In case you've forgotten since last fall, FFFF is the weekly film breakdown of Michigan's upcoming opponent where I apply my (limited) knowledge of X's and O's—luckily, this week much of the technical brilliance is provided by Chris Brown.
College football fans should know a few things about Alabama: they're good (duh), they play a soul-crushing 3-4 defense, and they grind out wins with a glacial-paced offense that's actually brutally efficient. I'll get into more detail below, of course, but that's the Cliffs Notes version if you hate to read.
Spread, Pro-Style, or Hybrid? Pro-style. Alabama mostly operates from under center, usually with either a fullback or a second tight end on the field.
Basketball on Grass or MANBALL? Though the Crimson Tide offense operates in the spirit of MANBALL, they actually utilize a lot of zone blocking—the outside zone is one of the staples of their offense, as detailed here on Tremendous.
Quarterback Dilithium Level (Scale: 1 [Navarre] to 10 [Denard]): Even with sacks removed, quarterback A.J. McCarron rushed for only 70 yards on 19 carries last year. He's mobile enough that he could escape the pocket and possibly pick up a surprise first down, but not much more than that. I'll give him a 3.
Dangerman: QB A.J. McCarron. Alabama loses most of their top skill position players from last year, but McCarron is often overlooked as one of the better quarterbacks in the nation, largely due to their run-heavy attack and defensive reputation. As a redshirt sophomore last season, McCarron finished 25th in the country in passer efficiency (147.27) and 24th in yards per attempt (8.0), most impressively posting a miniscule 1.5% interception rate. McCarron doesn't wow you, but he's the perfect quarterback for 'Bama's system: the proverbial "game manager" who rarely makes a mistake.
Zook Factor: This is my measure of how often teams have horrible ideas like "let's punt on 4th and 3 from the opponent 35" and so on. While Alabama is hailed as a conservative paragon, they've been known to break that habit in a big way:
Of course, the reason this works so well is because Alabama normally takes the safe route; earlier in the same game, they punted on 4th and 1 from their 46 despite the presence of one Trent Richardson.
Man or zone coverage?
Pressure: GERG or Greg?
It's not impossible. Denard used to bull's-eye womp rats in his T-sixteen back home. They're not much bigger than two meters.
You know you really sandbagged me back there.
Robinson will have to be on early with the passing game, this may open up some big runs later if his passing is accurate!
The content this week has been great. Defensively, I think stopping the run on first down is going to be critical so we can put Bama in obvious passing situations for Mattison to dial up some blitzes that hopefully will get through. Offensively, I think Denard has to have his best game "managing" the offense. It's going to be tough for him put up significant yards on the ground. Hopefully we are in alot of 3rd and shorts/manageable that we can convert on a good percentage of and eat up alot of clock. If we do that I think we'll have a legit shot at winning this thing.
I think avoiding negative plays is crucial against a defense like Alabama. Malzhan said it best, but getting in 3rd and 6+ is going to be tough.
It's going to take an epic effort on both sides of the ball for Michigan to win this game. But, I think we can do it. I am very pleased that our OC has has experience game-planning against Alabama in the past, and that our DC is the best in the business.
So much of this game is going to revolve around the maturation/development of Denard. His running ability will give him a bit more of a window than a traditional QB might get against Bama's defense. If he can pass well enough early, he might get a bit more of window through which to run.
Can't wait to see the effort our boys put in agains the Tide. Win or lose, it's exciting to have Michigan football back for the 133rd time!
Go Blue, beat Bama!
While Borges game planned against Alabama while at Auburn, only one of those games was against a Saban-coached Alabama, in 2007, Saban's first year. He did coach against Saban in 2004, his last year at LSU. Borges's team won both of those games, although they scored only 17 and 10 points respectively.
are in big, big trouble.
True. But, then again, I think Borges knows this fact very well, as does Denard. But, even more important than Michigan knowing it, is Bama knowing it. This might give Borges the crack in the scheme that he needs, i.e., Bama is going over emphasize stopping Denard from running. Again, it comes down to Denard executing the passing game. Also, Borges and Mattison are going to have to be right on top of their "adjustment game" to be successful.
If, for example, Michigan breaks tendency and comes out throwing, and is successful, there is no doubt that Saban will adjust. But, if Borges doesn't adjust right back, we might be right back where we started, i.e., playing right into the strength of the Bama defense.
It's going to be an interesting chess match coaching wise, and I like our guys in that department. Not that Saban & Co. aren't any good, they're very good, but I think Borges and Mattison have an edge there -- it's just that Bama has the edge in overall talent.
Maybe Borges supposed hatred of bubble screens has all been a front in preparation for this game.
.....not too much respect. Even if you're just reloading on defense, they still lost an epic amount of talent to the NFL. What we are seeing above is not what will be faced on Saturday night (and a thank youuuuuu for that). Plus, they have not seen a QB with Denard's speed before either. Don't know if I have ever seen a QB with Denard's speed before.
That being said, yeah, will be tough to win this one.
Agree with previous commenter on content this week. EPIC. Brian and Co probably don't realize that they have as much impact on Michigan's fandom as Brandon. I would argue this site has more influence on UM's fandom than any other source. But that's just me. Look how few MGoPoints I have. I know nothing!!!!
Would love to see them spread Alabama out, but if they're going to do that I want to see these guys in. Devin Gardner, Roy Roundtree, one of the smaller slot guys with great hands, and Devin Funchess. If they can get Devin squared out there spreading the field, I think it gives Michigan a MUCH better chance. I know this is just my opinion, but the passing game has to be successful.
I think both Devins give us a better chance because of their body types against Alabama. Devin Funchess is a match-up problem for them, and Devin Gardner is tall with good-great speed. Then you add in Roy, who has experience and one of the slot guys. Honestly, I think this gives Denard the best chance at success as well. It's a lot easier to make throws to guys 6'4" and up than to try and hit smaller targets. I just don't see the point in sitting a guy like Funchess because he's not necessarily big enough to block yet. He doesn't need to play TE, spread him out wide and let him go for this game. Not for endzone situations, but for all situations. He gives us the best chance in my opinion, and no one is really talking about that.
Cliches never more true -- protect the ball and execute the fundamentals well.
If at the end of the day Michigan is on the losing side of the score, but we can look at the film and honestly say, "You know, they played a hell of a game ... they just ran into a team with more on the field than we had" ... well then, okay.
If they protect the ball and play fundamentally sound football and win ... well then, hell yeah!
and agreed on the great site content this week.
A couple of notes:
1. Borges did run quite a few QB play actions last year but they just weren't as crisp or effective as they were in 2010. For some reason we kept throwing the ball short on curls rather than attack the safety up the seam. As an example, check the first series against MSU last year.
2. It's quite scary that the things Malzahn believes can hurt Alabama are what Borges seems to dislike the most. I find it highly unlike we're going to utilize tempo (even though we should) and Borges seems to be allergic to many outside running plays or extensions of the run like the bubble.
3. I could actually see some of our deuce and other trick packages being useful against Alabama but I just don't have much confidence in our ability to adjust after the offensive debacle that was the Sugar Bowl. Teams were allowed to stack the box much of last year because of our lack of constraint plays. That has to change if we're to have any chance.
we're going to get a good early look at he and Hoke's flexibility here.
We now have the luxury of an extra year in which to install tricky stuff. Its not the level you can run when you have starters four years deep in the system, but it should get us a little more versatility in the playbook.
As it was execution. There were guys open in the passing game, which is Boges' job... DR just didn't get to them.... At least that was my interpretation after the UFR
Well done. Thanks for taking the time and displaying all of the info and film. Hard to imagine not having Mgoblog during game week. We truly are spoiled.
...does Michigan have any? It seems that every preview I've read is doom². Somebody give me hope.
Denard. Alabama can play disciplined defense but it's hard to catch talent. Lesser teams had as many as EIGHT guys within five yards of the LOS to contain Denard and they did, but that allowed Borges to tear up the softened pass coverage (when he wasn't in the damn power I, anyway). The key to stopping Denard is pressure -- he's hesitant to run and makes mistakes when he throws -- but I'm hoping he's improved with a second offseason working with Borges. Practice time counts for a LOT between a QB and an OC. Anyway, I don't care how good Alabama's D-line is; trying to stop Denard with a 3-4 means you'll need a DE to catch him on more than one occasion. That will NOT happen. They won't need 7-8 guys in the box either, but Denard should force them out of their base formations and that's when things will get interesting.
Kovacs. Not surprising I'd mention the co-captains, but when Kovacs is given room he almost never misses a tackle, even at full speed. Last season Mattison quickly noticed it and used all sorts of packages to get Kovacs to the ball. He's not the strongest or fastest guy on the field, but what I marvel most about him is he's so consistent. His positioning is almost always perfect, he takes great angles and pursuit speeds and he always hits the ball carrier with the right move. Go for the sideline and he'll shove you out. Try to juke him and he'll barrel into your knees. Try to power through him and he'll wrap you up perfectly -- you may get a couple extra yards, but that's all he's giving you. He's enough of a playmaker that teams drew up and executed plays specifically designed to draw him away from the point of attack. With Kovacs taking away the freebies, Alabama is content to grind out yards but that plays right into Mattison's hands. Speaking of which. . .
Mattison. Alabama is what Michigan was in the ye olde days of Yost -- they had the talent to beat anyone and rammed it down your throat. But they're not cocky; they're fundamentally sound and execute well. They're not stubborn or overly predictable, either. They may not throw to the post route often, but they will the first time you fall asleep covering it. That's naturally why everyone's cautious about Michigan's chances. But they don't have Mattison, who may well be the best defensive coordinator in the country. This guy has experience stopping the best offenses in the NFL. Alabama's O-line can handle just about any standard D-line attack in the book, but if anyone can prepare a scheme they aren't ready for, it's Mattison.
If Denard's dual-threat attack can shake Alabama's D out of its comfort zone and Mattison finds a way to confuse the O-line so they can't rely on athleticism and fundamentals alone, Michigan's got a chance.
Wow. I was feeling pretty confident until I read this. Obviously Denard has to play one of his best games, but Borges needs to call one of his best games ever, too.
Damn the torpedos!
I've got $200 on Michigan (+14)!
Go Blue or Go Home!
I know we keep saying that their defense has reloaded, but if we are gonna require mistakes by the defense to help us score, doesn't experience means so much more than talent? If these green db's don't have much experience in big games, I fully expect them to make mistakes. I just hope our senior, experienced qb takes full advantage.
Looks like Alabama brought back 3YAACOD (3 yards and a cloud of dust). It's a sign a program has supreme confidence in its superior talent. Talent they shouldn't have because of oversigning and other crap, but I digress. It's there, and Michigan's gotta deal with it.
KEY ON OFFENSE: Overload the zones. The weakness of zone is that no matter how disciplined you are, you can't be in two places at once. So the typical way to beat a Cover-1 or Cover-2 is to overload a zone. I'd start with trips on the strong side with Smith to Denard's left. Corner takes the wideout, robber covers the slot, but if they're all only about 5-10 yards down the deep safety's useless so SOMEONE will be open. On the strong side Denard starts out facing that direction so he can sling it right out of a pistol set before any help can get there and looking at his eyes won't help because all the receivers are in the same zip code. When they start cheating to the strong side, Denard can take off to his left behind Lewan and Smith. If 'Bama goes with a nickel package that's just proof it's working; we WANT them to go small. If that happens, time to break out some option runs. Run when they expect the pass; pass when they expect the run -- Sun Tzu's Football 101. What I dread is Borges getting stubborn with the run before things open up. If he runs on every first down we're dead. He needs to use the pass to open up the running game, which is the WCO philosophy in the first place.
KEY ON DEFENSE: Free up Kovacs. He's a sure tackler who can bring anyone down, if not instantly, but he can't punch his way through the O-line and they can't expect the D-line to hold on every play. If we try to match power with power their bigger O-line will grind them down, so at times Mattison's going to have to get creative, and that's just code for getting Kovacs to the ball. A TFL or sack on 2nd-and-4 that brings them back to a passing down takes 3YAACOD out of its comfort zone. 3YAACOD doesn't expect to get beat. The experienced secondary, if it stays composed, can limit the big plays, trickery and play action. Unfortunately Alabama is great at combination blocking, while Kovacs excels at tackling in space. So Mattison and the D-line will have to execute a form of role reversal, where they block the blockers -- they need those linemen to stay on them to give Kovacs a clear path to the ball carrier. They did that quite a bit last season and Mattison's good at keeping things confusing. Expect some stunts and Okie packages purely designed to overwhelm one side of the line, so a couple guys get double-teamed while others wind up blocking air. It doesn't need to be done often -- and in fact it should be used sparingly and deceptively -- but it needs to be a drive-killer. Michigan can't give Alabama 5-8 yards per run, and that's gonna be tough to do without giving them something they're not prepared for.
Looking from the other side -- what Alabama sees when they look at Michigan is the same things we see -- the principal vulnerability is the defensive line, and Alabama's opening drive will be focused there. I doubt Saban sees any reason to get cute -- they will go straight at Michigan's weakness.
Agree with dragonchild above that Michigan has plans to compensate for the D-Line being overwhelmed, but the question for me is as follows: Do you give the line a chance to prove itself, or do you immediately throw the kitchen sink at whatever Alabama is doing?
Most coaches will do the former, because you can't have players thinking you don't believe in them, but there's something to be said for keeping Alabama off balance from the get-go by refusing to follow the standard script.