Thoughts on Defense
So... time to start dissecting the defense. Even though the game got called short, we got a full game's worth of defensive snaps thanks to the TDs. My thoughts:
- They don't look great. Minus the 2 obviously awesome plays, the defense was getting picked apart, bit by bit. They did a lot of quick throws to neutralize the pass rush, which should be one of our strengths, and exposed the coverage.
- They didn't give up the big play. While getting dinked and dunked for yardage and first downs is bad, they did not give up crippling plays. This gives me a small amount of hope that we'll be only a slightly below average defense.
- Turnovers and big plays!!! OMG, please yes more of this.
Agreement/disagreement? Other insights???
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:41 PM ^
that I saw was the lack of missed tackles. Yes we didn't stop the run by any means but we didn't miss tackles. We blew some coverage assignments too but you can clearly see the difference from this year and last year.
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:43 PM ^
D line was non-existant, but the LBs played much better. DBs were good when they played closer to their men or blitzed. Need better D Line play.
Overall, my take on the defense is "Please God, heal Woolfolk and keep him healthy"
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:53 PM ^
That is beyond great news. He looked really good in the brief time he played.
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:55 PM ^
Great to hear. I am happy we didn't need him back in because I would rather unleash him fully healthy against ND next week.
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:44 PM ^
Secondary doesn't look better? Do people forget last year where opposing receivers had no one within 10 yards of them?
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:49 PM ^
Color me slightly encouraged. Mattison's bend but don't break defense held up most of the day against a very good passing team.
<br>We didn't look great but IMO we looked better.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:40 PM ^
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:49 PM ^
I also noticed that alot of the WMU first half success was due to our inability to get lined up. Once we simplified the defense and lined up quicker they were much more effective in coverage.
They were also good in coverage on guys not named White.
The tackling AND block shedding is worlds better than last year. It was like watching different defensive players.
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:51 PM ^
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:08 PM ^
Courtney played really well. Good coverage in man. Especially when up in the WRs face. Thought JT played pretty good also. I noticed that hes pretty good when up in Press and tight man coverage but then he sags off things can get ugly. All around solid game. Jordan is being used in a good way, like the way Mattison had him up on the Line of scrimmage. Dude can blitz pretty damn well.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:25 PM ^
Even on the blitzes guys were not really open. WMU was able to move the ball basically having a pretty good QB throwing to one good wide receiver unerneath the coverage. Nothing much downfield and nothing much after the catch. Also guessing Gordon and Johnson had a decent game.
Thought Avery was much improved (as expected) and Floyd showed an ability to battle one on one when left on an island a few times. Wish we hadn't put our #1 corner on a special teams unit that is basically an injury factory.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:33 PM ^
Yep, this. They're not world beaters. But they did what they were asked and Mattison gave them a lot of help schematically. It's gonna be a lot tougher against Michael Floyd and Tommy Rees. Hopefully Woolfolk will be healthy enough to take him away.
The game reminded me a lot of Lloyd's teams in the years between Chuck and Marlin/Leon/Trent. Couldn't play C1 and just take away the dink and dunk AND the over the top, so they picked the latter and just beat them up front instead. Good, not great defense. I'll take it for sure.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:04 PM ^
A much improved defense from last year! Overall I would give the D a 6 out of 10 based on:
1) Defensive adjustments made during the game
2) Rotated guys on defense
3) Gave up no big plays
4) Good pressure in passing situations that spooked an above average QB (Carder)
5) Mostly our defenders did not give huge cushions to receivers
6) Tackling was much improved
7) We gained confidence on defense that poured over into the offense
Without a doubt the D still need much work - but hats off to Coach Mattison and our young defenders. You made us smile today. I honestly believe this game may have been lost, or at least much closer with G. Robinson as the DC.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:17 PM ^
i think they played like 20 different guys on D. that's pretty interesting imo.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:18 PM ^
I think a lot of that comes from the heat and trying to keep players properly hydrated so they wouldn't cramp up later in the game.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:22 PM ^
ah yeah that makes sense. i still think that's definitely different from last year though. i don't think RR would've felt safe enough to put guys like Marvin out there. rotate the DL, sure. everybody else? not so sure.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:11 PM ^
Defense got BETTER as the game went along. They didn't start a little hot and flame out. IMO, this is something all good defenses do and is something we very rarely saw last year.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:31 PM ^
I don't think you guys are giving enough credit to WMU. Carder will be an nfl qb, and has had years in his system. His receivers are experienced, and they have an all american corner, and a d-line that is expected to dominate while they challenge for their conference title.
They came into the game with the plan to throw short passes to negate a pass rush, and it worked for a little while. As every drive went on, though, you could see that they were slowly getting into "game time". If you watched MSU, Wisco, and other games, you saw everyone looked that way in the beginning of the game. The good teams are the ones that adjust, execute, and begin to beat their opponents. I don't think anyone can doubt that if we were given a 4th quarter, it was going to get ugly in an epic way for WMU. We saw where our coaches were BETTER than their coaches, and our players showed it as they caught on to game vs practice, and gained confidence.
I'm no sunshine and roses guy, but when in the last 3 years did we see our d absolutely ravage an opponent like we saw in that 3rd quarter?
Sure, Carder was able to complete some passes to White, but they incredible passes. That kid is GOOD, and threaded the ball into some well run routes into small spaces. Our coverage was there in places most quarterbacks wouldn't even try to throw into, let alone complete. I put Carder on the same kind of level as Dan LeFevour. It's no shame to give up completions in a quick passing game to a guy like that who doesn't make a mistake in a 10+ play drive. That's just a worthy opponent.
All that said, our offense worked well enough, barring a couple of 3 and outs. They held the ball and executed huge drives. I think the 1st one was 16 damn plays, with several bits of slamming it into the middle, and other times of Denard being unfair to the other guys.
Other than the kicking game, I'm encouraged to see what is likely an 8-9 win team, which is what we all hoped for at the end of last year, regardless of who the coach would be.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:36 PM ^
I agree with at least some of this. FEI had Western as an average team last season and they returned their starting QB who was clearly solid (we'll see about the NFL...don't have to be NFL quality to be good in college). Maybe they had so much attrition on the line that they're still below average. But so were a bunch of offenses we faced last year.
The only remotely close performance we had was against UConn and Zach Frazier is clearly waaaay worse than Carder.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:34 PM ^
I think Mattison made the correct adjustments at halftime. The D was much better in the 3rd quarter. I don't think I've seen a halftime adjustment since Shafer and even then it was mostly luck and/or Beast Graham.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:36 PM ^
This defense will improve drastically as the season progresses IMO. They need experience in real game situations .
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:47 PM ^
I think WMU is a lot like UMass last year - a team we should definitely beat, and beat badly, but with an experienced QB with good receivers very capable of making quick pass after quick pass without great coverage by the D.
At least by the 3rd quarter, the D seemed to be playing much better than they were last year against UMass. So that's a positive. Still nervous though.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:52 PM ^
They had some bounces go their way, which was good to see. Brian keeps railing that the turnover margins will regress to the mean, I think this is part of what he meant. The past couple years, when a good play was made it seemed like the bounces never went Michigan's way; they did today. Whether or not that continues is obviously just random chance, but if they can keep putting themselves into the position for those things to occur, good things will happen.
However, the defensive line seemed invisible and the secondary looked poor. I have a feeling a decent team with a somewhat experienced QB will pick this team apart and actually be able to beat them big when the blitz comes. On a lot of those blitzes in the first half, they had people 1 on 1 and open but couldn't make the play. The good teams Michigan will play this year will have the ability and athletes to make those plays. That doesn't mean it's the wrong strategy, just a risky one if Michigan has to blitz that often to get any pressure at all.
Overall, watching this game felt a lot like watching the UConn game last year. The D looks passable and made some plays when it needed to and the offense was good but didn't really show much. It's easy to compare this game to OSU/Wisconsin/Bowl game last year and think it was a huge leap in D, but compare it to UConn and it was pretty similar.
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:58 PM ^
Anyone notice that we our penalty situation improved greatly? Right before the game was called we were sitting at one penalty for five yards. I"ll take it.
September 3rd, 2011 at 9:01 PM ^
Anyone notice that we our penalty situation improved greatly? Right before the game was called we were sitting at one penalty for five yards. I"ll take it.
September 3rd, 2011 at 9:07 PM ^
Carder and White were on. WMU is better than UMASS. UMASS QB was nowhere as good as Carder. I think people forget that MAC teams have talent.
<br>
<br>Unlike last year, UM adjusted and stimyied WMU the rest of the game. In a short, controlled passing attack like the one WMU presented, you will give up yards and completions. Could the coverage have been a little tighter? Sure, but all-in-all UM play was improved from last year.
<br>
<br> I think UM's biggest mistake was not going pressure defense earlier on.
September 3rd, 2011 at 9:25 PM ^
Not a Defensive thought . . . but why in the world can WMU get a kicker that can get the kickoff out of the endzone, but Michigan can't get the ball kicked past the 15.
WMU's average starting position on kickoffs was around thier own 40. We're going to lose games if we keep letting the other team start at the 40.
September 3rd, 2011 at 9:25 PM ^
This defense is learning how to hit HARD.
September 3rd, 2011 at 9:26 PM ^
KENNY DEMENS AND JORDAN KOVACS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
September 3rd, 2011 at 9:45 PM ^
Some of the dink and dunk was due to Western executing. A perfectly timed hook route is hard to defend.
I really hope T-Wolf is OK.
I hope that the d-line can keep wearing down teams like that. They seemed to get better as the day went on.
Blitzing is good.
Holy hell, did Kovacs drill that QB on the fumble play.
September 3rd, 2011 at 9:58 PM ^
The defense looked very pedestrian - especially against a MAC opponent.
September 3rd, 2011 at 10:00 PM ^
What a difference coaching makes. Those Mattison blitzes were a difference maker. Not just the pressure they put on, but also on how well assignments were shifted so that Carder could not consistently exploit his hot reads.
HOWEVER, those blitzes were a necessary tactic to cover up a weakness. Our secondary still has problems, as we thought it would (or should have). With Michael Floyd coming to town, our secondary needs to have that first-to-second game improvement to extremes.
Someone needs to carry Woolfolk around campus so he can heal up quick.
September 3rd, 2011 at 10:34 PM ^
mattison blitzes. exactly
September 3rd, 2011 at 10:05 PM ^
If you had asked me at the end of the 1st q it wouldn't have been pretty. But things changed, seem to really turn around once Ryan forced his way through 2 blockers for the tip.
Overall improved, though the line was pretty bad. Pressure came from the lb's and secondary. We'll have to improve on the line vs the likes of Nor'western, Illinois - let alone Wisky or Neb.
At least there were guys not giving up on plays or so out in space...the secondary was around the ball, not leaving guys absolutely wide open. There were missed tackles and mistakes, but they were there.
Line must improve.
September 3rd, 2011 at 10:16 PM ^
definitely a work in progress. for the people who don't think they looked any better than last year, what exactly were you expecting? anyone who thought this defense was gonna get it all turned around in one offseason needs to get their mind right. overlall i'd say the d was slightly improved from last year but it's only one shortened game. i think the d will actually improve as the season goes on instead of regress. i do have a great amount of fear that michael floyd is gonna absolutely go off next weekend, but hopefully they can dial up the pressure and try to prevent too many big plays.
September 3rd, 2011 at 11:05 PM ^
where was craig roh today did he lose his spot. if so why?
September 3rd, 2011 at 11:10 PM ^
i thought they would staples on our line did they get beat out roh was the man what happened
September 5th, 2011 at 6:08 AM ^
I had a completely different feeling watching our Defense yesterday over last year. Admittedly, It is though the first game of the year and the real test always comes in the second half of our schedule. By then, our opponents have plenty of film to watch and expose our weaknesses. I think this is where you see good coaching. Can we not only improve, but also adjust our gameplans in a meaningful way?
I'm looking forward to taking it one game at a time this year. In the past I have been so disappointed at the end of the season after being so hopeful at the beginning. There is no reason though that with our potential on offense, just a marginially effective Defense will make a huge difference in the second half of the year.
Also, I like that we did not completely rely on Denard yesterday for offensive production. If we can establish some balance in offense, it will give us the opporunity to win some of the big games. Seemed to me that by the second half of last season, teams had seen everything they needed to see on Denard and could effectively game plan to take him out of the game.
Go BLUE!