I hate these trash articles that act like points = fun and use numbers to say meaningless things while shining up the SEC. Ruins football.
I'll never forget when Jack Lambert came to my Pee Wee football practice and told us the Steelers had to change all their Defensive line calls when his teeth got knocked out. He couldn't enunciate words like "STACK!" anymore, so they had to come up with calls toothless men can make. That was fun.
I enjoyed Jack Lambert create tons of "slog" football games with his greatness.
It would be fantastic to get a Neck Sharpie on how College defenses disguise coverage. Don Brown seems to scheme "gotcha" plays to mitigate obvious vulnerabilities, rather than use some of the other methods, such as rolling coverage or shifting assignments.
Curious what the options are for a system like DB's that relies so much on Man coverage.
Bummer about Seth's Ennui and the missing UFR. Anyone have a photographic memory for play-by-play who can tell us what schemes were most prevalent last year? Does it feel right that we ditched the 3-3-5 stack in that game?
In college, a 2-gapping 3-4 defense gives you some real advantages. Not only is it rare, almost exotic, it's a completely different animal than most college defenses these days. This advantage cannot be overstated. Also, the front just makes it harder to identify the assignments presnap. I do think this explains the "extra" OL confusion this week. The 3-4 compounded Kugler's weaknesses in almost every way.
The reason we cannot be creative is obvious. Our lack of experienced players is the reason, and it is not a trivial problem. With limited practice time, Harbaugh's coaches have hard choices to make. They do not believe practice time is best spent installing a few "funky" plays, given our current personnel. You can do more of that with veteran skill players and QB who are able to internalize their assignments quickly.
I agree with Harbaugh's assessment, although it sucks that it is necessary. We cannot make our players more experienced by closing our eyes and wishing it were so.
Given where we are, I'd actually like to see an MGO Article about how fast young QBs improve with playing time, and what that process looks like. For example, last year Hornibrook was a RS FR and looked a lot like Peters does for us now. In year two, he's able to make enough plays to win games.
Peters gets better each week, but not fast enough to put 24 on Wisconsin.
It's true that pro style offenses take longer for players to learn and really internalize than (say) a Wing-T. However, it's naively wrong to call it "too complicated." Our offense is running with a backup quarterback and about FR/SO at all the key positions. We do not have that critical mass of upperclassmen skill players required to succeed consistently on offense.
This only means that a pro offense requires a critical mass of upperclassmen (which we do not have), not that FR/SO players can't learn it, or that it's too hard.
So the REAL culprit (wait for it...) is the coaching transition recruiting classes, which were tiny and horrendous. We'd prolly be fine if we had a veteran Damien Harris in pass protection, along with several of the other skill players who would have internalized the offense, but instead decommitted when Hoke got fired.
The best comp for Peppers has always been Troy Polamalu, who was almost unwatchable in his first two years with the Steelers (0 starts as a rookie). It can be especially difficult for playmaking types to learn all the angles, and what you can get to.
At Michigan, Peppers had help over the top, so he could flash to the ball--playing right to his talents. He's learning a whole new way to play.
There are those of us on this blog who are not dumbasses about what the constitution says or does not say. If you wish to keep the conversations on football, please do not begin your comments with a law lecture.
It is obnoxious.
Also, there are those of us on this blog who are not dumbasses about what the constitution says or does not say. If you wish to keep the conversations on football, please do not begin your comments with a law lecture.
I promise you will see all of these things once Big 10 play starts, and not before. We have this conversation every year, because every year we put away all the exotic elements so they're not on film. We're not even putting our TEs on film (HA!). September is always vanilla pudding. We're busy working out the butterflies.
Last year, we saw an explosion of fancy at the perfect time (October). Wham plays, Peppers in the Wildcat, RB screens all over the place, the Train formation, the OL overloads, reverse handoff draws... am I missing anything? I promise we will see some flag routes to our TEs this year. No butterflies in September for Harbaugh.
Also take a look at Podio. It's a project management software like Basecamp, only much better. Nonprofits can get Enterprise level for free. I've used it at several NPs for years, and it allows you to collaborate not only with board, but also staff and outside contractors.
Podio not only allows you to upload and store resources and files of all types, but connect them to their related projects or initiatives. You can also set up process markers (e.g. under review, complete, etc), so you know the status of given projects. There's facebook style chat logs associated with each project so you can track conversations associated with specific projects, and each member of the project team is notified whenever actions are taken on the jobs. Notably, you can assign (or omit) any board members from specific project teams, controlling access and notifications.
By setting up your board using a project management approach, you can collect all/only relevant documents to streamline workflow.
Podio is incredibly powerful, and free for nonprofits.
Performance matters, but I love the current website (in a nostalgic way). It's a throw-back. MgoBlog just feels old-school, like smashmouth football from a bygone era. Yes, the 1990s.
Yes, do build MgoBlog for the future. But you gotta go back to go forward. Gotta Harbaugh it. Like Bo came back to life, bigger, stronger and crazier.
Please do not make a "RichRod" website. Please do not make a futuristic shitshow like the Maryland clown helmets. Football is for broken noses and bloody teeth.
How should we expect OSU to defend Kaiju and other types of Big personnel package plays? Do they stick with a base personnel, or embiggen their DL or DBs?
I should know this, but watching OSU play football is like watching Benny Hinn revivals, except without the joy.
I really enjoyed Blood, Sweat and Chalk by Tim Layden. Each chapter is an overview of one of the great strategy innovations in football, both college and pro. It's got a little history and nostalgia, some X and O type stuff, and lots of cool stories about how coaches came up with big ideas.
Not a "technical," book, it shows the fundamentals of how the West Coast is different from Coryell offenses, and tells the tale of why they came up with the wishbone, the two gapping 3-4, and so forth. Another chapter traces the keys for the Bucaneers dominating Ds back to the 70s Steel Curtain.
Each chapter is really short, so it's great to read in chunks. You can flip around to the football concepts that interest you. A fun chapter shows the origin of RichRod's nambypamby read option ball, and relates it to Pop Warner's early wing T. It's superfun.
If there's Nine, I think you just go with "The Nine." No superlative necessary, because they scare the bejeezus out of you on sight, or even if you heard rumours they are outside somewhere riding around. Maybe you call them "The Nine Riders" or "The Nazgul" if you want to be corny.
Who are the main 2016 recruiting candidates for Brown's SLB, the hybrid-space defender role? Obviously, we need a Pepper cracking apprentice. We lika da Pepper.
Your point is well taken, Mr. Yost - but I don't think it's correct to say we 'struggled' against Wisconsin. We beat them at their own low scoring game. They are a very impressive team and put up tons of yards against some quality defenses (e.g. 339 vs. LSU and 450(!) vs. OSU).
Against Michigan, Wisconsin only had 159 total yards, and their win probability was over 50% for about 30 seconds in the entire game. We had 349 total yards and 11 minutes(!) more possession time.
Every Michigan fan catastrophizes the dreaded 7 point lead into a doomsday scenario (it's in our DNA), but there were only a few fleeting moments in the game when WIsconsin was really in a position to beat us.
Wisconsin's performance against Ohio only validates their quality. We have a whole lot in common with Wisconsin -- a great team with an inexperienced QB-- but Michigan is simply better.
This is why I asked the question. If it's true that we stick with a few basic cadence and snap counts, why are we doing it? I am sure there are good reasons. I had hoped to learn what they are.
Do you think we change up the cadence/snap count more than I have noticed? Or do you think the points I made about the tradeoffs in using them are not an issue?
Even against Colorado our Offense has been very vanilla. This makes it easier for the D to read their keys and attack. Once we get into Big10 play, you'll see Harbaugh insert play designs that give our OL more advantages.
Remember last year? We suddenly began running whams and traps from new formations, and a whole series of inside screens to the RBs and TEs. These play designs create uncertainty on the defensive front, helping the OL win their individual battles while putting pressure on the DBs to defend the run. We just gotta be cool until Big 10 games.
In our offense, which guys will be asked to reach block most often? It looks like Cole is well-suited to reach blocking, based on his skill set. Is that one reason we want him at center?
Defensive stats and efficiency ratings are valuable tools, but they're hardly a silver bullet for evaluating a coach's ability. Brown's supremo 2015 numbers show that his defense performed, and probably support the idea that his defense was sound and well prepared. I'd like ot see other information, for example how many young coaches he worked with who went on to be successful.
We should not immediately fear that he's a mediocre coach based solely on a couple mediocre FEI seasons with lower level programs. FEI tells lies sometimes.
Case in point:
Bill Belichek's Defensive Efficiency rankings with the Patriots are absolutely mediocre:
9 in 2015
12 in 2014
20 in 2013
15 in 1012
30 in 2011
21 in 2010
14 in 2009
17 in 2008
Yet Belichek is not a mediocre coach. He's a middling spy, perhaps, but there's a couple Super Bowl years on that list.
My point is that Belichek is clearly one of the greatest coaches of all time, and a defensive genius. I'd let him coach Michigan's D.
Efficiency rankings and other statistics do tell you valuable things about a D's performance, and they are good tools to begin evaluating coaches. But they can't be the only measuring stick.
Does anyone know anything else about Brown's coaching background? Here are a few questions that interest me:
Does Brown have any kind of coaching Tree?
Do we have signature games where some new strategy changed the game (like the FSU performance)?
Can he evolve his schemes to fit personnel, when what he has is not ideal?
I'm excited about Brown, and I also thought Durkin did a fantastic job at Michigan, especially when you consider how different our new approach to D was from the old. We've had a run of fine defenses since Mattison revived the program (way back when).
He is poofing Belichek's shirt backward just by looking at him all meanly. Your average OL has no chance. Yet I am not sure he wins this if Coach engages. Classic Ki battle going on here.
Most offers go out to recruits early in what becomes a long process, a year or even two years, before the committing season. For many players, it begins a process of getting familiar with a program (or not). It's a bit like asking a girl out on a date. She might express no interest, and you might decide not to pursue it.
Of course, grey areas emerge if lots of players are interested and some emerge as better talents than others. Even more like dating.
Can anyone do some fun speculation on Connor Murphy for me? I don't understand his recruitment at all. He's a top 250 DE, who is 6'7 and rangy.
Just stand him on the edge of your defense with colorful mittens. He'll kill the namby-pamby screen game, and he can reach both the QB and the RB on an option, just by stretching out a little. Like Mr. Fantastic, except with Human Torch hair. Sounds like fun.
There's Hardly any buzz about Murphy, and ony a few Crystal Balls. Pundits will put in a crystal ball for ACHU if a kid sneezes. He's connected to big schools like Oregon, USC and Stanford, along with Michigan, but he's just now starting to take any visits. He's not going to Michigan till January, even though Harbaugh was his babysitter.
Maybe it's true that UM is looking at a numbers crunch, but damn I'd love to have a long edge player and would take him in a second over another kicker (pardon me, Mr. Nordin).
Is it because he's from AZ, and no reporters are there? No competition? Is it the company he keeps?
One college I visited had a requirement that you keep the door open in a dorm room if guys and girls were inside together. They would prop it open with a shoe.
They said you could be expelled for violating that rule.
I can see how that sort of lifestyle would make you a little chippy.
Many of the top ranked recruits have not yet committed, and that will shake up this board. I'll wager that you'll see a few changes after signing day, when a few of the big dog teams reel in the last of the 5 stars.
Hopefully, Mattison will add Gary and Bush, keeping him high on the list.
Interesting point. You're right he's not a traditional 4-3 DE. However, I think Glasgow would be perfect as a DE using 2-gapping technique -- which is not a penetrator but an evil block-occupying monster. We could play Mone at the Nose, and slide Glasgow over to DE. That would be happy days for keeping your ILB clean, and stopping the run.
It's funny that by saying 3-4, we don't actually know anything more about the kind of D Harbaugh wants to evolve into. I bet it is mostly the same kind of defense Durkin was installing (a multiple front 4-3/3-4), which is similar to what the Ravens run and what Stanford uses. Depending on your personel during a given season, you can emphasize certain schemes over others.
I read recently that Stanford (under Anderson) uses 2-gap principles in their 3-4 only about 25% of the time, and they'll also use a 1-gap 3-4 or an Okie setup. That would not be so much of a change from our current 4-3 under-with-buck setup, given Durkin's intention to become multiple. I bet we bring in a DC who uses the 2-gapping style more than we've done previously, but not as our primary D.
This article about Stanford's 2012 win over Oregon helps clarify some points about the fronts they like to use. Also, it shows how effective it can be against spread offenses... the kind that aggitate our board into such a frenzy. And that Oregon team was once in a generation good.
Of Note: Several recent Michigan DEs have gone to the NFL specifically as 2-gapping 3-4 OLBs, or in the hybrid roles. Lamaar Woodley, Brandon Graham, and Clark.
A 3-4 does not mean you have 4 LBs recruits playing. You still only have 2 or at most 3 LB-ish players. The rest are DEs standing up on the edge.
I completely agree. I am not sold on Malzone, although he looks like a good depth QB to me.
You're hitting on the most interesting issue, in my mind: How does our roster makeup affect Harbaugh's approach to player development for the 2016 and 2017 seasons?
For example, the roster outlook prolly factored into their willingness to play a few of the Freshmen in 2015, such as Newsome and Perry. We had to blood a few guys, so they can be real contributors in 2016-17.
My view is that it's better to play a young guy who's been in the system for a year than an older transfer. Rudock was exceptional for several reasons, the most important being that he came from a pro system at Iowa. A spread QB will take even longer to acclimate, and reduce his value as a 1-year stopgap even further.
It's exciting to imagine a veteran QB transferring in, with experience and all that. But even with a quality guy like Rudock, we saw growing pains as he learned our difficult offense. So it's hardly ideal. Next year, I'm hoping we focus on the development of our own young QBs, so that we get a QB who can start for a couple years and we can end the "who's our QB?" trepidation threads for awhile.
Guys like Gentry and O'Korn will be fully trained in the offense and can at worst keep the seat warm for Peters.
Here's a link to highlights from the 2015 Spring Game, where we got extended looks at Malzone and some Morris. Malzone, even as a month-old freshman, looks like a real QB.
If an extra year could get Butt into the 2nd Round (as opposed to the 3rd), it is probably worth it. Salaries of picks in rounds 1-2 are more likely to get guaranteed money, while usually this isn't the case for 3rd rounders.
Also, there is the "25% Increase Rule" in the CBA, which ties the value of your 2nd contract to what you got in your rookie contract.
It makes sense to think that if Butt gets stronger and improves his inline blocking, he could elevate his status into a legit 2nd rounder, and doing that would be worth big bucks and far more security.
The Big 10 needs a home bowl game, where we can tailgate out in the snow. How awesome would it be if we were playing Florida at (say) Lambeau Field, or maybe even Soldier Field?
It could be the DeGiorno Frozen Pizza Bowl at Lambeau Field. Let's see how Florida and Alabama would perform on the Frozen Tundra.
I have grown weary of all the SEC teams playing homegame bowls and then parading their victories as if the conference rules the world.
Isn't it the case that Durkin depends on the Buck DE/LB player in order to run his favored alternatives to the single high look? The type of player we do not yet have?
Michigan lacks the personnel to execute several of Durkin's go-to schemes (cover-3, cloud, buzz, etc), because you need a guy who can set the edge but also cover in space.
This is prolly why we tried to use Ross at Buck sometimes, in hopes he could hold up against the run, as he provided a better coverage option than any of the true DEs we have. It didn't work, so that made our cover-3 options problematical.
In this context (lacking a true Buck in Michigan's transitioning defense), Durkin had no answer. However, it's not valid to say his defensive philosophy doesn't work against the run-spread, or that he can't defend it. We never saw a fully realized version of Durkin's scheme. That we were so solid most of the year anyways, is awesome.
Brian's choice of image recalls Colin Powell's Pottery Barn Rule and the advice he gave to the president before the US invasion of Iraq. He should make this explicit for said contractor. You break it, you buy it.
'You are going to be the proud owner of 25 million [Michigan Fans],' he told the [MGoBlog Drupal Contractor]. 'You will own all their hopes, aspirations, and problems. You'll own it all.'
We should be proud of our D's performance. Even after the game against OSU, M is ranked #4 in total yardage allowed, despite the key injuries we sustained. In one year, Durkin installed an aggressive, attacking style of D and coached guys like Lewis and Peppers into stars. The techniques he was coaching were complete departures from the year before, and several key players (esp. the LBs) are not ideal fits.
Although players like Peppers are going to be good no matter the system, the week-to-week improvement as far as technique and ability to diagnose was obvious when watching games. We had an historic run of 3 straight shutouts, during which we utterly dominated, like Alabama.
Even Alabama, with a roster built for its system and incredible depth, gives up 40 points sometimes. That Durkin got this production out of a transitioning defense is nothing short of amazing.
Michigan has an ascending defense, and Durkin deserves a ton of credit for it.
I thought the same, but you can't fault Indiana for going for the TD. As it turned out, IU gave themselves a great chance to stop us and just couldn't do it, because Rudock went to Harbaugh's Top Gun school. We needed a set of a thousand things to go right, and they all did.
Their tactics result in the opponent scoring on 4th down with 2 seconds left in order to tie.
Michigan play of the year: Rudock becomes Maverick
During heart-attack time, on 3rd and 3 at midfield, Rudock eshews the dinky flare pass and hits Chesson on a 41 yard bomb. Rudock gets the Top Gun music for that.
Sometimes I do wish Harbaugh didn't antagonize the refs so constantly, though you love to see him fight. This kind of infraction isn't called that often, but we've been warned or penalized on substitution "strategies" in several games (e.g. 12 men in the huddle, congregating at the hash, etc.). It's on film, and I'm sure become a point of emphasis for the refs.
Substitution tactics have become a bit of an irritating strategy nexus in football. This is our version of what Oregon and the hurry-up offenses are doing.
Things are good when we feel sick over 26 points against. During the RichRod nambypamby era, Indiana would put 42 on us, and we were too sick to realize how unholy that was.
It looked to me that the Minn center moved the ball forward a few inches when he took hold of it and settled in for the snap (which is typical, and never called). If you start the replay at a point before Minn comes to the line, you can see him do it. The neutral zone does not move even if the center stretches out the ball a little.
It would be great if we kept Newsome's redshirt, but it's fun to think of what it means for us the rest of the year. We've still got Ohio and a bowl game. Since the loss of LTT, we've been fortunate that no OL have gotten hurt, especially Cole. Happy days if Newsome is now viewed as a reliable backup OT.
Newsome also makes our O harder to prepare for. You can move Cole around (like when we split him wide in our Ghost Peppers, aka wildcat formation), while still having a real LT to block (say) Joey Bosa on the edge.
If you lose Rudock for awhile, this kind of package versatility becomes even more critical. You may be able to use scheme to defeat defenses who stack the box, maintaining some O complexity even with the RS Freshman QB.
I am pleased that Newsome seems capable of backing up Cole, protecting us against catastrophe if Cole gets hurt, while making our O tougher to defend.
Aside: I would love it if one of our Coachy-type contributors would do a post on what it means for a team to be difficult to prepare for due to scheme, and how it affects your practice week. How much harder is it to get a D ready against us, now that we have all those wildcat plays, and the 6 OL package, and the 39 FBs on film? We're a lot different now than under (say) RichRod, where we had the 4 ways Denard could run it.
Agreed. Going forward, I do think they want to be able to play sound cover-3 while keeping the CBs in man coverage--which requires a speedy LB to play the deep middle. We simply don't have that player right now, and I think this is why we use it as a changeup. I would love to know how frequently Durkin used this coverage at Florida.
If we're able to recruit LBs who can really run, we'll add another dimension to our terrifying pass D.
Recent Comments
I hate these trash articles that act like points = fun and use numbers to say meaningless things while shining up the SEC. Ruins football.
I'll never forget when Jack Lambert came to my Pee Wee football practice and told us the Steelers had to change all their Defensive line calls when his teeth got knocked out. He couldn't enunciate words like "STACK!" anymore, so they had to come up with calls toothless men can make. That was fun.
I enjoyed Jack Lambert create tons of "slog" football games with his greatness.
Fuck you, FiveThirtyEight.
It would be fantastic to get a Neck Sharpie on how College defenses disguise coverage. Don Brown seems to scheme "gotcha" plays to mitigate obvious vulnerabilities, rather than use some of the other methods, such as rolling coverage or shifting assignments.
Curious what the options are for a system like DB's that relies so much on Man coverage.
How do you say Charbonnet's name? Can we pronounce it with a sweet french accent whenever he trucks people?
I misread the title as referring to MSU performances against "spread" offenses. That would have been interesting.
Bummer about Seth's Ennui and the missing UFR. Anyone have a photographic memory for play-by-play who can tell us what schemes were most prevalent last year? Does it feel right that we ditched the 3-3-5 stack in that game?
Righto!
In college, a 2-gapping 3-4 defense gives you some real advantages. Not only is it rare, almost exotic, it's a completely different animal than most college defenses these days. This advantage cannot be overstated. Also, the front just makes it harder to identify the assignments presnap. I do think this explains the "extra" OL confusion this week. The 3-4 compounded Kugler's weaknesses in almost every way.
The reason we cannot be creative is obvious. Our lack of experienced players is the reason, and it is not a trivial problem. With limited practice time, Harbaugh's coaches have hard choices to make. They do not believe practice time is best spent installing a few "funky" plays, given our current personnel. You can do more of that with veteran skill players and QB who are able to internalize their assignments quickly.
I agree with Harbaugh's assessment, although it sucks that it is necessary. We cannot make our players more experienced by closing our eyes and wishing it were so.
Given where we are, I'd actually like to see an MGO Article about how fast young QBs improve with playing time, and what that process looks like. For example, last year Hornibrook was a RS FR and looked a lot like Peters does for us now. In year two, he's able to make enough plays to win games.
Peters gets better each week, but not fast enough to put 24 on Wisconsin.
It's true that pro style offenses take longer for players to learn and really internalize than (say) a Wing-T. However, it's naively wrong to call it "too complicated." Our offense is running with a backup quarterback and about FR/SO at all the key positions. We do not have that critical mass of upperclassmen skill players required to succeed consistently on offense.
This only means that a pro offense requires a critical mass of upperclassmen (which we do not have), not that FR/SO players can't learn it, or that it's too hard.
So the REAL culprit (wait for it...) is the coaching transition recruiting classes, which were tiny and horrendous. We'd prolly be fine if we had a veteran Damien Harris in pass protection, along with several of the other skill players who would have internalized the offense, but instead decommitted when Hoke got fired.
The best comp for Peppers has always been Troy Polamalu, who was almost unwatchable in his first two years with the Steelers (0 starts as a rookie). It can be especially difficult for playmaking types to learn all the angles, and what you can get to.
At Michigan, Peppers had help over the top, so he could flash to the ball--playing right to his talents. He's learning a whole new way to play.
There are those of us on this blog who are not dumbasses about what the constitution says or does not say. If you wish to keep the conversations on football, please do not begin your comments with a law lecture.
It is obnoxious.
Also, there are those of us on this blog who are not dumbasses about what the constitution says or does not say. If you wish to keep the conversations on football, please do not begin your comments with a law lecture.
I promise you will see all of these things once Big 10 play starts, and not before. We have this conversation every year, because every year we put away all the exotic elements so they're not on film. We're not even putting our TEs on film (HA!). September is always vanilla pudding. We're busy working out the butterflies.
Last year, we saw an explosion of fancy at the perfect time (October). Wham plays, Peppers in the Wildcat, RB screens all over the place, the Train formation, the OL overloads, reverse handoff draws... am I missing anything? I promise we will see some flag routes to our TEs this year. No butterflies in September for Harbaugh.
Also take a look at Podio. It's a project management software like Basecamp, only much better. Nonprofits can get Enterprise level for free. I've used it at several NPs for years, and it allows you to collaborate not only with board, but also staff and outside contractors.
Podio not only allows you to upload and store resources and files of all types, but connect them to their related projects or initiatives. You can also set up process markers (e.g. under review, complete, etc), so you know the status of given projects. There's facebook style chat logs associated with each project so you can track conversations associated with specific projects, and each member of the project team is notified whenever actions are taken on the jobs. Notably, you can assign (or omit) any board members from specific project teams, controlling access and notifications.
By setting up your board using a project management approach, you can collect all/only relevant documents to streamline workflow.
Podio is incredibly powerful, and free for nonprofits.
Performance matters, but I love the current website (in a nostalgic way). It's a throw-back. MgoBlog just feels old-school, like smashmouth football from a bygone era. Yes, the 1990s.
Yes, do build MgoBlog for the future. But you gotta go back to go forward. Gotta Harbaugh it. Like Bo came back to life, bigger, stronger and crazier.
Please do not make a "RichRod" website. Please do not make a futuristic shitshow like the Maryland clown helmets. Football is for broken noses and bloody teeth.
We trust you completely.
How should we expect OSU to defend Kaiju and other types of Big personnel package plays? Do they stick with a base personnel, or embiggen their DL or DBs?
I should know this, but watching OSU play football is like watching Benny Hinn revivals, except without the joy.
I really enjoyed Blood, Sweat and Chalk by Tim Layden. Each chapter is an overview of one of the great strategy innovations in football, both college and pro. It's got a little history and nostalgia, some X and O type stuff, and lots of cool stories about how coaches came up with big ideas.
Not a "technical," book, it shows the fundamentals of how the West Coast is different from Coryell offenses, and tells the tale of why they came up with the wishbone, the two gapping 3-4, and so forth. Another chapter traces the keys for the Bucaneers dominating Ds back to the 70s Steel Curtain.
Each chapter is really short, so it's great to read in chunks. You can flip around to the football concepts that interest you. A fun chapter shows the origin of RichRod's nambypamby read option ball, and relates it to Pop Warner's early wing T. It's superfun.
If there's Nine, I think you just go with "The Nine." No superlative necessary, because they scare the bejeezus out of you on sight, or even if you heard rumours they are outside somewhere riding around. Maybe you call them "The Nine Riders" or "The Nazgul" if you want to be corny.
Who are the main 2016 recruiting candidates for Brown's SLB, the hybrid-space defender role? Obviously, we need a Pepper cracking apprentice. We lika da Pepper.
Your point is well taken, Mr. Yost - but I don't think it's correct to say we 'struggled' against Wisconsin. We beat them at their own low scoring game. They are a very impressive team and put up tons of yards against some quality defenses (e.g. 339 vs. LSU and 450(!) vs. OSU).
Against Michigan, Wisconsin only had 159 total yards, and their win probability was over 50% for about 30 seconds in the entire game. We had 349 total yards and 11 minutes(!) more possession time.
Every Michigan fan catastrophizes the dreaded 7 point lead into a doomsday scenario (it's in our DNA), but there were only a few fleeting moments in the game when WIsconsin was really in a position to beat us.
Wisconsin's performance against Ohio only validates their quality. We have a whole lot in common with Wisconsin -- a great team with an inexperienced QB-- but Michigan is simply better.
This is why I asked the question. If it's true that we stick with a few basic cadence and snap counts, why are we doing it? I am sure there are good reasons. I had hoped to learn what they are.
Do you think we change up the cadence/snap count more than I have noticed? Or do you think the points I made about the tradeoffs in using them are not an issue?
Even against Colorado our Offense has been very vanilla. This makes it easier for the D to read their keys and attack. Once we get into Big10 play, you'll see Harbaugh insert play designs that give our OL more advantages.
Remember last year? We suddenly began running whams and traps from new formations, and a whole series of inside screens to the RBs and TEs. These play designs create uncertainty on the defensive front, helping the OL win their individual battles while putting pressure on the DBs to defend the run. We just gotta be cool until Big 10 games.
In our offense, which guys will be asked to reach block most often? It looks like Cole is well-suited to reach blocking, based on his skill set. Is that one reason we want him at center?
Defensive stats and efficiency ratings are valuable tools, but they're hardly a silver bullet for evaluating a coach's ability. Brown's supremo 2015 numbers show that his defense performed, and probably support the idea that his defense was sound and well prepared. I'd like ot see other information, for example how many young coaches he worked with who went on to be successful.
We should not immediately fear that he's a mediocre coach based solely on a couple mediocre FEI seasons with lower level programs. FEI tells lies sometimes.
Case in point:
Bill Belichek's Defensive Efficiency rankings with the Patriots are absolutely mediocre:
Yet Belichek is not a mediocre coach. He's a middling spy, perhaps, but there's a couple Super Bowl years on that list.
My point is that Belichek is clearly one of the greatest coaches of all time, and a defensive genius. I'd let him coach Michigan's D.
Efficiency rankings and other statistics do tell you valuable things about a D's performance, and they are good tools to begin evaluating coaches. But they can't be the only measuring stick.
Does anyone know anything else about Brown's coaching background? Here are a few questions that interest me:
I'm excited about Brown, and I also thought Durkin did a fantastic job at Michigan, especially when you consider how different our new approach to D was from the old. We've had a run of fine defenses since Mattison revived the program (way back when).
He is poofing Belichek's shirt backward just by looking at him all meanly. Your average OL has no chance. Yet I am not sure he wins this if Coach engages. Classic Ki battle going on here.
Most offers go out to recruits early in what becomes a long process, a year or even two years, before the committing season. For many players, it begins a process of getting familiar with a program (or not). It's a bit like asking a girl out on a date. She might express no interest, and you might decide not to pursue it.
Of course, grey areas emerge if lots of players are interested and some emerge as better talents than others. Even more like dating.
Can anyone do some fun speculation on Connor Murphy for me? I don't understand his recruitment at all. He's a top 250 DE, who is 6'7 and rangy.
Just stand him on the edge of your defense with colorful mittens. He'll kill the namby-pamby screen game, and he can reach both the QB and the RB on an option, just by stretching out a little. Like Mr. Fantastic, except with Human Torch hair. Sounds like fun.
There's Hardly any buzz about Murphy, and ony a few Crystal Balls. Pundits will put in a crystal ball for ACHU if a kid sneezes. He's connected to big schools like Oregon, USC and Stanford, along with Michigan, but he's just now starting to take any visits. He's not going to Michigan till January, even though Harbaugh was his babysitter.
Maybe it's true that UM is looking at a numbers crunch, but damn I'd love to have a long edge player and would take him in a second over another kicker (pardon me, Mr. Nordin).
Is it because he's from AZ, and no reporters are there? No competition? Is it the company he keeps?
One college I visited had a requirement that you keep the door open in a dorm room if guys and girls were inside together. They would prop it open with a shoe.
They said you could be expelled for violating that rule.
I can see how that sort of lifestyle would make you a little chippy.
Are all of the BYU players Mormon, or just some of them? It would be even tougher to live in that environment if you aren't Mormon. Whoa Nellie.
Many of the top ranked recruits have not yet committed, and that will shake up this board. I'll wager that you'll see a few changes after signing day, when a few of the big dog teams reel in the last of the 5 stars.
Hopefully, Mattison will add Gary and Bush, keeping him high on the list.
Interesting point. You're right he's not a traditional 4-3 DE. However, I think Glasgow would be perfect as a DE using 2-gapping technique -- which is not a penetrator but an evil block-occupying monster. We could play Mone at the Nose, and slide Glasgow over to DE. That would be happy days for keeping your ILB clean, and stopping the run.
It's funny that by saying 3-4, we don't actually know anything more about the kind of D Harbaugh wants to evolve into. I bet it is mostly the same kind of defense Durkin was installing (a multiple front 4-3/3-4), which is similar to what the Ravens run and what Stanford uses. Depending on your personel during a given season, you can emphasize certain schemes over others.
I read recently that Stanford (under Anderson) uses 2-gap principles in their 3-4 only about 25% of the time, and they'll also use a 1-gap 3-4 or an Okie setup. That would not be so much of a change from our current 4-3 under-with-buck setup, given Durkin's intention to become multiple. I bet we bring in a DC who uses the 2-gapping style more than we've done previously, but not as our primary D.
This article about Stanford's 2012 win over Oregon helps clarify some points about the fronts they like to use. Also, it shows how effective it can be against spread offenses... the kind that aggitate our board into such a frenzy. And that Oregon team was once in a generation good.
Of Note: Several recent Michigan DEs have gone to the NFL specifically as 2-gapping 3-4 OLBs, or in the hybrid roles. Lamaar Woodley, Brandon Graham, and Clark.
A 3-4 does not mean you have 4 LBs recruits playing. You still only have 2 or at most 3 LB-ish players. The rest are DEs standing up on the edge.
I completely agree. I am not sold on Malzone, although he looks like a good depth QB to me.
You're hitting on the most interesting issue, in my mind: How does our roster makeup affect Harbaugh's approach to player development for the 2016 and 2017 seasons?
For example, the roster outlook prolly factored into their willingness to play a few of the Freshmen in 2015, such as Newsome and Perry. We had to blood a few guys, so they can be real contributors in 2016-17.
My view is that it's better to play a young guy who's been in the system for a year than an older transfer. Rudock was exceptional for several reasons, the most important being that he came from a pro system at Iowa. A spread QB will take even longer to acclimate, and reduce his value as a 1-year stopgap even further.
It's exciting to imagine a veteran QB transferring in, with experience and all that. But even with a quality guy like Rudock, we saw growing pains as he learned our difficult offense. So it's hardly ideal. Next year, I'm hoping we focus on the development of our own young QBs, so that we get a QB who can start for a couple years and we can end the "who's our QB?" trepidation threads for awhile.
Guys like Gentry and O'Korn will be fully trained in the offense and can at worst keep the seat warm for Peters.
Here's a link to highlights from the 2015 Spring Game, where we got extended looks at Malzone and some Morris. Malzone, even as a month-old freshman, looks like a real QB.
If an extra year could get Butt into the 2nd Round (as opposed to the 3rd), it is probably worth it. Salaries of picks in rounds 1-2 are more likely to get guaranteed money, while usually this isn't the case for 3rd rounders.
Also, there is the "25% Increase Rule" in the CBA, which ties the value of your 2nd contract to what you got in your rookie contract.
It makes sense to think that if Butt gets stronger and improves his inline blocking, he could elevate his status into a legit 2nd rounder, and doing that would be worth big bucks and far more security.
Here's a link to some useful comments from Forbes on the Rookie Salary Scale
What pro TE compares most to Butt? He reminds me of Heath Miller, who is a fine pass catcher without top end speed, who became a great blocker.
The Big 10 needs a home bowl game, where we can tailgate out in the snow. How awesome would it be if we were playing Florida at (say) Lambeau Field, or maybe even Soldier Field?
It could be the DeGiorno Frozen Pizza Bowl at Lambeau Field. Let's see how Florida and Alabama would perform on the Frozen Tundra.
I have grown weary of all the SEC teams playing homegame bowls and then parading their victories as if the conference rules the world.
Isn't it the case that Durkin depends on the Buck DE/LB player in order to run his favored alternatives to the single high look? The type of player we do not yet have?
Michigan lacks the personnel to execute several of Durkin's go-to schemes (cover-3, cloud, buzz, etc), because you need a guy who can set the edge but also cover in space.
This is prolly why we tried to use Ross at Buck sometimes, in hopes he could hold up against the run, as he provided a better coverage option than any of the true DEs we have. It didn't work, so that made our cover-3 options problematical.
In this context (lacking a true Buck in Michigan's transitioning defense), Durkin had no answer. However, it's not valid to say his defensive philosophy doesn't work against the run-spread, or that he can't defend it. We never saw a fully realized version of Durkin's scheme. That we were so solid most of the year anyways, is awesome.
Brian's choice of image recalls Colin Powell's Pottery Barn Rule and the advice he gave to the president before the US invasion of Iraq. He should make this explicit for said contractor. You break it, you buy it.
'You are going to be the proud owner of 25 million [Michigan Fans],' he told the [MGoBlog Drupal Contractor]. 'You will own all their hopes, aspirations, and problems. You'll own it all.'
We should be proud of our D's performance. Even after the game against OSU, M is ranked #4 in total yardage allowed, despite the key injuries we sustained. In one year, Durkin installed an aggressive, attacking style of D and coached guys like Lewis and Peppers into stars. The techniques he was coaching were complete departures from the year before, and several key players (esp. the LBs) are not ideal fits.
Although players like Peppers are going to be good no matter the system, the week-to-week improvement as far as technique and ability to diagnose was obvious when watching games. We had an historic run of 3 straight shutouts, during which we utterly dominated, like Alabama.
Even Alabama, with a roster built for its system and incredible depth, gives up 40 points sometimes. That Durkin got this production out of a transitioning defense is nothing short of amazing.
Michigan has an ascending defense, and Durkin deserves a ton of credit for it.
It is also a wham game. We put the traps in our back pockets the past few weeks, but I hope we bring them back against PSU (because they are so fun).
Does anyone know what kind of blitzes PSU likes to use? Are they an A-gap blitzing team, or do they blitz mostly off the edge?
Maybe we'll see some FBs and H backs lined up behind the guards, to support the interior OL and pressure with counter runs.
via GIPHY
Reese wants to enroll early. But which of the other players would enroll in January?
I thought the same, but you can't fault Indiana for going for the TD. As it turned out, IU gave themselves a great chance to stop us and just couldn't do it, because Rudock went to Harbaugh's Top Gun school. We needed a set of a thousand things to go right, and they all did.
Their tactics result in the opponent scoring on 4th down with 2 seconds left in order to tie.
Michigan play of the year: Rudock becomes Maverick
During heart-attack time, on 3rd and 3 at midfield, Rudock eshews the dinky flare pass and hits Chesson on a 41 yard bomb. Rudock gets the Top Gun music for that.
Are we allowed to use words like that? If I could upvote, I would.
Is anyone else surprised that we're offering new RBs and DLs, given how full our board looks at this point?
Sometimes I do wish Harbaugh didn't antagonize the refs so constantly, though you love to see him fight. This kind of infraction isn't called that often, but we've been warned or penalized on substitution "strategies" in several games (e.g. 12 men in the huddle, congregating at the hash, etc.). It's on film, and I'm sure become a point of emphasis for the refs.
Substitution tactics have become a bit of an irritating strategy nexus in football. This is our version of what Oregon and the hurry-up offenses are doing.
Things are good when we feel sick over 26 points against. During the RichRod nambypamby era, Indiana would put 42 on us, and we were too sick to realize how unholy that was.
Matt Millen is still following the FB. It really messes with him if there's more than one.
It looked to me that the Minn center moved the ball forward a few inches when he took hold of it and settled in for the snap (which is typical, and never called). If you start the replay at a point before Minn comes to the line, you can see him do it. The neutral zone does not move even if the center stretches out the ball a little.
It would be great if we kept Newsome's redshirt, but it's fun to think of what it means for us the rest of the year. We've still got Ohio and a bowl game. Since the loss of LTT, we've been fortunate that no OL have gotten hurt, especially Cole. Happy days if Newsome is now viewed as a reliable backup OT.
Newsome also makes our O harder to prepare for. You can move Cole around (like when we split him wide in our Ghost Peppers, aka wildcat formation), while still having a real LT to block (say) Joey Bosa on the edge.
If you lose Rudock for awhile, this kind of package versatility becomes even more critical. You may be able to use scheme to defeat defenses who stack the box, maintaining some O complexity even with the RS Freshman QB.
I am pleased that Newsome seems capable of backing up Cole, protecting us against catastrophe if Cole gets hurt, while making our O tougher to defend.
Aside: I would love it if one of our Coachy-type contributors would do a post on what it means for a team to be difficult to prepare for due to scheme, and how it affects your practice week. How much harder is it to get a D ready against us, now that we have all those wildcat plays, and the 6 OL package, and the 39 FBs on film? We're a lot different now than under (say) RichRod, where we had the 4 ways Denard could run it.
For my part, I would like to see how Jim Harbaugh would perform at QB if coached by his future self.
Agreed. Going forward, I do think they want to be able to play sound cover-3 while keeping the CBs in man coverage--which requires a speedy LB to play the deep middle. We simply don't have that player right now, and I think this is why we use it as a changeup. I would love to know how frequently Durkin used this coverage at Florida.
If we're able to recruit LBs who can really run, we'll add another dimension to our terrifying pass D.