The Respected Dr. Saturday's take on today's game
i think he sums it all up very well, even links to the decimated defense diary.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Another-def…
didnt realize this until reading his article, but this is definitely sobering:
"Assuming the chalk holds against Wisconsin and Ohio State, Michigan is on pace not only to miss a bowl game for the second year in a row, but to finish 1-7 in Big Ten play with seven consecutive losses, a regression from the unthinkable catastrophe of finishing 2-6 in conference games last year. Rich Rodriguez's second team seemed to establish the bare minimum of its requirements -- just don't be as bad as Rich Rodriguez's first team, please..."
November 7th, 2009 at 7:23 PM ^
Interesting take by Doc Sat. I do take issue with the notion that the team will be looking for another DC. At this point, GERG can only do so much with walk-ons and few impact players. As I've said before, it is not the DC's fault that Mouton bites on play action, that Kouvacs can't keep up with WRs, or that Ezeh and Williams cannot tackle. At this point, keep the continuity of the same DC, give him a year to plan and define a scheme that will work with the talent available, and hope the offense continues to improve and can put up 30+ points every game.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:27 PM ^
i think that was the only part of his analysis he got wrong. i dont think anyone is calling for the head of gerg, yet at least.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:31 PM ^
About 40 or so individuals on the CiL and a couple threads here and there over the course of the season. I don't think there were any this week in the wake of the decimation posts. That said, there's plenty of people who have at least expressed disappointment with him.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:40 PM ^
I think part of the disappointment was with the defense playing this badly, and it is easiest to identify the visible coach and calling him out. I do think that GERG has made some bad calls, but at the same time it is very difficult to place the blame on him. I was originally down on GERG until I realized guys like Kouvacs and Leach were passing players on the depth chart. At that point, it changed from a coaching problem to a recruiting one.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:39 PM ^
I think another part of the disappointment comes from setting unrealistic expectations following the first game of the year against Western. Odd that the only game our defense looked like world-beaters was the first game of the year, but I think upon witnessing that performance a significant portion of our fan base thought our d would be at least competent, if not good.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:27 PM ^
but your have to wonder that if he's such a good D-Coordinator why the places he's been at before didn't retain him.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:44 PM ^
Maybe my sarcasm detector is on the fritz, but do you seriously not know that he won a couple Superbowls and a BCS championship as a D coordinator? He's also 10-0 in bowl games/championship games as D coordinator.
EDIT: The 10-0 record is not all as D coordinator, but does include Defensive staff positions on teams that he has been a part of.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:17 PM ^
Essentially everyone associated with this team has proven that they can win on the college level (and beyond), multiple times, elsewhere.
Except the players. The talent just isn't there.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:32 PM ^
I was most surprised by the fact that he linked to and apparently read the posts about our defense, and still says we're going to be looking for a new defensive coordinator.
I'm pretty sure Gerg isn't responsible for that 58.3%. I'm also convinced that there isn't a defensive coordinator alive who could make something functional out of the pieces we have right now.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:47 PM ^
Just speculation, but my guess is that Doc Sat is anticipating that RR might let GERG go just to take some of the heat off of him in the offseason. I don't agree w/ that view. I think this defense needs some continuity more than anything (other than some more talent). Give GERG a chance to work w/ 11 scholarship starters at least.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:56 PM ^
My sense is that RR gave up on Shafer because both of them realized it just wasn't going to work at UM. With GERG, you get a sense that RR knows what he has to work with and probably doesn't want to go looking for another DC in 3 years. At some point, continuity beats out schemes and talent.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:43 PM ^
Forwarding some inside info I have from Shafer himself, dont ask how I came by it...He was super pissed about being scapegoated for what happened last year. It was not a mutual/happy "this just didnt work out" thing...If you look at his exit quote, "everything was my fault" you can really feel the full-on sarcasm dripping there. He feels that the D staff is just about useless, and that they are just Rodriguez lackeys who dont actually have any real coaching talent. He felt like he had to not only do his job, but actually had to overcome all their deficiencies as well. He specifically mentioned Bruce Tall as someone who has little or no idea what they are doing...I was hoping it was just sour grapes when I heard this info, but this along with some other things I have heard about the D staff are starting to get me worried.
Aug
November 7th, 2009 at 8:26 PM ^
The offense already puts up 30 a game -- 32/ppg to be exact (28.5 if you don't count Del St.). We need them to score 40 a game. 30, or even 35 a game ain't gonna cut it.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:34 PM ^
Michigan's offense doesn't get to play Michigan's defense, so is at a statistical disadvantage vis-a-vis the rest of the Big Ten.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:43 PM ^
My point is that this defense should improve somewhat next year, if for no other reason than the same coaches will be back and the depth chart should be ironed out a bit. Yes, the offense needs to continue to score, but 30 pts/gm is going to be enough to win more than enough games.
And just for reference, here are the rankings of the offenses they have faced (minus Baby Seal):
Total offense rankings:
WMU - 47
ND - 5
EMU - 118
Indiana - 78
MSU - 46
Iowa - 74
PSU - 24
Illinois - 66
Purdue - 65
That averages out to 65th place, and throwing out EMU gets you 57th place. They have faced some decent offenses, and with respect to Illinois and Purdue, offenses that were coming on in recent weeks. Not an excuse, but they have played some solid offenses.
And just for comparison's sake, Florida has faced 4 offenses ranked 90+ in overall offense (UGA, Vandy, LSU, and Kentucky). I know, SEC plays some good defense blah blah, but sometimes a good defense also benefits from playing a crappy offense.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:55 PM ^
To take your Florida example and turn it on its head, what are the offensive rankings of UM opponents, taking away the UM game?
November 9th, 2009 at 10:19 AM ^
But I think there is a much better chance of the offense improving than there is of the defense improving. The defense is going to lose most if not all of its best players and as we all know, there really isn't anything to replace them with.
Meanwhile, a good offense is going to return virtually everyone and should be improved. So, I think a goal of scoring 40ppg is more realistic than hoping our defense can improve enough to hold people under 30ppg.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:43 PM ^
All he is really saying is that the UM team isn't very good and this year's team is not much improved over last years. Yeah, we suck and the team is much more likely to go 5-7 instead of 6-6 or 7-5.
I also disagree with that looking for a new DC bit. GERG has too accomplished a background for people to question his X and O's just yet (yes I know, Syracuse, but he's also got 2 superbowl rings). He's got to get some better athletes on the field, plain and simple.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:57 PM ^
His teams in the pros had 2 of the best offenses of the decade. His D in KC was regularly awful and KC was in the position of needing to score a shitload of points to win.
GERG is NOT the problem in this case however and I don't want to see him go.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:37 PM ^
on D. That should say enough. In this day and age of Scout and Rivals, imagine how a walk-on starts, especially younger ones (not 5th year Sr's).
November 7th, 2009 at 8:00 PM ^
3 or 4 plays from being 8-2
November 8th, 2009 at 7:23 PM ^
OMG, I know WTF! Totes FUBAR.
This team has been lucky most of the year. They beat ND on a last-possession TD, and squeaked by Indiana because of some clutch runs and passes by a freshman signal-caller. Either of those games could have gone against UM, and they would currently be 3-7. Conversely, let's say Tate doesn't throw that INT against State and is healthy at the end of Iowa, and the team pulls out those wins, plus yesterday they rally and win. Now the team is 8-2. Those are the breaks in the game, and my point is that 5-5 with an offense that scores about as much as its defense lets up sounds about right. UM has had some magical wins and some tough losses.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:25 PM ^
We're also 3-4 plays away from 3-7. Stuff happens. 5-5 seems about right for this team; it can score on almost everyone and cannot stop anyone except mid-level MAC teams and Baby Seals.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:58 PM ^
I agree that the O has been much improved; they've looked downright competent at times this year! But they constantly seem to stall against bigger teams with more defensive talent. Watching the OSU-PSU game earlier today, I was having nightmarish premonitions of what the OSU D-line will do to our O-line. It's gonna be an uuugly game in 2 weeks :-/
November 8th, 2009 at 7:07 PM ^
I agree that OSU's defense will be really tough to move the ball against, but the offense looked okay against PSU and Iowa, two top defenses. Against PSU, the team had 250 yards (and probably would have had more had the receivers not dropped so many passes). I think the team will continue to struggle against good defenses, but most offenses do. At this point, though, I see this offense humming along next year and beyond, especially with DR getting some much-needed experience this offseason and becoming a legit dual threat.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:51 PM ^
hopson really needs to go .Gerg is already taking over more responsibilties and should continue to because hopson and his lb crew are clueless.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:47 PM ^
My guess (and this is only my opinion, no source for this) is that because RichRod will probably be unlikely to blow out GERG one year after hiring him, Hopson will most likely be the sacrificial lamb that gets the axe after this season.
Aug
November 7th, 2009 at 11:10 PM ^
Take out the non conference and the FCS game and we are averaging less than 30 pts per game on offense in the Big Ten and are giving up far more than that.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:18 PM ^
competition we are averaging a little under 26 points a game. Last year at this time it was a little over 21. So we are scoring under 5 more points a game then we were last year. Is that a substantial leap? Seriously, I don't know if that is or not.
November 8th, 2009 at 4:27 AM ^
BUT RICHROD DOESNT HAVE HIS OWN GUYYYYYYYYYEEEEEZZZZZZZ
November 8th, 2009 at 12:47 AM ^
2-6 to 1-7. wow. ugh.