So what went wrong in the passing game?
Lot of hand wringing about the passing game, maybe justified, maybe not. I have no problem with 44 yards passing because we probably could have won without ever throwing, but certainly 15 attempts for 44 yards is not ideal. So was the issue the play calling, Cade, the protection, the WRs or all of the above?
From rewatching the game it looks like we certainly made a conscious effort not to make risky throws downfield. A lot of short side to side passes that Washington was well prepared for. I noticed a couple times some whiffs on blocks that led to immediate tackles after the catch. Cade also looked a little antsy in the pocket.
My hope is that the ground game continues to pave people which should open up some play action down the field. Utilize the tight ends over the middle and stretch the field by threatening the edges with the slot guys. Having McNamara throw it 15-20 times a game is probably ideal but we need to get 10-15 for 140 yds as opposed to 7-15 for 44.
September 13th, 2021 at 11:51 AM ^
For me what went wrong is our perimeter blocking sucked on any of the various bubbles/swings/quick hitters
Then, our pass protection wasn't great on the couple of longer developing plays either
Finally, their good CBs were not going to let guys run free down the field, and they were playing two high safeties a lot too
Add it all up and that we were dominating on the ground and I think we just shelved most of the passing game. Which was the right decision
For the future, what concerned me most was the pass pro and WR/TE blocking was poor. Not really concerned about playcalling or QB/WR play in vertical passing game just yet.
September 13th, 2021 at 1:22 PM ^
Spot on. With the deep safeties and the 2 NFL caliber CBS the intermediate passing game was not going to get there without being able to hit the shallow stuff which, to Washington’s credit, they bottled up nicely.
I know we all want to see QB development but I cannot say enough how much UW committed to keeping everything in front of them with those safeties. It seemed like their game plan was to make Michigan beat them on the ground NO MATTER WHAT. Like they did not move that safety anywhere near the box let alone the LOS. I’m sure if they had, they would have attempted more aggressive route concepts from the slot but UW did not want to lose that way. Instead they were “ground into a fine dust.” I really, really do not think we’ll see a team so content on not trying to stop the opposing teams strongest asset the rest of the season.
September 13th, 2021 at 1:58 PM ^
This was exactly my take after watching the game. UW committed to stopping our "air raid" at all costs. And it cost them dearly. It was really dumb, IMO, especially because we were down our top WR. I made a mention in a different post that UW's failure to pull in run support cost them the game. If they stacked the box it would've made for a more interesting game because we would've thrown the ball more and probably scored more points. Or they would've scored more because INT's were more likely.
September 13th, 2021 at 5:19 PM ^
OK, let's agree that was the case. Then what is Michigan going to do when a team stuffs them on 1st and 2nd down and they're faced with 3rd and 8 against two deep safeties? Give up? I can promise you that throwing against two deep safeties is a lot easier on 1st and 10 than 3rd and 8, when the defense knows a pass is coming and you need a chunk play.
Good teams can't be intimidated into abandoning the passing game just because you play with deep safeties. If Michigan cared about generating a passing attack, they would try to do it. I'm afraid the simple conclusion is that they don't really care to, so long as they can continue to grind out yards on the ground. Good for them, it worked against Western and Washington, but at some point it's not going to work and then I have my doubts they will be able to adjust.
Contrast Michigan's play-calling with Oregon against OSU. Oregon had nearly as many yards on the ground but over 200 yards passing too, and constantly had OSU off-balance.
September 14th, 2021 at 12:32 AM ^
Really, this is the best analysis that I have heard. Yes, you do not stop doing something that is working and you adjust if something is not working. We all know that Harbaugh loves to run but his passing concepts seem to lack cohesiveness and fluidity. If so, extolling the virtues of the run looks like an excuse to avoid passing at all costs to not give opponents a tell that what we have is not very good. It doesn’t inspire confidence and does make me think we are intimidated by the thought of having to pass to win. Championship-caliber teams don’t have this hang-up. I hope we find some confidence here because the team certainly looks very confident and energized otherwise.
September 13th, 2021 at 7:11 PM ^
I'm curious as to what all the talk about 2 deep safeties is all about. You can throw against a 2 high look just as easily as you can against a 1 high look. Cover 2, Cover 3 and Cover 1 (or Cover 6, Cover 4, Match Quarters, Cover 2 Read....whatever they end up in post snap) all have areas where they are vulnerable in the pass. You can also run on all pre-snap looks. All this talk about 2 high safeties "taking away" the pass is absurd if you have any schematic knowledge of football.
September 13th, 2021 at 2:21 PM ^
Agree on the blocking concerns. I broke down all 15 passes and made a Diary post on it. The main conclusion is that it was mostly failed blocks that prevented the bubbles/swings from working. Cade had a couple bad reads, one bad throw, and a couple of the playcalls weren't great. But, overall, I think everything's fixable.
September 13th, 2021 at 4:57 PM ^
Michigan will miss Bell more for his blocking than his receiving abilities
September 13th, 2021 at 5:36 PM ^
I can’t remember those bubble screens really ever working
September 13th, 2021 at 6:32 PM ^
Also, the swing passes to Corum were not hitting him in stride. This slowed Blake up. (See Devin Gardner's breakdown)
September 13th, 2021 at 3:33 PM ^
For Washington it was actually the right strategy in that it kept them reasonably in the game. They made Michigan beat them on the ground and they did. I would have liked to see a little more throwing because it's fun to watch but why pass just for the sake of passing?
There was nothing wrong with the passing game...it just wasn't used.
September 13th, 2021 at 11:53 AM ^
IF UM threw for over 300 yds Saturday night, there would be little discussion about the run game. The game was a 'dozer!
September 13th, 2021 at 2:50 PM ^
No one believes we are beating OSU, and we for damned sure aren’t on the ground with a questionable passing game.
Therefore, great pulverizing win, but no development of a believable passing attack.
September 13th, 2021 at 10:13 PM ^
OSU’s linebackers looked awful and DL is serviceable at best. At least from what they showed against Oregon. I think we could beat OSU on the ground right now. Maybe not by November, but right now we could.
September 13th, 2021 at 11:58 AM ^
Some of the WR blocking was bad but the whole “speed in space” thing only works with actual space. The pass plays seem to take a long time to develop giving defenses plenty of time to react. That being said they called the right game plan for that game.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:03 PM ^
The rushing game beat the passing game into submission.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:04 PM ^
I watched Sam and Devin Gardner's podcast this morning. DG was suggesting Cade was nervous/not performing well and that caused Gattis to be "handcuffed", basically losing confidence in what types of passing plays he could confidently call. Since the run game was clicking, he decided to just ride it out rather than putting Cade in a position to fail.
Not saying it's right, but I found it interesting. And DG was saying we definitely need a pass game going forward, but he was impressed with the variety of run plays Gattis was calling with different pullers all over the line.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:07 PM ^
I agree that McNamara looked uncomfortable. Perhaps it being the first night game in Michigan Stadium was a big deal. I also noticed - and I know I'm not alone - that the crowd noise was affecting the line, the snap count, etc. I think that was frustrating to him at the beginning of the game and maybe threw him off.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:13 PM ^
I'm generally pretty skeptical of stuff like this because I think a bit of it is "guessing" and not really provable. However, I did notice the noise affecting the line like you said. Also he was really off on the swing passes after hitting them perfectly in Game 1. Those are low pressure throws and he wasn't hitting them.
I'm thinking the NIU game looks more like the Western game. I do also hope we get to see more McCarthy in the 2nd half.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:39 PM ^
If Cade and the line can't handle the crowd noise at home, they're going to have some real issues on the road. That is concerning.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:14 PM ^
So.....how does the OC make him feel comfortable? What is the answer? I loved the run game. I have no problem with the manner in which the game was called, but give the kid a chance to kill the nerves.
September 13th, 2021 at 3:57 PM ^
Play action seam passes work beautifully especially when the run game is happening. They are easy passes and develop quickly to get the ball out. Use the TE.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:18 PM ^
First rule of MGoBlog - come here to say something and odds are someone has already said it. But I agree with the above; I also listed to Gardner and it lined up with what I was observing in real time in the game. The easy throws that connected were not remotely crisp. There were some slow and bad reads. Add that up with "we are averaging 7 yards a carry and beating Washington into a pulp" and a Power 5 team with a well respected defense is not the game to go away from what is working in favor of higher risk plays.
It will be very interesting to see how the passing offense does over the next three weeks. Hard to predict at this point. We shouldn't pile on too quickly - the reality is this is game #1 after losing our best receiver.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:24 PM ^
So again - I go back to last week's game against WMU. Why are you limiting him to 11 passes? What does that prepare him for? He has no track record. That's the time to work downfield and develop the passing game and the timing. So that when its a night game and a big crowd and a bigger opponent, he isn't so jittery. I thought he was jittery too - but the fact that the second a QB shows nerves they shut it down.. i mean.. that says bad things about their confidence in their QB. We can't expect all of his pass yardage to be YAC. They have to use WRs down field or Wisky, MSU, Indiana, OSU, PSU will all be happy to oblige our 3 yards and cloud of dust offense. He needs reps and they should rep the shit of out it against NIU once hopefully up 21-0.
September 13th, 2021 at 1:20 PM ^
He would have had 17 passes against Western if we weren't trying to build depth and get JJ some reps too. He did exit 9/11 with a 79 yard toss in there so its not like he looked bad last week.
Perhaps the team was working on perfecting the running game against Western since they had an initial POV on the game plan for Washington. That worked out, didn't it?
Two weeks ago this blog was "It's a 7-5 for me dawg." Suddenly this blog is "dammnit here we go again on another godforsaken 9-3 season, we just won't beat Penn State, Wisconsin, or Ohio State." If you aren't happy until we get an undefeated & untied season, just remember we've had only one of those in the last 70 years.
Ultimately I'd rather take an improved defense and having an offensive identity over what we sat through last year. Maybe we'll strike gold and have a 2016 Penn State type run, where the team gets better each and every week and plays in Pasadena to end the season.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:46 PM ^
He did seem to be a bit off. He keyed in on receivers, and on a couple of different occasions he was hit before he could make a throw that was probably the right read.
The pass down the sideline that was decent but batted away early might have been a decent call, but on the other side of the field he had the slot receiver wide open if he had seen it. I almost called that a missed read, but he actually looked that way to look off the safety before making the sideline throw, so it was planned and reasonable (and he beat the safety to the receiver, importantly; just well defended).
Throws on the swing passes weren't great, and there were some blocking misses. But it is also true that Washington was keying on that stuff hard, and that's part of the reason why Michigan was able to run so well up the middle.
After the drive where Michigan got stopped at the goal line, which featured a healthy mix of passes, some of which worked and some of which were not good, Michigan basically stopped throwing the ball. That has happened before under this regime. I have a suspicion which member of the staff influenced that call, but others may disagree. It seems unquestionable that after a middling opening to the pass game and a good start with the run game that the team put the passing offense in park and just decided to run.
September 13th, 2021 at 2:07 PM ^
Your final sentence makes a lot of sense to me. Michigan’s run-only drive following halftime, when all parties had a chance to talk, supports your conclusion.
September 13th, 2021 at 8:51 PM ^
Let’s also not forget, this was what, Cade’s third start of a collegiate game? Not saying that’s an excuse to not let him sling it, but under the lights, national game of the night, lotta crowd noise, I get why he might be a little tight.
Rewatching the game, a couple incompletions were nice passes that the UW db’s made great plays on. Only saw a couple passes that were behind the receiver or uncatchable. I think long term he’ll be fine, my prediction is the UNI game will have a much more balanced attack.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:04 PM ^
All these arguments about the passing game are so unbelievably stupid at this point. Allow me to explain. THEY AVERAGED 6 FUCKING YARDS A CARRY!!!!!!!!! Maybe Washington sucks. It doesn't matter. When you are in a football game and averaging 6 yards a carry, you do not need to throw the ball. How about we wait until or even if they do the same thing against a better opponent, it doesn't work, and then they refuse to throw the ball. When and if that happens, I'll happily bitch about it with the rest of you, but again......THEY AVERAGED 6 FUCKING YARDS A CARRY!!!!!!!!!
September 13th, 2021 at 12:08 PM ^
The problem isn't the passing yardage total.
The problem is the inefficiency.
If we threw the ball really well and averaged only 3.0 yards per carry, there would also be concern about the running game. Instead, we ran the ball really well and averaged a terrible 2.9 yards per passing attempt.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:13 PM ^
I love you Magnus, but don't you think people are jumping the gun with the criticism? These first 2 games haven't been close. I mean, if we throw the ball on 10 more possessions and 2 of those get picked off is that really better?
September 13th, 2021 at 12:26 PM ^
I think the problem is that Michigan was one-dimensional to the point where it created doubt. Why not throw even one TD on those red zone attempts? The effect is that it had to lower McNamara's confidence and surely didn't look good to Dante Moore or Jaylen Brown, both five stars that want to see a solid passing offense.
If Washington's corner were "that good", then by default that says either our WR's aren't good enough to beat them or Cade isn't good enough to get it to them.
Thrilled with the win, but I don't see how someone couldn't be concerned a bit.
September 13th, 2021 at 2:09 PM ^
I think part of it was seeing Washington being practically unable to do much of anything on offense, combined with our ability to run the ball extremely well, and pretty much figuring out the only way we were going to lose is by a TO, so why even bother risking it. We were having pass blocking issues both on the line and by the WRs (not to mention complete inability to sniff out a CB blitz), so take the 5 yds per play and win the game
September 13th, 2021 at 1:03 PM ^
As I said in the comment above, it's not the 15 passing attempts.
It's the plays themselves and the total of 44 yards.
Montana even completed a higher percentage of passes for 4.6 yards per attempt.
September 13th, 2021 at 1:08 PM ^
Fair enough. I'll say this though. I know week 1 was against a MAC school, but the passing game stat line from week 1 is good enough to beat almost anyone, (OSU included), if this rushing attack is for real. People are acting like week 1 (13/17 for 216 yds and 3 TD's) didn't happen.
September 13th, 2021 at 1:19 PM ^
I will say the same thing about the passing game/Cade McNamara as I said about Denard Robinson.
At some point you need to be able to throw the ball effectively against a tough defense to win a game. Alabama is as good as anyone at running the ball with their 5-star linemen and backs, but in their two closest games last year (Ole Miss, Florida), they were 28/32 and 33/43 passing. They needed passing volume and passing efficiency.
Even Wisconsin has not reached great heights as a program (playoffs, national championship), and the big knock on them has been their lack of an effective passing game. They have the defense and the run game, but they can't do consistently well with the pass.
September 13th, 2021 at 1:45 PM ^
Agreed, but here is the interesting part. What does the opponent have to do to stop Michigan from rushing 50/300 on you? What do they have to commit on defense? NIU is probably considering putting 12 men in the box on every down and daring the refs to call it every play, but what about real teams?
Do opponents have to start a 4-4 look on every down? A bear defense base? Drop both safeties within 7 yards of the line and play Russian roulette on the run/pass? How many safeties looking in the backfield have the recovery speed to not let All or Schoonmaker run the seam for 6 7 yards off the line looking into the backfield?
That's when we'll know if we have a passing offense. If we can't do those basic things, we're screwed, you are right. I suspect Rutgers will give us an idea, but Wisconsin will be the real test.
September 13th, 2021 at 2:04 PM ^
I absolutely agree with you on this point. My gripe is that everyone is acting like it's a foregone conclusion that we have no passing game. The only thing I'm trying to say is that in Week 1 our passing game was better than competent, dare I say even decent. In week 2, many of us agree that there was zero need to pass the ball. It's very frustrating to me as a fan and member of this community that we are sitting at 2-0 after blowing out our first 2 opponents and there are still so many unhappy campers. Oh well, I commend you for having a civil disagreement with me and not calling me an idiot or disparaging my mother. See folks.......it can still be done!
September 13th, 2021 at 2:11 PM ^
Okay, well since you brought it up, I do have some issues with your mother...
September 13th, 2021 at 2:30 PM ^
she's a sweet gal, and a helluva good cook
September 13th, 2021 at 3:17 PM ^
How does week 1 look without Bell?
September 13th, 2021 at 4:02 PM ^
Nobody can really answer that friend
September 13th, 2021 at 3:02 PM ^
Alabama only punted twice in their first game and 3 times in their second. They are only averaging 2.5 punts per game currently.
What if they have a close game later in the season and they haven't really proven if they can't punt by then?!? At some point you have to get your punter game reps so he's ready to perform when needed. Until then, we don't really know if Alabama can punt or not. Could cost them a game or two.
September 13th, 2021 at 5:10 PM ^
This just might be the most apples to oranges argument in the history of the world.
September 13th, 2021 at 5:24 PM ^
I think there were a few challenges which feed into each other:
Cade appeared a bit over-excited early on - was not crisp with his progressions and execution:
- There were a few off the mark and timing delay throws he has not really "shown" to this point
- There was some reluctance with the playcalling to test the CBs - a few short slants & crossing routes to get Cade comfortable and in synch would have helped
- The quick hitters behind the line of scrimmage were well-prepared for and defensed with bad to no execution in the blocking from the receivers...to the point where going to the well on those was just a hope and a prayer poorly conceived.
I feel like Gattis should have at least tried a few plays to get Cade at least comfortable in the 2nd half, but the running game was punishing and Washington had zero success stopping it, so my take is that they need to work on the passing game some this week and use NIU to explore & test the wheels a bit more on that part of the game plan.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:21 PM ^
I can get behind that stance except that the sample size is extremely low at this point. If we decided to pass the ball 30 times this game it stands to reason that the YPA would be a bit better.
We simply do not know at this point how bad the passing attack is, or if it even is bad.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:27 PM ^
Not having something doesn't mean there's a 50/50 chance its something amazing. It likely means its not very good. As you said, we dont REALLY know, but.. if it was a strength, it wouldn't be non-existent.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:29 PM ^
Obviously the run game is the strength of the offense. No one is disputing that. The passing game may not be as much a liability as people think though.
Washington has the best secondary we'll face all season, had zero threat on offense, and was giving up 6-7ypc. Why throw it? Literally no reason to.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:41 PM ^
Okay - we agree on point 1. So, if that's the strength, what score do you need to work on your weakness? They crushed WMU and didn't bother. They were comfortably ahead on Washington, they didnt bother.
You may be right. Maybe its not a liability. But I didn't see us score 60 points. We had 24 points until the game was basically over and we scored with a minute left. That's not exactly blowing anyone out. I'm not saying it was a "close" game - im just saying, acting like we're Nebraska in the 90s with our rush attack isn't accurate. I'm also saying that you use your strength, but when feasible, you have got to work on your weakness.
Just because you have big biceps, doesn't mean you ignore your triceps.
And, there was not "literally no reason to" unless your fundamental point of playing is just to win in that moment and not care about anything else.
"WHAT ARE YOU DOING TODAY TO BEAT OSU?" is their mantra. The thing they could have done (in addition to other good things they did) was to get your QB reps against a good defense with a game that wasn't on the line and he couldnt (hopefully) screw up. That's what you do to beat OSU on Sept 11.
Yes, we play to win just one game at a time. But if that's the ONLY reason we play a given game, then backups would NEVER come in to mop up. We would never slow down and stop attacking since you must do EVERYTHING to just win that game. You wouldn't sub in lesser players since its only that game that matters.
Fact is, that yes, winning matters most, but you want to maximize your game winning and the season of winning. If the game seems in hand, start doing things to help your chances in other games.
September 13th, 2021 at 12:48 PM ^
And, there was not "literally no reason to" unless your fundamental point of playing is just to win in that moment and not care about anything else.
I might be mistaken, but WINNING THE GAME is the entire point of playing football. We played to win. Against Washington, that meant stuffing it down their throats because they could not stop us. Against someone else, it may mean throwing the ball.
I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that we should play against OSU in a game against Washington. You play the team you're playing, and you play the game you're currently playing. I'm sure they're slinging the ball around in practice. Let's see if we see that more in the coming weeks. Until then, the passing game is a non-concern in my humble opinion. Hard to be concerned in the absence of data.