Can we talk about the offensive line and what this means?

Submitted by wolverine1987 on

When you go through the offensive snowflakes thread you find that 90% of the discussion is around JOK's performance, understandably so. But I have to say that the largest impact this game made on me, beyond the happiness for JOK, was that it appeared to the untrained eye that our o-line is regressing, not progressing. Purdue came into the game with 1.5 sacks- against bad teams, yet there was constant pressure throughout the game. In fact only JOK's feet kept us from disaster a couple of times. If this was Iowa/PSU/OSU fine, you might say those guys are better than our inexperienced guys on the right side. But Purdue objectively has inferior talent on both sides of the ball, and yet: Ulizio continued to get owned. MO was shaky, and the rate of mental busts all over the line looked to me to be the highest so far this year. 

I don't know man, not to debbie downer this win but that was concerning. You guys agree or am I too negative?

charblue.

September 24th, 2017 at 10:41 AM ^

with pass blocking and Speight's sack and injury were directly related to a free blitzer getting no resistance from anyone in the backfield. The reason most of these don't get into the game more is because of this, the failure to complete blocking assignments. The reason other guys play at other positions is because they carry out these assignments and show courage in making blocks downfield.

I mean you always wondered why DeVeon Smith played more or other backs used to play under Lloyd Carr when they weren't necessarily the most productive runners, and the reason is simple: because they blocked and didn't get their qb killed in the process.

coldnjl

September 24th, 2017 at 9:50 AM ^

regressing may be strong....defenses have seen our o-line on tape and can attack accordingly. 

There were some moments where they played well. A key 3rd and long down in the forth saw 5 defenders on 5 olineman and they held up beautifully. I will say that the running backs blitz pickup was abysmal this game. Not sure how much of that needs to be acconted for in your view of regressing, but there were at least a half dozen times where the rb either failed to meaningfully sustain a block or worse, missed the block entirely

AA Forever

September 24th, 2017 at 10:15 AM ^

And he's a fifth year guy with a lot of playing experience.  It wasn't like we were throwing a true freshman out there for his first ever appearance.

And no, the offense may have been fine, but it was not "outstanding" in the second half, by any measure.  Purdue does not have a good defense, and we still had far too many poor plays.

michfan23

September 24th, 2017 at 9:51 AM ^

I think you have right to be concerned about this game and future games on the schedule, but I noticed two things that gave me some confidence.
1. Most of the sacks came when the QB he'd the football too long. JOK had a couple times when he needed to run or throw the ball away. He was a magician at times, but against better teams he needs to make quicker decisions. The line can't give unlimited time against any team, including Purdue.
2. Purdue seemed to send blitzes frequently, which weren't always picked up (concerning), but this did open up tight ends over the middle often. Linebackers blitzed and the middle part of the field was often open.
Concerning at times? Yes. Need to panic? Not yet for me. Maybe I'll be wrong, but blitzes are a risk/reward play. If JOK can make teams pay for blitzing then it bodes well for a young O Line.
My two cents.

jdemille9

September 24th, 2017 at 1:09 PM ^

O'Korn is a 5th year senior who has a great deal of starting experience in college.. No it's not power 5, but he was the AAC freshman of the year in 2013 with over 3,000 yards passing. He's not a first year guy with only spot duty.

My take was that the "two weeks" of first team reps in practice (and a well needed bye) should help him get back up to speed and eliminate some of the mistakes he was making yesterday. Regardless, he still looked A LOT better than Speight has this season.. so I'll take it.

BlowGoo

September 25th, 2017 at 2:16 PM ^

You write that as if opposing defenses are going to be LESS aggressive with O'Korn because he has limited starting experience (though he started at Houston many games).

 

They won't be. They're going to blitz him hard. Whether he likes it or not, he can't hold the ball as long as he did in the Purdue game. Not with this OL. He'll get killed.

LSAClassOf2000

September 24th, 2017 at 11:16 AM ^

While I have my skepticism about the right side of the OL when we get to, say, Penn State, I think this is something that really blew up a few otherwise decent calls yesterday. It looked like the RBs had some trouble on blitzes, and there's something else that bothers me a little frankly as we slide into October. 

Craptain Crunch

September 24th, 2017 at 9:52 AM ^

The o-line and running back protection of the QB is awful. Some of Speights issues weren't necessarily an issue with him but because he had no time due to the O-line or running back missing an assignment. But the we have been witness to a poor O-Line for many years. 

AA Forever

September 24th, 2017 at 9:58 AM ^

And he had far fewer "issues."  Certainly both would have been better with the Oline in better shape, but O'Korn was moving the exact same offense far more effectively than Speight.

charblue.

September 24th, 2017 at 11:02 AM ^

and after rewatching the highlights, it seemed to me that we were running many of the same pass plays that were run against Ohio State, simple drags, rollouts and crossing patterns with some verticals downfield. For example, on third and three with Speight in the game, Michigan ran a play with five tight ends and full backs, in which the Hammering Panda, was the primary receiver, and on the play Speight had to eat the ball and throw it away.

Michigan does a great job of disguising plays by formation and personnel lining up tight and then running wide or setting up for what looks like a run and then running a little off-tackle drag pass off of it.

In any case, it seemed to me that after Speight left, O'Korn was given plays with simple reads and progressions. In the second half, having gotten his feet wet, the play calls got longer on pass plays because crossing routes and verticals downfiled take longer.

Line-blocking should hold for a qb long enough to scan the field so he can make a decision about throwing. I don't know what the expectation is in terms of time, but its the difference between numbers and nano seconds. When you face pressure most of the time it's coming from the defense scheming to get more guys around a block or through a gap than you have prepared to resist them. Unless the qb is moving and looking downfield, poor blocking has put the play and offense at risk.

At times yesterday, the blocking was terrific on both pass and run plays. Evans TD runs were extremely well-blocked and so was Isaac's run. The Oline and qb play are a matter of timing and expectation of play delivery and when one thing goes wrong, it usually wrecks the effectiveness of any play.

bamf16

September 24th, 2017 at 10:10 AM ^

His previous OC experience before Michigan was San Diego. Not that San Diego (State, where Hoke came from) but San Diego.

 

Assuming Drevno continues to be the primary play caller, he's EXACTLY what I loved about high school OCs in my coaching days. Stubborn play-callers who don't recognize their players' abilities and continue to run their preferred theoretical offensive plays & sets.

Michifornia

September 24th, 2017 at 11:28 AM ^

Even with a young line (and we do have some experience as well), schemes can make up for that.  Drevno has seriously shown no ability to coach lineman.  I love and always support our coaches but this has gone on long enough.

I've been a diehard Michigan supporter for 40 years, we've always dominated in the trenches.  These past few years have been really hard to watch.

AA Forever

September 24th, 2017 at 9:54 AM ^

There has been zero player development on the Oline in three years.   On top of poor recruiting, especially at OT.  We're bringing in far too many guys who are projects at best, with little or no hope of being signifcant contributors by anything but default (a la Kugler, who is only starting in his 5th year because we have no one else).  

Without a top-notch offensive line, this team is not going to win championships.  Period.  And when you try to project when that's going to be, it's not pretty.  It's hard to project even a good one next year (let alone a great one) without tons of finger-crossing and "I trust the coaches".  It's even more discouraging when you see a lot of other teams fielding perfectly good offensive lines year-in and year-out with mainly 2 and 3 star talent.  

coldnjl

September 24th, 2017 at 9:59 AM ^

I think this is a little strong....we lose a guy to a possibly career ending injury, lose out on our top commit at LT right before signing day with no time to react, and then Wilson from last year. I think we still have some good pieces moving forward (Bredenson/Onwenu) as well as some prospects who we are looking forward to their development (Steubler, Ruiz, Filigua). The cupburd is far from bare, but we also haven't had everything go right either.

SeattleWolverine

September 24th, 2017 at 11:50 AM ^

Hoke's OL issues are well established. But Harbaugh and Drevno need to take some responsibility here too. Kugler and Cole are the two Hoke guys left but if in year 3 the best we can muster is Bredeson, Onwenu and Ulizio that is not exactly the stellar OL development that we expected. One ok and two below average B1G OL so far. Newsome had promise. 

 

Yep, they are young and there is hope still with the 2017 guys but at this point would anyone say that OL development for the Harbaugh recruits or even the residual Hoke guys has met or exceeded the high expecations? 

 

I mean, people didn't mind Hoke guys like Braden, Kalis and to a lesser extent Magnuson leaving but this line is worse, especially in pass pro. And how does next year look without Cole and Kugler? Maybe Ruiz as a first year guy can match Kugler but LT will be worse in 2018 and you'll get a little bit of improvement from Bredeson, Onwenu (and Ulizio if he is still starting) but it still projects to be a mediocre OL in year 4. 

AA Forever

September 24th, 2017 at 10:37 AM ^

He should have been a 3-4 year quality starter.  But he wasn't.  He is exactly the kind of default starter I was talking about, the kind we seem to be stuck with almost everywhere on the Oline, now and for the forseeable future, because of such poor coaching and player development.

bacon

September 24th, 2017 at 9:57 AM ^

Ulizio got straight up schooled on the sack play that took out Speight. It's bad when your right tackle is tossed aside like that. Also, the fact that that play wasn't reviewed for targeting is total bs