So what's the deal with Fitz?
[Great win yesterday, and I'm obviously very happy, but in true Wolverine fashion, I need to find something to complain about. ;)]
I'm worried about Fitz. Previously I'd chalked this up to changes in the O-line, particularly the loss of Molk. And he did look good in the 2nd half against ND. But more and more I'm convinced its something else. I mean, Denard is running just fine, and when Rawls came in yesterday he tore it up (albeit in garbage time). Do you think:
A. Fitz has lost a step
B. Defenses have committed to him, in a way they didn't last year
C. He's not getting the right playcalls
or
D. No, it really is the O-line
if you think it's A, then I have to ask why? Is it an outgrowth of getting suspended, or something else? If B, what is it they are doing? If C, what kind of run plays should he be getting. And if D, where exactly is the problem and why is this only affecting the RBs?
Also, do you think it's time to start Rawls and see how that goes, or should we stick with Fitz?
Note: I have no predetermined views of what the answer is
October 7th, 2012 at 10:46 AM ^
my thoughts exactly
October 7th, 2012 at 12:20 PM ^
you're both assholes! that makes 3 of us, and 5 or 6 if you count all the people who have induced me to be an asshole to them lately by being assholes themselves.
this is not trolling, people. it's flamebait. i mean, i'm not wrong.
October 7th, 2012 at 2:17 PM ^
Jon06? I mean, nice rant, but WTF is it about? Gave me a chuckle though.
October 7th, 2012 at 7:39 PM ^
Considering Fitz's woes have been a season long trend and are not confined to the Purdue game, I think this goes beyond the scope of the snowflake thread.
October 7th, 2012 at 9:29 PM ^
Do you guys really want everything Michigan football-related to be crammed into one gigantic thread? What is so horrible about having different threads for different topics?
October 7th, 2012 at 10:41 AM ^
It looked to me like purdues game plan was: fuck it, let denard do his thing, we're keying on the running backs.
While it failed miserably, that was the same gameplan used by ND.
We're gonna see 8 people in the box all year, which is going to be troublesome against better defenses if our downfield passing game doesn't improve
October 7th, 2012 at 10:49 AM ^
October 7th, 2012 at 10:55 AM ^
Please. Give them a little credit. They've had our number for 4 years, and are probably the gold standard in how to control Denard.
MSU had a hangover in the first half yesterday. They manhandled Indiana thereafter.
They are hands down our toughest defensive test remaining
October 7th, 2012 at 11:31 AM ^
We should remember that one of the primary factors in our 2010 loss to MSU was Denard throwing two drive-killing INTs in the red zone. We were moving the ball early in that game, but those were real momentum-changers.
Plus we had no defense whatsoever, and Bell and Baker ran at will on us.
October 7th, 2012 at 12:11 PM ^
This is the best way to contain Denard.
That said, I don't think we'll get a repeat performance when we play them this year. I expect to beat them.
October 7th, 2012 at 3:13 PM ^
October 7th, 2012 at 11:43 AM ^
A hangover from what? Their stirring comeback victory over Eastern? I'm one who doesn't talk any shit to a team that beat us. I'm just saying that the Big Ten sucks this year and MSU is no exception. Neither are we, but we appear to be improving at this point in the season and they most certainly do not. Their D does not look as good as expected, and if our offense plays the way it did in the first half then we should win. That's all I'm saying. And I never said they weren't our toughest test remaining. What I said is that the test they present is not looking close to Bama, and probably not better than ND. The fact that they beat us for the last 4 years affects my ability to talk shit to them, not my ability to recognize among friends that they look like shit this year.
October 7th, 2012 at 11:48 AM ^
They had OSU last week, not Eastern. I don't expect us to tear their defense up. We should still beat them, because their offense seems to be regressing and their OL is falling apart.
October 7th, 2012 at 5:05 PM ^
October 7th, 2012 at 12:12 PM ^
I will agree that MSU has shown an ability to slow down Denard, but since he's only been the starter for 2 games against them I'm not ready to crown them as Denard's Kryptonite. Don't forget, ND was blitzed by him for 2 years, then he had his worst game ever against them and everyone talked about how this ND defense had "figured him out."
MSU has a competent defense, but they get no push on the line and their linebackers have not been able to fill the gaps. And while they had a bit of a hangover from the OSU game, this is Indiana we are talking about. Hell, if Hill's fumble was ruled a such on that punt, Indiana had a chance to go up and maybe win that game. MSU is no longer the juggernaut people expected when the season started, and I'm high on UM beating them this year.
October 7th, 2012 at 12:57 PM ^
If you asked me who is going to win the UM/MSU game, I'd tell you its UM at this point just judging by which team looks better overall. But MSU has been able to figure out exactly how to beat Denard the last 2 years. There's no reason that they won't draw up the same game plan, because it has clearly worked. Blitz Denard early and often. Force him into making bad throws. Keep him inside the pocket. Make him beat you with his arm.
I'd like to think UM will win this game, but its a bit of a tossup. What I do like is our defense is beginning to really improve, and if Indiana can live in MSU's backfield all day, there's no reason to think Michigan can't. I want Jake Ryan to make Maxwell's life a living hell.
October 7th, 2012 at 7:50 PM ^
MSU hasn't had a particularly special gameplan or done anything that other teams haven't tried to do against Denard. Other than the miraculously-timed A-Gap blitzes, MSU has simply executed a gameplan that virtually all of our opponents have attempted since it became obvious that Denard is approximately 1,447 times better as a runner than a passer.
I still believe that we need to do a better job as a passing team to feel like MSU doesn't pose a threat, but it seems clear that the Spartans do not have the defense or offense that they had last year.
October 7th, 2012 at 9:33 PM ^
MSU had a hangover in the first half yesterday.I swear we've been saying this about MSU every week. Honestly, they've looked like crap most of the season.
October 7th, 2012 at 11:00 AM ^
MSU has a great defense...UM has issues throwing the ball and getting any production from their RBs. I am a lil scared of this game, esp when our fans show them no respect for the fact they have OWNED us the last 4 years.
October 7th, 2012 at 11:19 AM ^
October 7th, 2012 at 2:16 PM ^
Do you deal with Sparties on a daily basis? They deserve ZERO respect for the last four years.
October 7th, 2012 at 2:21 PM ^
defense ON PAPER at the beginning of the year. Not so much on the field. Their star DBs are kinda stinking it up. YES I think M wins by two TDs. YES I am biased. Too f'n bad.
Book it, M by 13-17. Fuck the green greek boys.
Edit: forgot to mention their O-line is one of the worst in the B1G. Jake Ryan will take up residence in Maxwell's grill.
October 7th, 2012 at 2:36 PM ^
Well, that "great defense" gave up 27 points to INDIANA... In the first half. No, they do not have a great defese. They have a GOOD one, and just so happens, we do too. I won't even bring up that pathetic offense.
October 7th, 2012 at 11:30 AM ^
October 7th, 2012 at 11:33 AM ^
October 7th, 2012 at 2:23 PM ^
played 'not to lose' in the 2nd half. His balls were in a jar on a shelf. OC lost the game for IU, not anything MSU did.
October 7th, 2012 at 2:03 PM ^
Purdue's strategy was pretty stupid. On both of Denard's big runs off the zone read, half the defense bit and on the second one, two dude actually TACKLED Fitz when Denard was a billion yards downfield.
October 7th, 2012 at 10:42 AM ^
I think we miss Molk more than we realize. Not placing blame on Mealer, but to this point I don't think our oline has been very good run blocking. Add to that a passing game that should strike fear into no one, I think defenses are able to bring their safeties up with confidence, always seems like we're out manned on running plays.
Denard needs very little blocking to give him a crease, RB's need a little more.
October 7th, 2012 at 10:43 AM ^
I believe you mean mere mortals need a little more.
October 7th, 2012 at 10:47 AM ^
I didn't count all the plays but at least a handful of Fitz's carries seemed to be an option from Denard where he makes the hand off decision based on the D.
...but I think more often Denard's trying to decide if he should run or not instead of passing, so the handoffs Fitz gets are ones that Denard doesn't think he has running room...so why would we expect Fitz to do better?
October 7th, 2012 at 11:00 AM ^
Yeah, I'm sure there's a "C) if there's no running room, handoff to Fitz" in the playbook.
October 7th, 2012 at 1:32 PM ^
wonder whether some of our more expert onlookers agree. It may be that Denard hands off if he doesn't see the run for himself; that doesn't mean it's there for Fitz.
I think they need to let Rawls have some runs, too, punish Ds a little (I don't always get the reluctance to "feature" more backs). And I also think that things are going to open up for Fitz as the O line gets better, even though he's often not placed in the best position to succeed.
October 7th, 2012 at 1:48 PM ^
...exactly what the zone read is designed to do.
The theory is that if Denard reads the play correctly and the offensive line blocks correctly, either he or Fitz will have a hole.
He's not handing the ball off when there's no room for anyone, he's handing the ball off when there's not a hole for himself; if the play is executed properly, that means there IS room for Fitz.
It's not like every single running play is either THERE ARE ALL THE HOLES FOR ALL POSSIBLE RUNNERS or THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ANYONE EVER. This would be a pretty boring sport if it was that black and white.
October 7th, 2012 at 10:48 AM ^
E. He's dancing around too much
I also think the OL took a step back this year even Lewan.
What I don't understand is, the pass protection is pretty damn good. They just can't run block for a RB.
October 7th, 2012 at 10:53 AM ^
run blocking hasn't been great at Michigan in many, many years. I would argue as far back as Jerry Hanlon's retirement
October 7th, 2012 at 11:01 AM ^
October 7th, 2012 at 2:25 PM ^
This.
October 7th, 2012 at 11:08 AM ^
has anybody beaten lewan on a regular basis this year? i thought he'd been pretty decent, but i haven't had time to read everything on the front page, and maybe i'm missing stuff in real time.
October 7th, 2012 at 11:19 AM ^
penalties, for one. And I don't think as donkey-hating as before, more of a dislike.
October 7th, 2012 at 10:50 AM ^
To me he looks indecisibe, many times insted of settling for a modest gain he would dance around and end up gaining nothing or losing yards. Not to say that the 0-line is doing a great job, or that the opposing teams are not loading the box, but to me he looks like Mike Shaw this year whereas last year he was more like Mike Hart. I agree with those who want to see Rawls with more carries.
October 7th, 2012 at 2:41 PM ^
Fitz has never, and will never, look like Mike Hart.
October 7th, 2012 at 4:59 PM ^
well last year he didn't look exactly like Mike Hart, he was like Mike Hart only faster!! Seriously speaking, last year he would make people miss in tight places and make something out of nothing, just like Mike Hart did throughout his entire career. Now he runs horizontally instead of vertically, just like Mike Shaw did his entire career.
October 7th, 2012 at 10:51 AM ^
A, C, and D.
October 7th, 2012 at 10:58 AM ^
Magnus - I'd like to ask you about A cause I see that too. Do you have any explanation for why this could happen? He's young - not exactly been over-utiilized and not injured (as far as I know).
But man he sure does look a step or two slower this year from last. And the burst seems to be missing when there are holes.
October 7th, 2012 at 11:17 AM ^
I'm not entirely sure. It looks to me like he's a little bigger this year than he was last season. Perhaps some added weight has taken away some of his explosiveness. I don't know. Maybe last year's success caused him to slack off a little bit in the off-season.
October 7th, 2012 at 12:03 PM ^
October 7th, 2012 at 12:14 PM ^
October 7th, 2012 at 12:32 PM ^