Holed Up In New Hampshire, Or Close Enough Comment Count

Brian

9/22/2013 – Michigan 24, UConn 21 – 4-0

dn02[1]dn28[1]

Detroit News

I watched the UConn game with two diehards who happen to be in town from out of state. I'd spent large chunks of the past decade trying to get one of these guys to come over to watch Michigan games for the same reason he refused to do so: he experienced games on television as an emotional trial to be bested. I'm the same way, but talk only goes so far.

So there's four of us in the room when Devin Gardner takes off up the middle for a sixteen-yard touchdown on third and eleven. Michigan's up seven midway through the first quarter. No one does anything. There's no whooping or even a slight fist pump or a clap. We just stare at the television, internally relieved but marshaling our strength for the road ahead like international meth kingpins on the lamb.

It takes a special kind of paranoia to be petrified about a game like that against a team like that, but it was redeemed in full. The recent history of Michigan football* lends itself towards nuanced discussion of this particular vintage of terror, and this one was spicy and piquant with notes of Denard Robinson's role in 2009 Iowa and 2002 Utah, which ended 10-7 despite the Utah offense scraping together only 200 yards of total offense. The nose was full-bodied, redolent of 2010 Iowa, and 2010 Michigan State, and the first three quarters of 2011 Notre Dame.

The aftertaste was like filling your mouth with iron shavings and walking into a strong magnetic field.

----------------------------------------------

One of the worst things from the worst things column last week was the familiarity of all this: struggles against mediocre competition that throw a wet blanket on your season after Michigan beats Notre Dame and gets all hyped up about it. To that you can add an even darker familiarity now, one that you may have been reminded of when ABC flipped to the end of the Texas-Kansas State game just in time to see Greg Robinson do a little dance of joy.

What is Michigan doing on offense? I don't know. They come in saying they're going to manball it up; they are largely prevented from doing so by Denard Robinson. They do dump the stretch play that had been Michigan's primary way of gaining yards on the ground for five years, when they have David Molk and Patrick Omameh and Michael Schofield on the interior of the line.

Denard's gone, as are Molk and Omameh; Schofield's at right tackle, a spot that's generally less important than those guard spots on stretch plays. So of course now is the moment when Michigan turns to the stretch as their base. They suck at that, unsurprisingly. They haven't run more than five stretch plays per year since Rodriguez left.

You could see the confusion last week, when guys were leaving first level defenders with easy paths to the backfield. Those plays against Akron were shockingly bad. You have a guy between yourself and the center, you deal with him before moving to the second level. Otherwise you die. Whether the issue there was the call or the execution, the underlying symptom is the same one that plagued Michigan's defense during the Rodriguez era: never settling on who you are and being terrible at everything as a natural consequence.

I mean, how insane is it that after two years with an offensive line entirely recruited to run the stretch they install it once Kyle Kalis is the right guard?

This is the second straight year Michigan has one of the worst running games in the country papered over by the fact that its quarterback can scoot for 40 yards without breaking a sweat. Toussaint can't see what's in front of his face sometimes. Neither can the line. While Toussaint showed his ability in open space on his touchdown, Michigan found itself behind the chains far too often against a defense that had just been ripped apart by Maryland. Michigan is looking up at North Texas, Tulane, and Florida Atlantic in TFLs allowed after four games. Michigan is 118th(!!!) of 123 qualifying teams in tackles for loss allowed.

Michigan lacks an identity, and once in a while they come out doing something completely different and disastrous (3-3-5 against Purdue; under center against Iowa). In this one, Gardner's inability to throw straight makes it impossible to judge the playcalling, but more ominous than the already-plenty-ominous dropoff of Michigan's quarterback is the persistent clown show on the offensive line. Any idea that the problems may have been fluky is now gone. This is Michigan, still: looking at the quarterback as the cause of and solution to all problems.

*[For a handy one-sentence review, let's go to the Hoover Street Rag:

Michigan is ALWAYS going to get an opponent's best shot, because if you beat Michigan, your name gets etched in history, next to the Appalachian States, next to the Toledos. 

I am not sure if that is meant with ironic lilt or not. This is Michigan, fergodsakes?]

Highlights

Also here is the bizarre Eminem-flavored opener.

Awards

brady-hoke-epic-double-point_thumb_3[1]Brady Hoke Epic Double Point Of The Week. The only truly good things that happened in this game happened on defense and there was one incredibly critical play that turned the game around. You know what it is already; you know it's about to be featured in the double fist pump, you know that Desmond Morgan is the man who made the play.

Honorable mention: Frank Clark, for sacking people frequently. Blake Countess, for seeming to be good at coverage. Fitzgerald Toussaint, for busting a much needed 35-yard touchdown en route to a 100 yard game that means I no longer have to predict 100 yard games for Fitzgerald Toussaint every week in the game preview.

Epic Double Point Standings.

1.0: Devin Gardner (ND), Jeremy Gallon (ND), Desmond Morgan(UConn)
0.5: Cam Gordon (CMU), Brennen Beyer (CMU)

Brady Hoke Epic Double Fist-Pump Of The Week. Michigan had just failed to convert a fourth and two, looked virtually incapable of driving the field against UConn, and trailed by seven points in the fourth quarter. UConn dropped to pass; Desmond Morgan dropped into a seam route, leap, speared the ball, and returned it to the UConn eleven yard line. One play later it was tied. Huzzah, Desmond Morgan.

Honorable mention: Frank Clark crushes UConn's inept right tackle for a critical sack on UConn's final drive. Gardner actually pitches on a speed option this time.

Epic Double Fist-Pumps Past.

8/31/2013: Dymonte Thomas introduces himself by blocking a punt.
9/7/2013: Jeremy Gallon spins through four Notre Dame defenders for a 61-yard touchdown.
9/14/2013: Michigan does not lose to Akron. Thanks, Thomas Gordon.
9/21/2013: Desmond Morgan's leaping one-handed spear INT saves Michigan's bacon against UConn.

[After the JUMP: PANIC and RUN AROUND SCREAMING.]

Offense

PANIC and RUN AROUND SCREAMING. Seemingly more often than not first down runs have resulted in second and eleven this year. It's one thing if that's Notre Dame. It's entirely another after playing Akron and UConn. We are reaching unacceptably bad levels of play here even if you do have three new starters, all underclass, one a walk-on, on the interior line.

There are offensive lines in much worse shape talent-wise than what Michigan is running out there. There are MAC offensive lines that have gone up against a murderer's row of guarantee-game opponents and come out better. Toussaint does share in some of the TFL responsiiblity, as detailed after Akron. Even 80% of the current rate is awful.

So what to do? While it's not quite as dumb as the guy on Scout($) who suggested Michigan move Frank Clark to SAM, Cam Gordon to WLB, and Jake Ryan to MLB, suggestions that Mike Schofield move back to guard midseason are almost as loopy. Erik Magnuson appears to be the option if that happens. You know, the guy who just got blown up on a QB sneak to help cause a defensive touchdown. Schofield hasn't practiced at guard in two years, and he's going to be better mentally than the current guys? Not unless he is a savant. Meanwhile, here's a 285 pound freshman right tackle. In a word, lolwut.

So it's Chris Bryant or nothing. In that scenario, Glasgow slides over to center and Miller is benched. This has many advantages, like playing guys at places they have practiced and not sacrificing the excellent edge pass protection they do have. Bryant's health will remain an issue until it doesn't, but with the Braden experiment over it's Bryant or a true freshman since Blake Bars is nowhere near ready.

md22[1]

Michigan Daily

Gardner. I think I might talk about turnovers here. Let's see.

Turnovers. Gardner has too many of them. We are now pining for those easy days when Denard Robinson was at quarterback, because Denard Robinson never turned the ball over. Yes. That's the ticket.

In this one:

  1. Interception at Gallon. Entirely on him. Fine decision on a third and six to get a conversion, which a completion likely is. He may have had Funchess open downfield, as some have complained, but that's not always how quarterbacking works. He had multiple open guys and threw to the first one he identified. Fine. Problem was, of course, the fact that it was airmailed. Gardner didn't set his feet because he was getting some pressure up the middle, and while that's suboptimal he had some room to work with that he did not use.
  2. Interception at Chesson. Underthrown and to the inside, allowing the DB to make a play on the ball. Chesson does have to help his QB out there by realizing that the throw is short and slowing down in an attempt to box out the defensive back. It was also a 50-yard throw. Those are hard. I'll probably file this an MA.
  3. Fumble. Not helped by Magnuson getting blown up, but look above: Gardner hardly ever puts the ball away. That's a QB sneak on which Gardner has one hand on the ball, and the fumble Gods strike.

Even more problematic was Gardner's accuracy degrading improbably. It is impossible to believe that Gardner is the same quarterback who stared down a brutal Notre Dame pass rush and lit them up with a horde of NFL throws. Against UConn Gardner throws that were too inaccurate for the wide receiver to bat them skyward counted as good ones. It was brutal to see him miss everything, over and over.

Michigan's best hope here is that's on an injury he was dealing with all game that screwed up his mechanics. Hoke said he was "banged up," FWIW, but I can't imagine him not saying someone was banged up, ever. Gardner was limping late and ABC caught a shot of him getting some sort of massage on his hip when he went over to the sidelines. In this battle between terrifying lack of causality and Gardner being hurt, I'm rooting for team Injury Gardner Gets Over In The Bye Week.

Running a quarterback sneak behind Erik Magnuson. Magnuson is the lightest OL on the roster, and is a redshirt freshman. Why is Michigan folding him inside Lewan instead of Schofield? It makes no sense.

Miller. As always want to wait for UFR before I say anything definitive but I do know he was responsible for at least two pressures directly up the middle, which is bad in the middle of the line. I bet UConn's defensive tackles are pretty good since they return from that elite unit from a year ago, but he's out of chances at this point, I think.

Don't give it to Norfleet. It would be nice if Dennis Norfleet was treated like a slot receiver instead of a rapidly expiring steak when he is inserted in the game. Any time he sees the field right now it's going to be a gimmicky play involving him. As soon as those things get on film they're dead meat.

It is okay to put him on the field and have him, you know, run an out or something. Or just run the ball as Dennis Norfleet runs a bubble or something, if you ever did anything so outlandish as fake a bubble screen in this offense. Ironic that the main reason submitted for not doing such things is that it is insufficiently manball to occupy a guy with screen action when you could be blocking him instead. Michigan can't block for crap.

Anyway. Norfleet's symptomatic of the offense's larger problem where plays exist as small subsets of things that work together instead of a consistent whole.

Toussaint: hello. Fitz had a couple of his best runs of the year late, on the field goal drive. He took a couple of stretch plays to the sideline, took a beat to wait, and then burst through Lewan-provided holes to bail Michigan out of some tough situations. That patience had not been there to date (also it may have gotten him plastered). He also turned about 15 yards into 35 on the speed option touchdown. It was nice to see him in space again, where he's kind of good at football. I wonder if he remembered what it was like to see grass in front of him.

Chesson. A couple of deep targets for Chesson, finally. They do not go so well. He had a step or two on both. On the interception he misjudged it; on the incompletion he also misjudged it, but in the opposite way. Hopefully that last one is just an understandable overreaction to the first issue and not an indication of Darryl Stonum disease, as Seth mentioned on twitter. The coaches had mentioned that Chesson was considerably rawer than Darboh; that is likely what they mean.

Speed option check. Don't run that against Michigan State. Michigan has to have something else they can check to that sees Gardner move from under center to pistol. Also don't run the throwback screen with two WRs stacked to the boundary.

Defense

HAPPY THOUGHTS. Can't ask for much more. Michigan stared down 13 UConn drives, gave up one legit touchdown drive and one drive that resulted in a longish field goal attempt (45 yards); they also let UConn punch it in after the punt fiasco. That's about eleven points ceded since a drive starting at the ten is worth around five points on average. Before the 26 yards UConn gained on fourth and twenty-nine on their last drive they'd acquired 180 yards; even with it they just squeezed over 200.

That is what you're supposed to do to a terrible offense.

Hello, Frank Clark. Ace helpfully noted in the UConn FFFF that if Kevin Friend was out, his backup was a problem:

The offensive line did a terrible job of protecting him, especially after right tackle Kevin Friend exited the game early with a high ankle sprain. His replacement, Xavier Hemingway, was completely overmatched, immediately giving up a sack upon entering the game and allowing at least one more after Friend gamely tried to return (this resulted in, yes, a sack, because high ankle sprains are no joke).

That overmatched tackle got ripped through multiple times by various Wolverines. Amongst them was Frank Clark, who picked up his first two sacks of the year, causing a brief-lived cottage industry of tweets about how Frank Clark read what this space wrote about him last week. (If that is what it takes for Frank Clark to get sacks, I will say he is a bum every week.) Even if that's a backup tackle who's completely overmatched, at this point any sign of life is a positive one, and a critical sack on UConn's final drive is definitely a sign of life.

In general, the pass rush got healthy. Michigan had four sacks overall and several other pressures on which Whitmer had to dump the ball. His inability to find the still-extant holes in the Michigan zone helped, but it also seemed like there were just fewer options for him this week than there had been previously.

Speaking of fourth and twenty nine, what the hell was that? Michigan lined up in press coverage with two deep safeties; various seams were open and Whitmer hit one. All it would have taken was one missed tackle from Jarrod Wilson and the epic self-facepunchings would still be going on. In that situation send four, have four guys 30 yards downfield, and three guys somewhat underneath. It's nuts that the only time Michigan played full on press in this game was fourth and twenty-nine.

Run defense. This game was a good example of how including sacks is pretty misleading when it comes to rushing stats. Officially, Michigan held UConn to 47 yards on 25 carries. Excise four sacks of Whitmer and a kneel-down and that becomes 20 carries for 78 yards, almost four yards an attempt. In sack-adjusted land that is still quite good. It isn't quite what it seemed. I'm still worried about what they'll do against teams that actually try to run the ball after Notre Dame got clobbered by Michigan State.

Goodbye, freshmen. Courtney Avery returned and got almost every snap as the nickelback—third corner. You know what I mean. He got beat over the top on the controversially overturned long UConn touchdown, but only by a step. It required a perfect throw and diving catch; otherwise Avery gets a shot at NOBODY CARES ABOUT FINDING THE BALL trail technique defense. It wasn't as good as Lewis's deep coverage last week; it was better than Taylor's.

I expect Avery will be the guy for the long term out there since Jarrod Wilson hasn't been responsible for a deep completion yet this season. The only long stuff opponents have gotten has been the fly routes right up the sideline. Expect that to be tested all year, but those routes are tough to throw. Better that than wide open posts like the bowl game.

Frustrating that both Lewis and Stribling saw their redshirts burned if this is how it was going to work out, but I don't see a way around it.

Bolden: not getting it? Spielman pinned the first UConn touchdown on Joe Bolden, and I'm pretty sure he's right. Early in the Mattison era the wing of the blogosphere that breaks down plays had a debate about what we were seeing on some coverages when the inside receiver would go vertical. We ended up having Heiko ask Mattison about it and he said that the nickelback had to carry a guy up the seam if he goes vertical. In an empty set that responsibility moves a player further inside, to the linebacker over the #3 receiver*.

Spielman equivocated a bit by mentioning Countess as a guy with that potential responsibility, but I don't think there's any way Countess can be expected to do anything with a guy running a seam route to his inside. There needs to be a guy under him to force the throw back to the safety, and Countess can't get under him. So: that is on Bolden, and is the second straight week that he's busted a coverage to give up a touchdown.

*[IE, the guy furthest inside. Receivers are numbered outside in.]

Miscellaneous

A tribute to Sean McDonough and Chris Spielman. Despite the way that game was going it didn't occur to me to mute them. Generally when things are going that badly I can't stand the announcers and their stupid, stupid minds; with those two guys it didn't even cross my mind. They're the best crew going now.

A reminder about how unbelievably stupid it was to reschedule The Horror. I will feel nothing if it's a rote blowout. If it is like this…

Nope, just hatin' on Jeter. I thought maybe the UConn crowd knew their kicker was 2/7, soon to be 2/8, from beyond 40 yards in his career when they booed as the kid came out on fourth down. Wow, UConn fans are really on top of their special teams issues, I thought. Later McDonough clarified that they put Derek Jeter on the scoreboard.

Here

Best And Worst:

Against Notre Dame, I compared UM’s attack to a stacked Madden offense and wondered if it was the best/most dynamic of the last 15 years.  In the last two games, against two of the worst defenses statistically in the FBS, UM has had 25 meaningful drives and recorded 7 TDs versus 9 TOs, including 2 that were returned for TDs by the opposition.  It is an offense in free-fall, unable to really do anything particularly well outside of letting Devin run for his life or test Jeremy Gallon’s ability to enter inner orbit by throwing at the garden gnome standing on top of his helmet.  I’ll get into more detail about the various faces of the offense below, but this display was actually more disheartening than against Akron simply because the last game felt like it could be chalked up to under-preparedness and/or lackadaisical play; a week later it sure seemed like UM was trying to get yardage and UConn would have none of it.

Inside The Box Score:

ST3's contrarian position of the week
* I think Borges actually called a good game. (/ducks) I think he's 3 for 4 so far this year, with the Akron game being the lone stinker. The problem with the Akron game is that it appeared he couldn't care less what kind of defense they were running. Let's go inside the boxscore on this game and look at the critical third down conversion stat. Michigan was 7 of 17, meanwhile, UCONN was 1 of 11. Let's look at some of the early third downs. On the second drive, we had 3rd and 1, and 3rd and 2. Gardner rushed for the first down on both plays. Later in the drive, on third and 12, Gardner ran again and ended up scoring our first TD. So my point is, Gardner rushing is one of our better (only? well, at least until Touss got untracked) options, and Borges dialed those up on the critical third down. Later in the game, he may have gone to the well once too many times, when we got stopped on 4th and 2, but if Devin had been more aggressive on that run, he would have made it. Then, after the Dileo punt return, with UCONN selling out against the Devin runs, Borges called a very safe pass play to Gallon on 3rd and 4. He had two WRs clear out the area for Gallon, who stopped just past the sticks. We eventually got down to the four, setting up Gibbons for a chip shot FG. Let's not forget that Gardner was 0 for 5 with an INT in the 2nd quarter. Had Borges continued to press the issue, Gardner might not have been able to recover to lead us in the 2nd half. Instead, Borges figured out what run plays were working, got Gardner back into somewhat of a comfort zone, and managed to get us a W in a game where we were -3 in TO margin.

Elsewhere

Hoover Street Rag:

So sure, it's 4-0 that doesn't feel well deserved, but did 2-2 after four games last year feel like what Michigan's team really was either?  You have two weeks to correct the mistakes, to work on the fundamentals, to get back to what made people think you were worthy of the preseason praise.  It's much easier to "forgive" a bad win than a frustrating loss. 

Sap's Decals:

FOREHEAD HELMET TATTOO-GUY – I’ve seen a ton of UM tats, but never have I seen one front and center on someone’s melon:

Head Tat

NICE

Post-game talk radio!

Faux Headset > At least two callers to the WTKA Sunday morning shows complained about Hoke  not wearing a headset.  One guy, I swear, suggested Brady should don the headset “even if there’s nothing coming through.”   God that is beautiful.   They could make one with hollowed-out earpads filled with Gatorade and the mouthpiece could be the straw.

Ira is a saint.

Space Coyote on the Ojemudia/Wormley sack, amongst other things:

Speaking of Wormley, his sack was because he did his job. MO got edge pressure with a nice rip move, and Wormley pressed the pocket, ripped through a double, and the QB stepped right into him. That's what I meant when I talked about someone winning 1v1 (MO) and everyone else doing their job is how you find success (Wormley).

Mattison was really asking Wormley after one set of downs to go to the rip earlier and better. I think that was the big move, the fundamental aspect they were working on with the interior players.

Touch The Banner. Big House Blog. Big House Report. Holdin' The Rope.

Newspaper types. Angelique on Morgan's INT:

“It was simple zone coverage,” Morgan said. “I was dropped back and tried to do as I was coached to do, just read off his eyes and, lo and behold, he threw it that way. I tried to jump up and make a play on it. Once I got the ball in my hands, it took me back to my high school days a little bit, just tried to follow the blockers. I just followed them.”

Baumgardner column. Also on Gardner's pop tarts. Turnovers. Whatever. Everett Cook on Toussaint. Slovin on the upcoming bye week.

Comments

ScruffyTheJanitor

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:32 PM ^

how much more PT did QWash get in this game? Seemed to make a difference on the D-Line (if my impression that he got more PT is correct). Of course, that could also be "UCONN". 

If Glasgow can handle the line calls, I think starting him at C is at least a lateral move and has some upside. Two things I noticed: 1) UConn was lining their NT right on top of Miller, and this was really effective.  2) Some plays the NT would line up over miller and then procede to crash to the side of him (if it was a passing play). Miller would then be funtionally useless, looking behind him for someone to block. 

wolfman81

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^

Interception at Chesson. Underthrown and to the inside, allowing the DB to make a play on the ball. Chesson does have to help his QB out there by realizing that the throw is short and slowing down in an attempt to box out the defensive back. It was also a 50-yard throw. Those are hard. I'll probably file this an MA.

Too bad Chesson isn't Braylon.  But he is a redshirt freshman, so we will forgive him.  I suggest Chesson watch this video and practice high-pointing the football.  Enjoy:

 

[Edit:  Fixed embed.  And it only took two tries.]

Pluto1600

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:37 PM ^

playing close games against teams that are supposed to be patsies hurts because younger players don't get a chance to see the field. hopefully the october big 10 schedule will permit some development time. 

CooperLily21

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:49 PM ^

Agreed and something many forget about.  Yost pointed it out on Twitter last night - these two games were ones where Morris and Green were to and should have gotten a significant number of snaps.  Now they head into the B1G season just as green as we saw them against Central.  That is bad.  Very bad.

dragonchild

September 23rd, 2013 at 3:03 PM ^

We ARE playing the younger players.  It's easy to forget because all our "skill" positions like are upperclassmen, but overall this is a very inexperienced team.

You know how in cupcake games the scoreboard will often show only another 7, 14 points tacked on, or even the other team coming back a little in the second half?  That's when loaded teams start playing their redshirt freshmen to get them some PT.  A hyper-talented squad loaded with underclassmen basically fight the worst FBS teams to a standstill.

That's us for four quarters.

JeepinBen

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:37 PM ^

But c'mon, the sky is not falling. Is this a perfect football team? No where near it. Except that their record is perfect. There are only 6 other top-25 teams who are 4-0. The interior OL has 12 combined starts now. The QB has 9. The defense looks good (if not great) and is getting back their best player soon. There's a bye week to get better and the schedule gives us another month before we play anyone who themselves can be considered "good".

How good is Michigan? We'll see. But right now they're 4-0 and that's a whole lot better than it could have been.

VintageBlue

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:44 PM ^

I'm surprisingly (naively?) an optimist right now too.  Better to be 4-0 and have no illusions about the work to be done than it is to be 4-0 with issues papered over by more comfortable wins against subpar teams.  It's September 23, Michigan plays only three games before November 2nd so there is a huge opportunity for development in all phases before the schedule turns into a meat grinder. 

CooperLily21

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:53 PM ^

You know how I know things were bad?  You already know this, but the only thing I looked forward to after Michigan scored the go-ahead touchdown was hitting the "source" button on my TV remote, firing up the PS3, and knocking out innocent bystanders in the new Grand Theft Auto game.  Not for pure entertainment purposes, for venting frustration purposes.  That is not how it was supposed to be after this (and the last) game.  The sky is not falling, per se, but there sure were a lot of ambulances dispatched to revive unconcious pedestrians!

WolverBean

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:41 PM ^

When it works, it's the "swiss army knife" offense, and you never know what's coming. When it doesn't work, it's "we have no identity on offense."

Of course, one alternative is Rodriguezian: when it works, "we exploit math to put our opponents at a disadvantage, and cycle through interrelated plays to make sure our opponent is always wrong." When it doesn't work, it's "we can't even line up and push our opponent off the ball for 2 yards when we need it."

Another alternative is DeBordian: when it works, "we impose our will on the other team, and push them off the ball when we need yards." When it doesn't, we "refuse to be creative or use scheme to take advantage of defenses, and rely entirely on execution."

I think the bottom line is, if you play well, then the structure of the offense makes you look good. When you play poorly, the structure of the offense makes you look foolish. Which in simpler terms just means "Jimmies and Joes, not X's and O's."

 

M-Wolverine

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:50 PM ^

He gets to do the Saturday night show where those same stupid people are calling in, and they're completely wasted. Lucky Ira.
 

And if Spielman is the best we have going, that's a sad, sad statement on announcers.

gbdub

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:57 PM ^

One thing I haven't heard much about in relation to Gardner was a) the wind, and b) the field condition. It was clearly bad enough to affect the kicking games, could it be to blame for part of Gardner's accuracy issues? Certainly the long balls to Chesson could have been impacted.

Arizona Wolverine

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:00 PM ^

Two things:

1) If Devin plays well, everyone is happy and talking about tweeks that need to be made to the offense while praising the tenacity of the defense.

2) If Devin plays well everyone is happy and talking about tweeks that need to be made to the offense while praising the tenacity of the defense.

In other words, Devin needs to play well and everything else will be minor.

Get rid of the "Backwards Question Mark" move and step up in the pocket when it's folding from the outside. Learn to throw the ball away!

His footwork is horrible. Sadly, we saw with Denard, that often can't be coached out of a player. In panic, motor memory takes over and you do what you know.

Jekyl & Hyde may be what we get this season. Devin may play a great game next time but we'll always be worried that the next game Hyde shows up!

On the good side, he has two weeks to shake it off and get Jekyl back on the field because when he plays well it's fun to watch. He's a good guy and we're all rooting for him.

DY

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:07 PM ^

on the videoboard was the look on his face matched that of every other Michigan fan in attendance and watching the game on TV. Of course when Michigan finally eeked it out, he got to go home with Hannah Davis, so I don't feel too bad for him getting booed by an entire stadium. The look on her face was pretty good too. One of, "god, he's going to be in a bad mood if they lose this game."

charblue.

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:13 PM ^

and playing them straight up is the difference in turnover margin, regardless of whether the Oline did or didn't block well. 

The difference in your quarterback play in those games versus his play against Notre Dame is knowing that you must step up in order to win, and make plays and then making them, regardless of the adversity you face. 

The problem for Michigan right now on both sides of the ball is inexperience regardless of who they are and what they are perceived to be by Michigan fans and outsiders. 

Because so much of college football is about appearance and tradition, the inability to put weak teams away and punish them seems as inherently required as dropping rating points in victory, which is a strange phenomenon, on any level.  

I think winning any game on the road should always be viewed as a positive, no matter how it occurs. And it's not like Michigan has been a powerhouse road warrior during the Hoke administration, barely edging the .500 mark, a point that was mentioned several times during the broadcast Saturday night. 

Here's the other thing about football as pure entertainment in prime time and Saturday in particular.  Michigan-UConn was at least a compelling contest for the audience, period,  even if Michgan fans felt betrayed by a less than convincing outcome. It was still a win, and if you fix what is ailing your team over time, then does it matter that you didn't club these teams to death in the preseason as part of your learning curve? I'm sure MSU would've been been happy with an ugly win in South Bend.  

We get caught up in the name game of college competion which never actually accounts for the competition that actually occurs between rival players with mitigating strengths, ability, motivation, hopes, fears and outlook and interests in, you know, wanting to demonstrate they can play on national TV. Wow, what a concept. 

So, Michigan has issues. And what team doesn't at this time of year. The biggest one is putting the defense constantly on edge and then judging it based on whether it's dominant or not. The defense is fine. 

I think when you only give up a pair of touchdowns, and only one on a legitimate drive, and the other on a play where the offense took advantage of a specialty defensive coverage near the goal line with Chris Wormley dropping off  to cover a back out of the backfield, you are doing pretty good. UConn barely cracked 200 yards in total offense. 

Not sure what you want your defense to do if its getting sacks and then people start rationalizing how they were achieved, as if the competition isn't worthy enough, because this is Michigan fergodsakes. And if you are Michigan you should only achieve against top notch kids or it doesn't matter. I just think that is ridiculous.

 

Stop turning the ball over. Make some plays on special teams and give your offense a chance for a few easy scores near the goal line. How about that as a recipe for a blowout, instead of the defense constantly being asked to defend sudden change and make no mistakes, period, or else. That is the difference between crushing Akron and UConn and playing them straight up. Quit turning the damn ball over. 

When you win two games after the turnover margin was 8-3 against you at home and on the road, you are doing something right, because that should never happen. Look at it from that standpoint, and then judge the results. 

cjpops

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:20 PM ^

More misuse of talent and lack of creativity on offense. I just don't get it.

"Don't give it to Norfleet. It would be nice if Dennis Norfleet was treated like a slot receiver instead of a rapidly expiring steak when he is inserted in the game. Any time he sees the field right now it's going to be a gimmicky play involving him. As soon as those things get on film they're dead meat.

It is okay to put him on the field and have him, you know, run an out or something. Or just run the ball as Dennis Norfleet runs a bubble or something, if you ever did anything so outlandish as fake a bubble screen in this offense. Ironic that the main reason submitted for not doing such things is that it is insufficiently manball to occupy a guy with screen action when you could be blocking him instead. Michigan can't block for crap.

Anyway. Norfleet's symptomatic of the offense's larger problem where plays exist as small subsets of things that work together instead of a consistent whole.\\\ 

Wendyk5

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:19 PM ^

There's no reason to think that Devin, skill-wise, just lost everything he's been working on the past three or four, or more, years. I believe it's completely mental with him.  My son has a similar mentality. He's a pitcher. Once he walks a couple of guys, especially in playoff games, he loses his confidence completely. It's like he's forgotten that he has the highest strike out percentage on the team. Or how freaking accurate he is. His mind goes into overdrive, and he overthinks everything, tries to aim instead of throw, starts to think about how everyone is counting on him to win the game and he completely forgets that he has a defense behind him. It's really a tough situation. And telling someone to relax and just let the game come doesn't help. At least that's what my son tells me.  

UMgradMSUdad

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:31 PM ^

I think you're exactly right.  And however much I may not want to admit it, Speilman was saying something similar about Gardner's play, especially after the sideline reporter talked about how loose he was, joking around on the sidellines.

I think it's mostly mental with the Oline as well.

MidwesternSpeed

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:47 PM ^

Chesson is not yet a significant outside threat.  Why don't the coaches line up Funchess and/or Butt as a wide out especially in the red zone?  New Orleans does that with Jimmy Graham and it seems to work pretty well.  Both guys are huge and unguardable by most college defensive backs.  

His Dudeness

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:48 PM ^

Strange season.

I went into the ND more confident than I had been in at least 5 years and we won. Then Akron happened and I thought "these are kids, kids get ahead of themselves sometimes. Thank goodness we got out with a win." Then UCONN happened and all I can think is "We just aren't a good football team." Then I look at the record and we haven't lost...

Strange season indeed.

I'm not really sure what we can do about the interior line at this point. Juggling guys isn't going to help much heading into the B1G season. I think that is pretty much the crux of the weakness of this team. DG doesn't have more than a second before he has guys (Akron/UCONN guys at that) in his face collapsing the pocket.

I'm not really looking forward to games against "quality B1G" teams.

mfan_in_ohio

September 23rd, 2013 at 3:27 PM ^

I have a feeling that Funchess will grade out badly in the UFR.  I don't know how much he played in the second half, but it looked like mostly Williams and Butt, and the stretch plays suddenly made it past the LOS a lot more often.  A TE that can't block is just a big, slow receiver, and I think we might see a lot less of Funchess and a lot more of  Butt moving forward.

 

Also, I disagree with Brian on Spielman, if just for the line where he said that Michigan wasn't built to run outside.  Well, Chris, we're definitely not built to run inside, so precisely where do you suggest we run?  

dragonchild

September 23rd, 2013 at 4:15 PM ^

Our interior line and TEs aren't ready and our "feature" back is a bumblebee, so we're not really a "pro-style" team yet.  Frankly we could be even worse off now because most of the best players of RichRod's era are gone or moved around.

This was a major topic of preseason.  I advocated using our sure-handed receivers to loosen up the running game but Dileo is underutilized, Darboh got hurt, Funchess can't block and Chesson is raw.  Gallon can't win a game by himself.  So much for my plan.

What's (not) happening to Dileo is criminal.  Both he and Funchess can catch but Dileo can put the defense in more of a bind with his routes than Funchess can pretend to block.  As long as you're trying to put a defender in a bad situation, I'll take a quick slot that's difficult to cover over a TE that can't block.  If the SLB is drawn away from the line (or replaced with a NB) on run plays it's as good as a block and Lewan really shouldn't need help against a DE (at least if it's Akron or UConn).  Dileo almost never drops a pass; Funchess routinely busts his blocking assignments.  The only reason to go with Funchess is because he needs the practice.  Which leads to my next point. . .

The silver lining, if one can call it that, is that for all the talk about respecting the opponent and not hiding anything, I think Borges deliberately called a bad game.  I mean, he ran core package plays but with little regard to situation or scheme early on (like repeatedly calling for zone stretch on 1st and 10).  As such he put the offense in bad positions and seeing if they couldn't execute their way out of trouble.  Poor CMU had no idea what was coming so they had to adjust mid-game, but I think if you swapped CMU and UConn the scores wouldn't be much different.  When they got behind in the 3rd quarter his playcalling was much more reasonable and he called a great game against ND.  Against cupcakes most coaches (especially RichRod) pull out all the stops early; Borges intentionally calls bad plays against weaker opponents to toughen up his offense and I think Dileo's lack of targets is a symptom of that.  Connecticut was more or less what he'd hoped for, as they were able to overcome some fluke turnovers (a tipped INT, the ball hitting the PR's foot) with relative ease.  Akron was far more dangerous because the players were too sloppy to get into any sort of rhythm.

If I'm right we can fault Borges for tinkering too much and too long, but I doubt he intended to get behind 21-7.  Challenging his offense was his goal, not racking up turnovers.  The thing that disturbs me is that what the line lacks in inexperience, they're NOT making up for with sheer power.  CMU and ND were more or less expected; beyond that though I'm concerned.  A line with Lewan and Schofield can't even blow back the likes of Akron and UConn?  That means the interior line isn't just inexperienced; it's downright bad.

snoopblue

September 23rd, 2013 at 4:25 PM ^

The schedule works out perfect for our struggling team. Have a bye week now to work out issues and get three games against 3 middling Big Ten teams, 2/home and 1/road. (Minnesota did look pretty good with their more than capable backup and pretty legit defensive line) Then another bye week to fix anything else and rest before a 5 game stretch against good to great teams.

I've always felt we've had a good coaching staff, but we haven't seen the team struggle like this since Hoke has been here. So, these next few weeks will tell us a lot about the ability of the staff that we have.

Profwoot

September 23rd, 2013 at 5:16 PM ^

Somebody with photoshop skills could replace the football in Devin's hand with a latte and it wouldn't seem too out of place.

I get that holding it in one hand has some distinct advantages for a QB, and Devin is great at faking a throw downfield and getting a bunch of extra yardage because of it. But on a QB sneak, and anytime you're well past the line of scrimmage, there's really no excuse. That's football 101 stuff.

PeteM

September 23rd, 2013 at 6:50 PM ^

I am a long time reader of the site (and am prepared to be mocked for asking) but Brian refers to the INT thrown toward Chesson as a MA. What's MA stand for -- I checked the site's FAQ/about section and didn't see anything.

Yostal

September 23rd, 2013 at 7:31 PM ^

Yes. There are many great things about being a Michigan football fans, but as has been noted, there are very few major upside games for Michigan.  Had Akron or Connecticut won, their programs would have had a signature victory.  We would have seen replays for years, reminders from every corner of the Big Ten and beyond.

It's part of the price of being a Michigan fan, the bar is so impossibly high for what would be memorable and awesome that those changes come few and far between.  When you measure yourself in national titles and Rose Bowl and Big Ten championships, but it's been a while since those things have seemed possible, the fear of the bad is going to outweigh the possibilities of the great.  But that great, when it happens, is so great, it's what allows us to deal with that fear.

EGD

September 23rd, 2013 at 8:42 PM ^

Why is it that when the defense has a bad game (e.g, S. Carolina, Akron), everyone acknowledge the talent deficiencies and say "as soon as we have better players, we'll be terrific," but when the offense has a bad game, so many people say, "Arrgh fire Borges!?" We have two very good coordinators. They aren't perfect, but calling for them to be fired based on a bad half here or a bad playcall there is silly.

socrking

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:01 PM ^

Name one game that we have lost in the last 2 1/2 years that can be attributed to defensive scheme.  I can name 3 from last year alone that we lost because Al Borges doesn't know what he is doing: ND, Nebraska, and  OSU.  His biggest deficiencies are well-documented on this site: 1) he doesn't adapt his game plan to the players he has but rather tries to  get them to do things they cannot do, and 2) his play calling is predictable. 

mgoO

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:24 PM ^

Brian, you're on the money here.

Firstly, the stretch.  My head has sufficiently exploded now.

This staff did everything they could not to run the stretch since they took over.  Still having nightmares about the pin & pull zone?

Beyond that, they didn't run an outside zone one time with Denard.  Not once.  They tried the QB sweep but it was usually slow to develop.

Now all of a sudden the stretch is their pet play and THEY ONLY RUN IT UNDER CENTER!?

Under center, we run the stretch, power, and iso.

From the pistol it's inside zone/belly.

Shotgun we have QB draw and inverted veer and the showed the sprint counter last game.  But I know you'll remark in the UFR...counter to what???

That's our run game.  It's predictable yet discombobulated.  If you're gonna run the stretch why not at least run it a few times a game from the shotgun with a read? 

Where's the arc blocking and anything besides the inside zone from the pistol?

What is our bread and butter?  Basically Devin sometimes being an untackleable killing machine.

P.S. $10 says they try the check to the speed option against MSU and most likely to the boundary.

 

Hannibal.

September 24th, 2013 at 11:14 AM ^

When Hoke took over the program, I was desperately hoping that he would simply keep all of the old offensive staff in place in just focus on the defense.  Instead, he brought his guys with him, and they aren't nearly as good.  Greg Frey, especially, got superb results out of his guys in the three years that he was here.  Calvin McGee was a really good offensive coordinator, and Rod Smith worked wonders with Denard.  Frey, by far, was the most effective offensive line coach that we have had since Jerry Hanlon.  Nobody else was close.  Now we have a guy who appears to be the equivalent of Tony Gibson -- maybe even worse. 

The rationale at the time was that Hoke was a manball coach and so he had to install manball.  But we haven't even installed manball.  The offense is realizing my worst fears when Hoke became the coach -- that we would return to the bad old days of having a shitty running game and reyling on dominant QB and receiver play to win games.  People have warm fuzzies about the Lloyd Carr power running days, but more often than not, Carr's running game was crap.  Between 1996 and 2007, Michigan averaged over 200 ypg rushing only once, and that was 2000.

Imagine that spread offense rushing and passing for 240 yards per game paired with a Greg Mattison-coached defense.  That team goes 12-0 in 2011.  Why couldn't we have this?  It was there for the taking.  RichRod's offenses sucked at ball security, but you can't make the argument that this has gotten better under Hoke.  And since we aren't running manball, you can't make the argument that our offensive scheme has made our defense tougher and more reliable.  Our offense has backpedaled each of the past few years, and it didn't have to be that way.  That is what is so frustrating about it. 

M-Wolverine

September 24th, 2013 at 3:39 PM ^

Rich didn't try to get him to come to Arizona with him. And Calvin Magee is a really good offensive coordinator? Based on what? Has he ever coordinating anything without Rich's hand up his ass so he could make puppet motions? Rich ran the offense.