Game plan and play calling cost us the game...
That was a hell of a game first of all! Tate was a beast out there in the 4th quarter. He really led us on not two but three scoring drives in the 4th quarter if Stoney doesn't cough up that ball. Props to Roundtree, Tay Odoms, and the second half defense too.
But I just have to say, the game plan, play calling and player subs cost us that game more than anything (O-line and dropped balls hurt us badly too).
How do we not run Minor up the middle or off tackle during that game a lot more, especially when Brown isn't getting it done around the end or off tackle? Unless he was really hurt, that was crazy. And would it have killed them to throw a couple HB screens in key situations.
That fake punt was one of the worst calls I have ever seen in my life. Whoever called that play should be fined 10K. We inside our own 20! And MSU was obviously ready for it when they came to the line.
And the substitution of Denard for Tate in the 4th quarter. That is just blasphemy against the 4th quarter God that is Mr. Forcier. I wanted Denard to come in for some time at QB in the 3rd quarter. But we were down 14 when he came in, and were in a mandatory passing situation. I know Tate wasn't moving the team down the field the first three quarters (some of that was because of drops), but we have seen him come alive in the 4th twice already. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That was stupid. Unless Tate was hurt and asked to be taken out, that was a horrible move.
The team showed great heart. It was an awesome game! We didn't deserve to be in it at the end, but almost pulled out. I just wanted to rant a little.
Can't wait til next week. I just hope the coaches have a better game plan.
Addendum: These are just my criticisms of the game. It doesn't mean I think the coaches suck. I think RichRod has been the best coach in the country this year (even including this game).
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:18 PM ^
Execution. Execution. Execution.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:25 PM ^
Obviously the execution was not where it needed to be at all in that game too. I neglected to mention that except for the drops and the O-line play.
October 4th, 2009 at 10:17 AM ^
greg robinson had four straight losing season as a head coach for the orangemen.we should have kept ron english cause he knows the rivlary games are important.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:11 PM ^
...Inspiration. Inspiration. Inspiration.
We played what appeared to be lackluster uninspired football (predominantly on offense) until the last few minutes.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:20 PM ^
We ran him 4 times for 2 yard today. What out of those 4 result made you think we should to it more often?
IMO, dropped passes early and the loss of Molk and inability to replace him cost this team the game.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:22 PM ^
on sweeps to the outside. We never gave him a chance to establish himself up the middle. You don't give it to Minor 4 times and give up! He's a wear you down kind of back.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:25 PM ^
If you haven't used Minor on a straight ahead Minor RAGE out of the I-Formation with Moundros blocking then you can't really say that you tried running with Minor.
You HAVE to take advantage of his strength.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:41 PM ^
The game early on really didn't give us a shot to stick with things that weren't working. When you have MSU's opening drive (not counting the quick INT to start) go for 10 minutes, that really doesn't give you a lot of slack to stick with things that aren't really working. We just couldn't afford to go 3 and out and put the defense back out there for another long drive like that.
And to MSU's credit, they pretty much sold out against the run and made us pass to beat them. With all of the dropped passes early on, we kinda beat ourselves.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:40 PM ^
Two of his runs were dives right up the middle. I would have liked for him to get more carries, but second guessing doesn't help.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:35 PM ^
coming into the game, the coaches should have known they'd have to throw to open up the run (MSU would stack the line), but I didn't see the game plan unfold that way.
All said, I'm pissed that the Defense didn't know MSU would run toward the center of the field on 3rd down in OT. Everyone in the World knew they'd line up for a FG, but we gave up a TD with that knowledge??? inexcusable.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^
1. Fake Punt call was on Zoltan.
2. Robinson getting in the game was after 3.5 quarters of our offense doing absolutely nothing. Questionable to put him in? Maybe, but they were trying something to get the gears turning. I would have sprinkled him in throughout the game and not given him an entire series.
3. I thought Minor might be better too, but then he got in the game and didn't do all that much.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:25 PM ^
week. Because all of the fair weather fans are going to just say "RR SUCKS WHAT A HORRIBLE GAME PLAN".
UGH
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:27 PM ^
I've been with RR since the beginning. I think he is the right man for the job. I was just pointing out that I think he didn't have it this week.
I'm proud of the team...and I will root for Michigan if they are 0-11 going into the last game.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:31 PM ^
I'm talking about the Blue Hairs, the people that want RR out, the Sparty hasn't beaten us twice in a row since the 1960's. That's why it sucks. I'd rather have lost to IU and beat Sparty.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:29 PM ^
That, and it really sucks to lose to State.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:30 PM ^
It WAS a horrible game plan.
But Rodriguez doesn't suck.
Good coaches are capable of making bad game plans.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:43 PM ^
I'm going to pick on you because I'm used to you backing up your statements. Most people here, like me, are football retards, and wouldn't know a "bad gameplan" if it shat on their chest.
So...WHY was it a bad gameplan?
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:56 PM ^
...at all in the first half. Nothing. Not even play action to Minor and pass. I dunno, maybe it is just me, but Minor was one of the team captains for a reason.
And, look at the time of possession in the first half. It was unreal. A lot of that was first half execution. But a lot of that was not using Minor and Brown effectively.
That being said, the defense knew what they were doing and brought it today. I will exclude the D from my criticism that the gameplan was not up to par. Gerg kept us in the game when the offense was going nowhere.
This is just my opinion. Feel free to tell me I am full of it if that is what you think. I can take it.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:02 PM ^
Re: Minor complaints: His later productivity shows you're right, right? Wait - it doesn't. At all.
Re: TOP: That's a result of 1) their offensive success on the first drive. That's not "bad game-planning" that's "getting beat". There's a difference. It was also a result of copious dropped passes, which I'm sure weren't part of the gameplan, and poor blocking, which, again, I'm pretty sure wasn't part of the gameplan.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:07 PM ^
He had 4 carries the whole game. That is not a statistically significant number.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:20 PM ^
I'm not sure where you saw Brown fail where Minor would have succeeded. When the offensive line gets massacred, the running game doesn't work. It doesn't matter who the RB is.
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:41 PM ^
I will partially concede the point. But Minor is much better at breaking tackles than Brown. Though, if Brown does break a tackle or two, there is a great chance he is gone.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:22 PM ^
and no dropped passes were made, Lloyd Carr's more conservative sister could have designed our game plan and we would have won. It's really as simple as that IMO.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:44 PM ^
A lot of that was first half execution. But a lot of that was not using Minor and Brown effectively.
It's not so much that we didn't use him effectively, but that on the few chances we had in the first quarter, we were shut down. There was no hole for him, that's hard to overcome.
That, and MSU's drives ate up fucktons of clock.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:02 PM ^
I don't think the coaches made a great commitment to run the ball. When your starting running backs (Minor and Brown basically share duties) combine for 10 carries, that's simply not good enough. As a team, Michigan had 28 rushing yards, and most of those came from Forcier on the last couple drives.
I realize neither Brown nor Minor had great numbers, but they shouldn't have given up on the run so easily. And Forcier carried the ball THIRTEEN times himself (including sacks and scrambles). Our runners should be running the ball, not the 5'11" white kid who weighs 175 lbs.
The strength of Forcier's running abilities isn't his pure speed and elusiveness - it's the element of surprise when he tucks it and runs when a passing play breaks down.
Forcier and Robinson can't run the read option play correctly on a consistent basis, so Michigan needed to line up in the I formation and use play action to open up the pass. And the conditions weren't conducive to playing a guy like Brown, whose strength is his speed and his ability to cut and go. When it's rainy, you need a guy who can lower his shoulder and gain yards after contact.
Michigan is a running team. You can't throw the ball 32 times (plus however many times Tate was sacked or scrambled) and only give the ball to your starting RB 10 times. That's horribly imbalanced, especially on a slippery field in rainy conditions.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:07 PM ^
Let's be real, though - 5 of Tate's carries came on the final drive with an empty backfield, and were not called runs. He had at least 2 other carries that were scrambles out of a pass - not a called run, and was sacked 3 times (count as rushes). So - he carried the ball 3 times on running plays.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:17 PM ^
True . . . which makes the playcalling even more abominable, in my opinion.
Using those stats your provided, that's 42 pass plays funneled through Forcier in the rain/wetness, as opposed to 10 running plays funneled to Minor Rage and The Guy Who Scores From 90 Yards Away.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:16 PM ^
I might be in chitown's aforementioned group of football retards, but I agree with your post 1 million percent.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:28 PM ^
you weren't watching the OL nor are you familiar with State's strengths and weaknesses.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:32 PM ^
Rain changes everything, my friend.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:40 PM ^
I don't think anyone would ideally like to see Minor/Brown get only 10 combined carries in a game. But given the way the game unfolded, when else should they have carried the ball? We really didn't run many offensive plays, period, in the first three quarters. (In the first half, we had the ball for all of three possessions.) A big chunk of all the plays we ran came in the 4th quarter and OT, and a lot of that was desperation time. Anyway, a lot of Tate's carries (especially in the fourth) were on the read option, when he could have handed off but chose not to.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:48 PM ^
"Anyway, a lot of Tate's carries (especially in the fourth) were on the read option, when he could have handed off but chose not to."
Again . . . Tate does not run the read option well. They need to call it less often. That is a game planning/play calling issue.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:54 PM ^
I agree in general. But in the fourth quarter against a tired MSU D, it was a solid play.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:56 PM ^
Word.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:34 PM ^
I had assumed that rogue punt-fake Zoltan, failing to pick up 60% of blitzes, giving up 40 yd scrambles to Cousens, and dropping the ball (repeatedly) were all part of the game plan.
EDIT: I almost forgot, bad snaps (again!) were surely a part of the game plan too.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:38 PM ^
If people have a problem with him RR on this sight, there not respectable fans. You are behind your team through thick and thin. Go Blue.
ECT..The only time to rebel is if Matt Millen comes into the picture, and hell will freeze over that day.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:52 PM ^
If you don't admit that you've made mistakes it's pretty hard to learn from them.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:49 PM ^
Internet Tough Guy!
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:28 PM ^
I'm notoriuos for noogies, wet willys and indian burns as well.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:55 PM ^
my ass. I'm as die hard a fan as anyone else here. And I'm "All In For Michigan" and Rod. That doesn't mean you can't question the game calling or game plan. I would have questioned if we had won in overtime, wondering why the hell we didn't spread 'em out sooner. I bet Rod's wondering that himself right now.
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:00 PM ^
We tried. Several key drops and a couple fumbles. We barely had the ball in the first half. It was execution.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:28 PM ^
Zoltan's call was SOP. Denard's insertion meant NOTHING to the final outcome.
1- tackling was poor
2- O-line blocking was very poor
3- LB play poor
Execution cost us the game, not any play calls
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:38 PM ^
play calling was bad on both sides of the ball. As Brian said in his preview if we get MSU in 2nd or 3rd and long and only rush 3 it will only be bad. 2nd and 25 we rush 3 guys and Counsins scrambles for 19 yards. This happend a lot on 2nd or 3rd and long. Putting Denard in was a terrible decision at that point in the game. How can you say it had NOTHING to do with the outcome? We lost 18 yards in 3 plays in a critical point. Forcier was lights out in the fourth why wouldn't he have been in that situation? I agree with the OP play calling did hurt a little in this game. That being said we still should have won.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:50 PM ^
but if I'm wrong (since I was too nervous to think straight at the time) I'll reconsider. And to my point about execution--yes, we rushed three I think, but it was a horrible pursuit angle by Mouton that made that a big play--not the call. And the poor third down play again was about execution: whatever the play call, guys have to tackle, they have to shed blocks, they have to stay with their assignments. I'm not excusing the coaches, (I agree with some that we should have passed more to open up the run--but again, did you see the poor blocking?) and in almost every game questionable play calls will be made, but as the cliche goes guys have to make plays.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:03 PM ^
It didn't cost us points, but we did lose 18 yards of field position and had to give up the ball at a time when possessions were at a premium. Fortunately, we tied the game anyway, but with Tate playing every series in the fourth, maybe we could've squeezed one more scoring drive in there. (That may be getting greedy.)
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:32 PM ^
I agree Mouton was horrible this game. Why did it seem like we were not as fired up as we should have been for a rivalry game? Ezeh played a little better this game and Brown played well. Mouton should have been replaced ala Bobo style this game. I still don't like not getting pressure on them on obvious passing plays. Our secondary, minus Warren, is not good enough to sit back and cover all day long. You are right the O-line was terribe. Every replay it seemed like Dorestein was on the ground! Thank God Monday starts a new week, lets learn and get ready for Iowa.
October 3rd, 2009 at 5:00 PM ^
Denard's insertion meant nothing to the final outcome? We went three and out and lost a series of downs in the fourth quarter (mostly because Denard is not yet ready to air-it-out consistently...and we were in a mandatory air-it-out situation at that point). That is a big deal if you ask me. I don't question trying him out. I just question the timing of it.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:31 PM ^
players dropped balls,fumbled,and most of all played like a very young team. The fake punt was awful but that was the only thing that i was upset with during the game. This is still a VERY YOUNG TEAM. This will happen a couple more times this year.Just deal with it.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:31 PM ^
Dropped passes, poor tackling, and conditions were the dagger to the heart. Where's the secondary? IMO. Good rant though.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:44 PM ^
...no offense, but the secondary's been missing all year. You're just now noticing?