Hot Take: Defensive Construction, Not Talent Level Led To Our Struggles In CFP

Submitted by Snazzy_McDazzy on January 18th, 2022 at 7:03 PM

There has been much rendering of garments over how bad our defense looked against Georgia in the college football playoffs. The immediate takeaway has been that Michigan needs a serious talent infusion on that side of the ball to hang with the best of the best. But allow me to offer a slightly different take.

From where I am standing, in order to have a chance against SEC offenses, particularly the Alabamas and Georgias of the world, your defense needs three things. First, elite defensive tackle play or at the very least, DT's that are massive and can clog up the middle and maybe get a little bit of a push on passing downs. Second, you need elite cornerbacks. Third, you need to not have any really glaring individual weaknesses in pass defense because the best teams in college football have potential matchup problems everywhere. You can see where I am going with all of this.

Bottom line, Michigan does need a talent upgrade on defense compared to the last three seasons. But I don't think there is evidence that we can't recruit well enough to put forth a much better showing. Outside of a handful of stars in Devin Bush, Daxton Hill, Aiden Hutchinson, David Ojabo, and Rashan Gary, Michigan has really struggled in defensive recruiting under Harbaugh. It's felt a little bit like stars or bust on that side of the ball. But we're coming off of two classes that to me look really strong on the defensive side of the ball. And there's hope that 2020 recruits Moten, Mullings, McGregor, and Jenkins turn out to be studs.

The future looks bright, despite the bad taste in our mouths from the CFP.

Darker Blue

January 18th, 2022 at 7:09 PM ^

I didn't read your op because I'm sure its nonsense.

Based on your title you didn't watch the playoff game. Georgia had far more talent on the field.

Find something else to do with your time. Basketball team is playing right now 

Joined: 10/30/2011

MGoPoints: 80446

I Like Burgers

January 18th, 2022 at 11:37 PM ^

But none of those positions are really where championships are won.  Michigan gets worse on both lines, and that was where the most striking difference was between Michigan and Georgia.  I was down on the field for the Orange Bowl pregame, and the size difference between the two teams was just jarring.  That game was over at the coin toss.

Joined: 10/06/2012

MGoPoints: 30575

Double-D

January 19th, 2022 at 10:02 AM ^

I would expect to be at least as good by more likely better on the OL.  We are better at three positions and probably as good at two. Possibly better at all and better as a unit.

When you have a guy like Barnhart who has started several games, and played well, fighting for a starting position that says something. Our offense should be a huge problem for people next year and it starts with the OL. 

Joined: 12/21/2013

MGoPoints: 87520

Double-D

January 19th, 2022 at 5:36 PM ^

Probably…but I read an analysis by Magnus at TTB that tempered that a bit.  Add that to the fact he is not going pro and we will see.  He was an All American and Rimington finalist. That’s pretty elite recognition.

Vastaridis was really good this year but I would tend to agree with you. And whoever wins Stueber’s job isn’t going to miss a beat.  

These guys have all played together for awhile now.  I see a better line next year. 

Joined: 12/21/2013

MGoPoints: 87520

lhglrkwg

January 18th, 2022 at 7:11 PM ^

Ok we fix the defense. Other side of the ball still scored 3 points before the game was well in hand.

This was a less talented team than some of Harbaugh's others recently. If you parlay this season into some top 5ish classes then this staff plus that roster can compete better

Joined: 07/03/2008

MGoPoints: 87934

brad

January 18th, 2022 at 7:14 PM ^

Actually I think your post contradicts your headline.

To your headline's point though, I think it would be correct to say that if M had played defense more geared toward limiting deep plays down the sidelines and protected their short flat areas from edge action at all costs, they would have been able to make Georgia beat them by grinding down the field in the run game.  The problem with that approach is that it looked very possible for Georgia to do that if we had a lighter front out there.  

I suppose they may have been able to get to halftime with Georgia at 17 or even 13 instead of 27, but they would have risked completely gassing the defense and going down 34-10 anyway, which was they way most teams went down to Georgia this year.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 15773

rcrichlo

January 18th, 2022 at 7:25 PM ^

We need:

Bush, Daxton Hill, Aiden Hutchinson, David Ojabo, and Rashan Gary plus Long

 

all in the field at the same time honestly. Or the next version of them. That’s what we went up against 

 

Joined: 09/16/2010

MGoPoints: 160

JonathanE

January 18th, 2022 at 7:48 PM ^

Out of your check list of three things you never mentioned the speed of Georgia's linebackers. Georgia's linebackers were flying all over the field making plays. 

Joined: 09/03/2017

MGoPoints: 2366

OwenGoBlue

January 18th, 2022 at 7:53 PM ^

You’re obviously arguing with yourself but also  “Michigan has really struggled in defensive recruiting” is absurd when you look at the number of draft picks. 

Joined: 04/03/2016

MGoPoints: 31529

Brhino

January 18th, 2022 at 7:59 PM ^

FYI Nobody is "rendering" garments unless we're doing some computer graphics.  If we're so upset that we're tearing away our clothes, we're RENDING the garments.

Joined: 09/08/2009

MGoPoints: 19502

Ronswanson13

January 18th, 2022 at 8:11 PM ^

I looked up the national recruiting rankings of each team’s defensive starters the day after our game vs Georgia and this feels like a good time and place to share it.

I’ll list all 11 starters ranked highest to lowest rather than by position to give a better visual comparison of the actual numbers.

Georgia: 1, 19, 22, 26, 31, 45, 107, 306, 356, 424, 6 * (JUCO player)

Michigan: 14, 31, 90, 105, 112, 211, 256, 314, 400, 511, 700

Our defense had a lot of talent and was a good college defense, but as you can see - theirs was just at a completely different level. Having 6 Top 50 players on a defense is not something we have had the luxury of, nor is bringing in a top end JUCO player to fill a need. And the thing is - their backups were almost all young, high end talent as well. Their backup CB who sealed the national championship game with the pick 6 vs Bama - the 4th overall ranked recruit a couple years ago.

Joined: 02/11/2016

MGoPoints: 10264

YoOoBoMoLloRoHo

January 18th, 2022 at 10:01 PM ^

Bingo.  More details for any data-driven folks. Referenced Our Lads depth chart with order based on LDE across DL, LBs, and then DBs. Ratings based on 247 Composite with transfer ratings based on HS ratings rather than Juco ratings to normalize the ratings.
Travon Walker 5* 22  
Jordan Davis 3* 424  
Devonte Wyatt 4* 278 Juco Transfer   
Robert Beal 4* 107   
Nakobe Dean 5* 19   
Quay Walker 4* 31   
Nolan Smith 5* 1   
Ameer Speed 3* 356   
Christopher Smith 4* 306 Juco transfer   
Lewis Cine 4* 45  
Derion Kendrick  5* 26 Transfer from Clemson after dismissal from team
Starters: 5* 4, 4* 5, 3* 2   
Median = 45
Jalen Carter 5* 18 
Travel Walthour 3* 629 Juco transfer
Nazir Stackhouse 4* 249
MJ Sherman 4* 45
Smael Mondon 5* 35
Channing Tindall 4* 103
Chaz Chambliss 4* 365
Kelee Ringo 5* 4
Latavious Brini 3* 508
Dan Jackson NR
Nylan Green 4* 72

2nd string: 5* 3, 4* 5, 3* 2, NR 1
Median = 103

Joined: 11/01/2012

MGoPoints: 18054

Don

January 18th, 2022 at 8:25 PM ^

Title: Defensive Construction, Not Talent Level Led To Our Struggles In CFP

Conclusion: Michigan does need a talent upgrade on defense compared to the last three seasons.

Did two different people compose your post?

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 148371