Quick look at statistics and implications
Sorry for adding to the already overflowing board, but I'm still fuming and need time to reflect publicly.
This was just bad, and Heiko predicted well that this would be another atrocious hangover game offensively. That being said, the statistics say we played a very strong game defensively allowing only 206 total yards... The defensive line kept the run game honest allowing 47 yards rushing on an average of 1.9 yds per carry. D-line also did a great job in the second half of being able to apply pressure to Whitmer. Linebackers played a decent game, and secondary wasn't bad either except for a couple of coverage lapses. Not utilizing bend not break throughout the game seemed to work.
Offense was a different story... Only compiling 284 yards against a team like UCONN is cause for for concern. The biggest concern has to be the turnovers. One was the miscue on special teams, but the other three are directly linked to DG and his lack of ball security throwing and running. Offensive line was REALLY bad... I'm not surprised that we ended up with 174 yards on the ground mainly because DG was constantly being flushed from the pocket and they were running Fitz to the left throughout the second half.
What this game says is that we are still a VERY young team mainly on the O-Line... This is a much needed bye week, and hopefully it will not be taken for granted. Coaching definitely has to do a better job of preparation and really needs to come down harder on these guys. More emphasis on ball security and addressing the offensive line issues...
I still believe this is a team that can go 10-2 and make the trip to Indy, but A LOT has to change. Youth needs to be overcome, and I think it will by the time we reach November. Plus, Jake Ryan returns giving us a leader on defense. Self inflicted mistakes will keep us from accomplishing goals in the long run, though.
Thoughts?
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:33 AM ^
I understand being pissed about the TOs, but there is a great deal of ignorance being displayed in this forum tonight (not directed at the OP). Yes, it's been emphasized by the coaches. No, it hasn't improved. So huge failure?
Q: What causes turnovers?
A: Mental and physical errors of every kind.
TOs are simply how mistakes in football often show up in the box score. Preventing turnovers is about improving in every possible aspect of the game. If you are pissed specifically because "the turnover problem" didn't get fixed yet, you're not thinking about it correctly.
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:35 AM ^
And you are right about why I'm mad about the turnovers... I don't know of a better way to put it, but I'm going to compare this season to 2011 and the early turnover troubles we had there. It was very frustrating, but by the end of the season, it had been solved.
September 22nd, 2013 at 8:45 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:33 AM ^
Thank God for the defense bailing us out tonight; adding Jake Ryan to the mix sometime soon will make a good thing even better. If anything, we almost need this defense to be depended upon for not only a few more turnovers, but directly for more than just an occasional TD.
The offense? Not MSU bad, in that we at least have the potential to be potent if we can stem the all-too-frequent mistakes of all kinds. But still so bad that eventually, if major corrections are not made, the offense will cost a at least a win or two, no matter how well the defense does their job. Offensive line arrrrrgggghhhhhhh!!!! Might need multiple changes, which in itself, is a dangerous thing to do 1/3 of the way into the season. Arrrrrgggghhhhhhhhh!!!!!!
Special teams, too, are a mess. Dileo's great punt return to the UConn 10 was wiped out by the most bone-headed of mistakes. Only cure is to sit the offender for a good long time and make him work his tail off to get back in there on ST. It would be a huge mistake to see him back in there any time soon. Too many other ST problems to mention right now, but some good things occasionally happening too----in particular that 1st-half open-field tackle by Joe Kerridge.
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:36 AM ^
I'm glad both the offense and defense picked it up in the 4th quarter, but I got the sense that Michigan was able to wear down the UConn players. That's good and bad: good because it gave us the win; bad because we had to depend on depth and conditioning to finally get an advantage against what should be by far the worst team we will play the rest of the season.
Oh, and btw. That ND team that we were so proud of defeating? They suck.
September 22nd, 2013 at 9:24 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:36 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:39 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:15 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:49 AM ^
Gardner is a more gifted passer, though. I do think he can cut down on the interceptions as he gains experience - although part of the blame goes to the WR corps, too. The long INT tonight was not really Gardner's fault. It was a little underthrown, yes, but Junior Hemingway would have outfought the DB for that ball.
September 22nd, 2013 at 7:50 AM ^
Really? Really? I love how people say Devin is a more gifted passer. What do you base this on? Performance? Look at his stat line.
September 22nd, 2013 at 9:47 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:57 PM ^
Do not confuse passing ability with decision-making and composure. He has the ability to make every throw in the game. The question is whether he can keep his composure and not let his mechanics go sloppy. He did so (for all but one play) against ND. He was standing tall, surveying the field and zipping it in to his receivers in time. Those were things that were tough for Denard. For one thing, he wasn't very tall so he couldn't see over the line as well, but he also really struggled to throw with touch and to lead his receivers with the ball. Denard's good passing games generally involved him throwing jump balls to Junior Hemingway and Roy Roundtree and counting on them to make a play. (That's not necessarily a bad strategy, but it doesn't tell us a lot about a QB's passing ability.) If we still had those two guys this year, Gardner's stats would be better. Hemingway would not have let the UConn DB beat him to the ball like Chesson did.
Gardner didn't show a lot of what he can do yesterday, but if he could against ND when he was our entire offense, he can do it again. The other question is whether the WR corps can step up and make plays on the ball.
September 22nd, 2013 at 3:37 PM ^
Denard, probably because of his height, was not a good passer with pressure in his face. But he could make throws with time. Devin has shown an ability to stand tough in the pocket - including against ND. That tipped ball in the middle though went high because he stepped back from pressure as he threw, I think. Or didn't take a full step, I cant remember. But at other points last night he stood tough.
September 22nd, 2013 at 8:23 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 8:35 AM ^
Well, to be absolutely fair, there are two other QBs (Connor Halliday at Washington State is one of them, I think), that also have 8 INTs, but that aside, Gardner's passer rating (131.1, if I did it right) puts him somewhere in the middle of qualified QBs. In other words, not the best performance by any means, but certainly not the worst.
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:41 AM ^
Inexperienced or not, they're terrible.
Any given year, you should be able to put two redshirt freshman on the line and get 3 yards up the middle on 80 percent of your carries.
We get negative yards to one yard up the middle on 95 percent of carries.
Inexperience doesn't cover that. There's something wrong.
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:12 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:18 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:34 AM ^
against Akron and UCONN would indicate that the o-line has other problems besides experience. The play the last two weeks on the o-line can not be excused just as a product of lack of experience, when your facing what is supposed to be inferior competition.
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:52 AM ^
Ultimately at the start of the season, most of the 'experts' were calling us an 8 or 9 win team this year due to our youth and right now the fanbase is being reminded of that. The play where Chesson failed to dominate the tiny little sub 6' corner covering him his a prime example of that youth. Senior Chesson will likely just reach over the guy, grab the ball and proceed to burn down the field for another 10 yards. Freshman Chesson doesn't jump properly and it results in an Int.
That said that throw made my happy, Chesson mistake aside, because it was one of many times that Gardner did throw to someone not named Gallon. Gardner was out of sync with a lot of those people but that can be fixed.
The second half went well and in the 4th we really did start to establish something. Fitz was running hard and the defense finally got pumped up thanks to the Morgan pick. Hopefully that will carry into the bye week and give the coaches a little something positive to work with before showing the 6 hour long clip of things that need to be corrected. I'm really hoping with 2 weeks off we can get the offensive line settled into at least mediocrity and Devin calmed down and out of the "I need to win it all by myself mode."
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:09 AM ^
The fumble for TD was actually punched out from behind by Kerridge. Again, not his fault (who expects your own teammate to do that?).
The long pass INT was also not his fault. A receiver with 5-6 inches on a DB should be able to jump up and grab that one. Even Spielman called that one right.
The punt return fiasco is all on the Special Teams unit. You need to CLEAR OUT when a punt is hitting inside the 10-15. Seriously. If the ball bounces even slightly different then it doesn't hit Jones' ankle. Michigan ball.
I hated every TO, but there's no way they were all DGs fault.
Two were freak accident plays and two were receivers not making the play even though they got hands on the ball.
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:13 AM ^
Disagree on the fumble. He's heading into contact and needs to protect the ball. As for the last pick...ok
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:25 AM ^
had the ball tucked under his arm on the fumble. Your own FB doing that is just something that you don't expect, so I personally wouldn't put alot of the blame on him for that play.
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:36 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:43 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 8:27 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:12 AM ^
is not playing up to expectations is because he has really been frazzled by opposing defenses, which, in very large part, falls on the o-line. I mean, the o-line has more holes than Swiss cheese. You look back at ND, Akron, and UConn, and you see Gardner constantly on the run; the pocket does not implode, there simply is no pocket. All-consensus the-opposite-of-good teams like Akron and UConn are making the Michigan o-line look like high school JV and, consequently, Gardner has been spending a lot of time eating turf. I am not really sure what exactly the issues are with the o-line. Is is simply a matter of inexperience? Is the o-line too slow? Too weak? How is it possible that Akron's D-line which, on average, weighs 50-60 lbs. less is shredding our o-line? I feel that, perhaps, if Gardner had a better line, that gave him more time, he would not force some of those throws on the run. I am not sure how the o-line woes can be remedied, if at all. Can someone replace Miller at center?
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:37 AM ^
The problems are obvious. Luckily the defense can keep us in games against stronger opponents. After DG's fumble, we'd given up seven turnovers over roughly a game and a half. That's attrocious. It's also fixable, though. The O-line will get better (though we still need mroe talented players on the interior), but the turnovers have to disappear or we'll lose to inferior opponents.
September 22nd, 2013 at 1:51 AM ^
Can someone explain to me why on the last play the DB's are so close to the line of scrimmage when it is 4th and about 20 and a few minutes left in the game.
Taylor got beat, luckily qb wasnt looking that way
Countess, if he was back maybe one more step he would have completely negated that throw.
I know we contained them but I am confused why having the DBs backing up a little more wouldnt be more containing
September 22nd, 2013 at 2:09 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 2:24 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 6:51 AM ^
If we're going to have a numbers-based discussion, then I suppose that is different enough in its focus that we'll let this one stand for that purpose. In any case, Some of Michigan's averages after 4 games:
Points For: 29.8 (5th in Big Ten)
Points Against: 19.8 (4th in Big Ten)
Total Offense: 383.1 yards / game (8th in Big Ten)
Total Defense: 320 yards / game (2nd in Big Ten)
Rushing Offense: 183.8 yards / game (5th in Big Ten)
Rushing Defense: 150.5 yards / game (6th in Big Ten)
Passing Offense: 199.3 yards / game (6th in Big Ten)
Passing Defense: 169.5 yards / game (2nd in Big Ten)
More will be in the coming review diary which will close out the non-conference season.
September 22nd, 2013 at 7:44 AM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 10:18 AM ^
Our team did not give up. Down 14 on the road and coming back to win was great no matter who we were playing. Yeah, I am avoiding the fact that we should not have been down 14 to begin with.
September 22nd, 2013 at 11:52 AM ^
And this whole notion of "the coaches need to come down harder on the oline" is bs. Yeah, so let's destroy these young men's confidence because they haven't been consistent in big time major collegiate football. Yep, that should make it better. That will do the trick.
So many people who post on here are rabid control freaks. Yeah, I have vented before and did last night. But I don't pretend to have solutions, like said OP or some of the comments below. You don't know anything about what's going on with the team. Maybe the captains and seniors are terrible leaders. Maybe the youth is rearing it's ugly head and we didn't expect it to be this glaring of a problem. We probably are still a year or so away. Devin clearly needs that 5th year. He is struggling being 110% the "man". Those are realistic, not ranting about "ehT the coaches should do is x,y,z, bs.
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:16 PM ^
It was a terrible game for Michigan but I loved it. I got to watch the game with my mother in law who is a rabid UM fan. She is freaking out. I'm completely relaxed. Even on the horrible fumble returned for TD I'm assuring her, no guaranteeing her Michigan has this game in the bag. I reminded her of the UM Minnesota game when Navarre reverted to his true self for 3 quarters before realizing he was playing Minnesota. I knew that UCONN was truly an awful program. They barely moved the ball the entire game and it was just a matter of time before that keystone cop QB made a major mistake. Unlike Michigan, one mistake and they were done. Perhaps my calm was fake but it was great to turn to my MIL and say I told you so with a grin on my face.
To the game there are some problems. But be aware that despite Akron and UCONN being crummy teams, both have first rate coaching staffs. This is their big game. They are good enough to game plan and scheme to get that big win. Both staffs were undone by the failures of their teams despite doing as well as possible at RPS. I'm still bothered that UM can't run at will against lesser teams or generate a consistent pass rush with 4.
That all said UM can not be a very good team and until OSU does it matter? Who in their division do we fear? UM may be bend but not break but Nebraska and NW are not existent. MSU made the ND defense that gave up 41 to us look like the Ravens. All UM has to do is cut the turnovers down a little bit and they will be fine. This is not your fathers Big10 but your Grandfathers. All hail the return of the Big2 and the little 12. Outside of UM & OSU, it is a complete trainwreck.
My prediction is the defense will be bend but not break. Give up some yards, give up some points. As long as Gardner gives up only one crazy horrible TO, he will always be able to get his 80-110 yards on ten carries. The dredges of the Big10 coaching staff will not be able to come up with a special game plan. We might lose one game going into OSU where everything lines up for one team. But never fear. Most of these teams are going to lay down for us. When your a goldfish in a fish bowl and your competition is snails, you win.
September 22nd, 2013 at 12:17 PM ^
The fact is that in both the Akron and the Connecticut games, elimination of turnovers would have guaranteed comfortable but not impressive victories. Sure other issues remain, such as better QB passing accuracy (last night: 11 of 23 for a net 97 yards --- that won't cut it in EL or Evanston) and continued OL improvement. But last night for what I believe was the first time this season, Devin wasn't the leading rusher. Fitz ran for 120 net yards (5.0 avg) and 2 TDs. The D gave up 47 net rushing yards. Granted UConn only had 25 attempts, and granted M's 4 sacks took 31 rushing yards away, but that 's still only 1.9 yards per. These are all stats M can build on, and they have an extra week to do so. Look for a better all-around, sustained effort on October 5 against MN..
September 22nd, 2013 at 5:30 PM ^
Not going to happen. I'm hoping for 8-4 and bracing for 7-5. This team will need to take a giant leap forward just to win 4 more games. Akron and UConn aren't B1G caliber teams. What happens when we show up at Penn St and the TO's aren't fixed? And it doesn't get any easier from there, except maybe for Indiana. Once November shows up this team is going to face much tougher competition and if they can barely handle college football's worst teams, man look out when they start facing some good ones.
I'm officially in panic mode!