Things/Players etc. you want to see v. Indiana

Submitted by ijohnb on October 13th, 2017 at 9:09 AM

I know that "basic elementary offensive competence" is the most likely and apt response, but aside from this generality, what are some specific things or players that you hope to see stand out in the Indiana game that would bode well on Saturday and for the rest of the season?  I have a couple.

1. Breakthrough reciever - Grant Perry is very good at doing what he does, but what he does doesn't strike fear in the minds of opposing defenses.  I think the loss of Tarik Black may have been more significant than any of us really knew at the time, and DPJ or Crawford really needs to step up to stretch defenses.  I don't think anybody really respects us a deep threat, and that kind of trickles down to the rest of the offense.  Teams sending pressure, really crowding the box.  I would really like to see one of these recievers emerge as a real threat, and I think that DPJ in particular should get a lot more targets.

2. Generating turnovers - This is not something we have done much of since Florida.  It could be that "not turning the ball over" is the more important thing, and I know that certain turnovers are kind of luck, but as good as our defense has been we really haven't taken the ball away much and our turnover margin in our last 10 games is atrocious.  I would like to see the D get all over the ball and try to come away with a couple of TOs.

3.  Animated Gif Harbaugh - I know that officials are cracking down on coach meltdowns, but with the exception of The Game last year, it seems like our teams under Harbaugh have kind of fed off of his outstanding sideline antics and played with a lot of intensity when he is fired up.  I don't think he needs to launch his headset but I don't think I would mind seeing an official getting a piece of his mind this weekend.

What are some others you hope to see.




October 13th, 2017 at 10:49 AM ^

Haha I would expect our offense to have a run, run, play action cadence this week. Or run, run, run if we are successful enough. I think we can manball Indiana. I also think O'Korn's throws will be basicall under 7 yards or over 20 this week. It'll be simple stuff like sticks and meshes and screens or it'll be posts and gos off play action. 

Just my guess.


October 13th, 2017 at 10:29 AM ^

Crawford just doesn't have the speed to burn people and hasn't made any "plays" he is more posession receiver than anything else and even then he has bad hands. He is very average so far unfortunately. 

DPJ needs to run more crisp routes but has the athletic ability to get step up on almost all CBs and definitely safeties. Run him out of the slots and go deep. 


October 13th, 2017 at 1:57 PM ^

last seaon a few times, but the ball was never thown accurately.  One that jumps to mind was the first play against MSU, he was wide open for a long TD pass, but it was overthrown.


October 13th, 2017 at 9:16 AM ^

like to see more life out of harbaugh, and also would like to see atleast 6-8 throws to DPJ, 6-8 to perry, 5-8 tight ends, a couple to evans and maybe 1 to crawford, mcdoom-0. I also would rather see peters play but i just dont think thats gona happen unless okorn gets hurt or throws 4 interceptions. 3 isnt enough i guess 

snarling wolverine

October 13th, 2017 at 3:46 PM ^

If Crawford/McDoom are going to be in the receiver rotation, we've got to throw to them sometimes.  

Besides, didn't Crawford catch a bomb for a TD last Saturday?  Yes, it was overturned by holding, but that doesn't change that he beat his man deep.


October 13th, 2017 at 9:19 AM ^

Yeah, DPJ in decent patterns would be nice.  Would also like to see a RB have a good day - ala Isaac the first couple of games.  But the most important for me: JOK settling down and having a respectable game.  I don't really care if he's a hero throwing, don't care if he runs for 100, and don't care if he's imperceptable.  Just manage the game, and get the ball safely into the hands of the skill players.  Let them do the work.


October 13th, 2017 at 10:26 AM ^

It isn't already? But, the real reason is we know what we have with JOK and he is a 5th year senior. He is not the future of the program in any way and it feels like wasting time having him play, especially if the two are close. Which it sounds like. At least with Peters in the game when the offense struggles or turns the ball over or whatever it's growing pains building towards something bigger in 2018 and 2019. When the offense struggles with JOK it is just a waste of time because it means nothing going forward. 

Jake Ryans Hair

October 13th, 2017 at 10:31 AM ^

We're not at the point where the season is over and we're just planning for the future. This team is still in a position to contend for the conference championship, even if that isn't at all likely. We should still be sending out the QB that gives us the best chance to win each game -- for now that seems to be O'Korn.


October 13th, 2017 at 10:43 AM ^

I'm not convinced that JOK is that QB. He is in his third year in the system and can't go from read one to two. He is hyper aware of the rush and gets happy feet. He seems to just not have a natural feel for playing QB. Sure, he throws and nice looking ball and has some mobility, but he plays like an athlete playing QB, not a QB who is athletic. 


October 13th, 2017 at 10:50 AM ^

playing time at Michigan has comprised of 1) Indiana game 2016 - Don't screw up and let the defense win the game, 2) Purdue - Holy shit we look really bad and I have to play now, and 3) MSU at night, Saturday Night Football, unplayable conditions approaching soon.

This is the first game that is going to be kind of a normal start, without some kind of circumstances that make it rushed, neutered, or otherwise unusual.  I think this will be the week when we find out if he is terrible or passable. 

I do think if we lose this game Peters will start to see the field.



October 13th, 2017 at 11:02 AM ^

I'm including his time at Houston as part of my evaluation. Whether commentors here want to admit it or not, that still counts in the process of determining who he is. What you laid out still doesn't excuse him failing to go from progression one to two or his happy feet. That is weather independent. 


October 13th, 2017 at 12:06 PM ^

The beauty of it is, we're going to find out soon. I never thought JOK was good. I always thought it was a mistake to bring him here to begin with. He doesn't fit this system at all. I trust JH but he is not above making mistakes like some on here would have us believe. If I had to bet, I think we will be seeing another QB very soon. 

Let's hope for the best for tomorrow though and hopefully JOK has a good game and I am wrong. I 


October 13th, 2017 at 11:18 AM ^

Way to totally misconstrue my point to fit your narrative. The offense is butt, the defense is not. My point is predicated on the assumption that the offense will not see a noticable downgrade with Peters at the helm instead of JOK. So, if the offense is going to struggle, might as well do it with growth toward the future in mind. GTFOH with your strawman bullshit.


October 13th, 2017 at 11:35 AM ^

might as well do it with growth toward the future in mind.  Why play Cole and Kugler then?  

I get the point about the defense but if the offense is struggling and we're building towards the future with the offense, Cole or Kugler(and neither Hill or Poggi) are going to be part of the offense in 2018 or 2019.  


October 13th, 2017 at 11:43 AM ^

think the difference is that chemistry between a QB and recievers can take time to develop, and since we have really young recievers as well, it would not be worst idea to begin to have them working with the QB of the future in game action. 

That is assuming he is the QB of the future, but I am not sure that is a wise assumption right now.  It is completely possible, likely even, that Speight could return and play next year and that McCaffrey may the QB of the future.  I don't think Peters current positioning on the roster, along with lack of playing time this year, bode particularly well for him as an impact QB.


October 13th, 2017 at 1:36 PM ^

is about building for the future.  If that is true across the team then you would want to get the players off the field who won't be back next year and put in players who will be here next year.  If you're building for the future why wouldn't you want two new linemen on the field who will be back next year?  Instead you want to leave Cole and Kugler in the starting lineup so next year we have a new center and new tackle who have possibly never played a college game at those positions.  You even said in one of your above posts if the offense (not JOK, the offense) is struggling might as well do it with the future in mind.  The offense is struggling with both Cole and Kugler playing as well as JOK.  Why not build the entire offense for the future? The reality is you are either anti-JOK, just huge pro Peters or a combination of the two.



October 13th, 2017 at 2:15 PM ^

No, building towards the future is part of the point. A larger part of it is that going from JOK to Peters will at most result in an incremental downgrade at the position. And that such a small downgrade warrants consideration towards the future. Put simply, going from Peters to JOK will not affect the final W-L and what you're suggesting would affect final W-L.