to MSU stings more because of the perception that it places on our program. We have owned MSU for some time so to have the tables turned of late (and being informed of this fact by every spartan we know) is off putting to say the least. This was a game that isn't as much of thorough domination as people are stating it to be, but it feels as such because MSU just dictated play so much that perceptively it feels that way. This was a very strong, powerful MSU team and it is no surprise that we had a tough time with them.
In terms of what will happen for this team in the future. If anyone asked me prior to Big Ten play who we would lose to my list would have probably been MSU, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Ohio State. The reasons are simply that each of these teams had veteran quarterbacks, run a significant amount of misdirection (counter plays and play action) which a young, inexperienced defense will get gouged by, and had strong defensive lines with solid linebacker play which is usually the best way to control a spread option run attack. You stone the offensive line and everyone plays their gaps. I think this prediction will still hold to be true. Michigan's defense can do a decent job on teams that can't throw seam routes or deep outs which expose zones. This allows them to control the game with their defensive line and makes passes somewhat harder. This is why the game with Indiana was so close. Indiana can hit those passes very effectively and they did. Iowa will hit those passes, so will Wisconsin. Those are guarantees. They will also try to limit lanes significantly for us to run and play man coverage forcing Denard to be a much more accurate passer. Ohio State is the wild card here as I believe if we Terrell Pryor is still a hampered runner at the end of the year we may have a chance.
Overall I think we will lose to Iowa this week. They are too strong on their defensive line and frankly Stansi is too experienced a quarterback to not dissect our defense and figure out our weaknesses. You don't have to have Edwin Baker at running back to beat our defense. If Darius Willis can get yards, Adam Robinson can get yards. And I hate to say it, Iowa has a defense that is light years ahead of MSU. This will be a hard game to win.
I am however confident about Purdue, Penn State and Illinois. All have young quarterbacks, debatable defenses, manageable offenses. Could one of those teams surprise us, of course. But we are just as likely to pull a surprise on one of the three remaining teams I've listed as a loss. So 8-4, a bowl game and hopefully an even brighter future.
I will also say I believe this defense will get better next year. If we had even a SERVICEABLE middle linebacker we would be light years ahead of where we are. People blame the secondary but they are predominantly freshman and former wide receivers. Their play is not horribly surprising. Our safety's being slow is also well know but the schemes cover up for that to some degree. However our safeties being slow AND having a middle linebacker who cannot recognize gap responsibility is killing us. It is also the reason we will lose to the teams stated above. They have the personnel and the experience to take advantage of it.