Running back outlet in the Passing game

Submitted by Blue-Ray on September 17th, 2019 at 2:51 PM

Pass protection has seemed to be a recurring issue. Somewhat thankfully now though, it's mainly from a blitz pickup standpoint...Whereas before there were also a lot of instances of pressure from the basic D-line.

Teams are showing a tendency to just send a backer and gamble on meeting the running backs at the mesh point, no matter if it's a running play or not. The RB has to then block them coming at full speed if it's a pass. 

Leaking a back like Turner (and Evans last year) and his quick athleticism out in space, in the flat, rather than staying in to block, seems much more advantageous to the offense. 

It gives the QB more room to operate and also another outlet receiver. The safety's have to keep an eye on that threat too, in case the assuredly slower LBs have a problems. 

Wisconsin's D is very susceptible to this. I saw PSU use it a lot when Saquon was there (OSU also, but not quite as much).

He would just run out and stand by the sideline perpendicular with Trace and I would think how in the world is someone not covering him of all players. The answer is that you really can't. 

I'm sure this is a wrinkle to the offense Gattis brought with him and we'll see it on Saturday, now that the tackles seemed to have earned some trust. 

 

 

 

BBQJeff

September 17th, 2019 at 4:23 PM ^

We saw flashes of the new offense in the first game and when they executed it looked quite promising.  

I don't know why they abandoned it in the Army game - their explanation doesn't make a lot of sense.  

Having said that, Army was always going to be a weird game, MTSU is a better indication of what this offense will look like this year.  

GOMBLOG

September 17th, 2019 at 4:06 PM ^

We were all excited for the space thing but this offense similar to last season minus a FB, Shea in the shotgun, and no play-action deep in UM’s own territory.  

Lots of time left and we’ll learn more this weekend but I think what we’ve seen so far is all the space we are going to get. 

Alumnus93

September 17th, 2019 at 4:22 PM ^

Don't discount Harbaugh holding back the offense on film vs a lesser MTSU and weird Army opponent, for the Big Ten season.  I believe he has done so and you'll see the offense we've been hoping for.  

It didn't go as planned vs Army, but this is the most logical explanation, and I am banking on it... Your post might be a few weeks too early. If it's the same vs Army then we will know. 

Marvin

September 17th, 2019 at 3:10 PM ^

Are you basing this on what you saw in the Army game? Patterson is excellent at throwing screens and darts to the flat. He's an athletic, accurate qb when he knows where to put the ball. It remains to be seen how well he can read coverages and make quick decisions in the new offense, but this idea that he has all at once become inept at throwing is simply not borne out by his body of work. 

 

(responding to UM21's comment above)

outsidethebox

September 17th, 2019 at 3:19 PM ^

Like hell he is...you must be confusing him with Mahomes-damn is he good!!! 

 

Edit: You guys negging me here must be mindless homers. I do not believe Shea has hit his RB in stride this year-so far.  My Mahomes reference is from last Sunday when the Chiefs offense insolated the RB on an LB. The LB read what was happening pre-snap and played it perfectly but had no chance because Mahomes' pass was so perfect the RB never had to break a fraction of an inch of stride-what a beautifully executed play. And I said out loud, "I hope Patterson is watching"...because he is struggling to even complete this simple, short pitch yet alone hit his teammate in stride. I believe this is a composure issue. This kid has got to get a grip here. Shea has a ton of talent...but if you can't make the play live it doesn't matter how good you look in  practice. 

UMfan21

September 17th, 2019 at 6:40 PM ^

I'm basing it off the last 10-15 years of watching Michigan football.  Go back and watch that comeback we had in the Metrodome in our huge comeback.  That was predicated on screen passes to the RB.  It wasn't long after that we stopped being able to effectively make those plays.

blueday

September 17th, 2019 at 4:43 PM ^

Very disheartening when ohio brings in a transfer and his throws are perfect. I'm not going belly up yet; however, this next game will be very telling. Do we have a new O. Can a SR QB lead. Is the OL better. Can the coaching staff outcoach someone???

maize-blue

September 17th, 2019 at 3:22 PM ^

New wrinkles on offense wouldn't work. The Michigan way is to do things the hard way. Even if the defense knows what's coming, Michigan will still run that fucking play. Being bland and vanilla is preferred rather than innovative and modern.

Arb lover

September 17th, 2019 at 3:47 PM ^

So, last year in the 38-14 win, Nico was our high yardage guy for passing and he had 31 yards!!! Patterson had 124 yards passing. Higdon had 105 rushing. 

Hopefully the old guard who, at the first sign of game time trouble appears to step in and say "run it because we are 29-0 if we can get a rusher to 100 yards", stays quiet. We'd like to really see what this offense can do, please.

LKLIII

September 17th, 2019 at 4:54 PM ^

A huge % of this new offense is supposed to be post snap reads & then running or passing based on what certain defensive players are doing.

I don’t give two shits what the run/pass ratio at the end of the game.

What I want to see is us making the correct reads & efficiently executing the play to pick up as much yards as possible. If a team stacks the box like Army, yes I want to see us on the edges & torching them through the air.

But if a team gives us a soft middle because they’re hedging against the “speed in space” stuff, then obliging then and cramming a Charbonnet sandwich down their throats is exactly what we should do. In fact, in that circumstance,  trying to edge them or bomb them through the air would be just as dumb and stubborn as running into a stacked box repeatedly. 

MGlobules

September 17th, 2019 at 4:49 PM ^

I know that "Michigan" is a kind of metonymy in your and other posters very sage writings for coaches, tradition, the football program, Schem Hall, whatever, but honestly. . . this all gets so reductive and repetitive. Can you all get a room, put your heads together and come up with something, anything, new? How many times can the same uninspired tropes be assembled in the service of such quarter-arsed thinking?

It just doesn't follow--and wouldn't make a lick of sense--for Jimmy to hire Gattis and completely jettison the playing style they've worked months to master. Not gonna happen. May hiccup, may fail. But it isn't being tossed out after one-and-a-half games.

I absolutely promise you that if the current experiment doesn't work out the narrative will be reversed and the same people will be talking about how Michigan lacks an identity, keeps changing coaching philosophies, etc. Who are we, why aren't we the tough Michigan of old. . . you can already see hints of it in Wojo's column this morning.

Or how about this? Since Patterson and a bunch of guys were injured and we were playing Army last week, give this thing two weeks. If they still play like complete crap thinking people can all concede the field to the lemmings and crazies, get on with our lives, and let you carry on with your torches and pitchforks. Clearly, this is now what America does--shriek a lot--and Michigan football fans do it with the best of them. For people who want to criticize football players and their coaches, there is an interesting undercurrent of hysteria to it. . .  that they might want to take a look at.

Reggie Dunlop

September 17th, 2019 at 3:38 PM ^

True?

I don't know what this is. Is there a question? Sometimes running backs run routes? I agree. We should do that? We do. 

Blue-Ray

September 17th, 2019 at 5:52 PM ^

You must think I was being critical or something. Wasn't my intention. 

Your play is similar to what I'm talking about but not quite. 

Wasn't much space with the ball being on the right hash. The play was pre-determined to go to him. 

Eubanks' particular route actually hurt the play. Drew attention plus they were able to guard both at the same time. Had he ran a drag, a slant, or anything over the middle, the LB would've had to chose (conflict). 

 

*Even on that play Charbonnet garners so much attention that Shea could've ran to the left and easily got the First down at the least. 

Also, If the top receivers were running Fly patterns, he's running until they turn around. 

 

jwfsouthpaw

September 17th, 2019 at 3:58 PM ^

The OL situation may partly explain this. The coaches might think the extra blocker is needed with Mayfield and Hayes being thrown into starting duty as redshirt freshmen, and especially so if they think Shea is bailing on plays too early.

Then I seem to remember that Harbaugh's offenses have never really emphasized the RB in the passing game, and I shrug. But that's more feelingsball.

IheartMichigan

September 17th, 2019 at 4:09 PM ^

The flare to Evans last year against OSU was nice. The Angle route against OSU two years ago was nice, except JOK couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.

 

Would think these two types of routes would help fill spaces where blitzers came from 

cbutter

September 17th, 2019 at 4:10 PM ^

I think the shiftiness of Chris Evans was a bit over blown, honestly, and his lack of ball security (ironic I know) would have scared me coming into the year. I know he had a few good moves, specifically I remember his run against FSU. But for a guy that was supposed to be really elusive, he seemed pretty easy to take down, even in the open field.

Am I the only one who thinks this?

michymich

September 17th, 2019 at 4:29 PM ^

One of these days UM will find a qb that has qb passing instincts. I guess Rudock counts. It just goes to show you how tough it is to find these guys unless you play for Oklahoma.