Tuesday Presser Transcript 10-29-13: Al Borges Comment Count

Heiko

What’s the secret to moving the ball against this Michigan State defense?

“Uh. Well, the first thing you have to make sure is you don’t give it to them. Same deal, because they’ve done a great job of feeding off turnovers, either creating opportunities for offense or literally scoring themselves, which is amazing how many times they’ve done that. So that’s the starting point. Take care of the football and minimizing the damage, if in fact there is damage. Making what could be a bad play not into a disaster. That’s number one. Number two is getting your bodies on their bodies, making sure your plays get started, so you give your skill guys a chance to do what they do best, whether it be in the open field or around the line of scrimmage. Those are really key points. If you’re getting hit in the backfield as soon as you hand the ball off, you’re not going anywhere, and they’ve done a lot of that.”

What transfers forward from the Indiana game?

“Just efficient play, you know? Having open receivers, throwing and catching in the passing game, getting all your plays started offensively with your run game. Those types of things. You’re going to have a certain amount of plays during the course of the game that are going to be a little ugly, as much as you like to think that everything’s going to turn out exactly as you planned. Make sure those plays, A, don’t put you in such bad down and distance situations that you’re always fighting the chains, and that you’re not creating an opportunity for their offense by turning it over. That’s what we did on that game as much as anything. We had opportunities and we took them. As our offense becomes more and more efficient and understands more and more what to do, I think you’ll see more and more of that.”

Have you picked up any tendencies from their defense after playing them the past couple years?

“Oh, you study all you can, but he’s going to mix it up to where there’s not going to be a true, ‘Oh here it comes.’ You have to, as an offensive coach, make sure you take care of all the things they could do to you. If you don’t call the perfect play, can we still handle what they’re doing. I learned years ago, ‘What’s the contingency plan?’ If we can still handle what we’re not expecting at times – and again, if it’s not perfect, minimize the damage – then we’ll be okay. You just can’t put yourself in bad situations where they disasters, you know what I mean? They’ve fed off that all year. If we do that, they’ll feed off it against us. We had to be smart with the ball.”

You talked about getting run plays started. How have Erik Magnuson and Kyle Bosch stepped up this week?

“They’re developing. But the test is going to be much greater. There’s really to me not a great deal of carry-over from what we just played to who we’re going to play. This team plays a similar style of front and a similar style of coverage, but it’s much more a sic’em mentality where they’re trying to take everything away – short passes, long passes, as well as the run. It will be a completely different test in a completely different environment.”

Michigan State likes to pressure up the middle. What can you do to help your guards and center?

“Oh it’s a huge test.”

What do you do?

“I’d never tell you, but we always have a plan for it. That’s all I can tell you. We’ll have a plan for it. That said, it is going to test the core of our offensive line?”

Is that an area where Devin needs to be conscientious and not panic?

“Oh yeah. Like I said, minimize damage. If someone does make a mistake, just minimize the damage.”

You’ve talked about the battle at the line of scrimmage. What about the perimeter? Their corners are aggressive. How important is it for your receivers to get free?

“Oh that’s huge. You have to, because there’s going to be some instances where you’re singled up, and you’re going to have to get free. If we’re not able to do that, then we’re going to have to hold the ball longer than we want to, and generally something bad happens after that. It’s a joint effort, you know? Yeah it’s offensive line handling the A-gap blitzes or whatever, it’s the quarterback – it’s everybody involved. To beat a team that’s that good defensively, you need a stellar effort from your entire offense. Not just certain positions, because when a team’s good defensively, it’s because they can exploit a lot of different things. It’s not because they’re good at one thing. We have to play well at every position, play aggressively at every position, and handle the adversity of being on the road and all the things that come with it.”

What does Michigan State do to discourage teams from spreading it out and having to force it back up the middle?

“They don’t change a heck of a lot. If you spread or play tight. They’re going to pressure receivers, try and implement their blitz package and do all that, they’re a little further from the ball, but they’re still thinking the same. They’re going to stop the run and take your wideouts out of the game with their corners.”

Taylor Lewan talked about the physicality of this game. How do you ramp up the physicality without taking penalties?

“Yeah. That’s a delicate balance. You have to be smart, but then you don’t want to go in with the idea that you’re going to get pushed around. This is a figurative street fight. You want to go out there and match and exceed the intensity of your opponent. That’s the only way you’re going to play games like this. These aren’t finesses games, to me. There may be a little finesse here and there, but when push comes to shove, the winner is going to be the guy that’s most physical and won’t back down and still be smart and not throw punches when you might be tempted to throw punches. Whatever. It’s easy to get caught up in that stuff, but that generally doesn’t win football games. That loses football games, to be honest with you. There’s a composure that comes with your emotion that helps you win the game. But you do want to play with some emotion. Not going to erase that. Especially in rivalry games.”

When a game is as physical as this, is that all on the players to take it to them, or is there something you can do as a playcaller that puts them in position to do that?

“Oh yeah. At the end of the day it’s the players. I haven’t hit anybody in 40 years. So it’ll come down to giving them that opportunity, and when they get that opportunity, take advantage of that opportunity. But physicality, particularly offensively, being physical has to be matched with technique. Just coming off trying to kill somebody doesn’t usually work. There has to be technique, there has be fundamental issues that go with your physicality. I think when you do that, you really give yourself a chance.”

How much leeway does Devin have to make changes at the line of scrimmage?

“It’s just like any other game. There will be scenarios when we will. There will be scenarios where we’ll be locked into certain plays. It’s like that every game. It’s not anything different.”

You lead the country in yards per completion. Is that a function of Devin, your recievers, or something else?

“Yes.”

Is it by design?

“It’s everything you said. It’s by design, who we have [catching], and who we have throwing the ball. To a degree that’s the nature of our offense. But we’re not a completely push the ball down the field kind of the team. We still throw the ball underneath the defense a little bit.”

Big plays may determine the game …

“Any game, just like Indiana, it wasn’t any different – some of your bombs have to land. But to depend on that the entire game is a little scary. If you’re just trying to heave the ball over the guy’s head all the time, sometimes it doesn’t work out. You’ll be in second down and longs. But there’s got to be some of that just like there is in every other game.”

Will adjusting to the level of physicality be an issue for Devin Funchess when he switches between tight end and receiver?

“Well it’s good for him. He’s been in tight and he’s been out wide. The physicality shouldn’t bother him any. He’s used to it. He doesn’t really – he’s played more tight end in the box than he has out wide.”

Do you need to worry about Jeremy Gallon?

“No. Jeremy Gallon will show up. I’ll promise you that. He’s exactly the demeanor you want for a game like this.”

Are you pleased with the way practice has gone the last two weeks in terms of intensity and execution?

“Yeah. It’s Michigan State. You can feel that. Kids looking forward to playing the game. And they’re going to compete. I don’t have any doubt about that. They’re going to come out there and compete. With all respect for what they do, we’re going to come out and compete.”

Do you simulate a street fight atmosphere?

“We do our best. Heh heh. Sometimes we literally have them.”

How’s Kyle Bosch doing with that?

“Bosch has no trouble simulating the street fight atmosphere. Heh. Taylor Lewan. That’s easy for them. It comes natural. But you know, you play a team that you know you’re going to have to play that way against, and the message is being sent loud and clear by everybody involved. Usually it’s kind of reflected on how you practice, whether it be hitting after the whistle a little bit. As long as it’s during practice. We can monitor that. We have to be smart when it counts.”

Do you and Mattison throw punches at each other?

“No. No. Are you kidding? We’re a little too old for that. I always tell the guys I have one fight left in me, and I’m not going to use it on Mattison.”

Do you like this?

“Oh yeah. I love it.”

You’re known to be more of a finesse guy.

“I don’t think so. I think it just depends. If you look at my background, there’s years we’ve thrown the ball more, there’s years we’ve run the ball more. It’s all been based on personnel. But at the end of the day, I love mixing it up and I like all the other stuff, too. I said this before. I think good offenses are the perfect mix of finesse and physicality. Not too much of one or the other. But as a competitor, as a human being, I love these games. I love it. This is why I coach. Just personally. And I think all our guys feel that way. I don’t think it’s just me. I don’t think everyone feels that way. These are fun games to play.”

What are you looking for from the tight ends who have to make up for AJ Williams’s absence?

“We have the next guy up. You kind of treat it like he got injured, and you just move on. We had that happen early in the year and he missed a game. This isn’t a completely novel concept. Can’t make too much of that. I feel bad for the kid. He made a mistake. He knows he made a mistake – he made a bad decision, not a mistake. And now he’s paying for it, and we’ll move on from there.”

Will you move Funchess inside more?

“I wouldn’t tell you if I was. Would you tell me [if you were me [then I’d be you, and I’d use your body to get to the top]]?”

No.

“It’s fair to ask. But I’m not going to answer that.”

Comments

Pit2047

October 30th, 2013 at 3:04 AM ^

Defense and Offense are two very different jobs.  On D you can come in like Greg did, install discipline and creative blitz packages and use it to turn a defense around because a lot of defense is instinctual.  Offense is almost the opposite, it is all mental.  OL is the most unique position group on the field. It is extremley hard to predict and harder to play at a high level.  Most other positions talent can carry you to be at least a good player but not on OL.  OL is completely technique driven and you have to know not only your blocking assignments and everyone's that affects you as defensive allignments and motions can change you assignment right before the snap.  You gotta know that stuff backwards to have a chance at being average at the college level.   The guards are lost mentally out there and it shows, there is a reason OL are usually the nerds on the team, it takes a lot to play that position.  That's why we need players executing not "GO SPREAD THAT'll WORK HURR DURR" 

UMFan95

October 30th, 2013 at 8:58 AM ^

Yea, this is another thing I never understood, why continue with the blitz when you have tipped your hand and the offense changed the play.  That seems to me to be a receipe for disaster.  I understand that you didn't coach them the first time this happens in the first game.  But this week 9, you ought to tell your players if they know you are blitzing and they changed to a diferent play, play this base defense instead or something of that sort. It shouldnt be hard but we never do it, we just blitz anyways.

Den-blue

October 30th, 2013 at 12:15 PM ^

"There will be scenarios where we’ll be locked into certain plays."  

There should always be an option out - especially when things are so glaringly obvious as in the PSU game. I also beleive we have plenty of strength and talent on the young offensive line to blow the MSU defense off the line of scrimage. Unfortunately the blocking schemes used so far this year don't play into the "road grader" skills of our young linemen. There are far too many combos and chips that have our line taking two or three steps before they cross the line of scrimage...it's no wonder why there are so many tackles for loss.

Space Coyote

October 29th, 2013 at 7:03 PM ^

It's directed at many of the others that responded to my reply. 

This constant, idiotic, bull shit attitude where about a dozen people look at things Borges says and twist it, act like he's stupid and doesn't know shit, is really, really annoying. Someone the other day bitched about Hoke saying "most teams have 4 base runs and 4 base passes". "Haha, how stupid is that? How much are our coaches out of touch, eh?" Well guess what, most teams have about 4 base runs and 4 base passes.

People on this thread bitching about "we'll lock into some plays". Guess what, every coach at this level will lock into some plays. Why is it stupid for Borges to say, "alright, I don't want my college QB to get into a chess match with one of the best DCs in the country?" Why is it stupid to think Michigan's OC, that has tons of experience, might have a better idea of what's going on? Why is it, that if Borges calls a pass play that has a single high beater to one side and a two high beater to the other, that he needs to have DG have the ability to check out? 

People are bringing PSU nearly three weeks after it happened and still don't understand shit about what happened despite the attempts by some to explain "maybe it wasn't the greatest, but it was far from the worst. Very far from the worst." People keep bringing up "27 for 27" and don't even understand what half of it fucking means, don't understand the game situations that corresponded with it, don't understand that Borges in fact called 14 runs to RBs in the first 54 minutes, which if Michigan weren't trying to eat clock at the end, amounts to a very modest 17 runs in the game.

And then people use a bunch of BS logic. "How many QBs does Borges have in the NFL?" How many has Tressel had? Maybe Pryor? How many does Rich Rod have? Zero? How many does Meyer have? One from his Utah days? What the hell does this even have to do with successful college QBs? But let's bring up how a RS FR, for the first time ever, won the Heisman. Then lets disregard any actual knowledge of anything. Did he check into better plays? Did he run the offense against Alabama? Why are we comparing our QB to maybe the best QB in college football as if that is exactly what Michigan's QB should always be because it's the way it is in your NCAA football game.

But no, it's way too much credit to think an OC that's been in the game has even a functional knowledge of football. I think that the people that think this is his first time seeing a football game since he played Tecmo Bowl as a child are on to something. Oh God he's so fucking stupid that half the posters on here know he's an idiot and see things and understand things he has no idea about.

Honestly, this is getting beyond annoying. The posters here, at least a lot of the outspoken ones, are complete fucking morons that think because they are outspoken they are right. Maybe I should take a break from these boards, from these sites, and let it just degrade into idiocracy. Because I'm sick of every thread even tangentially about Borges turns into this "Hurrr duurrrr Borges dumb, he don't even know that you no can run out of formation not called spread". The wave of stupidity and ignorance mixed with unentitled arrogance that has washed over the board is overbearing. I don't mind debate, I don't mind different opinions, but opinions stated repeatedly time and again without even the effort to have any damn clue what your talking about, and then ignoring people that try to say "wait a second" time and again is exhausting.

Am I done here? Yeah, I think I'm done here.

One Inch Woody…

October 29th, 2013 at 7:10 PM ^

Amen!

Let's hope the players execute better on the road for once! Get all the set-ups working before the knockout punches, instead of failing all the set-up plays and getting destroyed on the knockout punches.

And on defense... I really hope that the "main street" lightbulb went on for Stribling and Lewis or the MSU receivers are going to snatch picks away like candy from a baby. If we can't sack the QB in this game or get TFLs, MSU will get their first downs and kill us in TOP at the very least.

Erik_in_Dayton

October 29th, 2013 at 7:20 PM ^

There will always be a fountain of unreasonableness and negativity on the board, though. I've let it get to me before, but I try to always remember that it's just the nature of the internet, where there is little cost for being loudly and obnoxiously wrong...You seem to me to have done more in the past few weeks to change the group perception of Borges (for some but not all, of course) than I've ever seen any poster do by himself on any issue. You've certainly tempered my frustration and made me question it. It would be a shame to lose you.

InterM

October 30th, 2013 at 2:02 PM ^

If you're measuring your value here by the number of simpleminded posts on either side of a contentious issue, you're setting yourself up to fail.  I'm clearly more down on Borges than SC is, but his posts allow me to see the other side of the argument and provide a better perspective of what Borges might be thinking (understanding that we're all on the outside looking in).  This is a valuable service that I, too, would hate to lose.

DonAZ

October 29th, 2013 at 7:26 PM ^

Holy crap on a cracker ... I loved that rant.  Well done!

Maybe I should take a break from these boards

Please don't.  I suspect you have more fans than you realize.  I learn a lot from your posts.

The wave of stupidity and ignorance mixed with unentitled arrogance that has washed over the board is overbearing.

Don't forget dismissive ad hominem attacks and pointlessly repetitive snarky posts.  Oh, and reflexive contrarianism.  Lots of that bubbling about.

Bravo for your post.  This board member applauds you.

jsquigg

October 29th, 2013 at 7:31 PM ^

If you want to defend the coaches ad nauseum and are comfortable settling for less than the best in on field performance, than so be it.

The reason people still bring up Penn State is because that is the point at which the pattern of stubborn ineptness on offense had reached its boiling point.  It isn't just Penn State.  It's Akron.  It's Connecticut.  It's Ohio State 2012 and South Carolina 2013 and Michigan State 2011 and 2012 and Iowa 2011 and I'm sure I'm missing some.  

Borges is answering questions quite clearly.  If you agree with his answers, so be it, but he continually talks shit about the spread, an offense that is ripping apart the Big 10 in the hands of our biggest rival, who just beat the team we completely shit the bed against by 49.  He just said in this presser that he hasn't hit anyone in 40 years and that the success of the game plan is on the players, de-emphasizing his role in constructing an effective game plan.

Maybe you are sick of the people who complain about it.  I'm fucking sick of watching football games where a coach, who I think is generally a pretty smart guy, has spent more time than anyone else with the players who run his offense, has a pretty successful pool of plays to choose from, and still reverts to the very plays his team is worst at executing.  Al Borges has forgotten more than I will ever know about teaching technique, but his play calling is insane in the literal definition of the word more often than not.

If you want to bitch about people bitching, so be it, but you frequently miss the point and fail to see the coaching failures that happen on the road as a pattern.  Maybe being positive is a coping mechanism for you.  I'm happy for you, because I can't not criticize the coaches for the continuous abortion of talent that is the Michigan offense, only to be treated like a fool when "brilliant" Borges unloads on inferior competition.  I love Michigan football more than any other sport, but my fandom is becoming increasingly jaded.

Ron Utah

October 29th, 2013 at 8:02 PM ^

SC doesn't defend the coaches ad nauseum.  He's pointed out differences of opinion.  He's simply saying that the people who act like Borges is a moron are morons.

It's good to question the coaches; even better to do so with evidence and a cogent argument.  But it's foolish to call Borges an idiot or pretend that his understanding of the game is anything other than top-level.

I have disagreed with some of AB's decisions, but I won't pretend he's an idiot.  There's a big difference.

Moleskyn

October 29th, 2013 at 10:54 PM ^

Open your eyes to the reality of the team. Everyone on our interior OL is either a freshman or starting/playing significant time for the first time in their careers. Outside of Gallon and Dileo, none of our top receivers have been playing football more than 2 years. This team is young and inexperienced. Young and inexperienced teams generally don't do well. You have unrealistic expectations for this team, and that's why you're disappointed.

jsquigg

October 30th, 2013 at 7:30 AM ^

No.  I'm disappointed because people keep rehashing the same excuses to defend Borges at almost a level that the Rodriguez excuse makers couldn't get away with.  There are other coaches in college football who have made more out of less.  We don't have to be an up tempo spread attack to set plays on fire like Borges does, and even if you defend the pro style rushing attack that continually gets stuffed, and even if you ignore the actual data that shows Michigan is a way better rushing team from the gun or pistol, you aren't taking into account the fact that Borges doesn't adjust his style to the players he has.  I find it funny how the Borges defenders are quick to call those who have a differing opinion morons who don't know football or even calling out Brian as an arm chair blogger who doesn't know what he's talking about.  Believe it or not you can attain an extensive knowledge about football without having played it, and Brian's metric system seems pretty fair.  God forbid anyone want Borges to run an offense similar to the style that is shredding college defenses.....

Moleskyn

October 30th, 2013 at 12:30 PM ^

You're disappointed with Borges because people keep defending him? The teams that do "more with less" are usually able to do that with junior and senior-laden teams (see MSU's defense as evidence of that). Experience, especially experience in one system, can mitigate lack of stud players. Give this team a couple of years and they'll start playing up to your expectations. Can you wait that long?

Creedence Tapes

October 30th, 2013 at 2:02 AM ^

I still don't get how you can come away from the Penn State game, where we scored 40 fucking points, thinking Borges was the problem! Mattison's Defense gave up 43 points and somehow Borges was the problem. Guess what, if our defense held Penn State to the same total that Ohio held them to, we would have won 37-14. Hell, if our defense would have just stopped them from scoring a TD with 45 seconds to go and no time outs, we would have won the damn game. 

 

uncleFred

October 29th, 2013 at 8:24 PM ^

I've never played nor coached a single down of organized football. I have learned more from your analysis of the various games, plays and explanations of various packages, than most of what I've read or watched on the field over too many dacades.

I hope that you'll hang around. You provide a thoughful articulate educated balance against the "spread babies" who seem to think that there is exactly one solution to winning football games.

I also want to commend your integrity. Lately you have been one of a few voices who've pushed against the tide on this site. Your attempts to educate the ignorant and restore quality to the debate have been laudable and note worthy. You have my thanks and respect.

somewittyname

October 29th, 2013 at 10:08 PM ^

It's all about execution. Just call the plays you want to be able to run and expect your players to execute perfectly because this is Michigan. Football is a game of establishing your will, so it doesn't matter what the defense is doing. We aren't going to rely on gimmicks. We're going to execute our game plan.

Sincerely,

Al Borges and Brady Hoke

Reader71

October 29th, 2013 at 10:27 PM ^

No, Thank You. Football is not at all about execution. It is only about surprising the other team. Offenses should have either no base plays or the 40. Every play should be dictated to you by the defense. NEVER try to impose your will. No 3rd-and-1 runs, because EVERYONE KNOWS ITS COMING. The problem is that the defense knows that you know that he knows. Because the defense is showing cover two, they will be running cover 3, but they know that you will never run a cover 2 beater against cover 2 because that wouldn't be a surprise, so they will actually not play cover 3. This is a tricky game, where the only rule is to never play against a Sicilian when death is on the line. Sincerely, MGoBlog

TIMMMAAY

October 29th, 2013 at 10:37 PM ^

I have occasionally griped about Borges, but this shit recently is out of control and embarrassing. A day or two ago, I started to type out a similar response as this to the guy who posted the "4 base plays?" comment. I gave up half way in, because I was struggling with how to not be a total dick.

What you said was better. Thanks. 

Reader71

October 29th, 2013 at 8:36 PM ^

Not true. 1995 Oregon. Leads PAC 12 in passing. 1996-2000 UCLA. Turns Cade McNown into All-America and 1st round draft pick. 2004-2007 Auburn. Coaches Jason Campbell, 1st round pick. He has always been a pass-first type of coordinator. He runs man blocking schemes, but he has always been a finesse guy. And he isn't a liar, so when he says some years they pass more and some years they run more, and its based on personnel, not only is he telling the truth, but he's giving a damn good answer. The perfect offense has the ability to do all things well, so as to take advantage of the defenses weaknesses. We don't have the perfect offense, but we have a perfectly good scheme.

Ron Utah

October 30th, 2013 at 12:07 PM ^

You're wrong.  At UCLA, Borges ran the ball more than he passed, rushing 2,235 (56%) times and calling only 1,741 (44%) pass plays.  Just because he had a good QB doesn't mean he was a "pass-first" coordinator.

At Auburn, the only season Jason Campbell was his QB (2004), he ran the ball 64% of the time for 2,435 yards.  That's a lot of smashmouth football.  From 2005-2007 he called runs over 60% of the time.  At Auburn, he was even more run heavy than he was at UCLA, running 2,023 (61%) times and passing just 1,281 (39%) times.

For his career, AB has called 56% runs and 44% passes.  Running the WCO doesn't mean you're pass-first, and doesn't mean you're a finesse coach.  Borges runs a lot and uses deep passes to get chunk yards, and that has been his pattern almost every season.  The only season where he was really pass-heavy was at Oregon when he was coaching under Mike Belotti and executing Belotti's scheme.

There is no doubt he adjusts to the talent and strength of his team (and his head coach), but he's not a finesse coach.