- Member for
- 2 years 32 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- Current value
|6 weeks 1 day ago||this doesn't make sense||
this doesn't make sense anyway but Bellomy isn't a pro-style QB...he has good wheels and they're a big reason why he was recruited in the first place
|15 weeks 10 hours ago||We already debuted the pistol||
We already debuted the pistol against OSU and used it against South Carolina. Granted, in true Borges style we only ran one play out of the look but the fake inverted veer sweep to Denard was from full house pistol.
Gruden even pointed it out during the bowl game although he laughably attributed the formation to the Redskins rather than Utah...
|22 weeks 6 days ago||bizarre||
Corner makes more sense than safety but Norfleet is a guy that the coaching staff was designing plays for earlier this year. Now he's just a corner unlikely to ever start considering our current depth at the position?
|24 weeks 4 days ago||that doesn't make sense||
considering 3 of the National Title teams referenced ran up-tempo "spread" offenses
I guess the salient point is that Danielson is a tool along with 99% of the commentators out there.
|25 weeks 5 days ago||Blue Note||
|27 weeks 1 day ago||inverted veer||
M used the inverted veer last week just not often. The inside zone read will still be used as well.
|29 weeks 1 day ago||The Kerridge "option" play drives me NUTS||
1. When was the last time Michigan handed the ball off to their fullback?
2. Beyond the traditional inside zone read, inverted veer, and speed option, none of these are actual reads for Denard. The jet sweep action, triple option look from late last year, Kerridge orbited out, etc. are just decoys. Decoys that nobody bothers honoring. Even the speed option is usually neutered since we almost always run it on 3rd and short and Denard is just trying to find a crease for the first down. Except on 3rd and 7 (topping it off I think it was to the boundary) against Nebraska which was extremely humiliating.
3. Even if the Kerridge play was a good idea, wouldn’t it make more sense to line up with a 2nd tailback such as Rawls, Hayes, Norfleet, or at the very least Hopkins so the defense might be concerned with them. Do you think Nebraska would have ignored Norfleet on that play? I doubt it.
These lame decoys are causing us to have to play quite a bit of 10 man football.
|29 weeks 2 days ago||RR era "inverted veer"||
|29 weeks 2 days ago||Brian-||
Michigan did run the inverted veer in 2010. I THINK it debuted in the Penn State game if my memory is correct. I know it was run multiples times in that game, just not sure if they used it at all before that.
Check the tape. Tape = UFR in this case.
|31 weeks 12 hours ago||Needs||
M didn't run the inverted veer at all vs. Sparty last year. I don't think it debuted until Purdue.
|32 weeks 15 hours ago||Magnus...||
Regarding Kwiatkowski, Brian was talking about him releasing downfield in a pass pattern, not getting to the second level to block.
|33 weeks 6 days ago||If Alabama were to play||
If Alabama were to play Oregon in the title game and Alabama won, you'd conclude that it was a failure of the Ducks' offensive philosophy?
Is it possible (if that hypothetical comes to fruition) that Alabama would win simply because they were better?
I would bet on Oregon to beat every team in the country this year besides Alabama. If only they didn't run the spread they MIGHT be able to take out Saban, am I right???
|33 weeks 6 days ago||Nate- Do you really think||
|33 weeks 6 days ago||If given a fair shot I don't||
If given a fair shot I don't think Bellomy will beat out Gardner unless they just decide they need Devin at receiver and basically force the issue.
I think you're going to be very disappointed if you think Bellomy will be better than Denard next year with literally no meaningful game experience under his belt.
He might make fewer mistakes but you'll lose explosiveness on the ground and he doesn't have ideal arm strength for what we THINK Borges wants to do either.
|33 weeks 6 days ago||Unless you think Shane Morris||
Unless you think Shane Morris is going to beat out Gardner and Bellomy next year, Borges is going to have a spread-type QB at the helm again so it's not just about Denard leaving.
I find it highly unlikely that occurs but if we're starting a true frosh QB next year the offense is going to stink either way.
|34 weeks 1 day ago||It's not hard to figure it||
It's not hard to figure it out. Borges is philosophically opposed to the bubble. Probably too "basketball on grass" and horizontal for his and Hoke's taste.
|35 weeks 1 day ago||incorrect||
The T Rob reception you're talking about came on a fake bubble, not QB play action.
That being said, we DID run "Rocket" earlier in the Notre Dame game but Denard didn't throw it.
They talk about it in "3 And Out."
|36 weeks 4 days ago||Not true regarding the tunnel||
Not true regarding the tunnel screen.
RR ran them here. Off the top of my head I can remember Stonum scoring on one against UMass.
As for Borges, he might not like the bubble but he's starting to see it's usefulness I would say. After 2 bubbles against Alabama, Denard's first TD today came on a fake bubble QB draw.
No tunnel screen's yet. Or throwbacks.
Considering it "always" worked last year you know it's coming...
|37 weeks 1 day ago||Yeah, it would work. That's||
Yeah, it would work. That's pretty much a QB power or ISO, depending on the blocking scheme. Would it work consistently against Alabama when your blocking execution is poor? Of course not.
My biggest issue with Borges is that his reasoning for not running Denard more (plus 1-ing) was basically that Alabama simply wouldn't let him succeed. Again, that's probably true in this case but I'm not sure how that squares with the fact that the backs got quite a few carries when the game was still in doubt. Vincent Smith down a man is a better option than Denard with an extra blocker?
It's just a matter of philosohpy. if they were really that geared up to stop Denard, they could have been susceptible to Denard playaction, misdirection, etc. Those were all things that Malzahn pointed out were needed to beat Alabama's D. Sometimes you have to run into a brick wall a few times before you can counter-punch.
I think they figured they'd take a punchers chance in the first quarter and throw it around and then packed it in once they got down in a hurry. I have no problem with them protecting Denard but we can't afford to protect him when we're back in a dog fight.
|37 weeks 1 day ago||inverted veer = "jet read"||
inverted veer = "jet read" (according to Hoke) or "dash read"
Meanwhile, in the 2nd video, if Denard keeps and scoots outside of Schofield and Gallon chips the nickel corner we've got profit. At that point 'Lace is one on one with the safety and we're getting 10 yards at a minimum. That's highly preferable to Rawls getting blown up while heading toward the sideline.
Any chance Borges lets Denard run the zone stretch this year?
|37 weeks 4 days ago||Denard was pretty good||
Denard was pretty good running the inside zone read last year against Notre Dame. He had success with the "inverted veer" against OSU and that's about it. It got blown up last night the couple times they ran it like everything else.
What's unquestioned is Denard was VERY good at running QB outside zone and we haven't used it once since Hoke & Borges arrived. Watching Denard wait for blockers on the QB sweep is painful. This is square peg round hole stuff. Wouldn't have changed the outcome last night but it does matter in the grand scheme.
Beyond that, Denard had one meaningful designed carry before the game was out of hand. That's just poor coaching unless you aren't trying to run the ball at all.
|38 weeks 1 day ago||Great post||
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.
|1 year 24 weeks ago||Toussaint would have gotten||
Toussaint would have gotten more and made Simon irrelevant by taking it further outside.
The Smart Football RG3 Heisman post diagrams an inverted veer playaction TD pass:
|1 year 25 weeks ago||Yes, he has been playing all||
Yes, he has been playing all year but very sparingly early in the season. The few snaps he got were almost all running plays as he was not a legitimate receiving option with the hand/arm injury. Brian commented in the UFR that his presence was a run tip at one point.
I agree with the post above saying that he has been crucial to Denard's resurgence the last few games. Tay was great last year in limited time as well before the injury and made that nice TD grab in the Gator Bowl.
|1 year 25 weeks ago||Well, I don't think either of||
Well, I don't think either of us truly know what happened on those specific plays against Nebraska. I appreciate that you were at 2 spring practices but how do you know they spent much of the bye week working on it? It seems to me that they spent the bye week re-dedicating themselves to running I-Form Power and Iso's and setting themselves up to lose to a mediocre Iowa team.
I've already ceded the point that Denard often makes the incorrect read but I personally think in the 2nd half of the Nebraska game he was instructed to handoff. That's just a guess, as is your assertion.
As for the part about Borges being ineffective...
In your scenario, running the zone read properly has been a focus all spring, fall, and during the bye week. Yet, Denard just had perhaps his worst performance in that area. If he's getting worse, or at least not getting better, it would seem to me that would make Borges pretty ineffective at that coaching point, no?
For the record, I've been pleasantly surprised by Borges this year but his gameplans against State and Iowa cost us a shot at the Big Ten Championship.
Either way, let's see what happens this week.
|1 year 25 weeks ago||Win will cause Brian to...do||
Win will cause Brian to...do an Akron State Golden Bobcat UFR while cackling with knowing glee?
Beat these fools.
|1 year 25 weeks ago||For some reason I don't think||
For some reason I don't think Ohio will have an internal rebellion and continued bickering as to whether Urban is a true "Ohio Man."
|1 year 25 weeks ago||I would be more inclined to||
I would be more inclined to agree with you if all of the "mistakes" seem to be him not pulling the ball rather than mistakes of him keeping when he should give AND not pulling the ball when the end crashes or LB doesn't scrape.
Denard does make lots of mistakes but the examples against Nebraska are quite egregious and repetitive. Do you really think Borges wouldn't have been in his ear after a couple of those if they were true reads? If so, he's not a very effective coach.
While RR ran the zone read less than we ever thought he would, it certainly wasn't abandoned. We had to guess in 2009 and 2010 that he simply turned a lot of the reads into straight zone runs which is exactly what we're surmising now.
Pete99, have you been attending practice?
|1 year 25 weeks ago||Gotta believe those are just||
Gotta believe those are just inside zones without a true read. I'm not sure what I'd prefer as that either makes me pissed at Borges while the alternative is worrisome for Denard. Even though Denard has never been great on the read he's never been THAT bad. They also might have been trying to limit his carries some since he racked up a bunch early in the game.
With regards to the speed option, he did dangerously pitch in the the SDSU game when the speed option debuted, but that might be it. Just going from memory. Like much of what we do, what looks like an option or read is often just a decoy it seems. It's either that or Denard just makes up his mind what he's going to do before the snap. But certainly Hopkins is not a true read on the dive and Odoms is not a true read on the jet motion or end around.
I suppose there's a reason why we never saw the speed option (or additional reads) for Denard under RR.
|1 year 26 weeks ago||QB/RB Alignment||
That's playing with fire, though given the different alignments of the QB in stretch versus inside zone alert opponents might pick up on it.
There's a great video on fishduck.com which talks about the Oregon inside vs. outside zone runs. Until this season, when the RB was lined up slighty behind the QB, it would always mean inside zone. If the RB was to the side of the QB, it would always mean an outside zone.
The guy that runs the site surmised that Kelly WANTS teams to recognize the formation and overreact to the plays which opens up cutback lanes and allows the whole zen part of zone blocking to work even better.
Oregon has broken tendency a couple of times this year to give defenses a few new things to think about but if Michigan commits to using more outside zone along with our steady dose of the belly play (and Denard makes a few better reads) I think we should have plenty of success on the ground in the next 3 games.
Now that the stretch play is back in the arsenal I think it would be VERY nice to allow Denard some carries on the outside zone so he doesn't have to wait up for his blockers every time he heads outside.