Michigan Monday at O-Zone

Nice point, I'd add that Gordon (almost) always seems to be in place to make the tackle as the last line of defense.

The question has merit, and there are probably a dozen threads asking the same question.  No one disputes that more rushers generally will result in more pressure on the QB and that watching Chappel and other quarterbacks pick apart Michigan while moving slowly downfield is excrutiating. 

What it boils down to (IMO) is a decision by the coaching staff.  Bear with me here, hopefully my explanation works--most teams in most games seem to run offense and defense separately.  In other words, the offense does its best to be effective and score points while the defense tries to shut down the other offense, nothing revolutionary.  Occasionally, teams will go with a "bunker mentality" when seriously overmatched (Tennessee vs Florida last year is a great example) and basically try to seriously limit the number of possessions to shorten the game and maximize the variance.  In other words, a game with, say, seven possessions per team means that single big plays and turnovers should have a greater impact on the aggregate game than a game with eleven possessions per team.  If the overmatched team can get a couple of huge plays in their favor, then they have a better chance of winning.  This requires the offense to seriously slow down the game and play field position, thus having a more integrated game plan between offense, defense, and special teams.  When it works, the score is probably lower and closer than expected, which may give the overmatched team a better chance for a last minute drive to win.

I think Michigan is doing something like that.  The basic assumptions for the staff are that the offense is awesome and can score with just about anyone and that the defense doesn't have the ability to shut anyone down completely.  Both have been true in the first five games.  However, there's one other assumption.  The staff assumes that almost no college quarterback can execute consistently to score enough points with this offense (the integration part) if he's only given 5-10 yard plays all game.  The strategy is to minimize big plays (variance) and expect 1-2 critical mistakes like fumbles and turnovers.  Those, plus the normal drops and some stops here and there are going to put Michigan in a position to win every game--if everything works out. 

Basically, the idea is that Michigan has Denard and can score enough points to beat anyone if the other team isn't given the long touchdowns that have become commonplace over the past two seasons.  Their playing that strategy because the secondary simply cannot man up with anyone and the staff feels the additional space with 6-7 men in zone is too much for this secondary.  What we don't know is what they'll do when facing a team like MSU that can both run and pass effectively and generally doesn't want to play a spread.  You can probably go back to UConn for some of that info, but their QB was so inaccurate that there's no way to tell how effectively a traditional offense will fare.

I hope I articulated my thoughts well enough to make sense, especially because I'm going against the current feeling of the board.