Warren on GERG (i.e. Better than last year)
For those of you who don't (at least partially) blame Shafer for our horrid defense last year... Maybe Warren can add some insight...
Michigan DBs helped by Robinson's system
August 3, 2009 10:15 AM
Posted by ESPN.com's Adam Rittenberg
As the last line of defense, Michigan's cornerbacks and safeties have a heightened sense of accountability.
There will be times this fall when Donovan Warren or one of his secondary mates either must make a play or watch six points go up on the scoreboard. But first-year defensive coordinator Greg Robinson has crafted a scheme that minimizes the plays when a defensive back gets left alone on an island.
After a season when Michigan's defense often felt deserted, it's a welcome change for Warren.
"Coach Robinson's all about playing to your help and not just playing your game alone," Warren said. "You have to play to your help. That's what defense is all about."
Warren, a true junior who enters his third season as a starter, will be playing in his third defensive scheme this fall. Fortunately, Robinson's system reminds him of the one employed by former coordinator and current Eastern Michigan coach Ron English, who remains very popular with veteran Wolverines defenders.
Like the rest of the team, Michigan's back four struggled last season, finishing ninth in the league in both pass defense (230 ypg) and interceptions (nine). Warren is one of the Big Ten's most-experienced cornerbacks, but he'll be surrounded by youth this fall. Michigan loses corner Morgan Trent and safety Brandon Harrison, and safety Stevie Brown has moved down to linebacker this fall.
"We have a lot of unproven guys and guys that haven't been on the field," Warren said.
If Robinson's system works correctly, Michigan's young players won't be feeling green too often.
"It's using your leverage and knowing where your help is and what guys can do to you in certain situations," Warren said. "Coach Robinson, he breaks it down so much more mentally, so you know what to expect."
we blitzed a lot last year, espically early... till it became very obvious that we couldnt cover the middle of the field...
espically out of the okie look...
August 5th, 2009 at 10:23 AM ^
Therefore, I "blame" him (and,yes, Gene... maybe my opinion is "stupid").I think the coach's (gsimmons85) first name is Greg. I think Gene Simmons is the guy with the big tongue from Kiss.
As a HS DC I know would say, "Jimmy's and Joe's instead of X's and O's".
Really? A high school football coach you know would prefer to put the blame for a team's poor performance on the players as opposed to the coaches? That's shocking!
Truth be told, there is plenty of blame to go around for the crappy play of last year's defense, and certainly plenty of it falls upon the players' shoulders. But this notion that everyone BUT Shafer deserves blame is absurd.
But this notion that everyone BUT Shafer deserves blame is absurd.
Put the torch away, big guy - Strawmen are people too.
I never said Shafer didn't deserve some blame. I'm saying that placing blame on his "schemes" when players can't tackle, are hurt, and run out of position (and have for two coaching staffs) doesn't tell the entire story.
Really? A high school football coach you know would prefer to put the blame for a team's poor performance on the players as opposed to the coaches? That's shocking!
Again, you are wonderful at burning down strawmen of your own creation. Did I say that a high school coach blames his own players? No.
I said that a high school coach I know feels that elite talent will trump scheme any day of the week.
I appreciate you calling me a "big guy." Especially given I'm actually on the smallish side. It's empowering.
You never said that Shafer didn't deserve some blame? If I were you I'd re-read your many many posts in this thread, the gist of which mention the various shortcomings in individual players on the team (many of which are valid), with little to no mention of Shafer's responsiblity in the abomination that was last year's defense (you did say that his hire may have been a mistake because RR didn't trust him; that's not quite the same thing). If you intended to suggest that Shafer was at least partly responsible for the failures of last year's defense, you need to do a better job of articulating yourself.
I said that a high school coach I know feels that elite talent will trump scheme any day of the week.
If that is what you were saying, then it's totally irrelevant to all of your other statements about Shafer's defense. Your posts all suggest that the defense last year was crappy because the players on the field couldn't tackle and simply weren't good. Not once have you said that Shafer was coming up with fantastic schemes that were being "trumped" by elite talent (presumably on the other side of the ball?) that was rendering them useless. If that was the case, I think people would have been a lot less frustrated with Shafer.
If what you intended to say was it doesn't matter how good a coach's scheme is if the players can't execute it, well then you (or your HS coach buddy) need to actually say that.
Me not discussing Shafer's culpability isn't the same thing as arguing that he deserves none.
How is players>>>scheme not relevant to this discussion?
its my saying, if you find fault with it, or what it means, please feel free to adress me, and not chitown..
He didn't identify you. How would I have known to address you directly?
thus the reason for my response, now you can..
Understood. Thanks for identifying yourself.
What I was saying to Chitown with regards to his HS DC friend is that saying "elite talent will trump scheme any day of the week" (which is the statement he attributed to you, although not verbatim) is not the same thing as saying that scheme doesn't matter if the players cannot execute it.
My point is this - I think Shafer deserves as much blame as his players for the poor performance of the defense last year. Neither you nor Chitown appear to be willing to attribute any blame to Shafer.
ever said that NO blame should go to Shafer. He's saying that TOO MUCH of it is going to Shafer.
Correct.
the only reason im here, and chitown i assume, is becasue the post is about how much better things will be without shafer...
my point is just that shafer was not the problem..
I don't think he's implying you should have known.
Fair enough. I misunderstood his response.
to visit my site for further explenations of my sayings... i think it was one of my first posts
Btw, just so we're clear, I'm not downvoting any of your (or Chitown's) responses. It seems like most of them have a negative, but they aren't coming from me.
that players make plays...
success goes to players as well as failures..
I appreciate that sentiment and was going to post the same thing when 2000 made it seem like you would blame the players when things didn't go well.
It comes down to the players making plays and the coaches putting them in the best position to do so.
I think that the real argument here is a "chicken or egg": did the players' poor play lead to issues or did his poor coaching enhance their poor play?
A neg for that?
No explanatory post? Who is this anonymous deviant? SHOW YOURSELF!
We need to establish some etiquette when it comes to negging people.
EDIT: So it's gonna be like that huh?
Yeah - people should disagree with words. The anonymous neggins is super, super, lame.
but then how would I catch you in the MGoPoints race?
Disclaimer: The MGoPoints race is not to be taken THAT seriously.
August 5th, 2009 at 12:40 AM ^
You and chitown lack top-end MgoPointSpeed.
August 5th, 2009 at 10:30 AM ^
I have good pad level!
August 5th, 2009 at 11:07 AM ^
Inferior hip swivel.
August 5th, 2009 at 11:17 AM ^
the Morgan Trent of MGoBlog posters?
August 5th, 2009 at 10:33 AM ^
the Johnny Sears of MGoPoints.
August 5th, 2009 at 10:54 AM ^
I think it's WolvinLA that has that "high" total.
I think what we probably saw last year were a bunch of coaches who were new to a school and who (in the case of Shafer and everyone else) hadn't worked together before. It sure seems like things just didn't mesh very well, with the Purdue game being the nadir of the whole experiment. Probably everyone involved is better than what they produced last year.
i think that is a pretty good possiblity, good response...
... to what extent you can add further angst toward Shafer or any individual player(s) is obviously arguable.
day,
Merph.
Good, bad, I'm the guy with the butter knife. Rodriguez gets frank about the talent on last year's team:
"It was like taking a butter knife to a gun fight," Rodriguez said.
…ohhhhh crap they're gonna blow up about this media fiasco again…
"And that was not from a talent standpoint, but more from an experience standpoint. As much as we tried to coach and educate them, they were going to be in a tough battle, and we knew that coming in."
…nice save.
defense as well as offense was bad last year, its just going to happen sometimes..
I'm just saying this:
Charles Stewart proved, under two DC's and head coaches, that he wasn't very good.
Stevie Brown, under two DC's and head coaches, has not been very good.
Obi Ezeh, under two DC's and head coaches, has not been very good.
John Thompson proved, under two DC's and head coaches, that he wasn't very good.
Morgant Trent proved, under two DC's and head coaches, that he wasn't very good.
Donovan Warren, by all accounts was injured.
Brandon Graham, under two DC's and two head coaches, showed he was good.
Terrence Taylor, under two DC's and two head coaches, showed he was good.
So, in all of the above situations, what's the commonality? The coaches were different. The actual player was the same. Sometimes, guys aren't elite football college football players. When you have fewer of them, your team is worse. I understand this is blindingly obvious, but some here seem to be missing it.
Yes but you are ignoring the blindingly obvious difference in outcome between the two DCs. One year we went 8-4, the next we went 3-9. That is what we want to help explain (along with offensive breakdowns).
Talent level is a factor, as many here will agree. But so is DC, other coaches, relationships, communication, schemes, etc. I argue simply that the combination of other factors has a much, much greater influence than the talent level of 8 people does.
Yes but you are ignoring the blindingly obvious difference in outcome between the two DCs. One year we went 8-4, the next we went 3-9. That is what we want to help explain.
You want an explanation?
Chad Henne vs. Threet/Sheridan
Hart vs. McGuffie/Minor
Manningham/Arrington vs. Mathews/Odoms
Long vs. Ortmann
Kraus vs. Molk
Boren vs. Mooseman
Crable vs. John Thompson
Jamar Adams/Bradent Englemon vs. Charles Stewart/Stevie Brown
Healthy Warren vs. Cripple Warren
Oh wait - but it's stupid to blame it on the players on the field, right? Why blame it on 10 people when you can blame it on 1? It must be the coach's fault.
I argue simply that the combination of other factors has a much, much greater influence than the talent level of 8 people does.
What has a greater impact on your defense than how good the players on the field are at football?
Why can't you have a disagreement without negging every post?
I honestly don't think you're doing a very good job of getting your point across (and I'm not even disagreeing with you), or are you saying we had 3-9 talent on defense last year?
but he appears to also be pointing out that our offense was not nearly as good in 2008 as it was in 2007, which is beyond debatable.
The offense's inability to avoid three and outs put undue stress on the defense. Combine that with the defense's other problems and you get a 3-9 team.
Yes. I'm saying that putting the blame for 9-4 to 3-9 squarely on the defense, as the poster seems to want to do, requires you to ignore the giant vat of suck our offense was. It also ignores that we took an excellent OLB (Crable), an average LB (Graham), our best safety tandem in years (Adams/Englemon), and our best CB (Warren), and replaced them with a repeatedly benched OLB (Thompson) two repeatedly benched safeties (Stewart, Brown) and hobbled our good CB (Warren). Add in the overwhelming TOP differential they faced, and, yes - you get a shitty defense.
This is what I said: "Yes but you are ignoring the blindingly obvious difference in outcome between the two DCs. One year we went 8-4, the next we went 3-9. That is what we want to help explain (along with offensive breakdowns)."
Try scrolling up and reading between the parentheses. Another great argument. Thanks.
It just seemed odd for you to post, in essence:
"Explain this (explanation for that)."
I thought all along we were taking the - admittedly artificial tack - of looking at the defense separate of the offense. I recognized the necessity of mentioning the offense when speaking of the record.
BEST explanation YET. no SUGARCOAT.
I'm saying that:
1 CB who had repeatedly demonstrated that he's not good (Trent)
+
1 CB who was crippled (Warren)
+
2 LB's who have demonstrated themselves to be not good (Ezeh, Thompson)
+
2 Safeties who have demonstrated themselves to be not good (Brown and Stewart)
=
Bad defense.
and there was no reason to expect the '08 to be better. And then the offense imploded spectacularly. That adds up to 3-9. I'm on board with this explanation. "Communication issues" are things that become important when the talent level is low because making those players marginally better is so important. If there was more talent coming in, Shafer probably survives.
Here is what had so many people upset with our defense last season. One year earlier, with largely the same personnel, it was a functional (and dare I say, effective) unit with the exception of the Oregon debacle. Yes, our 2007 offense on the whole was light years better than the '08 defense, and put the D in fewer tough spots. BUT - there were games in '07, when Mallett was playing or Henne was gimpy, that we had very little offense, and still the D usually kept us in the game. We held PSU to nine points (yes, they had Morelli, but still), Illinois (with Rashard Mendenhall) to 17, MSU (when they had the conference's top offense) to 24, OSU to 14 (yeah, they went into a shell, but no one else held them to so few points). Even against Florida it held up about as well as anyone has facing Tebow at QB.
A year ago at this time, people were talking about us having one of the best defenses in the country. That may have been overexuberant - I do think we underestimated the loss of Adams and Englemon at safety - but I don't think anyone expected us to get shredded like we were. Our talent in the back seven wasn't great by Michigan standards (our front four was terrific), but was it really worse than most other Big Ten teams'? We were at the bottom of the conference. Even some MAC teams (like WMU) did better against common opponents than we did.
I don't think anyone can dispute that the unit underperformed last year. How much of the blame lies at Shafer's feet is debatable, but in the end, he was accountable for its overall performance, just as English and Herrmann were beforehand. Maybe he is, in fact, a really bright mind who just had a bad year. But the fact that RR felt compelled to step in at midseason was an extremely troubling sign, as were the reports that the two of them couldn't get along. In the end I think both Michigan and Shafer are better off parting company. Can anyone disagree with that?
drop off is bigger than you imply i think...
the single biggest reason why the defense was bad last year was becasue of the inability of the players onthe field to make plays...
now, some of htat lies on the coaches, some of it lies on the coaches from the year before... but most of it lies simply on the fact that many times there was an opportunity last year to make a play, that a kid didnt not make...
it wasnt like 2007 where there were no players around to make plays, for most of the year last year, players were in positions to come up and make plays,and didnt get it done..
coaches are the pilots of the plane, but the players are the engines and the wings.... last year we were trying to fly a plane with one wing..
RT @jmblue:
I would propose that the defense played horribly against App State and worse than they should have against the Buckeyes- Beanie's huge run. Not only that, the 07 offense may have been very ineffective at times, but NEVER had the fumblitis that afflicted the 2008 team. Hart, while never a breakaway runner, held on to the ball. This was a great boon to the defense as it rarely put them in the horrible field position that the 2008 defense found itself in.
Second, (or third) you are correct when you wrote that "I do think we underestimated the loss of Adams and Englemon at safety..." but this is a BIG deal. Safeties affect the corners and the LB's and the ability of the front seven to pass rush. If your safeties can't play one-on-one, you can't blitz. If they can't tackle, you can't mix up the run support. The defense is an incredibly inter-linking puzzle.
I remember the 2002 Miami (yes, that Miami) defense that had an incredible amount of talent and solid schemes from Randy Shannon, but individuals were over-running their gaps- they weren't staying in their responsibilities; because of this, that really talented NC-caliber defense was giving up 60/50+yard runs... Just remember how interdependent defense is, and how a defciency in one area will cause failures/ limititations in the rest.
Excuse me? CHeck your assumptions. I have yet to neg you. Now you are just being childish.
There just seemed to be surprising synchronicity between your posts, and my negatives.
If it's not you, it's someone who doesn't have the nuts to actually tell me why what I'm posting is wrong. Apologies to you.
I am not ready to say Ezeh is not any good. I still like his game. Perhaps being flanked by Thompson (a meh at best fifth year senior) and Mouton (getting his first real playing time) led to some overall struggles with the LB corps, but I still have high hopes for Ezeh and Mouton being part of the next good LB group at UM.
We'll see what the new season brings, I guess.