Big Ten opponents talk Michigan defense from the Wolverine.com
I'm surprised this wasn't posted and part of it is behind the paywall but it's a good read about anonymous opponents and their thoughts on M's 2010 defense.
"The two things I always notice about defenses is if they're rallying to the ball - because then everyone is on the same page - and if they're hitting you hard. They'll really hit you with everything they've got if they're confident their teammates will have their back if they miss. I didn't see Michigan doing either of those things last year.
"That'll be the first thing I look for this year. If they've got five, six, seven guys in on every tackle and when they get to the ball, they're giving you everything you've got - that's when I'll know it's different."
Should be fixed this year.
On U-M's defensive line: "I felt bad for Mike Martin. He was the best defensive lineman in the league last year, for me it wasn't even close, but on that defense he wasn't going to put up numbers and he didn't get any recognition. But poll the guys that played against him and I bet 80 or 90 percent would say he was the best.
Woot. If BWC can produce and M can get some rotation the line should be very effective.
It's an interesting read, sad but all the problems/critiques form M's opponents are fixed or getting fixed which gives great hope for a good 2011 defense.
EDIT: Dagnammit
It's behind the paywall but I found it by going here first:
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/teams/mmk
Then on the right hand side its under the title heading.
• Big Ten opponents talk Michigan defense - Jul 31
MODS: please delete if I'm over the line.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:44 AM ^
Always interested to hear the view of the players on the field...even from other teams
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:42 PM ^
When opposing players, not coaches, are commenting on our poor fundamentals, that shows how far we had fallen on defense. There is simply no reasonable excuse to have such a poorly prepared team. Additionally, these same comments have been validated by our own players whom I feel terrible since they were let down by their staff.
Defensive coaching at LB and in the secondary appeared to be terrible, yes. But key injuries to Woolfolk and Floyd, youth and inexperience had nothing to do with how the defense performed???
Is this some sort of defense for GERG? It's not a very good one. The defense wend from terrible to rock bottom in his 2 year tenure. The scheme itself was terrible. 3 man rushes on every play = lots of time for opposing QBs to pick apart our weak secondary. The things you mentioned contributed, but there is more than enough evidence to suggest that our D was subject to spotty at best coaching.
Injuries account for players who arent on the field. These comments are directed towards the players who ARE on the field, specifically, their lack of aggressive hitting, confidence in each other, and lack of proper fundamentals in technique.
These are things that are more on the coaches than the players, though they aren't blameless.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:48 AM ^
It is behind a paywal
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:00 PM ^
I got most of it looking for the "10 out of 10" story from yahoo.com. I would like to read the rest but that’s behind the paywall.
• Big Ten opponents talk Michigan defense - Jul 31
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:40 PM ^
That is both the most depressing and hopeful article I have ever read.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:43 PM ^
I seen the light at the end of the tunnel at every position and scheme change.
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:52 AM ^
Good stuff if teams have to pick their poison on how to double team with a four man front. Again if BWC blows up and QW can rotate, Roh can rush and RVB can thrive without being doubled. I would love to get Magnus and the coaching posters here to chime in.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:00 PM ^
It's just that it will be the Tackle and TE, vs. what he saw playing the interior (Tackle and Guard)
If Martin can be freed somewhat, and he has to just by virtue of running a 4-3 Under, things should be better.
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:58 PM ^
Definitely agree. I think the front four this year will be very disruptive in the pass rush (well, at least Roh, RVB and MM) and if Campbell is improving as has been reported, he will be able to eat up a lot of space on the defensive line to stuff plays up the middle (as if Martin wasn't doing that already.)
The play of the front four will be key to easing the pressure on the young linebacking corps and the secondary as well. And if RVB and MM are drawing double teams on pass plays, that's one less receiver opposing quarterbacks have as an option. Just need those guys to stay healthy and Will to play ato his capability.
BWC on passing downs. Teams will take care that Martin is covered, and if Roh gets it going early in the year they'll account for him too. But BWC will see a lot of single blocks. It's too much to ask that he become a sack machine, but we can expect what we've seen from him in the past - driving a guard deep into the backfield, then falling down.
On passing plays, this will disrupt a QB's timing and have him turning, taking additional steps, or otherwise rolling out of the the pocket - likely into the waiting arms of MM, RVB, or Roh.
This is possible even if BWC isn't the run stuffer we need him to be, and QW supplants him in the starting role. He can have a very disruptive effect just by pushing the one guy in front of him deep into the backfield. Someone just has to tell him to do that vs. batting the ball down (which he does very well, but only b/c he's stuck at the line not getting penetration).
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:34 PM ^
That's harsh. Hoke/Mattison have a lot of work to do.
Anyone else notice that article is pretty much what everyone here has been discussing for months. I read the article and I didn't find one new insight from the 'opponents'. I'm probably overthinking this, but it seems like anyone who knows about michigan football could have posted this, then used 'opponents' in the title to try to get people to think this is what everyone else thought about us. Anyway, it was an ok article, but nothing great.
It makes me want to dong punch the staff for running the 3-3-5, and running it badly at that. It's one thing that we bitch and moan about GERG, but having opponents knowing that M telegraphed and they only had to D.T. Mike to win...Da fuck.
I like the Wolverine, I'm a subscriber, but these always feel fabricated. The responses basically pander to Michigan fans' suspicions/preconceived notions. I give them 3 fakes out of 5.
My thoughts exactly. It would have been very easy to fabricate this and claim it was anonymous opponents. Ace Williams could have written it, as could have any of us after reading the UFRs.
For at least twenty years, anonymous quotes like this regarding Michigan have all had the same theme: "It all depends on which Michigan team shows up for the game."
It wasn't an issue with RR because there simply wasn't enough talent on the field. Hopefully, Hoke proves to be the motivator he appears to be, and it won't be an issue with this regime, either.
Fascinating. It's always interesting to see how your peers perceive you. For me, this is the kicker:
We went into our meetings and our coaches would say, 'Okay, we're going to do this and then this and then this. And we'll do this at this time.' Most of the time there are a lot of contingencies like, 'If the defense does this and has success then we're going to counter with this.' But it was like they didn't think there was any chance we wouldn't be successful.
Wow. Pretty brutal stuff. Especially the part about not hitting hard and not rallying to the ball. I really hope we get back on track defensively. I can't stand our defense being so poor that opponents can make these comments and be right.
On the upside, some of our young players showed promise. If Avery, Demens and Roh take the next step and our injured secondary comes back hungry we should show vast improvement. The scheme we were running was ridiculous...
I don't trust anonymous quotes.
Writers can simply make them up to fill copy and no one is wise to it.