Michigan Monday up at "The Ozone."
Michigan Monday is up. Here is the LINK.
This is my absolutely favorite outside source of analysis on Michigan's play. Gerdeman writes well, and is insightful. Here is this week's money quote:
Many outsiders are still expecting the standard Michigan collapse this season, and while that might still happen, it will happen for different reasons. I'm of the opinion that from here on out any losses incurred this season will be simply because of lack of talent, and not lack of coaching. That might not seem like much, but it's significant. Coaches are finally giving this team an opportunity to win, even if they're outmanned.
Gerdeman sees alll four of our remaining games as being both winnable and losable. He sees both outcomes being just as likely as the other.
Maybe the most important thing is what Gerdeman doesn't say explicitly in his column. The clear implication is that when Michigan eventually has the same talent level as Ohio (and probably the rest of the B1G,) our coaching will give us enough of an advantage to win. To say Gerdeman is scared would be to read too much into his comments. But Michigan's coaching staff, particularly the defense, comes in for high praise.
Here is one final quote, regarding the strength our defense is becoming, and what that means for Michigan - Ohio at the end of the season:
The most you can ask from this defense is relentless effort, and that seems to be what the bulk of them are best at. That doesn't lead to plays always being made, but it does lead to key plays being made at key times, and most of the time that's all you need.
In fact, it's that ability to make the big play when it's absolutely necessary that has me baffled on whom to pick when the Buckeyes head to Ann Arbor in four weeks.
To me, a close game favors Michigan because of their ability to pull a play out of nowhere on defense. That tendency will only be multiplied by the fact that the game is in the Big House.
Go to the link, and give credit to Gerdeman. You won't regret the read.
November 1st, 2011 at 2:06 AM ^
To say it lacked touch would be like saying Taylor Lewan is a peaceable fellow.I always knew that Lewan was just a big cuddly teddy bear.
November 1st, 2011 at 2:27 AM ^
A cowardly lion, actually
November 1st, 2011 at 9:28 AM ^
whoever moderated that as flamebait didn't notice the link on the cowardly lion. I see what you did there, and that's good stuff.
November 1st, 2011 at 8:14 AM ^
That jumped out at me, too.
Um, Gerd? Better leave the similes to the experts, mmmkay?
BOOM MICHIGAN ARROGANCE'D
November 1st, 2011 at 2:53 AM ^
I love the idea that this OSU team is clearly more talented than us. How many of their offensive starters would start here? I would guess one of the tackles (moved to RT, obviously). Obviously the same applies in reverse with our defense compared to theirs, but overall I don't think it's that obvious.
November 1st, 2011 at 3:26 AM ^
I don't know the answer on who is more talented. I'm not qualified to compare Ohio players to Michigan. I am an unabashed Michigan homer. In general, the consensus seems to be that Ohio has been much better on defense for several years. (like, duh.)
Regardless of the talent level, I think we can agree that Mattison in particular is getting the most out of his players.
November 1st, 2011 at 8:38 AM ^
Hankins wouldn't beat out Martin...but he'd give Ash a run for sure - who has not seen his day as yet. Interesting comparison Hankins:Ash given how those recruitments played out for both players.
November 1st, 2011 at 9:31 AM ^
Hankins is better than Martin right now and he is two years younger. Hankins has put up excellent numbers for OSU this season: 43 total tackles, 6.5 TFL and 2.0 sacks through 8 games. Martin's numbers through 8 games: 28 total tackles, 3.5 TFL and 2.5 sacks.
RR really f'ed that one up when he wouldn't pursue Hankins because he was "too fat."
November 1st, 2011 at 11:11 AM ^
You are aware that Hankins wanted to come to UM and was "persuaded" to go to Ohio State instead by his Sparty slappy coaches, right?
November 1st, 2011 at 11:42 AM ^
surrounding talent plays a part in how good he looks. When Martin had Graham lined up next to him he looked like a world beater. If we had 1 or 2 better lineman, he would look great.
November 1st, 2011 at 9:24 AM ^
I think Dan Herron would start at RB for UM. Stoneburner at TE. Shugarts at RT. Molk and Brewster are a push at C as well as Lewan and Adams at LT. I am not familiar with OSU's OGs but I bet they are comparable to Schofield/Barnum and Omameh.
The only areas of advantage for UM is WR (until Posey comes back) and QB (even that is debatable given Denard's propensity to throw the ball to the other team). Miller looks like he will be better than Denard when he is a junior if he continues to progress.
November 1st, 2011 at 3:09 AM ^
Always a good read. Thanks for the link!
November 1st, 2011 at 4:56 AM ^
eh disagree with him on the talent issue.. his back handed "compliments" are typical buckeye.
It is amazing what a couple wins in a row do to the ohio mentality towards how "great" their team is... or not when they lose.
Furthermore, for him to say that Nebraska is definitely more talented than Michigan...is far from an objective view of the actual situation. The rosters are fairly close in terms of actual "talent" and could be perceived either way.
November 1st, 2011 at 7:04 AM ^
He stated that Lewan or Molk will start only if they play guard and that Mike Martin hasn't played well enough this year to start on the D line. Am I missing something here? This guys analysis is smoke and mirrors simply repeating what everyone else is saying.
November 1st, 2011 at 7:10 AM ^
Mine eyes be sleepy... Now I see. I still think Lewan is a top LT and Molk is as good a center as there is in the B1G. And Martin is pro material.
November 1st, 2011 at 9:47 AM ^
Martin may be pro material but so are both of OSU's DTs. He would have a serious battle for a starting spot at OSU. Both Simon and Hankins (argh) have been great this year. They're one of the big reasons that Wisconsin couldn't get anything going on the ground. (Seriously, what did Miami do to get as many running yards as they did against this D?)
As for the others, I like Molk more than Brewster, but that's a toss up and they both struggled a lot against MSU's blitzes. Lewan would be up against a 5th year senior, Adams, whose return from suspension has a lot to do with their resurgence.
November 1st, 2011 at 5:57 PM ^
He's actually good most of the time. Molk would be in a serious battle to start at center only because they've also got an All-American center. OSU does have a monster D-Line, but Martin would be starting and looking really impressive if he had the sick collection of talent OSU has on its line around him. Would he be the unquestioned star of the line? I don't know.
That said, Lewan is a star. Personally, he's Michigan's best player at any position. He's almost a perfect left tackle prospect. He's just missing the weirdly low center of gravity that the perennial All-Pros in the NFL (Jonathan Ogden types) have. I don't know that he starts on every team in the country.
November 1st, 2011 at 8:18 AM ^
His talent thingy surprised me, too, especially on offense. I would definitely take Herron over any of our backs and (*swallows own vomit*) Boren over McColgan, and I like Stoneburner a little, but who else? Maybe whoever is at RT?
On defense, though? Man. They looked tough against Wisky until somehow they forgot that you're supposed to keep playing until the clock runs out. But for the first 56:00 I'd do a one-for one swap with everyone, with the sole (and only possible) exception of Martin.
Come ON, class of 2012! Get here!
November 1st, 2011 at 11:38 AM ^
OSU's OL is better than ours. I'm not sure we could have dominated Wisconsin up front the way they did. They ran on close to 90% of snaps in the second half and put up 30 points.
November 1st, 2011 at 11:53 AM ^
I guess, if you're running pro-style. But I'd take Lewan, Molk, and Omameh for zone blocking, any day, I think. It's probably apples and oranges.
November 1st, 2011 at 12:32 PM ^
Have you watched much of OSU this year? They are not by any stretch of the imagination a pro-style offense. They run out of the occasional power-I, but that's not their base offense any more than it is ours.
November 1st, 2011 at 12:40 PM ^
No, I more meant that that's what they were recruited for and best suited to. In other words, part of the reason our OL doesn't look like killers is because they are adapting to a new system and that system doesn't feature as much of the things they are good at.
November 1st, 2011 at 9:25 AM ^
Talent is determined by who wins when you play each other, as far as the only actual objective measure we have to compare talent. Talent can be more than just what you run the 40 in, or how much you can bench press, or how many stars Rivals or someone else gave you when you were a high school senior. Do we not have examples of "talent" that show that it is not only the ability to run fast and be strong, but also the ability to know where you are supposed to be and when? Kovacs is not the most "talented" guy, but he is one of our best players because he knows where to be and when and how to get there.
Discussing talent is for people who have lost 3 games this year, not for people who have lost only 1!
November 1st, 2011 at 11:33 AM ^
like All conference honors to see who has more players or even NFL draft slot (although most of both team's players will not be drafted). You can even use stats to compare, since both OSU and M are in the same division and are supposed to play the same level of competition.
November 1st, 2011 at 1:13 PM ^
OSU and M aren't in the same division.