Thoughts on our last game
I waited until todat to post my thoughts because I didn't want to post in the heat of emotion or until I had a chance to re-watch the game (which I do on Sundays with my young son). So, on with my useless opinions:
1. Our offensive line had a terrible game, other than Lewan.
While Denard had a terrible game (more on that in a bit), not all of it is on him. He was consistently running for his life, as large men with ill intent came at him practically unimpeded. I know that MSU has a great front 7, but come on - we need to be able to at least slow them down. Denard couldn't run, but even the mest runner needs some hole to run through. Denard couldn't pass, but it even Tom Brady requires 2-3 seconds to allow his receivers to go through their routes (even a short route takes a few seconds to develop. The O-Line really didn't do Denard any favors.
Also, when we got Hoke, and he used the word "toughness" in every single sentence, I thought we would be . . . tough? MSU was taking personal foul after personal foul, beating up our star player (who happens to be a wee bit smaller than the guys body slamming him), and call me crazy, I would have liked to see Lewan make them pay. Nothing dirty - I love that we stayed classy - but I would have been ok with a penalty for a late hit on Cousins (again, nothing dirty or aiming to injure at all), just to send a message that it is not ok to do what they tried to do to Denard.
2. The Running Backs
I know that we didn't run them nearly enough, which is partially on Borges (more on that in the coaching section), but this is really an area of weakness. V. Smith is a great blocker, and has been productive, but he is NEVER productive against the faster, bigger teams, going back two years. He was stuffed on every run after the first drive. Fitz - I know, fast, strong, Chris Perry mated with a cheetah, but I just don't see it. Hopkins is clearly goingg to be a FB. Finally, Shaw. I am usually own on him, but with MSU owning the interior, why not bring in Shaw to try to get the edge? Either way, we need help at this position, pronto. Hoping that Hayes is working his ass off in the weight room and that either he or Rawls will take over here next year. Or that Brionte comes to Ann Arbor (please come to Ann Arbor, Brionte).
3. Denard at QB
I saved this for the middle since, given the number of posts on this topic, it is a hot button for some peope. My take: Denard is an amazing runner, and is more effective running the ball from the QB spot than he would be from the RB spot. However, I do not feel that he will ever improve enough as a QB for us to really hang with the better teams. There are three problems, some of which are not solveable. (a) He is too short to see over the front when the line is stacked to hit his receivers over the middle and punish stacking the box. Unless he grows 4 inches, this is going to continue to be a problem. (b) His decision making is horrible. Sure, coaching can help this but it has now been a problem under two different coaches. Several different sets of game announcers have now commented that once Denard makes up his mind on a play, he gets locked in, even if the intended play is not there. If 2 sets of coaches cannot chance this, I am fearful that this issue ain't going away. (c) Poor throwing mechanics - this may be able to be fixed, but again, two sets of coaches haven't been able to do so.
In the end, I think that we are going to see the Devin / Denard set become more standard, with Devin lining up at QB, and Denard playing RB, slot, WR, decoy and on at good percentage of those plays QB (think hand off and then pop up and throw, or lateral pass to enard who then takes a step to run and then backs up to throw). To me, this is the perfect blend. I don't recall a major team running a standard 2-QB base set - the possibilities really are endless. Hoke conceded that Devin is more accurate, which is something that we will need once we hit the hardest part of our schedule, but at the same time, enard is our playmakes, so having both in for most of the game makes sense to me.
4. Coaching
I love me some Hoke and Borges - I was complimentary of Hoke and openly campaigning for him before, during and after the Process. However, he and Borges coached a terrible game. How do you not go for it on 4th down TWICE, when we clearly need to score points. Poor choices. As for Borges, clearly the inside running wasn't working. Go outside. Call some slants, some screens, some short quick-strike passes. Enough of this down-field throwing until Denard shows that he can do it. I know that Borges said in an interview a few weeks ago that even if the downfield passes are not completed, they have a value because they force the defense to respect it and stretch out (taking pressure off of the line), but MSU was not buying. They were not moving off the line, no matter what we did, so stop wasting downs on long throws and start moving the ball.
I don't fault Borges for not using the RBs more, however, for the reasons listed above.
Finally, I know that MSU moved the ball on us well, but no failt to Mattison. He has essentially made water into wine with this defense - there are still limits on how much of an effect coaching can have. But, the D played well and came up with some big stops.
5. Going forward
Unless we crator (not happening), Purdue should be an auto-win, and Iowa should be a win. That would get us to 8 wins, which would satisfy most predictions. We then have a tough schedule against Illinois, Neb and OSU. We should be able to win 1 of these three, and possibly two, giving us between 9 and 10 wins, which would be a wildly successful season, in my opinion.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:24 AM ^
Well thought out, topical and thought provoking, too.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:32 AM ^
but i don't think you're allowed to say that about your own thread.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:00 AM ^
I wasn't calling my own thread useful - I was being sarcastic about the guy who I was responding to - he posted the gif of the guy beating a dead horse and nothing more. Would actually be funnier if I responded to my own post say that it was useful, well thought out and thought provoking.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:25 AM ^
(a) Doug Flutie. Drew Brees.
(b) and (c) another year off will make him better. He's not going to be Peyton Manning, but he should at least be able to do enough with his arm to make a defense pay when they cheat up to stop the run.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:58 AM ^
a) I don't think this is a good argument to why it's not an issue. These were great collegiate players and Brees is an all-pro QB. That said, it's an anomaly and certainly not a reason to disregard height.
b) I keep hoping that Denard will 'get it' in his senior year the same way Troy Smith somehow turned from RB that can throw to ohmygod he's killing people with his arm.
I am however losing confidence that it will happen. Time will tell.
October 17th, 2011 at 12:42 PM ^
He said that Denard's height will not allow him to become a good QB. I was disproving that assertion. I'm not saying he will live up to those standards, but I think it's silly to say that he absolutely can't.
I'm not even hoping for his passing to be a weapon. I'm just looking for it to no longer be a liability. If he can complete 60% of his throws like last year, and learn when to run when the pocket collapses, then he will be deadly.
October 17th, 2011 at 1:47 PM ^
I did not say that Denard's height would "not allow him to be a good QB." I simply said "Unless he grows 4 inches, this is going to continue to be a problem." And it is.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:29 AM ^
People rag on Denard for bad decision making, but Devin missed a WIDE OPEN Hopkins on a pass play and threw into double coverage instead.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:43 AM ^
To be fair, Devin was being pulled in and out of the game sporadically. I'd like to see how he'd do in a full game (not saying I want him to start over DRob, just saying I think it's unfair to judge a QB on sporadic playing time)
October 17th, 2011 at 11:17 AM ^
Denard was being pulled in and out of the game sporadically. I would've liked to see how he would've done in a full game (I AM saying that I want Denard to start over DG and saying that i think it was stupid to switch qb's sporadically)
October 17th, 2011 at 11:58 AM ^
I would love to see Devin start the next game*
*if Denard is injured.
Devin will have his time to shine in 2013 and hopefully 2014 and I think he's fully capable of being a great qb, but now is not his time.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:32 AM ^
TWIS : you
October 17th, 2011 at 10:39 AM ^
TWIS is for people who want their coaches fired, want a player shot (or beat up), and mention they are killing themselves (or at least drinking then blacking out). The OP just put some thoughts on the game and what went wrong. Not TWIS material.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:41 AM ^
Still funny to see the shimmery Hoke coat lose it's luster after one whole entire loss. Our fans are crazy people.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:57 AM ^
Hoke definitely hasn't lost his luster in my eyes. I think that Hoke is an awesome coach, and was the perfect hire. That does not make him perfect. Saying that he and Borges called a bad game is no different than saying that Peyton Manning played crappy in a loss - great player, bad game.
Hoke and his staff have transformed our defense into a unit that is capable of tackling, taking proper angles and playing sound fundamental football (while causing a ton of turnovers). Can he make Avery into Woodson? No, the staff is maximizing the potential of the players that we have. On offense, one bad game aside, I love Borges' creativity. Couldn't be happier with this staff. Still critical of a bad game.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:02 AM ^
LOL @ "trolling"
October 17th, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^
For the record, I didn't downvote any of your posts. I actually appreciate your contrary viewpoint - the board has lost so much of its "luster" because of the group-think and the shouting down of contrary opinions. It happened when people started to criticize RR. It now happens if anyone dare say anything other than "DILITHIUM, HE IS SO FAST AND HAPPY" about Denard, and it will happen if people criticize Hoke.
Maybe my perspective is off, but one of the cool things about coming to a message board is the ability to come and discuss a team about which we are all obviously passionate. As long as the commentary doesn't take on an "MLIVE" feel - personal attacks on posters, players or coached, offensive behavior or pure idiocy - I am ok with any opinion expressed, and happy to engage in debate.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^
was fine with most of the calls from Michigan's coaching staff except for the 4th and inches call. I thought Denard was throwing the ball very poorly and the running game wasn't getting it done. I liked Devin getting in the game to see what he could do. His passes had more zip on them and weren't getting swatted down, but he was making bad reads. So, in hindsight, it didn't work. There was poor play all around and that was more disturbing than anything. It looked to me that the team just flat out didn't show up to play which is odd due to the rivalry. MSU was blowing it with all of their penalties and I thought for sure that it would bite them in the ass, but didn't. The penalties and turnovers kept Michigan in the game. If not for those things, at least on that particular day, I felt that MSU would have won by a larger margin as they were outplaying Michigan when it mattered.
Side note: The backwards pass was clearly a whole yard backwards and it blows my mind how a ref would have a quick whistle like that in that instance. It wasn't even close. It was so clearly a backwards pass that it was beyond ridiculous to blow the play dead there and I was livid that there was not even the thought of a review (instantaneous fumble recovery or not.) Also, I found myself wondering why Gholston wasn't ejected from the game for throwing a punch at Lewan. What's a guy gotta do to get ejected these days?
October 17th, 2011 at 10:34 AM ^
Just put devin and denard 5 yds behind Molk and let him decide who to snap to.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:39 AM ^
The reactions on this board thus far:
I did not think Michigan would come out ahead in this game. Michigan is not there yet as a team and the pieces are not in place. I, for one, think it is pretty damn good that they are 6-1 at this point in the season.
October 17th, 2011 at 10:48 AM ^
Not that the OP is part of this, but the tears of the whining Michigan fans about MSU being classless and taking cheap shots has reached Dr. Saturday's attention. And not in a good way: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Headlinin-8217-Michigan-takes-a-beating-but-?urn=ncaaf-wp8156
October 17th, 2011 at 10:56 AM ^
Hoke was all over this guys nuts before the start of the season and now we never see him. It seems odd we didn't see the FB in the backfield blocking for DROB or in short yard situations.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^
when in fact, the Michigan D forced a 3 and out AND a tunover. We scored on one the possessions and then the infamous 4th down from the 8 yard line play. So like it or not the end results of the "pooch" punts turned out to be "good" decisions. Because those punts kept MSU close to their goalline they limited their offense, which wouldn't have occurred if they had the ball at the 35 or 40 yard line. Just another way to look at it ...
Go Blue!
October 17th, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^
and start advising the staff. How could they possibly not have thought of this. The implications and ramifications are tremendous.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:27 AM ^
I'd be all for having Denard and Devin in at the same time more often but the reality of the situation is that behind them we have a freshman who is way too small and inexperienced to go in if both of them were to get hurt. It would also help alot if Barnum was healthy because we could slide Schofield over to RT to replace Huyge who was getting destroyed on the edge all game against MSU. I hope Lewan can heal up nicely over this two week break because you can tell he isn't close to 100%.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:38 AM ^
Couple points..
1. THe deep pass was not respected against MSU because there were 40 mph winds.
2. Denard had issues throwing the ball because he had no help from either playcalling or the offensive line.
Vincent Smith missed a few blitz pick ups.
We went with an empty backfield in the shotgun and they still lined up and blitzed us. THat is the definition of bad playcalling. THe RPS on the UFR has to be horrible this week. We should have slanted and tunnel screened them to death.
3. When Denard had time (see first drive before they pinned their ears back he was 2/2 for 30 yds) he hit his targets.
Everyone needsd to chill the fuck out. Sure, Denard isnt hitting every single throw, but if he was hitting on 65=70% of his passes we woudl win every single game by like 3 touchdowns. I get it thats the point, but if this was in the normal mold of programs Denard would be a RSSo. Give him time to develop.. counsins is a 5th year RS Sr
October 17th, 2011 at 11:47 AM ^
1. Agree - the wind allowed MSU to not have to respect the deep throws. So why throw them? If Denard isn't hitting the receivers, and the wind makes that even less likely, and if MSU is not going to play off of the line, these were wasted downs.
2. Agree - the O-line killed Denard. He was running for his life and had to rush every throw. Never had time to set. As to the play-calling, Borges totally failed in this game - I expect that this will be a one-time thing, though.
3. Sort-of agree - Yes, Denard hit his targets during the first drive. Which means that he is not an incapable thrower. Unfortunately, this has been a consistent pattern for Denard against better defenses. Last year, we scored on our opening drives against OSU and MSU (Gator). We then stopped scoring altogether. I think that the same thing happened against either Wisco or MSU last year as well, but I am too lazy to confirm. My guess is that teams need are so unaccustomed to his speed, that he really surprises them on drive number one, but that better teams are able to quickly adjust.
October 17th, 2011 at 12:02 PM ^
against OSU came in the 2nd quarter in 2010. Neither team scored on its opening possession that game.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:44 AM ^
three pieces cost Michigan Saturday. The OLine didn't slow down MSU's defense at all, the DLine didn't get any push on MSU's Oline and Borges called a poor game while I think Hoke didn't get his players angry enough at MSU.
Hoke inheritied a team that's not really built for the B1G and he's working with the ingredients he has. Borges is trying to do the same, unfortunately he had an off day calling plays.
Let's face the facts, MSU is a bigger, stronger and faster football team the Michigan right now. And they play to win, whatever that takes. They have an attitude, we don't have that attitude yet. Of course, when we do, we'll do it in a classier way.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:51 AM ^
I think our D-Line played alright, they stalemated their OL more often then not, which is fine. Our linebackers, however, never came through and cleaned up the plays.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:49 AM ^
We lost on the road to the best team on our schedule. We'll live.
October 17th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^
Double post =(
October 17th, 2011 at 11:51 AM ^
Really epic computer fail day today. Triple post =(. I should try posting more often!
October 17th, 2011 at 12:04 PM ^
is amazing. It is rare to see so many in agreement on what went wrong, so we're probably right. Borges gets a massive fail for the play calling and personnel use - especially with respect to the backs. The O-Line got manhandled by state with both inside and outside rushes.
One thing, though. I thought our use of smaller linemen was supposed to get us more speed on the line. It definitely didn't show, Out muscled and outrun was the order of the day. Denard barely had a chance back there. Hoke will bring in the right talent to fix this. In three years we will be a legitimate top ten team year in and out.
Now that Borges has had a taste of what the real Big Ten is (Wisconsin, Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, MSU), he will have to make massive adjustments and my guess is that he will.
The D played okay under the circumstances but still didn't get enough pressure on Cousins.
Look for a gigantic win after the bye week.
October 17th, 2011 at 1:38 PM ^
I think we need a shut out against Purdue. Offensively, show one drive of what your basic plan is for the future. Then pack it in and run the ball.
October 17th, 2011 at 12:07 PM ^
was putting Devin and taking Denard out completely early on. Denard is the fastest player on the field in this game and should have been out there whenever he could possibly play. Using Denard for a bubble screen might have been an idea.
Also, how about a couple of mass-protect pass plays where just one or two guys go on routes and we try to hit one.
There were no holes for Denard or any of the backs and Denard got hit too much for the OLine to have done a decent job.
If nine guys in the box and constant blitzing is the key to stopping Denard, and with his accuracy issues, the remaninder of the season could be un-settling.
October 17th, 2011 at 12:12 PM ^
I agree with you on at least one point - I thought Borges' playcalling was horrible. He came out with several misdirection/"trick" plays on the first drive which, while interesting, set a very strange tone for the offense, IMO. After that drive, I couldn't figure out what he was doing. And I respected and agreed with Urban Meyer's commentary was on spot (if only because he clearly knows football) - there is no reason to bring Gardner in for one play at a time. (Remember, Urban Meyer had Chris Leak and Tebow, both of whom came in for a few snaps at a time at one point in their careers.)
In short, there was absolutely no flow, no consistency in the playcalling, IMO, and I for one was very disappointed with it. Each of the past few weeks saw me more and more impressed with Borges. This was a big step backwards. And where is the "diamond" backfield look that we saw against Minnesota???
October 17th, 2011 at 12:33 PM ^
"...is amazing. It is rare to see so many in agreement on what went wrong, so we're probably right."
eat pewp cuz 50 billion flies cannot be wrong?
is this wut you are saying?
October 17th, 2011 at 1:33 PM ^
I'm really excited to watch Sparty collapse next weekend. They are getting so much hype, and you know it's going right to their head. I see a repeat of the Iowa-MSU game from last year. I think their defense is extremely overrated, mainly because Michigan was extremely overrated on offense. They won't be able to blitz (will probably be without Gholston) and load the box against Wilson because he'll kill them with his arm. I know Wisconsin has some bad luck playing IN the state of Michigan, but with what's on the line this year I just don't see them tanking again. Maybe I am being a sore loser for rooting for them to lose, but to be honest, it was the way they won that really made me mad. There is a difference between controlled aggression, mean streaks vs. intentionally trying to hurt someone. Whatever the case, I don't think Michigan will forget this loss so we can look forward to next years game being a clusterfuck. Also, I know MSU-Wisco is a big game, but I just dont see MSU having the same emotion and energy they had against us. You want to be big brother? Win one at home against a big time team under the big lights.
October 17th, 2011 at 2:10 PM ^
I wish we had just got into the backfield and Alan Branch'd Cousins. That'd send all the messages we needed too.
October 17th, 2011 at 2:11 PM ^
Oh yes, good thing Lewan stayed classy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMqbRgOGq24&feature=player_embedded
October 17th, 2011 at 2:13 PM ^
And more class from UM fans, like this comment on another video:
"Whether its football, hockey, or basketball, Michigan State is chalk full of criminal thugs and gangsters who do so much outrageous shit it makes Terrell Pryor look like Jesus. Fuck their entire inbred sports program with stinky niggers like William Gholston, Jerel Worthy, and Kalin Lucas, and psychotic crackers like Marcus Rush, Corey Tropp, and Andrew Conboy. They all can fucking burn in hell."
If only we could all be so enlightened and classy in defeat.
October 17th, 2011 at 7:19 PM ^
think even though we gave up over a 170 yards on the ground we still played good enough to at least tie the game. Why didn't we run any screen passes or drag routes over the middle or more QB draws or WR screens to the side of the blitz? Also for people that think DG is ready to start just look at the missed touchdown when hopkins was running wide open in the middle of the field! GO BLUE!!!