Official Snowflake Thread: Offense

Submitted by LSAClassOf2000 on October 5th, 2013 at 6:25 PM

I am going to start creating these now - this is the official snowflake thread for thoughts about the offense and offensive playcalling.

Comments

Michigan Arrogance

October 5th, 2013 at 7:08 PM ^

 

1st Downs

Minn

16

MICH

17

3rd down efficiency
8-15 10-13
4th down efficiency
1-1 0-0
Total Yards 281 348
Passing 145 235
Comp-Att
14-21 13-17
Yards per pass
6.9 13.8
Rushing 136 113
Rushing Attempts
41 35
Yards per rush
3.3 3.2
Penalties 6-35 2-10
Turnovers 2 0
Fumbles lost
1 0
Interceptions thrown
1 0
Possession 33:48 26:12

 

TakeTheField

October 5th, 2013 at 11:13 PM ^

if you think that eliminating turnovers is enough to give us a shot at the division. We have a below average running game, an erratic QB, and a defense that's no better than decent. You don't win championships with that kind of performance. You just don't. We are no better than 4-4 in the BT right now. OSU, MSU, Nebraska and Northwestern are all playing significantly better than us right now, and Penn State and Indiana will be close games too, and very losable. The only game we figure to be a solid favorite in is Iowa.

tigers17fan

October 6th, 2013 at 11:56 AM ^

Excuse me??? No better than decent defense! We're 27th in the effing nation on points against per game. And that has been with a metric shit-ton of turnovers leading directly to points. Now, even without those we aren't what I'd call elite (a la MSU), but come on. It's a far cry better than decent.

LSAClassOf2000

October 5th, 2013 at 7:10 PM ^

These are some encouraging numbers, I would think:

  Michigan
1st Downs 17
3rd down efficiency
76.92%
4th down efficiency
0-0
Total Yards 348
Passing 235
Comp-Att
13-17
Yards Per Attempt
13.8
Rushing 113
Rushing Attempts
35
Yards per rush
3.2
Completion % 76.47%
Avg. Yards Per Play 6.69
Yards Per Completion 18.08

Also, not in this table but VERY nice - zero turnovers. A controlled game plan which worked incredibly well, I would say. 

CompleteLunacy

October 5th, 2013 at 7:25 PM ^

There's too much bitching about the playcalling. We saw a touchdown drive go 6 RB handoffs, 0 passes. It was a bit watered down on offense, but done so on purpose. And it worked...ZERO turnovers, which cannot be emphasized enough, to along with 35 points.

It was a bit of a "palate-cleansing" game, so to speak, offensively.

Crime Reporter

October 5th, 2013 at 7:16 PM ^

Very happy with how offense performed. I thought the opening drive of the third quarter was key. We were physical with the running game and mixed in some nice passes. Good game.

MGoBlue96

October 5th, 2013 at 7:19 PM ^

doesn't paint a pretty picture, but I think run blocking was better than those numbers would indicate when your factor in the goalline plays, sacks, and the fact that they were running into a stacked Minny box at times. Still needs work, but there was difference in push for the most part. Definatly the best running lanes RB's have seen so far this year.

JayMo4

October 5th, 2013 at 7:26 PM ^

The blocking and run game need improvement BUT aren't as bad as they look.  The biggest flaw on this offense so long as the turnovers are limited is the absence of quick pass plays, screens, or anything deep that doesn't involve a slow-developing playaction set-up.  Opposing defenses don't need to account for these things, and so are free to stack the box with extra defenders.  Until we can force teams out of that approach, our run blocking will look worse than it is, and our pass blocking is going to lose numbers games sometimes.  I know Borges hates those quick throws, but IMO it's an essential part of a balanced offense.  Just because you throw the occasional slant or quick out doesn't make you a finesse spread team.  It's OK, Al.  We can do it.

Swazi

October 5th, 2013 at 7:28 PM ^

No turnovers is what I like to hear about today. If we played like this the last two week s Michigan would be in the top 10 instead of dropping.

Danwillhor

October 5th, 2013 at 7:42 PM ^

Running game was better but Green is what I thought he was and that is a "2nd level runner" (great potential still!). He is essentially a guy that needs an OL to get him churning into the 2nd level. When he gets that, watch out. When he doesn't, he literally gets brought down by arm tackles sometimes. The OL was better. That was nice to see. Gardner just needs to be the guy he was last year and I saw a bit of that in the 2nd half. The receiving corps played out of control and really helped Gardner out, to be honest. Yet, no turnovers is a first step to regaining confidence, imo. Still a bit concerned with our overall team "feel". The offense especially seems to lack confidence/awareness in a few areas. Yet, it was an improvement so I'm not complaining.

Danwillhor

October 5th, 2013 at 7:55 PM ^

on his first where he was off tackle and untouched until the 2nd level. Then the TD run was, if not around the 3, a pay where he would have (did) hit the 2nd level before being touched. Other than that, if met at the los he twice was brought down by arm tackles and by a LB smaller than he is without even lowering a shoulder. I'm not saying he is a bust but what I knew he'd be. If/when he has an OL that can get him to the second level.....watch out. Be it this year, even! Yet, it's the kind of back he is. Fitz has more will to lower a shoulder than a guy 30lbs heavier. Just, at any level, a HB is who they are almost right away. You know their traits. Green is a monster if behind a great OL (like scary monster). If the line we have today? A guy you wouldn't want to start. Good thing we've been recruiting OL like crazy, lol. Again, not a knock or worry. Just an observation.

Monocle Smile

October 5th, 2013 at 8:05 PM ^

I thought this thread was bad, but the defense thread is even worse. There's some legitimately good discussion and comments, but waaaaaay too many posters seem to have watched a funeral instead of a football game.

Running game looks markedly improved. Boringball means your numbers will probably look a bit ugly in the box score.

Gardner looks calmer, if not totally accurate. The throws to Funchess were okay, but Gallon made some nice adjustments. Also, he seems to be coming away from Gallon lock-in syndrome.

Speaking of Funchess, he murdered today. More of him, please.

The game was over in like 3 hours flat. On ESPN2. ALL the run plays and huddles!

Reader71

October 5th, 2013 at 7:56 PM ^

I know the announcer meme is hysterical, but they were right about Gardner's inaccuracy. He didn't turn it over, so he's taken a step forward, but he was bailed out by quite a few nice catches. I'm sure the UFR will confirm his lack of accuracy, and then I wonder if the guys who were so bothered by the announcers will make fun of Brian.

The line was a lot better. One bad snap by Glasgow, but I was encouraged by his play. Miller seems a bit quicker and better at scoops, but I'll take that trade-off. Bryant looked good, a lot better than in the spring, when I essentially wrote him off. He might be a liability in pass protection down the line, didn't look great. Whatever, first game. Kalis cannot pull for shit, at least to the left. He's ok leading the sweep, but he gets off really slow on power. Really slow.

As for game plan, I never really criticize. All plays are OK if blocked properly. One tiny problem. On an early 3rd and 1, we ran a spread shotgun QB draw which was the most obvious call ever. I'd rather take my chances with a sneak. Seems a bit higher percentage.

Needs

October 5th, 2013 at 8:05 PM ^

Eh, of the throws they kept reshowing, the throw to Gallon on the post was inaccurate, the cross field throw to Chesson was fine, a ball that gave only him a chance to catch it, and the throw to Funchess was a dead on back shoulder throw. Funchess made it look difficult by slipping in his cut, but the ball was right where it should be.

Reader71

October 5th, 2013 at 8:49 PM ^

But he's been inaccurate in general. Very few YAC from our receivers. He almost never hits anyone in stride.

He threw a wide open third down effort to Tacopants instead of Dileo. He missed behind Funchess on a crossing route.

And I don't think we can call that a good back-shoulder throw to Funchess, who was breaking outside, was open, and required an over the front shoulder throw.

befuggled

October 5th, 2013 at 8:20 PM ^

He was definitely off on some of his throws, but the receivers still made the catches. Even if three of those weren't caught, he only goes down to 10 of 17. This is good for 58.8%, which while not quite where he was against CMU and Notre Dame is still not bad.

MGrether

October 5th, 2013 at 8:10 PM ^

that they moved Taylor Lewan around. The stacked looks that they came out with and the effort put in to run the ball behind your best man... great step forward.

Charlie Chunk

October 5th, 2013 at 8:28 PM ^

I take away a quarterback that hasn't lost his nerve!  He gained a little bit of confidense in the 1st half and made some nice decisions in the 2nd.  Taking the sack was a milestone moment.

DG played a pretty nice game.

PSU is in trouble next week!

goblue81

October 5th, 2013 at 8:33 PM ^

Pros:

  • Run blocking was better - not great but better.
  • No turnovers - yay!
  • Funchess is a man among boys on the outside
  • More Green was good - Fitz was really solid today
  • One botched snap - one - not bad with a new C in the game

Cons:

  • Spotty blocking in the 2nd half - Bryant got beat really bad once that I remember
  • Devin was a "inaccurate" in case you didn't know

 

I overall I thought it was a solid performance by the offense after the last two games.  I liked Borges playcalling with the exception of one series the late 3rd/early 4th.

GGV

October 6th, 2013 at 11:50 AM ^

 

No turnovers was HUGE!!!!
 
We have found two big pro-style WR’s to go with our damn good slots.
 
The adjustments to the OL seem to work!  Even when having his head ripped off, Glasgow wouldn’t release his block.
 
We put up 40 without trying all that hard on a pretty good team.  I know people downgraded Minnesota after what happened with Iowa, but the Gophers started a different QB last week (who was still a bit injured).   Different team with the new kid in there.
 
Green looked pretty good as a change-of-pace guy for a frosh.
 
I would love to see Green in there as a FB.
 
Devin ate the ball a few times.  Major step forward there.  I’d much rather have him take a short sack rather than a 20 yard loss or throw a pick. 
 
Over the summer, the major questions surrounding this O was big men at WR and performance of the OL.  Looked to me like those questions were answered yesterday.

UMfan21

October 5th, 2013 at 8:44 PM ^

OL change made tangible improvements. Still room for improvement, but I'm optimistic.

Fun chess belongs as a WR. Glad to see him out there. Best 11 on the field means Funchess split wide and AJ Williams blocking. I also liked Lewan lined up all over as long as it doesn't telegraph plays.

Doc Brown

October 5th, 2013 at 10:06 PM ^

Wow, all I hear in this thread is bitch bitch bitch bitch. Wouldn't be Michigan football with our fans bitching about a 42-13 blowout. 

I for one was impressed by our offensive line. For once we had a semblence of a running game. Garnder had time to make his reads. Sure Gallon had a down game, but Funchess picked up the slack. 

Blazefire

October 5th, 2013 at 11:35 PM ^

8 Posessions - 5 TD's. Fantastic.

13 of 17 passes were at least catchable. 14, really. That one was over Dileo's head, but he had two hands on it. Your WR's need to make plays. QB's are rearely going to be dead on for every throw.

When we weren't running into a stacked box, we got penetration and holes to run through.

Remove the sack, the bad snap fumble and the rushes from the 4th quarter clock kill drive starting at 7 minutes, and suddenly we rushed for 4.6 YPC. I'll take it up down left and right.

PurpleStuff

October 6th, 2013 at 12:22 AM ^

The three times Minnesota "stopped" us were Gardner failing to beat a guy in space for one  yard on 3rd and short, the blatant PI call the refs missed (after a few first downs to flip the field), and Gardner overthrowing a wide open Dileo on 3rd and 5. 

The pace of the game was weird, but there really wasn't anything to complain about.  The creative stuff also worked out quite nicely (moving Funchess outside and lining Lewan up all over the field to spark the run game).

Canadian

October 5th, 2013 at 11:22 PM ^

Was quite predictable. When lewan and schofield lined up on the same side they ran it that way pretty much every time (I can only think of one in which green ran opposite direction and went for negative yards)

Blazefire

October 5th, 2013 at 11:50 PM ^

If it was a 55-3 win, they'd all say, "Well, Minny sucks hard, so that doesn't prove anything." Iowa's play against MSU today shows that they're a damn good (for Iowa) team, and Minny was 4-1 with some solid wins. This was an EXCELLENT 29 point win.

Georgia just needed OT to beat Tennessee! Georgia is #6 and Tennessee sucks worse than Minny by far.

GGV

October 6th, 2013 at 11:57 AM ^

was the same one that hung 43 on SJSU & didn't play VS Iowa. You may already know that but I think it should be mentioned because if he had played VS the Hawkeyes, I suspect the game would have at least been much more competitive.

I dumped the Dope

October 6th, 2013 at 12:25 AM ^

Likes...

- Opposition seems to be zeroing in on Gallon after reviewing tape of prior games.  Like that Funchess is opening up a second target that opposition needs to defend.  Think Butt will be the secret weapon at that point.

- No turnovers

- OL seemed to pass protect reasonably well.  After watching Ohio run thru Northwestern's OL rushing 3 time and time again gives me some hope we are better than that.

Would like see improved...

- Green seems to lack ferocity in his runs.  I realize he's a big body but would like to get the appearance that he's fighting harder.  Perhaps its just another year in the weight room to get rocked up so he feels like he can run thru more defenders.

- Chesson had one catch at his belt after jumping up for it.  Would like to see him catch it "rebound style" with arms extended to use his height advantage over the defenders.  Maybe a couple of pickup games at CCRB 8-)

Tater

October 6th, 2013 at 1:24 AM ^

I think it can be safely said that Devin Gardner will be around next year.  He shows potential and isn't half as bad as the announcers said all through the third quarter, but he is going to need another year of experience at QB before he has a high enough profile to get a fair look in an NFL camp.  

Can Devin Gardner become the first football player to graduate with a PhD during the same school year in which he is eligible?

DonAZ

October 6th, 2013 at 8:25 AM ^

The UFRs will be really interesting for this game.  Until then, I went by the play-by-play data to chart Michigan's production on 1st down, and their production on 3rd down. 

1st down because I keep hearing how important it is to get production on 1st down so the QB isn't digging out of a hole; 3rd down because moving the chains is the key to this game.

Michigan 1st Down Situations

First Half

  • Run, Toussaint, 4 yards
  • Run, Green, 14 yards
  • Run, Toussaint, 5 yards
  • Run, Toussaint, 0 yards
  • Pass, Funchess, 13 yards
  • Run, Green, 0 yards
  • Pass, Funchess, Incomplete
  • Pass, Funchess, 18 yards
  • Run, Gardner, 5 yards

Second Half

  • Run, Toussaint, 14 yards
  • Run, Toussaint, 5 yards
  • Run, Green, 9 yards
  • Run, Touissaint, -1 yards
  • Run, Green, 2 yards and TD
  • Run, Touissaint, 2 yards
  • Pass, Gallon, 30
  • Run, Green, 1 yard
  • Run, Toussaint, 12 yards and TD
  • Run, Touissaint, 4 yards
  • Run, Green, -1 yards
  • Run, Green, -1 yards
  • Run, Touissaint, 2

Michigan 3rd Down Situations

First Half

  • 3rd and 1, Run, Toussaint for 4, 1st down
  • 3rd and 1, Run, Gardner for 0, 4th down
  • 3rd and 1, Run, Gardner for 2, 1st down
  • 3rd and 3, Pass, Gallon for 9, 1st down
  • 3rd and 8, Pass, Funchess incomplete, 4th down
  • 3rd and 14, Pass, Funchess for 24, TD

Second Half

  • 3rd and 11, Pass, Funchess for 21, 1st down
  • 3rd and 7, :Pass, Dileo for 12, 1st down
  • 3rd and 5, Run, Gardner for 13, 1st down
  • 3rd and 5, Pass, Dileo incomplete, 4th down
  • 3rd and 11, Pass, Funchess for 22, 1st down
  • 3rd and 12, Pass, Funchess for 46, 1st down
  • 3rd and Goal, Run, Gardner for 2 and TD

Again, the UFR will provide far greater detail and context.

1st Down -- A bit of feast-or-famine going on ... still, only 3 for negative yards.

3rd Down -- 10 for 13 is a nice rate.  Seeing Gardner for some but not most is a good sign.  Funchess' name pops up with a lot of double-digit gains. :-)

Edit - in browsing around other box scores I see Oregon held Colorado to 0 for 15 on 3rd downs.  Ouch.

Smash Lampjaw

October 6th, 2013 at 9:10 AM ^

Someone must have already said this, but I thought Gardner did especially well considering that so many of his passes were 3rd and long. He may have had better accuracy and better numbers with more early down success and early down throws.