You Can Call Me Al
There were incidents and accidents
There were hints and allegations
It's obvious to me that the staff knew that MSU could not be run on. Their plan was to pass most of they day. I think this was a good plan.
However, there were two items that thwarted this plan:
The stiff 40mph wind all day.
The inability to protect the passer.
I didn't expect the OL to fold like a cheap lawn chair. But they did. Thankfully, we don't see a DL like this until perhaps a bowl game.
October 16th, 2011 at 10:22 AM ^
Ohio state?
October 16th, 2011 at 10:53 AM ^
With Nate Williams out the rest of the year their DLine isn't even close to MSU's.
October 16th, 2011 at 10:23 AM ^
I think you got most of that right. I think OSU has a pretty tough Dline based on what they did to Illinois yesterday. We will have tough sledding the rest of the way except for Purdue.
October 16th, 2011 at 10:26 AM ^
What hurt us the most was Denard's inability to make accurate throws and when Devin was in he made bad reads.
Nobody can run the ball when the D puts 8-9 in the box.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:22 AM ^
Denard was not good yesterday passing the ball. DG also missed a wide open (Koger I think) for a TD. Oline was bad, QB's were just as badder.
October 16th, 2011 at 12:34 PM ^
That was Hopkins, and he was WIDE open. Would have been a TD for sure. He just seemed to be locked on Hemmingway and had decided to throw to him no matter what. We definitely had our chances yesterday. We just need to execute better, and ofcourse not play against a team that is literally trying to kill you.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:34 AM ^
Something that I believe was mentioned on the board last week prior to the game was MSU's ability to jump the snap. It seemed to me that we were allowing MSU linebackers to jump the snap all game. Maybe that is something that is near impossible to stop, but it seems like they could have changed the snap count in some manner. I would have also loved to see some screens of some sort. I am by no stretch of the imagination a smart football mind, but at the same time I think the ability of MSU's LBs to put pressure on Denard could have been gameplanned against much better by the coaching staff.
October 16th, 2011 at 12:20 PM ^
Didn't MSU's D-Line get false start called on them 2 or 3 times? I thought that was indication that we were mixing up the snap count and catching them on it. No?
October 16th, 2011 at 10:32 AM ^
I wasn't thrilled with some of the playcalls, but the complete lack of execution by our offense really limited what we could try to do against MSU. The lack of a deep passing game made it almost impossible to try any screens or misdirection plays. I just hope there are no more games where the wind is that bad, because MSU just showed the rest of our opponents the blueprint for shutting us down if we're forced to be one dimensional.
October 16th, 2011 at 10:41 AM ^
Not only is Cadmus right -- Cadmus and many other posters saying the same -- but this is what Borges has been saying all along. Folks, seriously, when a great D has 8 in the box, how can you think it would be smart to run the ball, especially when the D-line is manhandling your O-line? Michigan's running game isn't as one-dimensional as last year, but it still is disproportionately predicated on Robinson's success. Michigan has no stand-out threat at tailback. If Michigan cannot have a viable -- not an erratically successful -- passing attack, they're in for some frustrating games.
And I have a question, but only for people who truly understand the mechanics and strategies of college football. Why do people on this board treat Bubble Screens (and I type that magical phrase with veneration and mysterious awe!) as though they're a silver bullet, THE play that would volatize Michigan's passing game? It seems to me that, as with many plays, that one too can be successfully defended with minor D adjustments?
October 16th, 2011 at 7:43 PM ^
But I think it would do just that... Force the D to adjust. Quick pass routes generally were needed though, not necessarily bubble screens. That pass play to Roundtree for a TD was very Tom Brady/Wes Welker esque. I wish we saw more of that.
October 16th, 2011 at 10:44 AM ^
It has been the same for the last 2 years. Stop DROB running or any other back. Since there thoughts are his arm wont' really hurt us I'm sure we had receivers open all day but most of the time DROB did not have time to set his feet and throw. It seem like we did not even scheme properly for their blitzes. Even though Al made the wrong call in my opinion on 4th down and 1, at the 9, an MSU blitzer came untouched into the backfield. Sending the RB into the line did not fool them and as a result DROB got sacked.
I hope the coaches can get on our O-Line to block better. They're upper class-men and I thought it was going to be one of the strengths of the team, just like I thought the D-Line would be a strength on defense.
Overall, the defense has improve and will probably prevent a B1G collapse like the previous 2 seasons. Though I worry about IL, NE and OSU...all have physical D-lines that will give our O-line fits.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:38 AM ^
I'm a layman, but I think Borges could have done a better job scheming for the pressure and punishing MSU for their agressiveness. It would have been nice to see some more screens, mis-directions, throwbacks, etc. Despite the FOOTBAW talk, we're still a finese team and I feel like, to a certain extent, Hoke is trying to jam a square peg into a round hole (a frequent critism of RichRod in his first few years). The two QB sets were interesting, but didn't really amount to much (aside from the Denard jet sweep, which worked nicely).
It also seems like the read option is completely gone, right? I'm a little confused as to why we can't keep that in the playbook as a failsafe when nothing else is working. At the very least, it's a different look, and our guys can probably run it in their sleep.
I'm encouraged with Gardner's performance, though. He had his problems, but he made a couple of nice throws. I'm confident he'll be ready to take control of the offense in 2013. That redshirt is now crucial.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:44 AM ^
1) He can't there even if he tried
2) We didn't try to run the ball in the second half
3) The catch was a first down and the spot was horrible. Our coach did nothing, but stand there like he did most of the game. Bo would have been stomping up and down the sidelines with all the personal fouls. Brady looked like a deer in headlights.
October 16th, 2011 at 1:51 PM ^
October 16th, 2011 at 6:25 PM ^
Brady be Brady. Brady ain't Bo, Brady ain't Bear, Brady be Brady.
I think comparisons between Brady and whoever are unwarranted. Brady be Brady. I am happy Brady be Brady
October 16th, 2011 at 10:53 AM ^
collapse of the O line was the difference. Imagine him with another half second to work on most plays and you have to imagine a more successful Denard. The game plan would look better, too.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^
Lack of time created by a folding offensive line led to some bad decisions (and sacks). Not the only problem yesterday, of course, but a consistently nagging one.
On several plays, I thought we were about one more second or two steps away from breaking off a few big runs and maybe changing that game significantly.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:04 AM ^
We need to seriously address the WR position in this and the next recruiting cycle... I luv our WR but their lack of speed and inability to get deep ruins everything , If we had a legitimate deep threat that could make the Safeties back off a lil bit we would fair much better in games like this...Everyone knows our plan is to run run run but teams are going to make us beat them throwing by lining up 8, 9 in the box and playing our WR man and we just arent getting open
October 16th, 2011 at 11:18 AM ^
Open wide receivers is less of an issue if you can't protect the quarterback and he can't consistently deliver catachable passes.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:22 AM ^
But he is not a qb. Borges is doing all he can with an exceptional athlete who can't throw consistently.
October 16th, 2011 at 6:33 PM ^
Show me a QB that can complete passes while being pressured as Denard was yesterday. To me, that was the difference in the game more than anything else.
October 16th, 2011 at 12:59 PM ^
Exactly. But I think fundamentals need to be addressed at the WR position. It's painfully obvious that they cannot recognize the blitz and break their routes to "hot". This is essential when opposing a blitz heavy scheme or dominant d-line. Complete failure yesterday.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:21 AM ^
Bad call on 4th and 1. Other than that...keep up the good work. Look forward to seeing you turn Devin into Vince Young, and Shane Morris into Tom Brady.
October 16th, 2011 at 12:37 PM ^
is an understatement.
October 16th, 2011 at 6:17 PM ^
I upvoted you, but there is a caveat: Borges would be a genius if it had worked. I think the spectacular failure of the play really hides some decent thinking.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:40 AM ^
Our running backs had 10 carries, total, all game. 4 of those were on the first drive. MSU didn't stop the run, we abandoned the run.
Borges' playcalling was horrendous this game. They kept sending corner blitzes and other blitzes, and he only punished them for it once all game (the Roundtree TD). For some reason he kept calling deep balls and dives with Denard when they were bringing the house. I'm not an OC, but even I could see that he needed to call some quick passes and outside runs to back off their blitzing. Instead, he was content with letting them blitz for 3 quarters of the game. The only thing that disappointed me more than Borges' playcalling yesterday was the performance of our Offensive Line.
October 16th, 2011 at 11:58 AM ^
There was a reason why we had only six tailback carries after the first drive: those six carries gained about five total yards. MSU adjusted to our blocking schemes after the first drive and our OL couldn't open up any holes thereafter. After the first drive, I believe the only designed running plays that gained more than five yards were a pair of jet sweeps to Denard.
October 16th, 2011 at 12:27 PM ^
So you get stopped running the ball a few times, might as well abandon the running game altogether right?
October 16th, 2011 at 11:43 AM ^
The offensive line play was disappointing -- yet we should've run more? I'm not sure how that math works out. And I recall a misdirection, one of those cutback plays.
It got stuffed for a 2 yard loss.
October 16th, 2011 at 12:35 PM ^
The only problem is...I think they could have also integrated more perimeter short-passing to deal with the wind, as well as more sweep/pitchout runs. Try Mr. Bounce at tailback, etc.