What did you expect see?

Submitted by natesezgoblue on

Almost all of us are pissed about the playcalling. So instead of bitching,  Im curious how you thought and expected the game to called.

Myself I expected to see Denard and Devin in at the same time about 2/3rds of the time.  I really thought after last week we'd see a lot more wrinkles in the O.  Last year DG came in at Q with Drob at WR and ran a lot of JET motion and end arounds.  I expected Denard to get 12-15 carries and calling play action off of his runs.

Needless to say Im disappointed, but hopefully the correct adjustments are made so we can end the season on a positive.

MGoBoard

imdwalrus

November 24th, 2012 at 5:10 PM ^

You're probably right.

But on the other hand, we'd probably have lost by even more because old-school Michigan never went for quarterbacks that could run like Denard and Devin can.

Most of my time at Michigan was with Carr as a head coach, and the one thing I hated more than anything in those games was when the play calling was:

10 RUN BALL UP MIDDLE
20 GOTO 10

...no matter what.  The single biggest disappointment about today's game, for me, is that we returned to exactly that for the second half of the game.

Smith didn't make 2.5 yards per carry.  Rawls didn't even make half a yard on average.  At some point, when things aren't working, you need to try something else.

Joined: 10/31/2009

MGoPoints: 797

nyc_wolverines

November 24th, 2012 at 5:07 PM ^

Let's look at Borges hide-bound mind-set:

1. Force players into a MANBALL scheme that doesn't work - CHECK

2. Force D Robinson to be a pocket passer - CHECK

3. Keep D Robinson bottled up - CHECK

4. Not groom #2 QB in case our running QB gets taken out for a game(s) - CHECK

5. Run Vincent Smith/Rawls/Fitz at the line WITHOUT  effect ALL season - CHECK

 

There's a pattern of behavior that shows us Borges doesn't have the mindset to be a successful OC. So why should I expect today to be different?

 

Borges should be gone, but he won't. He will make same mistakes next year. I put this on Hoke. He's HC, he is the FINAL word.

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 570

maizedandconfused

November 24th, 2012 at 5:17 PM ^

Breathe. Im not going to argue against the utter stupiditiy of running up the gut, or not having Denard in the backfield on our last series, but saying Al can't coach the offense is crazy. 

We didn't execute on the offensive side, mostly because we got no push up the middle. THats what happens when sub-par B10 OL run into a top 10 draft pick DT. It's difficult to run anything when you cannot pull your guards because the playside G is in the backfield

Joined: 01/14/2010

MGoPoints: 4523

OmarDontScare

November 24th, 2012 at 5:22 PM ^

Are you fucking kidding me? Why did we not have Devin and Denard in at the same time. Every time Denard was in we ran the ball (obv) and when Devin was in we threw or ran up the middle. Why couldn't we use Denard as a decoy when Devin was at QB? What the fuck is wrong with you people? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!!!

Joined: 08/13/2010

MGoPoints: 1800

nyc_wolverines

November 24th, 2012 at 5:24 PM ^

 

Turnovers were NOT the issue - the issue is when you had plays to run, what did you do with them? NOTHING in the 2nd half.

 

Al may be a "passable" OC but when  you hire an employee, do you want the "passable" guy or the great guy?

 

You get 10 candidates, sure, 3 or 4 can do the job, but you want that 1 person.

 

Al ain't the guy we need. And that's fine, it's not an emotional thing.

 

Life isn't that hard, a lot of mediocre people make a lot of money and do well & b/c they're successful folks think they have a secret sauce, but in reality it was timing, luck or sheer hard work.

Being a good OC isn't about hard work or luck, it's intelligence, and does Al have it? 

 

Time to take a hard look at what Al is. Hype can take you to the top, but can someone stay their with talent/capabilities???

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 570

CoachZ

November 24th, 2012 at 6:26 PM ^

What are you talking about?  Turnovers weren't the issue?  In football turnovers are always an issue and if you turn it over you will not win very many games.  In our four loses we turned to ball over 16 times.  That is umm, not good.  It also make it difficult to call plays during a turnoverfest because your players often become rattled and are thinking about not turning the ball over, which leads to mistakes. 

How is Al only a "passable" OC?  He was the OC on Aurburn's undefeated team awhile back, when he had players that fit his system.  Who are the OC that could have made Denard a pocket passer?  He did the best he could to modify his system to fit Denard while still building for the future.  Maybe you should give him sometime with a pocket passer before you say he isn't great.  This isn't a video game where you can just add the plays you want  and it doesn't really matter how they work together or what type of talent you have. 

"Being a good OC isn't about hard work or luck, it's intelligence,"  That couldn't be futher from the truth.  In fact, that is one of the dumbest things I have read on here in a long time. 

The fact of the matter is that the offense is really not that talented.  We have a QB that doesn't fit the system, average running backs, one stud OL, one good OL, three interior OL that are simply not good enough to get the job done no matter how hard they try, our WR's leave a lot to be desired and our best TE is a skinny true freshman.  Look how many Ohio defenders will get drafted in the next few drafts (I count five in just the next one) and then look at how many of our offensive players will. (I count two and Denard will switch positions) 

I like this quote to describe how Brady and Al have handle the offense, "Always be a first-rate version of yourself, instead of a second-rate version of somebody else."  If you want to see a high tempo, spread option attack that is going to put up video game numbers then you are in for a lot of disappointment in the future.

Joined: 01/24/2011

MGoPoints: 208

nyc_wolverines

November 24th, 2012 at 6:45 PM ^

No my friend, without intelligence you can work 20 hours a day and still not get anywhere - go ahead and bet on the guy who puts in 20 hrs day and I will bet on the smart guy, whether that's 20 hours a day or 10 hours a day.

Luck and Hard work are nothing without intelligence to execute. Today was not good execution. Nor was it good execution to have a woe-ful back-up for Denard at Nebraska. That was luck. hard-work or intelligence re the inability to have a back-up ready?

In the second half we didn't get anywhere: 39 yards.

Turnovers? If we were behind by 21 points, but our D and Mattison kept us in the game. It was woeful execution of offense. But hey don't take my word for it.

I don't care what he did at Auburn - what has he done AT Michigan? 11-2 to 8-4.

Your comment: "Who are the OC that could have made Denard a pocket passer?" Thas was Al B who tried this and frankly did NOT succeed. Remember Al saying Denard's an improved passer at the beginning of the year? Yes, he tried to make DR a pocket passer, limiting his runs.

Your comment "Ok, so now we don't have a passer that fits his system?" So then why doesn't Al work with what he has?

Your comment ""Always be a first-rate version of yourself, instead of a second-rate version of somebody else." Ok.. So then why all the season long run straight ahead at the line of scrimmage plays? That's NOT being a first rate version of yourself.

Sorry, I am not a RR guy so your comment that I like video game offenses is off-base. But in a world where blind hard work trumps intelligence, I would expect one to rely on blind effort rather than intelligent craftsmanship of an argument.

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 570

Coldwater

November 24th, 2012 at 5:00 PM ^

End the season on a positive? The Ohio game IS the season. And a unproductive 2nd half by the offense side cost them the victory. The most important game of the season and Al Borges pissed his pants

Joined: 12/14/2008

MGoPoints: 11234

NFG

November 24th, 2012 at 5:01 PM ^

1. The veer with denard and devin which we did against Iowa.

2. Rawls out the I-formation on 2nd or 3rd and short.

3. Vincent Smith only in there to pass protect on third down.

4. A screen play.

5. Designed run play for Devin.

6. Not running up the middle because our interior o-line is awful.

7. Not seeing Smith as the HB on a i-formation draw.

8. Not seeing Rawls as the HB on a shotgun veer read option to the outside.

 

None of this happened. Get off my lawn.

Joined: 04/24/2012

MGoPoints: 47985

The2nd_JEH

November 24th, 2012 at 5:01 PM ^

I expected to see similar play calling as the first half, and I expected to see Denard throw the ball off a pitch once at a crucial moment. Nobody would've expected it and it would've caught everybody off guard.

A man can dream, can't he?

Joined: 06/11/2010

MGoPoints: 7026

Simple Boy fro…

November 24th, 2012 at 5:02 PM ^

It would be refreshing to see people on this board accept realty.  We sucked today, our play calling and oline in the second half was embarrasing.   We have another year or two before we are possibly competitive nationallyd.  Until we are honest with our self assesment, we will always be consider alof, arrogant and out of touch.  

Joined: 10/30/2010

MGoPoints: 313

DonAZ

November 24th, 2012 at 5:12 PM ^

I don't agree with this.

Michigan is a good team with a few notable points of weakness, offset by several notable points of strength.  Ohio State is a team with the same kind of profile.  Giants they are not.  They were 11-0 against a demonstrably weak schedule. 

It was not predestined we lose that game.  We could have and likely should have won that game.

Joined: 12/05/2011

MGoPoints: 16679

Champ Kind

November 24th, 2012 at 5:13 PM ^

Regardless of the bowl game outcome, this season is a huge disappointment.  Obviously, the Big Ten championship game was missed, but that doesn't even sum it all up.  Michigan laid an egg in every big game.  What was the best win of the season?  Northwestern?  

I expected the playcalling in this game to be much better (stop running up the middle; it hasn't worked all season), but I also expected the entire season to be better.  8-4 with no good wins is definitely a season to forget.   

Joined: 01/02/2009

MGoPoints: 1829

Cope

November 24th, 2012 at 5:13 PM ^

I expected a cornucopia of Iowa play calls. I assumed no one would reveal all those wrinkles against Iowa unless 1) he were warming them up in real game scenario for Ohio And 2) he had a few additional wrinkles for Ohio that he hadn't shown (no one would show his entire hand of tricks. Instead, they were a complete waste against an Iowa we were already blowing out and never showed up when it mattered. I expected Denard was secretly ready to make a couple key throws where Devin would line up as a wide receiver, or Denard would switch between receiving hand offs and being used as misdirection. Not reverting to Denard qb guaranteed rush. A few surprises would've gone a long way. The play with Denard and three blockers that went for a touchdown mixed with many other wrinkles are what I expected to see.

Joined: 10/07/2010

MGoPoints: 2648

Drbogue

November 24th, 2012 at 5:30 PM ^

I think the biggest difference besides the offense of the defense of line strengths this year compared to last has to come down to turnovers. If you look at the Notre Dame game and the Ohio State game the similarity are the giveaways. Giving the ball to the opponent inside your own 40 is a killer. This is the difference between last year's team and this years. If had we dont have those turnovers we are 10-2, and not 8-4. That's college football in a nutshell. As for how the game was called I thought we were being very aggressive in the first half and it was wonderful. Play action deep balls on every first down really kept Ohio State honest and allowed us to break those large runs with Denard. We went back to that all little bit in the 4th Q but by then we abandoned the run. Simply heartbreaking.

Joined: 07/22/2011

MGoPoints: 3715

mishler3

November 24th, 2012 at 5:33 PM ^

With the opening of the playbook vs Iowa, I thought we would see some of that. I really thought Denard would throw the ball today. I expected to see DR and DG on the field together most of the time. Even though our between the tackles running hasn't been good, I did expect to be able to pick up 1-2 yards when getting 8-9 yards on first down. A very winnable game.

Joined: 09/01/2009

MGoPoints: 389

Simple Boy fro…

November 24th, 2012 at 5:41 PM ^

Look, we all hope to win every game every season and we all hope to be a national powerhouse.  However, we are far from being what we want.   Hoke is a great coach and a great leader for our program.  Overall we have a very good staff, however we kidding ourselves if we think that we have talent that can play with Bama, LSU, Oregon's of these recent years.  I am comfortable that Hoke will get us there.  However, games like today and years like this year are very painful. As long as we are moving in the right direction with recruiting, execution and the are kids getting coached up, I am behind this staff.  And as much as I bitch and complain, we are completely headed in the right direction.   Go Blue and I need to chill tonight!

Joined: 10/30/2010

MGoPoints: 313

Muttley

November 24th, 2012 at 6:46 PM ^

We played a very beatable Ohio State, but we became very predictable in the 2nd half.

Yes, Hoke has the program going in the right direction, but you play with the weapons you have today.  We didn't use all of our threats to our advantage in the 2nd half.

Joined: 07/07/2009

MGoPoints: -73245

NYMICH

November 24th, 2012 at 5:58 PM ^

a whole bunch of plays with Devin at QB and Denard as RB, WR, whatever.  And the plays would be designed to go to Denard or to make OSU think the plays were going to Denard to open up the rest of the field for the rest of the team.  That's what you, me, every Michigan fan and every OSU coach and OSU fan thought.  And every Michigan fan was delighted at the prospect and every OSU coach and fan was terrified at the thought.  The only person who cared about the game who apparently didn't think this was a good idea was Borges.  Fucking idiot.

Joined: 09/01/2012

MGoPoints: 284

Norcal Trublue

November 24th, 2012 at 6:21 PM ^

Just like in the Carr days show everything in the previous game against a inferior team that means nothing, then turtle up in the one game that means everything. I was really hoping that when Hoke came in it wouldn't be a return to those days. Why not an offense that can be imaginative and bold along with a D that can be shut down and dominant. Or is that just a pipe dream.

Joined: 10/14/2011

MGoPoints: 135

Doughboy1917

November 24th, 2012 at 6:25 PM ^

Devin at QB, Denard at RB/WR  

  • Devin hands off to Denard.  Flea-flicker for deep pass.
  • Devin hands off to Smith, reverse to Denard.
  • Devin drops back to pass, WR screen to Denard. 
  • Devin passes.
  • Smith/Rawls runs.
  • QB option with Devin & Denard

Denard at QB, Devin at RB/WR

  • Direct snap to upback Devin who passes downfield.
  • Denard hands off to RB Devin who runs, then stops for halfback pass.
  • Denard runs a sweep, reverse to Devin who stops and passes downfield.
  • Denard runs.
  • Smith/Rawls runs.
  • QB option with Devin & Denard

I hoped to see plays like these.

 

 

 

 

Joined: 10/31/2010

MGoPoints: 702

Soulfire21

November 24th, 2012 at 6:52 PM ^

iDVD not want a return to lloydball. Lets, you know, be nationally relevant. I didn't know what to expect but after the first half I was optimistic. The offense was exciting, explosive, and unpredictable. Borges walked away from that all in the 2nd half. Expected r defense to lose for us, not our OC

Joined: 03/18/2010

MGoPoints: 22716