Michigan Iowa thread

Submitted by victors2000 on

Just wanted to start a thread for those of us who weren't too much into the live blog...

Mannix

November 5th, 2011 at 4:12 PM ^

The most dangerous player in college football, apparently, can put some pressure on the edge with only three yards to defend. Sure, they are accounting for him but if I'm covering the shallow route in the end zone, I'm left with "Oh, here comes Denard, uh, go, stay, go, stay, oh crap" defense.

It's a bit easier in "out there" but not so much in the endzone area. Also, DRob is a crappy pocket passer, and I  know you can see that. So, making him make a decision to force balls into double coverage is much worse than getting him on the edge to the wide side of field with only three yards to get.

jmblue

November 5th, 2011 at 4:37 PM ^

Denard's really not a great passer anywhere, if we're being honest.  And I don't think the odds of him running it in were great given that he was obviously Iowa's top concern.  He may have been able to get a receiver open in the endzone by rolling out, but he's had problems completing the pass in those situations. 

I think Borges called those plays with two big concerns in mind:

1.  Being able to run all four plays, if necessary

2.  Not losing yardage.

Throwing from the pocket right after the snap accomplishes both of those.  We threw the ball to receivers who were isolated on a defender.  You can't really complain about that.

There were other moments where I think Borges made poor decisions (the Gardner packages come to mind), but I think he did fine at the end of the game.

mtlcarcajou

November 5th, 2011 at 5:04 PM ^

It was one of the few series Borges got right. We had one TD, one dropped TD, and one CLEAR PI which should have extended it.

Add in the other red zone PI/INT and even without playing very well, we are in position to steal this.

Work in progress (admittedly that is not what I said at the end of the game..)

bo_lives

November 5th, 2011 at 3:39 PM ^

Home-field advantage is truly nothing more than the psychology of refereeing. Refs are more likely to give the home team the benefit of the doubt in order to please the fans.

Anyone else read that Sports Illustrated article from last winter that talked about this? It's actually been studied statisically by several independent groups, and most come to the same conclusion.

Wolverrrrrrroudy

November 7th, 2011 at 6:41 AM ^

I would add that Home Field in Football is more than just the Referree's which I agree with.  It is also the crowd noise.  Perfect example is MSU this year when we couldn't change our silent snap count because they can't hear on the field.

It also is psychology of the players, having a routine that is normal, not traveling. 

 

All these elements can be overcome, but it is a disadvantage.  The statisticians put homefield advantage as a +3 advantage to the home team, but that is really +6 when you consider the swing from the comparison between playing at home versus away.

I can't say that I'm too disappointed in Borges, I hate that the animals come out to attack him when things don't go as planned.  There are a lot of variables in the play calling and the people second guessing are arm-chair quarterbacks who of course are always right.

We were Smith's one elbow down away from an amazing score.  We were Hemingway's catch away from a TD and chance to go to overtime with successful 2point conversion.  We had pass interference that wasn't called, but those would not result in a guaranteed touch down.

All told, we had to score twice, and then get to overtime, and get the win in overtime, so we were a long shot away from winning that game.

What is most disturbing is how unpredictable this all is.  We trounced Minnesota who beat Iowa.  On paper, it doesn't even appear we should have been close with Iowa.  It just goes to show that Any Given Saturday, the players and coaches must come to play and execute, there are going to be unpredicatable bounces of the ball and turns of events. 

There is really no explanation for the Big 10 wins and losses this year.  Looks like anything can happen, which we already know far too well from our loss to Appalacian State.  Sh-T happens, Deal with it, and then time to show what we are made of.

 

 

jcorqian

November 5th, 2011 at 3:43 PM ^

We should have called a rollout run/pass option on the 4th down however.  I totally agree with before, since you can't afford to have the clock run out.

The officials were terrible this game, but let's be honest.  Our offensive play-calling didn't work in our favor.  Edge running wasn't working, drop back passing wasn't working, only running up the tackles where they were weaker was.  We got away from that and had shitty production.  Then we switch back to the spread option (which this offensive skillset is built around) and have two ~80 yard drives at the end when its basically too late.

I get the need for Borges to transition, but why don't we wait till we have the personnel?

RDMB2003

November 5th, 2011 at 4:58 PM ^

 

The refs absolutely need to be reprimanded for their poor performance today but that does not excuse us from the mountain of mistakes, poor decisions and bad play calls.  I thought the defense played pretty well today but the offense was ineffective, out of rhythm most of the day and the play calling was suspect at best.   

The coaches claim to want to utilize the skills of their current players, then why not use the spread shotgun formation early and often to get Denard rolling with some sure throws / read option plays?  Once our QB has some confidence, positive momentum and the defense on their heels we can start to work in the lead draws (I personally don't think lead draws will be very successful against good Big Ten defenses with our current personnel), play action and power game.  

Borges has fallen in love with the Devin formations and it hurt us today.  Denard has earned the opportunity to lead this team, time to get out of the way and put him in more positions to be succesfful using his current skill sets from the QB position. 

Ps. I would have loved to see a run / pass option on 4th & game. 

 

 

mgobrady

November 5th, 2011 at 7:32 PM ^

I know Gardner has not played very well, but I think it might be worth a shot to start Gardner over Denard. 

Hear me out.

1) We need to establish the pass early. 

- Denard simply cannot pass well. Gardner has a better arm and has a better chance of completing passes.

2) By playing Gardner, the defense will not know if Denard is going to throw or run. 

- If you use Denard as a runningback/quarterback/ widereciever, BUT stiil continue to give him some passing opportunites, it might be a better attack

3) Establish Ftiz and STOP RUNNING VINCENT SMITH UP THE MIDDLE

- Fitz is our best back period. Stick with him, and hit V.Smith on the slants or dumps, thats the best use for him

Just some thoughts.

Go Blue!