OL: inferential leap in competency
The offense line impressed. It allowed no sacks - think about this compared to the last few years. Recall spinning and scrambling QBs getting harrassed and hurried almost every play. I am not going to embed an example - the 3rd quarter of the Minn game last year - you can search it yourself.
This looked like an OL of the great past, allowing the QB to stand in the pocket which is what a pro-style offense needs. This is a fundemental real improvement.
We could be a dangerous offense with this line if we can get a few skill players to hit the holes, run correct routes, check down receivers and have a little more touch on the long throw. The OL gave the opportunity to win the game.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:05 AM ^
September 4th, 2015 at 8:46 AM ^
Agree with this - he had multiple situations where he could've gotten a DE off his feet and ran for 15 - 20 yards. He seemed a little panicked to me at times in situations that didn't really warrant it.
The most positive thing I saw from him all night was how he immediately got past the overthrows. As soon as the ball hit the ground, he was looking back at Harbaugh for the next play. Don't dwell on it, it won't help.
He could be serviceable but I wasn't impressed with the first go round. Hostile environment, etc... but they had plenty of chances to win that game.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:06 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 4th, 2015 at 8:08 AM ^
Despite a similar score, I felt like I was watching a competent team with competent coaching adjustments at half. We got better as the game progressed, not worse. Even without the running game working very well we moved the ball well against a pretty good team on the west coast at night and may have won the game had Rudock not thrown 3 interceptions. Utah, with one of the best RBs in the game, was only able to score 17 points on offense. That kind of defense will keep us in any game this year. I just wish one of the RBs looked a tad bit better -- we just need someone that can hit an open hole.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:22 AM ^
Or we need a running back that can make a guy miss. Both Smith and Green have this knack of running right into tacklers. Smith especially does a nice job of getting yards after contact. But it would be nice if the initial contact occurred further downfield, after a defender had missed a tackle.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:24 AM ^
Hitting the hole would mean getting further down field before encountering contact. Making someone miss would just be icing on that cake.
September 4th, 2015 at 10:04 AM ^
He could get further down the field before contact if he ran to open space. He's on auto-pilot and his vision is terrible. I get leaving Ruddock in the game so as not to destroy his confidence, but Smith got way too many carries. Missing that big opening on the left side was as bad as a pick-6.
September 4th, 2015 at 9:50 AM ^
I know, but......
How are these 5 star RBs not better?
Outside of "Bama, we have some of the most highly rated RBs in the alst 3 years? No line play? Ya, but as stated thousands of times, no vision, no ability to juke, no "nothin'?
September 4th, 2015 at 10:07 AM ^
September 4th, 2015 at 9:55 AM ^
i forget that MGoBlog is full of somewhat nerdy dudes who have never actually played football. You have no idea how hard it is to try and make people miss in the backfield AND THEN get to the LOS. haha
Barry Sanders was the only guy who could make guys miss on the regular behind the LOS and go on for a nice gain. The other 99.9% of RBs need at least some blocking to hit the whole and then make ppl miss in the second level to break a big run.
September 4th, 2015 at 10:17 AM ^
September 4th, 2015 at 8:10 AM ^
You're not serious are you? Yes, the QB had time, but you also have to be able to open holes for the running game. That didn't happen often. You also have to be able to pick up a yard on third and one or fourth and one to get a first down.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:28 AM ^
Seriously. 2.6 YPC does not put "great OL of the past" into my mind. I think the OL play clearly looks like the most difficult-to-fix problem with the team.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:45 AM ^
did you ever consider it just might be the running backs ? Drake had no issues rushing the ball last season when he finally got his chance. Granted Smith runs very hard - but has no vision. Issac at least got to the outside a couple of times ... and unfortunately Green just doesn't have anything working for him. Smith also cannot drop passes.
Perhaps OL isn't going to be great, but what we're lacking is speed from the tailback position.
Go Blue!
September 4th, 2015 at 8:59 AM ^
September 4th, 2015 at 9:00 AM ^
September 4th, 2015 at 10:12 AM ^
Smith's drop was on a pass that's hard for RB's to pull down, high and right over his head.
September 4th, 2015 at 10:18 AM ^
I saw Smith greeted by 2-3 red shirts behind the line of scrimmage on like 70% of his runs. Yes, he missed a big cutback lane but he was running into a wall and had no choice on most of his carries.
September 4th, 2015 at 11:37 AM ^
difficult-to-fix problem with the team. As the season progresses and with very good Drevno-coaching, they will improve. However, what can't be fixed is running backs that have no vision or open field running instincts. As a back, they either have it or they don't and I don't believe any amount of Wheatley-coaching is going to fix that. So, they will either have to find other backs (Johnson, Higdon, Kerridge, maybe Isaac) or run other types of running plays (QB keeper, reverse, sweeps, who knows). Somehow I don't see Harbaugh abandoning manball though. He will find the right mix of people and keep coaching up the OL until it works.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:46 AM ^
Agreed.
Pass protect was good. B+. run blocking not so much. D. Part of that is lack of vision of backs but not all of it. Drake Johnson appears to be the only guy on team who sadly can find holes and do proper cutbacks. But there were not many holes esp in the 1st half. In the 2nd there were some once Utah tired. But pretty bad for a unit that now has 4 upperrclassmen on it.
September 4th, 2015 at 9:21 AM ^
a D might be a little too strong...A C would be my grade. We knew going into this game that Utah had a very good front 7.
September 4th, 2015 at 10:28 AM ^
yards on 29 carries and Rudock threw the ball 43 times for 279 yards for 2.6 and 6.5 yard averages per offensive attempt.
Those numbers in college football are, well, pedestrian in terms of production. Utah never allowed any big plays although it should have, and Michigan didn't either.
The Oline play is still a work in progress. Dline play was a strength although it registered the only sack of the night for either team on a blitz.
The game was very close by the numbers and the score with the difference being TO margin, which remains a major problem for this team.
September 4th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^
let's also not forget that tackling was not good yesterday...
September 4th, 2015 at 9:47 AM ^
"B" for pass blocking. Looked world's better than the last two years, but that is not saying much at all. There were some really nice pockets along with a few QB hits/hurries. ("B" means good, by the way to all the grade inflaters out there).
"D" for run blocking. Looked just like last year for the first three quarters. Not a single long run. Crushed our drives by putting us in second and long every ... single ... time until late in the game. Had a few nice holes here and there (not taken in many cases), but overall, we got our asses kicked on run blocking.
September 4th, 2015 at 10:07 AM ^
I think folks are being too hard on the OLine with regard to run blocking. They opened enough holes for a decent back to get through, but Smith didn't play like one. I'd give them a C+/B- for run blocking and Smith a D for his game. He bounces just one run outside and it's a different ballgame.
September 4th, 2015 at 9:48 AM ^
September 4th, 2015 at 10:16 AM ^
September 4th, 2015 at 11:57 AM ^
Who is to say that Utah wouldn't also have improved over the same period?
I agree that we obviously would be better after having a few games under our belts, however, anytime you go out west to play a top 25 team on a Thursday night where it is the premier matchup that day - it is going to be difficult to win - regardless of how many games you have played.
All in all we hung with them until the end - which bodes well for the future.
September 4th, 2015 at 2:07 PM ^
Every other year, I would agree, but for this year with a new coaching staff and a new system, I also would've wished to see a more manageable "warm-up" games in the opener. At least some experience of Ruddock meshing with our players in a "real-game" situation.
I know I'm biased, but I really think Michigan's trajectory of improvement, especially in the early part of this season, will be steeper than that of Utah (or many other teams for that matter).
September 4th, 2015 at 11:59 AM ^
September 4th, 2015 at 12:39 PM ^
I completely agree with you on this. I think we are far better off starting 4-0 against anyone than starting 2-2 or 3-1 against a couple of tough opponents. Early wins get Michigan ranked; early losses get Michigan dismissed. Boise St needed to beat quality opponents to be taken seriously (and even then many in the media didn't take them seriously), but Michigan does not. You go 4-0, you get ranked, and the perception of the team is very different than going 2-2 and hearing about your "struggles".
How many years did Syracuse basketball play all of their nonconference games at home or at least in NY against weak teams to build up a gawdy record and get ranked high? Then they could be barely .500 in conference play and stay ranked and seeded decently in the NCAA tourney. Not a perfect comparison, but still...
For a big time program like Michigan, wins make positive press and losses make negative press and it doesn't matter who the opponents were. I'll take the positive press of 4-0.
September 4th, 2015 at 12:34 PM ^
Pass pro was really improved upon since last year, as expected with 5 returning starters. Run blocking was horrendous, not improved upon at all. It looked like they were getting stalled right off the get go.
September 4th, 2015 at 1:25 PM ^
the fourth and one was smith's fault. plenty of room to the left, no room up the lineman's ass.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:10 AM ^
Rudock was hurried on the Darboh long overthrow. That was one instance where the pass rush definitely affected his accuracy, so I don't blame Rudock for that one (maybe a blown assignment?). Overall, though, the OL seemed much more consistent on pass protection. It was nice to see a QB with enough time to sit in the pocket and go through progressions on a handful of passing plays.
September 4th, 2015 at 10:58 AM ^
Still, the overthrow was bad on the first bomb that went amiss. That was the play that could have changed the game and loosened up the defense. He was 5 yards open. You just lay it out there and let him run under it. If you can't hit that play, any defense in the country can load up the box with 8-9 guys and stop your running game. As has been the case for many games over the last several years, if we have even a competent passing game to keep the defense honest, we can win. I won't put the blame on Rudock because of all the obvious pressure on him, but his play was poor and it was the reason we lost the game. I'm sure he will be better when he relaxes.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:10 AM ^
I didn't see what you saw.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:10 AM ^
OP says: "This looked like an OL of the great past ....."
Stats say: 76 yards on 29 carries (with, of course, no sacks)
I'm as excited as I've ever been about Michigan football, and things have gotten better, but the line didn't look _great_ to me.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:14 AM ^
They were better but still not great. A lot of Rudock's misses were the result of him having to get rid of it a little before he was ready. The lack of the spin-o-ramas is probably more Rudock vs Gardner than 2014 OL vs 2015 OL. I do think the RBs generally did a better job with blitz pick-up though, except one or two situations.
Run game was pretty ugly early on the other hand, maybe even a step back compared to late last season. The middle of the line was consistently ceding 2 yards right after the snap. It seemed to be strength vs technique or assignment though, which is disappointing considering the size of our line. It's also a harder, long term problem to fix. They did seem to improve through the game, which is encouraging. Utah's front seven is legit good too, so maybe it's just strength of competition. Unfortunately, we have quite a few good front sevens left on the schedule though.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:14 AM ^
Great may be a little much, but honestly they looked solid. Very good pass protect against a very good pass rushing team.
The run block was average, maybe slightly worse. But I think our RB's lack of vision made it look worse than it was and keep in mind there are few run defenses better than Utah's we will face this year
September 4th, 2015 at 8:15 AM ^
Yes, loved the pass protection. Pretty darned impressive. The lights were off in "Sack Lake City."
Conversely, we couldn't seem to open too many creases in the run game. Of course, the other side had a pretty stout front seven, and they clearly were stacking the box to stop the run most of the game and gamble that our passing game would be a bit lackluster.
Looks like the Utes were right.
I was hopeful Rudock and the entire offense would be in better sync. It felt like about 30% of the time, they were just "off."
On paper, we should match up well with just about anyone. Perhaps we just don't have "it" quite yet.
Here's to hoping the coaches can break down our break downs and fix 'em!
September 4th, 2015 at 8:20 AM ^
I think that was the big takeaway from this game, for me. The fact that they weren't in sync yet and that something like this can be improved quickly with more playing time. That has me excited because I think we'll see a lot of improvement on offense this year as the season progresses.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:24 AM ^
I think this is an important point. Utah has been a top-notch pass rush team in recent years. I think our OL performed above expectations from a pass proctection perspective against a very good defensive front 7. Running game? Maybe not so much. But they exceeded my expectations against the pass rush.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:15 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 4th, 2015 at 8:17 AM ^
I was telling a buddy of mine last night that the OLine play was improved a lot. Pass blocking looked great, gotta give them credit for 0 sacks. I mean that was very different than what we've been used to. Give credit to Rudock for properly bailing out a play or two before taking a sack. The OLine did great.
In the run, I think they did above average, above what I was expecting. I think there were a lot of missed holes by our RBs, but when Utah's good DLine got penetration it wasn't a big TFL. I think at most I noticed a 1yd TFL. If it was ever more it was when we were running outside the tackles. They looked strong and I saw a ton of potential. I'm excited to see how much they improve when our running game also improves.
September 4th, 2015 at 9:00 AM ^
There were some seriously missed holes, but there were a good share of plays where there was no whole to be found. One play in particular that stands out was the 4th and 1 where a pulling Kalis (-2) ran right past a crashing DE/LB (BUCK?) to block a next level defender who wasn't a threat to converting a 4th and 1. SMH...
The UFR will be very telling in this outing.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:17 AM ^
September 4th, 2015 at 8:28 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 4th, 2015 at 8:18 AM ^
Notable improvement in pass production, yes, but there were few real holes for the RBs. There's every reason to be confident that the run blocking will improve, but I didn't see much improvement in that specific area last night.
Would better RBs help? Absolutely. Smith runs hard and always keeps his legs moving after contact, but he's pretty slow-footed and doesn't exhibit much vision. I was sort of surprised that Isaac didn't get more carries.
September 4th, 2015 at 8:25 AM ^
isaac and green missed a few blocks in pass protection
might be holding their run #s back
September 4th, 2015 at 8:21 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad