Post Game Thoughts [Snowflake Landing Spot]

Submitted by MGrether on October 6th, 2012 at 7:13 PM

(+)

Nice to see 300 yards of rushing. Seems to have been Hoke's message for the past two weeks.

Defense was dominant. Anything they got had to be spectacular or hard earned.

Clock killing. We were on the field for a LONG time.

FG kicking, aside from the crossbar one.

(-)

Kick off coverage was eh (fumble recover aside)

Fitz... Suffered today from the "8-9 guys in the box to stuff Denard and I don't have an extra blocker like he does and we are not passing the ball." Even still, 1.1 ypc sucks.

WR drops. Don't know if it was because of the cold or what... but there were at least 3 good gains that Denard put on the money that the WR dropped.

Needing 24 carries from Denard to win. Seeing him rack up yards was nice and he didn't take any big hits... but there should have been another way to win this game.

[ED:BISB -  All your snowflakes are belong to this thread]

Comments

bluebrains98

October 7th, 2012 at 9:56 AM ^

My hatred for OSU almost drives me to want to see them win all of their games (excluding UM). Success will just make the sanctions sting that much more...kind of like when you see the holding flag get thrown when your opponent is on offense and you root for them to score, knowing it will get called back.

All-American

October 6th, 2012 at 7:33 PM ^

The defense was solid, and I'm definitely impressed with Taylor at CB. He's stepped up big time.

I was also impressed with Borges's play calling to start the game. A good mix of screens and misdirection opened up holes for Denard in the middle, and really got us off to a good start.

Hopefully we can build off this against Illinois and get ready to take down sparty!

JHendo

October 6th, 2012 at 7:40 PM ^

I've never seen someone call more fair catches back there than he has so far this year.  I'm all for self preservation and all, but I'm really perplexed by this, and this wasn't just today that it's been bugging me.  I started noticing it during the UMass game.  He'll have plenty of room to actually attempt a return (in many situations, the nearest defender is still 7-10 away yds at the time), and he'll just fair catch it. Does he have absolutely no sense of where anyone is at during a punt, is he scared of taking a hit, or is it possible Ferrigno has coached an extremely passive PR game?  I'd be quite curious so see some stats on how many fair catches we've called this year (as well as returns vs. FC's) and see how it compares with the rest of the country.  I'd have to imagine our percentage of returns attempted out of how many times we've been punted to is pretty close to the bottom of the FBS.

Edit: Not sure if anyone cares, but after taking a quick look, as of last week, we're ranked 2nd to last in the nation with only 3 punt returns attempted...

BlueUPer

October 6th, 2012 at 7:35 PM ^

Great performance. Seems like a lot of things were cleaned up over the last two weeks. Play calling was conservative but effective. Our tackling was solid.

Still don't know how good we are interms of the big picture but in the Big10 we are the best squad.

snowcrash

October 6th, 2012 at 7:36 PM ^

Next to the Neb game last year, this was the most complete game they've played under Hoke. The defense was excellent, they mostly controlled the line of scrimmage and didn't have any disastrous plays. I like the way Ryan keeps the QB in front of him instead of launching himself and taking himself out of the play. Offensively Robinson ran like Robinson and didn't make any knucklehead throws. The one real negative was his decision to hand off the ball when Smith had no chance. Special teams were good, but Gibbons probably should not attempt any FGs beyond 42 yards. Wile should kick those.

Setshot

October 6th, 2012 at 7:38 PM ^

but we need to get more production from our running game outside of Denard. In my opinion, Rawls needs to start getting some more Carries. It's worth a shot seems how fitz struggles to gain a yard every time he touches the ball. One other thing, is gallon really our best option at returning punts? Gallon always fair catches (sometimes drops it when he calls a fair catch), or lets it bounce and roll 20 yards down field. I don't see what he's doing that somebody else can't.

MgoblueAF

October 6th, 2012 at 7:54 PM ^

Clark still knows how to deflect passes. This time it led to an INT. Also, the line drive punt to Gallon was the only fair catch that really bothered me.

BlueManballGroup

October 6th, 2012 at 7:56 PM ^

"Fitz... Suffered today from the "8-9 guys in the box to stuff Denard and I don't have an extra blocker like he does and we are not passing the ball." Even still, 1.1 ypc sucks."

Well Denard managed 235 yards on 24 carries with the defense focused on him. The threat of Denard on the reads that Fitz got should have helped not hurt him.

BlueManballGroup

October 6th, 2012 at 8:55 PM ^

That's on a designed run. A lot of Denard's good runs come on reads where Fitz isn't blocking for him.  I was just saying that Fitz should have at least done better on the read handoffs he received.  Denard gives him the ball and options off a defender. At that point on a read play Denard and Fitz have the same blockers vs defenders.  That's not a comparison of the two (Denard is obviously a lot better) I'm just saying Fitz was really terrible.

Victor Hale II

October 6th, 2012 at 7:59 PM ^

IMO, Purdue ~= ND, and we manhandled both teams with the obvious turnover issue against ND. I actually felt good about quite a few things after ND, except the TO problem and the final score.

I like our chances of getting to the conference title game. Nebraska and ohio will be tough road games.

blueheron

October 6th, 2012 at 8:04 PM ^

How soon people seem to forget about the 1000-yard season Fitz had last year. As far as Rawls is concerned, he was running against either a tired defense or a 2nd-team defense. (Not sure which ...) At this point he still looks like a rich man's Kevin Grady (not necessarily a bad thing) to me. I still think Fitz has a better chance of running effectively against top-notch teams. (I realize he didn't do so against a mediocre one today, but he lots of good moments last year.)

Mich1993

October 6th, 2012 at 9:35 PM ^

I think we need to keep going with Fitz.  I don't think he's reading things like he did last year.  That will come as the season goes along.  He hasn't had a lot of carries, and it took him a bunch of games to get in the groove last year as well.

marti221

October 7th, 2012 at 12:06 AM ^

That was the same defence Fitz was getting stopped for no gain against over and over. You're really gonna tell me that they were THAT much more fatigued with 3-4 min left, compared to 6-7 min left.... He came in and racked up more yardage than Fitz had the entire day... ON 4 CARRIES.

LSAClassOf2000

October 7th, 2012 at 9:25 AM ^

To be fair, we were 6-6 in the red zone on offense against Purdue (3 TDs, 3 FGs), which makes us 17-20 on the year in the red zone (11 TDs, 6 FGs). If the trend holds, we would actually put up a comparable performance to last year (49-58 in 2011, 37 TDs and 12 FGs). If we project the same rate of success this year and assume 58 appearances in the red zone, we would go 50-58 overall this year in theory. Something in that neighborhood  is still quite achievable with seven games left (at least the relative success, if not the actual number of trips to the RZ, although an average of around 5 trips per game to get over 50 trips for the season would be pretty good).

mGrowOld

October 6th, 2012 at 8:24 PM ^

That comment is insane.  The offense scored 37 points, on the road, against a team being played up as the B1G "flavor ot the month" team destined to represent the Leaders division in the championship game.  Everybody on the B1G network picked Purdue to win.  Everybody on ESPN (save Desmond and he took some shit) picked Purdue to win.  But instead we smashed them and hung 44 on the board.

"Yet much work needs to be done in the redzone."  Michigan fans are NEVER happy.

aiglick

October 6th, 2012 at 8:27 PM ^

To be fair this is the "snowflakes" thread though I agree with you and other posters that we thoroughly took care of business and then some today against a decent team in a ok conference (kind of generous but whatever).

Want to see the defense keep showing up and owning and for the offense to not turn the ball over and keep putting points on the board.

On to Illinois.

trueblueintexas

October 6th, 2012 at 8:36 PM ^

Happy with the defense today. Happy with 300+ rushing yards. Happy with dominant win on the road.

Not sure why we still seem to miss recognition of rushers off the edge. That's happened in every game this year and it doesn't seem to be getting better.

A little surprised Denard finished 50% on passing attempts. Thought it would have been better given the domination.

lhglrkwg

October 6th, 2012 at 8:47 PM ^

Easily dispatching a bad big ten team is not something that has really happened too often in the last 5 years. It feels so comforting to feel like we're back to same ole grind

MGoStrength

October 6th, 2012 at 9:03 PM ^

I know we are not even half way through this year, but what can is say...I am always looking ahead.  Anyone concerned about our team next year?  Our defensive lineman won't have developed enough yet to contribute, we lose Campbell and Roh, Ross/Bolden will replace Demens just fine, and Countess/Taylor/Avery will be a step up since Coutess will swap with Floyd, we lose Kovacs.  But losing Denard, makes me wonder if we go with Gardner at QB or at WR.  Either way, wherever he's not will be a poor position...QB or WR.  I am concerend about D-line, O-line, RB (now that there's no D-Rob to help running), and WR.  Next years seems like more of a transition than ever.

jdon

October 6th, 2012 at 9:23 PM ^

 I think we will be better next year as our talent becomes more experienced.  Sure, we lose the most exciting player we have had since Desmond, but I expect a better team when we have a better passer... and defensively we will have countess back, our freshmen developed adn ultimately we will have some more depth and talent.   we are on the upswing my brother!

 

Mich1993

October 6th, 2012 at 9:48 PM ^

The D-line will be fine.  Sophmore Pipkins >= Campbell. Clark, Beyer, Washington will be a year better.  One of Black, Heitzman, Godin, Wormley will be fine at SDE.  The defense will be in the transition year from really good in 2013 to dominant in 2014.

O-line will be passable if Lewan comes back with Lewan-Kalis-Miller-Burzynski-Schofield with Bryant/Magnuson plus other redshirt freshmen as back-ups.  I think Burzynski is ready to play if needed.  He looked pretty good pulling in the play he get in against ND, and Hoke subbed only him in with the starters at the end of today's game.

I think overall the offense will struggle.  I think Bellomy would do well at QB if we had a really good line, RB and WRs, but we won't be quite there yet in 2013.  I am of the opinion we'll play Gardner at QB because we'll need his athleticism to make plays.  I think he'll do well at QB once he gets consistent playing time. 

ChopBlock

October 6th, 2012 at 9:17 PM ^

So Denard was only 8-16, but his recievers definitely dropped a couple balls. I think that the run set up the pass nicely and that Denard had a better game in the air than the stats might indicate.

BlueGoM

October 6th, 2012 at 9:18 PM ^

Anyone else concerned about his hand? He was holding his right hand awkwardly at the end of the game.  Anyone hear anything more?

We should be able to handle Illinois relatively easily next week, setting up a nice showdown vs MSU... given MSU's struggles this season I don't see how we don't beat them.

 

Leonhall

October 6th, 2012 at 10:22 PM ^

Feels a little like OSU last year, I won't believe we can beat them until we finally do. I'm still very concerned with our lack of a running game besides Denard. Still think he is gonna have to throw the ball for us to beat state, they seem to know how to control him. I also shiver thinking about fat Levon running full speed on the edge towards jt Floyd all day...I'm not ready to call Msu an easy win.