Midseason Expectations Revamp: Offensive Backfield
QUARTERBACK
[Bryan Fuller]
SEASON PREVIEW TAKE: Some concern generally overridden by Harbaugh's flawless track record as a QB coach and developer:
On one level, "who is the starting quarterback?" is the single most critical question about the 2016 Michigan Wolverines. On another level, eh, it'll be fine.
By the time the preview was published Speight was expected to start, and he has indeed started. The "expectations" section pointed out that Speight had just as much experience in Harbaugh's system as Rudock did even then, so a repeat of Early Rudock was probably not on the cards. On the other hand:
It's probably irrational to believe that the starter will be late-season Rudock. Despite Rudock's early struggles this is a guy who was a solid two-year starter at Iowa prior to his arrival. Speight has about two quarters of on-field experience, and O'Korn's season and a half ended in disaster.
...The end result should be somewhere near last year's outcome: 60% completions, 8 YPA, 2:1 TD-INT. The ride there should be far less turbulent.
I offered some clarification as I projected a new starter would be one of the most efficient QBs in the league: the Big Ten has no quarterbacks.
NUMBERS AT THE HALFWAY MARK: Close to preseason projections. He's at 62%, 7.5 YPA, and an 11-2 TD-INT ratio. The YPA is a bit off the target mark, but Speight's done a good job avoiding interceptions. He's also been fortunate that a number of throws against Wisconsin didn't get picked off. S&P+ has an "expected turnover margin" metric; Michigan is +6 on the season but expected to be +3; I'd imagine most of this is a gap between the number of PBUs the other team has gotten without picking the ball off.
Otherwise, fancystats are oddly enthusiastic, with S&P+ declaring Michigan the #26 passing offense thus far despite peripheral numbers that are mediocre. They do capture Speight's tendency to start slow:
Michigan has a spate of average-or-worse P5 passing defenses coming up (Illinois, MSU, Indiana, and Iowa are all in a band between 46th and 68th in S&P+, with Indiana(!!!) leading the way at 46) along with a good Maryland outfit (that is terrible at run defense, surprise) and the looming monstrosity that is Ohio State. The schedule doesn't uptick until the Game and whatever postseason Michigan arrives at; Speight should reach the end of the regular season with numbers at least equal to his current production.
FEELINGSBALL: It's hard to tell if we're genuinely disappointed in Speight's performance as a redshirt sophomore first-year starter or if we just don't have anything else to complain about. UFRs and PFF suggest the former, however. Speight's shown a couple of nice attributes—he's got excellent pocket presence and will find second and third reads—that are offset by spates of iffy accuracy, especially early.
This certainly doesn't feel like a passing offense on the verge of the top 25 nationally, and Speight stands out as the single biggest fixable problem Michigan has.
UP OR DOWN OR EH: I'd say this is a slight downgrade, because Speight's actually gone slightly backward from a strong start. The trajectory has been flat over the past few games, and he's increasingly unlikely to take off a la Rudock.
RUNNING BACK
[Eric Upchurch]
SEASON PREVIEW TAKE: De'Veon Smith was projected as the main man, flanked by Ty Isaac and Drake Johnson, the two veteran options. Smith was "a good bet to be Michigan's first 1,000 yard back since Fitz Toussaint" after a second half surge in 2015, but I did use "plurality" instead of "majority" when describing his workload.
Ty Isaac was expected to emerge after a rough 2015 largely based on practice hype and Harbaugh press conference pronouncements; I expected him to be the clear #2 and heir apparent. Chris Evans actually got quite a lot of airtime for someone listed as a backup to Jabrill Peppers at the "spread H" position I made up so I could shoehorn Peppers into the RB post, because the practice chatter about him had been nonstop.
Karan Higdon, on the other hand, was shoved in with the freshmen and mostly forgotten about.
NUMBERS AT THE HALFWAY MARK: Drake Johnson's recovery from the forklift thing was apparently exaggerated; he has not played. Smith has gotten the plurality of carries and might have a slight majority of snaps but it's a lot more even than we thought it would be preseason. This is partially because Michigan's been on the friendly end of a lot of blowouts; it is partially because the top four backs are all producing. The four milkmen:
- Smith: 61 carries, 5.5 YPC
- Ty Isaac: 53 carries, 5.5 YPC
- Evans: 48 carries, 8.3(!) YPC
- Higdon: 35 carries, 7.4 YPC
This is, how you say, unsustainable. Higdon in particular has been handed multiple offset draw touchdowns so easy that most readers of this blog could have picked up a first down on them. The fancystats that ignore garbage time have Michigan 21st as a rush offense.
FEELINGSBALL: Along with the linebackers this unit is the most pleasant surprise of the season. Smith has mostly picked up where he left off in the bowl game. There have been a few iffy cuts but those are the exceptions rather than the rule; he seems to have learned to press the hole and put himself in another gap. His pass protection may have fallen off a bit and he fumbled against Rutgers; otherwise he's been close to the best version of himself.
Meanwhile the other three guys are revelations. And yes, three. Since Isaac did little last year and nothing after his fumbles against Maryland this is actually three players bursting onto the scene, not two. And burst they have. Each guy brings a slightly different package of skills to the table. Isaac is huge and can weave from one hole to the next, stiffarming the first DB he meets into a pile of sludge. Evans is lightning quick and will turn five yards into 50 more consistently than other options—he's averaging 10.3(!) yards a play after he gets those first five, which is a bonkers number. Higdon is the best guy for a power play, a shifty guy who runs low to the ground and bounces off tackles.
All of them have looked like capable feature backs. Ty Wheatley's found some traction with his charges this year.
UP OR DOWN OR EH: Major upgrade. Michigan entered the season still a little suspicious of Smith and uncertain if there was anything high-quality behind him. Six games into this season Michigan appears to have four good to very good backs.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:06 PM ^
Define "top tier".
Is Wisconsin a top 5 defense? No.
Is Wisconsin a #10-#15 defense? Yes.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:21 PM ^
Wisconsin's defense is #6 according to fancystats. I'd say that's top tier
October 14th, 2016 at 2:12 PM ^
I think come the end of the season - they'll be between #10-#15 on advanced stats.
October 14th, 2016 at 4:44 PM ^
corrected. We've only faced 1 top tier defense.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:04 PM ^
on your definition of elite. S&P rankings have Wisconsin with the #6 rated defense and PSU with the 14th rated defense. UCF comes in at 41 and CU at 37.
Now those rankings will probably change some but at least according to S&P, UM has faced a couple of pretty solid defenses and two that aren't too bad.
October 15th, 2016 at 8:31 AM ^
Wait, what? PSU is #14? WTH??? They sucked!!!
Is Michigan's offense that good that they can put up 59 on the #14 defense in the land? I had no idea PSU was rated that high. Has to be a statistic outlier somewhere in that equation! I have no doubt UM would lay another 59-10 beating on that team without even breaking a sweat...
October 14th, 2016 at 3:42 PM ^
October 16th, 2016 at 3:46 PM ^
dare you disrepect Rutgers like that.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:05 PM ^
What was your preseason expectation? Remember, this is a former 3* Borges recruit, playing as a RS soph, who had proven nothing last year on the field in limited play and beat out a transfer from Houston who lost his job.
He's not Jake Browning. He wasn't going to be. If you thought otherwise, you were simply fooling yourself.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:13 PM ^
I think that's exactly why I've felt more negative than I should. Reminds me about how I felt about watching last year's rush offense early in the season against Oregon St., UNLV, Maryland, etc.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:13 PM ^
October 14th, 2016 at 10:08 PM ^
October 14th, 2016 at 12:18 PM ^
I think its been interesting that Isaac has been in on short yardage and goal line situations over Smith a fair amount this year.
I also think bye week to work on footwork and a hopefully better weather game against illinois, though their pass rushers might cause some issues, can get Speight going again back to early season deadly accurate on everything short. If he comes off the bye looking the same I think late season boom is unlikely but still think there is a shot here if they can get his footwork back to settled in the pocket after getting two weeks of the line playing together again.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:19 PM ^
Where's the guy who was working on the Higdon flip at his high school for like two years? More thanks coming your way...
October 14th, 2016 at 12:25 PM ^
Don't forget that Rudock stil hadn't hit his stride yet at this point last season. It was on Halloween last year when we played Minnesota, and, before he got knocked out of that game, the group I was with was discussing how confused we were with how disappointing Rudock had been, especially noting his inability to connect on anything downfield. I'm not saying Speight is guaranteed to have the lightbulb go on like it did for Rudock, but, it it had already, Speight would be ahead of the Rudock schedule.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:57 PM ^
Rudock didn't even have summer camp with Harbaugh, who had to de-program the Iowa out of him, and then Rudock had to get down the pace of his teammates (hitting various receivers of various running speeds in stride is HARD). He spent half the season adjusting to Chesson's speed. He blew up because composure and accuracy were never issues for him when healthy, so it was all about getting him up to speed during the season.
Speight's been under Harbaugh's wing for much longer. There's no lack of familiarity with the playbook or the receivers. His flaws are not only unrelated to comfort but invariant of opponent. They're not huge flaws, he's fine overall, but flaws are what defenses will sniff out and relentlessly attack. Wisconsin knew what they wanted Speight to do; got one pick out of it and with luck on their side could've gotten a few more. Every defense from now on will try to squeeze the pocket and force him into those erratic throws he attempts under pressure, because that's how you get Michigan's offense off the field.
So, either the flaws are exaggerated for lack of more glaring ones or they're that problematic because defenses can goad him into a pattern so easily, depending on your point of view. In any case, it's the hurdle he has to clear to go from being a game-manager QB to a playmaking one. And everyone's nervous because a game-manager, while good enough to beat every other opponent on the schedule, won't be enough to beat OSU. And no matter how good Harbaugh is, not every QB is made of playmaker stuff. Only time will tell.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:24 PM ^
I agree that it's a bad comparison, but it's one people insist on making. My point is, if you're going to make that comparison, it's too early to be alarmed with where Speight is at.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:25 PM ^
Rudock may have been in his first year in the system, but he had way more game experience than Speight does. Game experience is very valuable to improvement, so acting like a RS sophomore that has started 6 games can't improve on his flaws is silly.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:45 PM ^
If games are so important, now is when Speight should be learning the fastest. And to your point, his first few quarters of game experience were a very sharp skyward trajectory, getting out those big-game jitters. Real-game experience indeed has made a significant difference. But since week 2 he's been running in place at a time when game experience -- by your logic, if there's logic here at all -- should be making the MOST difference. I mean, if this trend continues, what sort of improvement are you expecting between his 20th and 21st start that shouldn't have happened between his 3rd and 4th?
This isn't to say his room for improvement has stalled completely; this could be more a matter of when, not if. But there is no telling how long this plateau will last. For starters, it's not like he's particularly broken to begin with; the next step is both as much a nice to have as it is tremendously difficult. There's certainly no guarantee he'll make the next leap before the end of the season. It's far more likely to happen over the next offseason. In light of that uncertainty, why is extrapolating off the only data we DO have "silly"? What do you recommend in place of data, logic and analysis? Magical powers?
October 14th, 2016 at 11:14 PM ^
is damage. People are damaged by bad leadership, and it's always harder to repair damage than to build from the ground up.
Damage to human beings is not always measured by data and logic.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:57 PM ^
I think he means learning the playbook is faster than learning how to be a college QB, which means we shouldn't expect the rate of improvement from Speight as we saw with Rudock. To put it another way, Rudock was very much underperforming his ability due to lack of time in the system, Speight is performing at his ability, but that ability can improve over time.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:27 PM ^
I think he has done what has been required. He has demonstrated that he hasn't lost a game because of his play, which shouldn't be overlooked.
I just don't see his game right now as someone who can win a game on his own because of his play.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:36 PM ^
I know I'm being nitpicky, but it's a team game. As you said, what's more important is having a guy who doesn't lose a game on his own. We lost the Utah game last year because of 3 INTs, but even that wasn't completely on Rudock as his frosh WR ran the wrong route at least once. If Speight doesn't make that throw to Darboh against Wisconsin, it's still 7-7 and maybe we head to overtime with a shaky kicker. His last two games have been against a tough Wisconsin defense and during a rain storm related to a major hurricane. Speight is doing just fine. If he hits one more deep ball, we're right at 8 YPA. But when we're scoring 50 ppg and giving up 10, do we really need to be taking those deep shots?
October 14th, 2016 at 12:27 PM ^
I think he has done what has been required. He has demonstrated that he hasn't lost a game because of his play, which shouldn't be overlooked.
I just don't see his game right now as someone who can win a game on his own because of his play.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:30 PM ^
I think comes as much from game viewing as it does from pure stats. His stats aren't bad at all, but when you watch the games you see him short arming easy crossing routes, throwing balls that are even outside a wide openn 'Butt'zone, and looking far too uncomfortable on plays in which he has plenty of time and space. Stats don't show that he could and should have been much better in a few games.
Then again, Michigan is inarguably one of the top 4 teams right now, and only has positions of any real concern at all, QB and Kicker. Speight has the ball a lot more than Allen so he has plenty of opportunity to draw ire.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:33 PM ^
Speight is disappointing only within the framework of assuming Michigan should win the national championship this year. I'm not saying those are irrational expectations, but I think it's important to remember that this is essentially the barometer we're judging him against.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:57 PM ^
We came into the year expecting Speight to be a guy who takes care of the ball and makes the open throws and for the most part he's been that. Only having thrown 2 picks through 6 games is spectacular.
I think the main reason there is so much concern is OSU. If they looked just ok and had a loss or two, we'd probably be fine with Speight's play. But as it stands everybody wants to see more because they assume we'll need excellent QB play to win in Columbus. That may be true, but we'll see.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 14th, 2016 at 1:10 PM ^
I wonder how Speight's numbers compare to other "game manager" QBs who have gone on the win national titles (i.e. Griese, Krenzel, every Alabama QB ever)?
I'm think you're underestimating the Alabama QB quality a bit...
*2015: Jake Coker - #32 QBR, 70.2 rating
2014: Blake Sims - #4 QBR, 84.4 rating
2013: AJ McCarron - #14 QBR, 82.5 rating
*2012: AJ McCarron- #3 QBR, 84.9 rating
*2011: AJ McCarron - #8 QBR, 77.9 rating
2010: Greg McElroy - #12 QBR, 77.8 rating
*2009: Greg McElroy - #17 QBR, 72.1 rating
Speight is currently #28 at 71.1 rating.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:21 PM ^
Statistically he's probably a lot better than Griese, but teams averaging 30-40 ppg are kind of normal these days, whereas '97 Michigan scored 20-30 in an era when that was the norm.
That said, I'd would very eagerly trade this season's gaudy offensive stat's for the 97 team's consistency. They were maddeningly SLUDGEFART to watch at times, but by hook or crook and sometimes special teams, they always eked out 20 points a game, which with one exception* was all the defense ever needed: 27, 38, 21, 37, 23, 28, 23, 24, 34, 26, 20, 21. I can find very few teams in history that pulled that off. This year's offense already hasn't. Yes they should've scored 20 vs. Wisconsin. They didn't.
This isn't to complain, but to convey the premium I place on consistency. A team that never fails to score 20, paired with a defense that never allows that many*, no matter who they played, make for a terrifying combination. It sends a signal that it just doesn't matter what you do or how good you are -- we will score 20, you will not, you will lose. This year's offense has already ranged from 14 to 78, meaning their output is highly opponent-variant. 78 was fun, but it's the floor that makes everyone so nervous about The Game. OSU's defense is a lot closer to Wisconsin than Rutgers.
*The Iowa Tim Dwights scored 24, but half those points were special teams -- return TD, FG and PATs. No offense scored 20 points on '97 Michigan.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:37 PM ^
October 15th, 2016 at 9:13 AM ^
October 14th, 2016 at 12:36 PM ^
What I like about Speight the most is how he is aware enough in the pocket and steps through it and keeps his eyes downfield, that's NFL type stuff right there. It drives me nuts when QB's don't step up through the pocket and Wilton already does that very well.
He has a strong arm and will improve, especially after the bye week.
The RB's have indeed been a wonderful revelation and it seems like the OLine is becoming more cohesive. I see improvement coming from that crew too.
With the way the defense plays, our offense will have many short fields and downhill running in the 2nd half of the season.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:44 PM ^
October 14th, 2016 at 12:46 PM ^
October 14th, 2016 at 12:42 PM ^
October 14th, 2016 at 1:07 PM ^
I could be mistaken, but I don't know of anyone on this board who put absurdly high expectations on Speight. The prevailing sentiment was that Speight would be a game manager who is average at best but could be turned into an above average QB because Harbaugh. If he only did the things we want him to do--make the average throw and don't turn the ball over--we would in no way consider him a Heisman candidate. The concern is that he is not making the average throws right now and he has avoided turnovers because of luck, not because he has avoided risky reads. Fingers crossed that he makes the Rudock leap in the second half--or at the very least, he reaches the Speight ceiling.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:19 PM ^
If he's missing so many "average" throws, how is he ending up with "average" completion percentage and YPA? Maybe your eye calibration for average is off?
October 14th, 2016 at 1:44 PM ^
I'm no advanced metrics guy, but it goes back to what many others have noticed and what Brian mentioned in this post, the stats don't quite tell the whole story of his play. Whether it's yards from infrequent but long completions or luck in not have poorly thrown balls intercepted affecting his stats, the fact remains Speight has often missed what many consider easy throws. How that factors into completion percentage, I have no idea (math hard!), but he is missing a higher percentage of the throws he should make.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:56 PM ^
Define "should" make. In order for Speight to be an "average" QB statistically, while still missing an inordinate number of throws he "should" make, you have to believe that Speight is being presented with (and missing) a much greater number of easy throws compared to the "average" college QB.
But I don't see the throws Speight making as particularly easy - if anything, they are above average difficulty when you factor in the complexity of the Harbaughffense compared to most spread teams, as well as the sometimes dodgy pass pro Speight has gotten this year.
So my theory is that average QBs do miss those throws fairly frequently, but you don't notice because you see highlight reels of everyone else and UFRs of Speight.
October 14th, 2016 at 2:06 PM ^
It looks like you've hit on the crux of our difference of opinion. I think too many of his misses are on easy throws; you believe they are not 'easy' throws. That's fair. I have not problem with that.
October 14th, 2016 at 3:41 PM ^
I don't disagree that Speight misses "easy" throws. I disagree that other average QBs miss "easy" throws much less often.
We seem to agree that 60% completion percentage, give or take, is a reasonable expectation. Speight has hit that mark so far. Yet you assert that Speight misses too many easy throws - in other words, that his completion percentage on easy throws is lower than that of the expected college QB.
In order for both these things to be true (Speight has an average completion percentage AND a below average "easy throw" completion percentage) one of the following must be happening:
1) Speight gets to throw more easy attempts and fewer hard attempts than average. This is possible but seems unlikely - again, compared to the average college offense, Harbaugh's passing game is more complex, i.e. you'd expect the throws to be harder (or at least not much easier) than average.
2) Speight has a much better than average completion percentage on "hard" throws. This would be weird - he's inaccurate on easy stuff but super accurate on hard stuff? Also his deep ball accuracy has been griped about almost as much as his easy throw accuracy.
3) Michigan's receivers are way above average and are routinely making circus catches (and never dropping good throws), artificially inflating Speight's completion rate. We do have a good receiving corps, but I don't think we've seen an inordinate number of circus catches, and all of the receivers have had a few drops.
It's not impossible that Speight is simultaneously decent statistically but unusually bad at simple throws. But the things required for that to be true seem less likely than the alternative, which is that Speight is exactly what an "okay but not spectacular" college QB looks like - in other words, what we could reasonably expect coming in.
I won't say that I don't wish he was better - of course I do! But remember that a 60% completion percentage means that 40% of throws are not caught - not all or even most of those are going to be intentional throwaways or near misses on miracle throws (if they were, I'd seriously question the design of the offense).
October 15th, 2016 at 9:20 AM ^
October 14th, 2016 at 2:43 PM ^
I think Mich fans have forgotten what typical sophmore pro style QB looks like after a rollercoaster grad transfer and 7 years of nonsense.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:44 PM ^
Is Harbaugh encouraging him to make risky throws on the expectation that he'll clean up his mechanics and eventually blossom into a playmaker, or is he going to spend the next few weeks coaching Speight to mind his limits and take better care of the football? As noted above, he has a low INT rate but it could very easily be a LOT higher. His pocket presence and reads are good, but his erratic accuracy and tendency to force throws make an insanely dangerous combination. He is very much on the lucky side, at least for now, and I'm sure no one needs to tell Harbaugh that.
If anyone can turn Speight into a playmaker it's Harbaugh, but as I've said before, he's already "fine" for a QB his age and there are very few QBs that can make the leap from where he's at to true (college) greatness. I'll bet Harbaugh's already made up his mind whether Speight can get there or not, and he's definitely got his back in pressers, but if he's grooming Speight into a playmaker he's been quite demure about it.
October 14th, 2016 at 12:54 PM ^
I'm no QB guru, but I'd just like to see Speight become more consistent. One second he's dropping dimes to Chesson in the corner of the endzone in covereage, the next he is over/underthrowing wide open targets. I'd be happy with him just fixing the easy stuff.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^
It seems to me that we have a lot of arm chair quarterbacks here, and I do not mean to criticize you in particular. Yes, he is not that consistent at dropping dimes in the corner of the endzone, but how many college quarterbacks are? Right now we have a guy who has some accuracy problems, but is generally pretty good, and has enough arm strength to make those big throws like Darboh against Wisconsin, or Chesson against Rutgers. But the thing that I think he is an absolute best at, and is probably one of the best in the country, is his uncanny ability to feel the pressure and find a way to if not make a play, at least lessen the blow with a throw away. How many times this season have we seen an almost sure fire sack lead to a modest gain because of his ability to avoid a tackle and advance to his second or third read? He is the college equivalent of big-ben with his pocket presence.
Yes, he should have a few more interceptions based on his errant throws, but if this Wilton Speight is the team's biggest problem, I feel confident that they can contend with the best teams in the country, including in Columbus and a possible playoff game.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:31 PM ^
Regardless of who you're criticizing, who talking about Speight would NOT be an armchair QB? What other role could we possibly play except blind zealous faith? Eff that this is MGoBlog.
He's fine. He's not elite. If we have a worry, it's that we need elite to beat OSU. He's not that yet, and we don't know if it's in him. That's not being down on him; that's being realistic.
October 14th, 2016 at 3:10 PM ^
because of O'korn.
Almost EVERYONE predicted/assumed that O'korn would be the starter.
He threw for a ton of yards as a freshman.
He was reportedly the best QB on the entire team last year while running the scout team.
Had a year to work with Harbaugh, blah blah, blah.
So when we all find out that Sp8 is starting over Okorn I think many people took that as a sign that he was somehow above & beyond not only where Rudock started last year, but possibly where he ended up as well.
So far, being an "average" QB feels a bit like a let down at Harbaugh's Michigan.
October 14th, 2016 at 4:27 PM ^
My point to him wasn't that Speight doesn't have flaws and that he doesnt need to improve to get this team where it needs to be. My point is that this guy has never lost a game as the Michigan QB, has fine stats, and does a lot of things really well, and there are fans on here just trashing him. The Armchair quarterback comment was simply saying that everyone needs to chill out and realize that if he is the only thing we have to complain about, we probably shouldn't be compaining at all.
October 14th, 2016 at 1:42 PM ^
My goodness....... in three years, two offensive coordinators, qb coaches, an iffy OL... his first seven starts and hes 7-0. But F**k me, I guess... oh, and he has another two years left......
Have some perspective, folks...
Comments