MGoPodcast 9.6: I Don’t Eat My Friends
1 hour and 6 minutes
[Bryan Fuller]
We Couldn’t Have One Without the Other
We can do this because people support us. You should support them too so they’ll want to do it again next year! The show is presented by UGP & The Bo Store, and if it wasn’t for Rishi and Ryan we’d be talking to ourselves.
Our other sponsors are also key to all of this: HomeSure Lending, Peak Wealth Management, Ann Arbor Elder Law, the Residence Inn Ann Arbor Downtown, the University of Michigan Alumni Association, Michigan Law Grad,Human Element, Lantana Hummus and new this week introducing Ecotelligent Homes
---------------------------------
1. The Offense
starts at 1:00
That’s the O’Korn we remember from Indiana. Right tackle is a massive hole. Think this team needs a receivers coach and needs to adjust better to what it cannot do. Drevno what exactly do you do here moment.
2. The Defense
starts at 27:47
Dominant again: State’s one successful power play was surprising because we never see a normal play work against them. Hurst was mighty. State got just about everything on frippery and luck, which was in abundance. Michigan will be in every game as long as the defense plays like this.
3. Special Teams and Feelingsball
starts at 39:09
Michigan got close to blocking a bunch of punts and got to one of them—first time this year that it looked like a solid special teams win. Maybe go for it on 4th and 2 but when your offense is butt and you’re in a 1950s game that’s fine. Don’t take the ball out of the endzone on kickoffs please.
4. Around the Big Ten with Jamie Mac
starts at 48:20
All bad blowouts. Ferentz decides to coach this week. Barkley had –7 rushing yards in the 3rd quarter. Minnesota-Purdue was probably the most interesting. Is Purdue going to challenge Wisconsin for the West or is that just the Badgers’ birthright still?
---------------------------------
MUSIC:
- “This Night Has Opened My Eyes”—The Smiths
- “Nineteen Years Old”—Muddy Waters
- “Everyday is Like Sunday”—The Smiths
- “Across 110th Street”
THE USUAL LINKS
October 9th, 2017 at 8:25 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 10:25 AM ^
We need to stop giving Harbaugh a free pass on this. This is his 3rd year now, no more excuses that he doesn't have his guys or his system. I think it's time to start talking about how secure his future is here.
October 9th, 2017 at 10:32 AM ^
it really isn't. Who are you going to get man? Give me your list.
I think it may be fair to wonder how long Harbaugh plans on being here, but as long as he chooses to stay, I assure you his future is very secure.
October 9th, 2017 at 10:45 AM ^
I'm not saying Harbaugh should be fired, I'm not saying that. But his track record so far is competent mediocrity and getting destroyed by our rivals (1-4 vs. state and ohio). If he follows up this loss with a loss against the Hoosiers, the knives will be out.
Also, Harbaugh has the same record through his first 31 games as Brady Hoke. Chew on that.
October 9th, 2017 at 11:05 AM ^
Wtf? I don't really see why that is even relevant. Hoke's job was perfectly safe until he face-planted after the 2013 ND win. We had won a BCS bowl, beaten Ohio State and beaten Michigan State. After that he 1) almost lost to Toledo, 2) lost to Rutgers, 3) got blown out by Kansas State in the Whatever Bowl, 4) lost 31-0 at ND, 5) got blown out by Utah while routinely fielding ten man defenses, 6) got blown out by Minnesota while continuing to play a QB who was in the middle of REM sleep, 7) missed a bowl game.
Hoke was fine through his first two seasons. Unless Harbaugh takes an epic nose dive that comparison will be completely irrelevant.
October 9th, 2017 at 10:59 AM ^
Rivalry games so far under Harbaugh:
- got destroyed by defending national champions Ohio State
- lost to MSU on the most insane play in the history of Michigan in the most lopsidedly officiated game in the history of Michigan
- Handily beat a bad MSU team in East Lansing
- lost by a replay official's definition of an inch at Ohio State
- wet fart game
How is that getting destroyed? Also: are you saying that Harbaugh's tragectory is the same as Hoke's? At this point in Hoke's career we were heading into the 27-for-27 game. Unless you're arguing Michigan is going to go 7-13 from now until December 2018, you're cherry-picking records to be an ass. Take your razor-blade filled candy and chew on it yourself before suggesting others try it.
October 9th, 2017 at 11:10 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 11:16 AM ^
is hard to argue with, I will give you that. Losing in front of Fowler and Herbsteet is starting to be a little bit of a Michigan tradition. It would be nice to win an "all eyes on us" kind of game for once.
October 9th, 2017 at 11:30 AM ^
This is what I'm getting at. Lack of focus comes down to coaching. You can make all the excuses for how or why we lost but close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. You are what you record says you are, and right now, that is 1-4 for Harbaugh when the lights are the brightest.
October 9th, 2017 at 2:51 PM ^
A statistically relevant sample is 1,000. If you get to 100 samples you might have something that could be backed up by other evidence.
If Michigan lost all of its close games the same way it might count as some evidence. For example in 2005 Michigan lost so many close games at the end (and non-close ones became so) that you could look at things that might be hurting them down the stretch: is their conditioning worse, or are they leaving players out there too long due to depth problems, etc. Or you might be able to show that a certain coach tends to have weird success in high-leverage situations and gets RPS wins in those situations (for example Greg Mattison kept Michigan in a game vs Northwestern once by winning high-leverage situations with frippery).
But you're still dealing with a small sample size and football games have so much that go into them--in and outside of the control of coaches--that picking out overarching trends is hard. In close games anything can make the difference: officiating, a key injury, a weird bounce, a fumble by a guy who never fumbles, etc. If you're actually trying to prove something, the outcomes are often less important than the larger data sets you get from stats. In many of these games (OSU 2016, MSU 2015) Michigan was vastly statistically more likely to win. On the other hand the Orange Bowl last year should have been a blowout against us, and the Utah game was also much closer than the stats suggest it was, and the Wisconsin game was closer than it should have been.
In the micro nothing in particular stands about about Michigan's close losses under Harbaugh except bad luck. Jerk-offs like to say "you make your own luck" but tautologically randomness is random, and inarguably part of the game of football. Speight didn't fumble a snap all year until he fumbled one against Ohio State. No punter ever did what Blake did until he did it. Amarah Darboh was an all-conference receiver who dropped the game-sealing pass at Iowa. Newsome was set to be Michigan's starting left tackle for 2016-2018 until he had one of the worst injuries in program history. Why do we have more bad luck than other schools? Bad luck.
October 9th, 2017 at 3:32 PM ^
This is a great point and is the crux of the friction between analytics people and non-analytics people. Human beings are nearly universally awful at evaluating statistics in general and randomness in particular. People are so good at identifying patterns that they'll see many that aren't there.
I've heard a good argument that it's actually evoluationary -- finding patterns out of the randomness of the environment was a significant early human survival skill, and it was better to overreact to a pattern that was actually the result of noise than to underreact. Properly evaluating the chance that the noise you heard was a lion to be 0.1% was great 999/1000 times and would sometimes get you killed.
You can see examples of this everywhere, from spending patterns in Congress to gambling to, well, fans' reactions to a highly improbable streak of events. Televised poker is a great example of this, actually -- watch and you'll see. People tend to round 51% to 100% and 49% to 0%.
If you replay this game 100 times, MSU wins about 15. If you replay 2015 100 times, MSU wins about 20 -- that MSU team was much better than this one, but Michigan's 2015 offense was much better also. So, that gives MSU about a 3% chance to win both and a 29% chance to split. Would you rather be the team that had a 3% chance to sweep and did, or the team that had a 68% chance to sweep and didn't? I know what I'd choose.
October 9th, 2017 at 11:34 AM ^
Today's pod won't satisfy the owners of A2 Torch and Pitchfork.
October 9th, 2017 at 10:33 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 10:34 AM ^
Create another new account because his future is completely secure. He's the best we can get. The OL and QB recruiting was terrible before he arrived, and the OL problems were compounded when Newsome went down for nearly two seasons.
October 9th, 2017 at 8:27 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 9:08 AM ^
did not really take it like that. Michigan State showed up, played hard, and avoided the big mistake. That cannot be questioned. They were formidable. However, you can't dismiss that there was an element of flukishness that played into the game. The Bush penalty was really questionable and turned what was going to be a field goal into a touchdown. The long completion in the first half was 100% luck. Really good coverage, ball bounces to the only place it could have gone for a catch to be made. Both times Michigan fumbled it went directly unimpeded into State's hands, and when they muffed a punt it bounced directly back to him when we had like 3 people in the area ready to recover it.
Additionally, we were developing some momentum at about the exact time that the real rain and wind started. The conditions made actual football impossible for about 10 game minutes and those were minutes that we desperately needed. It would have been really helpful if there had actually been lightning (like there was in basically every other part of Michigan) because then the game would have delayed until those conditions had gone.
I think we can give Michigan State credit but also recognize that the ball did not bounce our way on Saturday. We badly needed just one break out of about ten possibilities and did not get one of them.
October 9th, 2017 at 9:15 AM ^
At what point do patterns evolve beyond "flukishness?" This offense has been attrocious all year (pattern). State always finds a way to win or at a minimum intensely compete with Michigan, regardless of talent level (pattern). State was one dropped ball in the 3rd/4th (can't remember exactly when, but it hit him in the numbers for like a 25 yard gain) from putting that game away. 5 turnovers isn't bad luck, it's bad preperation and poor play.
This comment is the classic "we just needed more time" Michigan apologism. Win football games.
October 9th, 2017 at 9:38 AM ^
it isn't homerism, it is simply objective analysis. Sometimes you get the breaks and sometimes you don't, and it matters.
I don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying. I don't know why we seemingly cannot match Michigan State's preparation and performance in this game. I don't have any answers for that. Perhaps Michigan's recruiting focus is a little more national than Michigan State and the game is not as personal for more Michigan players. Perhaps Dantonio literally doesn't prepare for other games on their schedule to focus almost exclusively on Michigan. I don't have the answer for that. I don't disagree that it is a very real thing.
What I am saying is that State made mistakes too but they were not of the back breaking variety, and we did not get away with any mistakes that we made. They all resulted in maximum-negative impact. I'm not making excuses for the team and frankly I don't think it looks like I am. I think we were both unprepared and unlucky. They can both happen at once.
Think about Rocky 3. Yeah, he was slacking and Lang was probably going to own him anyway, but did Mick have to die literally during the fight? (Or maybe don't think about that at all because it is a really bad comparison).
October 9th, 2017 at 10:07 AM ^
Agree. That long completion over Watson is an incomplete 9 times out of 10. A lightning strike would have probably won us the game, but so would have running Higdon ten more times in the rain rather than throwing pick after pick.
O'Korn needs more safety valve check-down options. There was on replay on a sack where he avoids the first couple players but as he escaped, every receiver was well down field and covered. Absolutely no short options or any receivers coming back to the ball, coverage sack.
October 9th, 2017 at 10:19 AM ^
Like the pass that Khalid Hill dropped? Man, they really shot themselves in the body parts on Saturday.
October 9th, 2017 at 9:19 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 10:14 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 8:33 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 8:42 AM ^
How about 1 receivers coach and 1 line coach!! I believe the line is mixed up because of 2 line coaches, because apparently the added focus isn't working here!
October 9th, 2017 at 9:10 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 9:14 AM ^
I'm not even mad about the RBs, when you have no line to run behind it's hard to evaluate. It does seem like Chris Evans has regressed a little, but I think we're so used to DeVeon Smith and Mike Hart and even Fitz never fumbling that it pisses us off more when guys do now.
October 9th, 2017 at 9:25 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 9:46 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 10:31 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 9:05 AM ^
I wasn't as impressed. The first half didn't look great, and I can't give them much credit for the second half due to the monsoon. Giving up 4 ypc isn't world beater numbers.
October 9th, 2017 at 9:12 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 9:18 AM ^
Regardless, that final stat line for what should be evaluated as only 3/4s of a game is not super impressive. They were straight up beat on a handful of plays this game. I didn't feel like the Michigan D was forcing its will on State.
October 9th, 2017 at 9:48 AM ^
I mean, if your bar for "good defense" is never getting beaten on a play, then sure they weren't great. But MSU didn't record a first down for over half the game. MSU still tried to run an offense once they were up 14-3; they weren't going to just sit on the lead and bleed the clock. They tried to run their offense and Michigan ate them up. It's fine that you didn't like the outcome, but 4.06 ypp on the day is damn impressive; that's the average ypp of Auburn this season, which is ranked #6 in that category.
October 9th, 2017 at 9:50 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 11:15 AM ^
Everything wrong with this game and you're picking on the defense??? The defense kept M in this game. The D shut MSU down to give the O a chance to score and take the lead. The O had -5- f'ing turnovers, yet M only lost by 4 freaking points and were in it until the end. Any D that can triumph in those situations is amazing. What's the matter with people?
October 9th, 2017 at 9:08 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 9:15 AM ^
Passing game coordinator I think. But I think it's been said that he hasn't been a WR coach before or doesn't have much experience with it at any rate.
October 9th, 2017 at 10:04 AM ^
Drevno also makes $1M a year, FWIW. So our OC effectively makes $2M a year.
Good times.
October 9th, 2017 at 10:13 AM ^
Clemson's two OCs make 500k each and I'd say they are doing a better job than what we've got going for us.
October 9th, 2017 at 9:38 AM ^
Michigan State got basically all the breaks. Speaking of the random flukey ones. Sometimes that happens for the other team or it's more even. Or our team gets most of them. The better team should find their way around those.
We weren't the better team. Proven by the result.
They also neutralized our advantages in basically every area. Their offensive line on the pass blocking front was very disciplined against the blitzes and was far from a shell. It was better than ours in pass blocking and that was a critical aspect of the game. Due to this, their defensive line appeared to get better pressure with the base 4 man rush.
They also took Devin Bush out of the game for the most part. This was the work of an offensive line of underclassmen and low star rating types. I take my hat off to their coaches time and again for how they coach up their line.
One thing I'll say about Dantonio and his teams in this game basically every year: they exploit their advantages big time and he knows which ones the other team needs which are critical to the result. He plans well to neutralize those. He hides his talent weaknesses with sound preparation. He knows it's a 60 minute game and if he's smart, the weaknesses won't amount to much of a factor. At the same time he knew he had the edge at quarterback and he put the game in O'Korn's lap squarely.
I am not from the turnovers are totally random school. I am also not 100% from the turnovers are because of great or poor coaching school either. But they clearly are winning plays and have to be credited to the team which forces them. However they happen. They generally don't happen in perfect conditions where the defense has zero intent to create them.
October 9th, 2017 at 9:54 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 10:18 AM ^
Fumbles have an element of luck, but Isaac had the ball ripped out by a textbook move, and Mckeon's featured a Spartan getting a helmet and all his contact into where the ball was extended. Both were great plays by the defender which greatly increased the odds of a fumble occuring.
October 9th, 2017 at 11:37 AM ^
Getting the ball ripped out isn't luck, but having every damn ball on the ground bounce right to a Spartan when (other than the McKeon fumble I guess) there are Michigan players in the area certainly is crap luck.
October 9th, 2017 at 11:44 AM ^
the McKeon fumble could have easily went out of bounced but instead just hits on the point and dies. That fumble and recovery was officially when I went from "this is a little irritating" to "we are probably going to lose."
October 9th, 2017 at 9:55 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 10:53 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 4:54 PM ^
Also, it's pronounced Bah-tah-ahn. :)
October 9th, 2017 at 9:56 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 10:06 AM ^
October 9th, 2017 at 10:07 AM ^
I will say, the idea that "seeing what you have" with Peters means putting him out in a game during a season where you are 4-1 and ranked #17 in the country is insane to me. The coaches have seen what they have with him in practice for 2 years now. He is apparently the third-best QB on the roster. Sure, if Michigan was 1-4 then so be it. But good lord, watching a guy get murdered on TV isn't better than seeing him in practice just because the rest of us get to join in.
Comments