Things to take from MSU over ND that relate to UM-MSU
1.MSU has a crappy defense. Crist shredded MSU despite this being his first road game as a starter and little run game. Imagine what a DR-led spread can do to the Sparties at home?
2. MSU's OL is superb at run blocking, not so much at pass blocking. UM's 3-3-5 is in for a long day, I fear.
3. Kissin Cousins has regressed.While he makes some nice throws, he also makes the boneheaded mistake and is not finding receivers as quick as he was last year. UM's secondary will be tested, but I think they can come up with a INT or two vs MSU
4. MSU has a nice stable of RB's. I think this is a bad matchup for UM.
5. MSU still exhibits MSU discipline. Penalties galore in this game.
It is my semi-informed opinion that the keys to the MSU game is UM controlling MSU's run and UM not turning the ball for I don't see MSU stopping UM. They just don't have the athletes to stop spread offenses, but UM does not have the scheme to stop MSU's offense so it is a wash.
Can anyone explain to me why people rave about MSU's defense? It is very average. Dantonio has to be the most overrated coach in the country.
September 19th, 2010 at 1:04 AM ^
"If it's like today, it will be a nail biter."
Thanks
September 19th, 2010 at 1:56 AM ^
i dont know why people continue to insist that having a high TOP is advantageous. While it might be the result of a strong offense and long drives, it doesnt benefit a team to have a high TOP except in the following way: it increases the chances that a team will have the ball to end the half/game. other than that, TOP means jack sh*t
September 19th, 2010 at 2:16 AM ^
Having the ball, so the other team can't score? Or having your offense out there, to wear down the other team's defense, and resting yours?
It's probably an overrated stat, to be sure, but I think it means more than J.S.
September 19th, 2010 at 8:11 AM ^
TOP isn't an unimportant stat, but it's very overrated.
TOP is argued as being valuable for two major reasons:
1) It wears down defenses. That's not the right correlation. It's the total number of PLAYS that wear down defenses. If you have a pass-happy offense like Notre Dame in a nohuddle formation, you will blow through a lot of plays and wear out a team, even if you have lopsided TOP. The Spartan defense was looking pretty cooked by the end of that game.
2) It keeps the ball away from the other team. This is only true at the end of the first and second half. It's like a basketball game were one team scores with ten seconds on the shot clock and the other team scores as the clock expires. Regardless, after a team scores the other team gets the ball back, so they both get the same number of chances to score. But, if you can keep that ball at the end of a game, you can take away the other team's last possession, which can get you a win.
So, you can kinda sorta use it as a statistic, but I don't think it's as meaningful as total plays, that gives you a pretty good measure of both the efficiency of the offense and its impact on the other teams endurance.
September 19th, 2010 at 9:19 AM ^
makes me totally agree with you on point #1. I actually think it hit me as a "moment of clarity" during the game as I had always kinda been a slave to TOP.
It almost reminds me of shots on goal in hockey. It provides an initial lens to see the game, but certainly can be misinterpreted.
September 19th, 2010 at 10:26 AM ^
1.Total number of plays is nice, and yes, running them roughshod will wear them out, but if the team is possessing it, and holding onto the ball, that means their defense is sitting on the bench, resting, getting their wind back. While the other is out there, getting pushed around. It's not just a matter of running really fast. It's having guys who are naturally bigger and stronger than you (offensive linemen on D-line and linebackers), beating on you play after play, with no rest. (Not to mention offensive players who know how hard and fast they have to run routes depending on the play called, vs. having to go at full speed every play. And in most systems, WR are bigger than D-backs too).
2. What it does is cut possessions. Less possessions for both. Yes, it cuts down yours too, but as Brian has statistically shown, the more possessions the more it favors the more talented team (a problem he had with Lloyd playing conservatively against less talented teams). So if you can keep that offense off the field and you get an outlier and stop them, it has a lot more impact than if they have 3 times as many possessions to make it up. If a team scores 9 out of 10 times, and they get all 10 possessions, then there isn't much change in results. If they score that often, but only get 4 touches, and you get 1 of their 10 to fall in that 4...that's a big change in end result.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^
M-Wolverine,
WRT 1: Again, I think that total plays per drive do a better job of measuring this. Time of Posession doesn't reflct time on field (a stat that people don't keep). Pass plays tend to stop the clock and get more first downs per successful play, so if a passing team and a running team both run the same number of plays, the amount of time for a defense to rest is the same. That being said, eating up four yards at a time in a running offense does keep the defense on the field. Nice if you can do it. It's pretty clear that Michigan has an offense that can do that kind of thing, although they are so explosive we forget.
WRT 2: Heh, less talented NCAA basketball teams used to do this all the time to try to keep the game close. In effect UMass did something of this sort as well by keeping the ball so long. Carr certainly subscribed to this philosophy. I'm not sure how I feel about this. The key issue for me is that you don't really know how efficient your team is relative to your opponent's until your defense pairs up against their offense and vice versa, so approaching a game with a low-tempo strategy might actually be to your disadvantage. It seems like a coin flip unless you're absolutely certain your team is not as talented offensively.
Oh, and Nice signature, Daredevil
September 19th, 2010 at 3:26 PM ^
I've just watched Michigan Football for the last two years....
(I kid...kinda)
September 19th, 2010 at 1:24 AM ^
MSU running game does look good. I think it comes down to how GERG mixes up the variable fronts on running downs versus how well MSU mixes in play action. I think our linebackers are still spacey and indecisive on play actions, though some improvement has occurred.
September 19th, 2010 at 11:10 AM ^
You mean like Mouton hesitating to hit the UMass QB on his TD run?
September 19th, 2010 at 2:27 PM ^
That was Floyd, or maybe it was both.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:02 AM ^
Like last year, their run defense is solid, but pass defense is sketchy. Unlike last year, their OL is better at run blocking than pass blocking. Cousins is off to a slow start.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:25 AM ^
If there was any team that needs a back shed whipping it would be sparty. I think the defense will be up for this game and there is no way sparty will stop our spread and DROB. UM 52-MSU 31!
September 19th, 2010 at 5:11 AM ^
The drop-off in talent at UM is glaring since Coach Carr's departure. That of course hinges directly on the fact that RR's spread offense doesn't produce NFL players so what's the point of playing at Michigan anymore. Couple that with OSU's rise to national prominence again, and subsequently shutting down UM's historic recruiting in the state of Ohio, and you've got a recipe for epic failure. Let's recap: 1. RR's Spread: No recruits interested in playing in a system that fails to produces NFL players. 2. OSU's rise to elite status: Michigan can no longer recruit the state of Ohio, where so many of its greatest players hailed from in the past. 3. Image & Public Relations Hell: NCAA violations, RR's negative image following him from Morgantown to Ann Arbor is the third ingredient for the current malaise. COnclusion: No easy solution. 1st, hope that Tressel retires sooner rather than later. 2nd, hope somehow to get to a bowl game once in a while for some positive national exposure again. 3rd, keep beating Notre Dame, but that's a dead horse and nobody cares anymore about the Irish. 4th, somehow, someway, beat Ohio State. But that's not going to happen in the next two years, at least.
September 19th, 2010 at 8:24 AM ^
1. What is your basis for the idea that Michigan doesn't produce NFL players anymore because of Rodriguez, when he hasn't cycled 1 of his recruits yet who has declared he is going pro?
2. What is the basis for your assumption that kids think about going pro first and foremost? Give these kids and their family's more credit than that. The odds are infinitesimally small even if you play elite division 1 football. Even smaller, they'll actually stick and make any serious money. Don't mean this as a dig but I hope Ohio State or other large programs don't go out of their way to promise unsophisticated kids that they have the better path to NFL gold and riches?
Having a coordinator or coach who has league connections and knowledge about what it takes to play in the NFL is one thing. He shares that fact with a recruit, cool. But selling your program as a professional stepping stone as a primary recruiting ploy is nonsense and wreckless to a kid.
September 19th, 2010 at 8:56 AM ^
...... so we arent getting elite recruits because of our spread defense? this is bs this spread d will never work in the big ten.
what the hell are you talking about ? have you seen our offense? we can score like you read about. our d is TERRIBLE i agree but to bitch about our offense is stupid. yes congrats to you . osu has gained a naional reputation for choking in the big games.
September 19th, 2010 at 9:13 AM ^
September 19th, 2010 at 9:42 AM ^
Obviously there's a biased poster here, but he's addressing points that I think some in our fanbase have used against Rodriguez and so a response is necessary. First, the idea that spread teams don't produce NFL players has been completely rebuffed. Look at last year's Superbowl. Two spread teams. The NFL is one step behind college but you're starting to see spreads throughout the NFL. Hardly anyone runs a traditional set anymore and those that do (Jets, 49ers, Ravens) have struggled offensively. True, most of the spreads you're seeing are pass spreads and not run spreads. But in all spreads, speed is a common demoninator. Speed is the single reason why Michigan players have not had success in the draft lately (Warren's 40 time placed him outside the draft, Manningham fell because of poor speed numbers). If anything, a renewed emphasis on speed will result in better draft results, not poorer ones.
As for recruiting, Michigan has always recruited nationally and should continue to do so. The Rivals 150 map and other recruiting sites have been abundantly clear that the talent resides in Florida, SEC states, Texas and California. I do not see sustained success for OSU if they don't branch out (and they have). Northern schools all have speed problems on defense. It is essential to go into these states to acquire talent by selling them academics and elite competition (a combination you won't get in Florida, for example).
September 19th, 2010 at 11:49 AM ^
a/k/a OSU Troll. Comment relates to UM vs. MSU how? Don't feed the troll.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:27 PM ^
So dumb.
September 19th, 2010 at 8:01 AM ^
If a defense is as bad as ours is, I think TOP is actually pretty damn important.
September 19th, 2010 at 2:29 PM ^
It's the real Don.
September 19th, 2010 at 9:50 AM ^
Take the Over on 10/9
It cant possibly be set high enough for me
September 19th, 2010 at 10:46 AM ^
points to take out of this game. But at the same time we have to prepare some other things from state on Defense. I think they threw every weapon they had on offense at ND but i can't help but think (knowing Dantonio) that Michigan will see some diffferent schemes that State is waiting to show Michigan on the 9th. It seemed like every time i turned my head last night all Dantonio was doing was dialing up the blitz.
September 19th, 2010 at 3:04 PM ^
We really look stupid arguing the one second thing. I have watched the play 10 times on my 61 inch HDTV and for the life of me, it seems like the snap and the "00" on the scoreboard show up at virtually the same time. The ABC clock is a second off. Plus, and this is what kills me, there are two refs whose job it is to watch the clock at all times. They didn't flinch. It's not like they were asleep at the switch during the game...ND got 2 or 3 delay of game calls. The call was amazing, just let it stand and focus on Oct. 9. We have a great chance at taking Paul Bunyan back.