Yeah, this one should have been a noon game. Back in the day (i.e. the early 2000s), this would have been a comfortable Michigan rout on ESPN Plus. This game might end up that way, but the Wolverines are up just 28-17 heading into the half.
Michigan was nowhere near ready to play defense on IU's long touchdown score to Cody Latimer. In back-to-back weeks, Michigan's defense hasn't exactly responded too well to any sort of uptick in tempo.
Running from the shotgun on Michigan's first touchdown drive was a sight for sore eyes. The drive went 56 yards in 5 plays, with Toussaint rushing for half of those yards.
Before anyone extrapolates wildly, it should be noted that Indiana's defense is atrocious.
Jeremy Gallon took what was basically a bubble screen 70 yards, setting up Michigan's second score. Again, IU is very bad defensively, but Michigan is much more likely to find success when it spreads people out.
On a 1st & 10 late in the first, Gardner had all day to throw. Unfortunately, he threw it a half second too late, and Jeremy Jackson was not able to reel the ball in on the right sideline.
Derrick Green showed a nice burst on seven yard carry that closed out the first quarter. To start the second, he showed some nice feet, moving left and cutting niftily back to his right to pick up seven more.
On more than one occasion, Gardner didn't handle IU pressure too smoothly, especially the play in the second quarter when he was slow to get up.
IU's two scoring drives lasted just 1:03 and 1:21.
Yes, that should have been a holding call on A.J. Williams. You win some you lose some.
Jeremy Gallon's first half stats: 8 receptions, 170 yards, 1 TD.
No. 18 Michigan heads to Happy Valley to take on the Penn State Nittany Lions at Beaver Stadium, where the Wolverines have lost the last two times they've visited; of course, those two visits came during the Rich Rodriguez era.
On the surface, you would think a game against a team that just lost to Indiana by 20 would be a slam dunk, but, once again, I get the feeling that it won't be. I wasn't quite right on my 31-13 prediction for the Minnesota game, but at least I got Minnesota's point total right. Take away that Blake Countess pick six and my prediction was pretty close to spot on, which of course means absolutely nothing.
The oddsmakers have the Wolverines as just a 3-point favorite, a week after Michigan was a 19-point favorite against then 4-1 Minnesota. Will the game be that close? It will if Michigan fails to do a few things with consistency:
Devin Gardner vs. mistakes/road environment. One week of mistake-free football won't erase what happened during the Akron and UConn games. If Michigan is going to coast through this one into the second half with a lead of any size, Gardner cannot gift the Nittany Lions points and/or great field position. Penn State's defense has not been tremendous of late, giving up 34 to a speedy Central Florida team and, of course, 44 to Indiana's up-tempo spread bonanza.
However, Penn State is still 18th in total defense, given that their other three opponents were Syracuse, Eastern Michigan and Kent State. This is not a vintage Penn State defense, but playing at home against Michigan always has a way of motivating Big Ten foes. Gardner has played in the Horseshoe, at Nebraska (as a wide receiver) and saw time at quarterback against Michigan State in 2011, so the environment shouldn't be a complete shock to him.
That said, his ability to get the team on the same page when the crowd turns up the volume will go a long way toward limiting the sorts of basic errors he's made to date. Playing Minnesota at home during homecoming and then playing in Beaver Stadium are like going to the opera and then catching a Metallica concert.
Pass protection vs. PSU pass rush. The Nittany Lions don't have an elite pass rush on paper, but they are tied for 47th in the country in that department with 11 sacks on the season.
On the bright side for the Wolverines, PSU doesn't seem to have a single pass rushing specialist. The Nittany Lion defense has 11 players credited with at least half of a sack; No. 91 Da'Quan Jones and No. 84 Kyle Baublitz are tied for the team lead with two sacks apiece. Both are seniors and both play tackle. Chris Bryant, Graham Glasgow and Kyle Kalis will have a tough task ahead of them, even if PSU's numbers don't show it. If Gardner is getting pressure up the middle, you'll probably see a few big losses on sacks as Gardner scrambles to the edges, or, worse, an interception or two.
On that note, Jones leads Penn State in tackles for loss with 6.5 to date. For a squad historically known for its linebackers, Jones is the defensive player to watch on this PSU defense. Once Michigan recruiting target C.J. Olaniyan is second on the team with 4.5 tackles for loss from the defensive end spot.
Offensively, it's difficult to get much going if your interior OL is getting bull rushed and swim moved with even semi-regularity. Combine that with the road game environment and an early sack or a turnover could send Gardner spiraling back into the dark place he was in against UConn for most of that game.
UCF and Indiana exposed the PSU defense, so it's not as if it will be impossible for the Wolverines to successfully attack this group. However, the defensive line (especially Jones), is active and capable of making plays in the backfield, which Michigan hasn't exactly done a good job of preventing thus far. Also, as sad as it is to say, I don't know if Michigan has the same offensive firepower, speed-wise or pace-wise, as UCF and IU, respectively.
Blake Countess (and safety help) vs. Allen Robinson. Simply put, if Allen Robinson has a game like he had against Indiana last week, Michigan will be in big trouble. As much as Michigan fans might not want to hear it, the gameplan might just have to feature a lot of that soft, Cover 2 shell we've seen much of this season.
Michigan should be able to get into the upper 20s in points. In order for that to be enough, Michigan will have to limit the big plays when the Penn State offense is on the field. Conservative defense is not fun to watch, but it has been effective for Michigan. Hackenberg has thrown just four interceptions in five games, but he is still a freshman. The odds are good he'll give Michigan a pick at some point.
In the meantime, especially in the first half, don't be surprised if Michigan is giving up lots of yardage. You won't have a fun time watching it happen, but as long as those seriously threatening long drives end with field goals or punts once PSU crosses midfield, Michigan will be okay.
Tight end Kyle Carter is a distant second in the receiving department, with 11 receptions for 147 yards. Wide receiver Brandon Felder has 16 receptions for 135 yards of his own. QB Christian Hackenberg has thrown eight touchdown passes to date, five of them going Robinson's way. Sophomore receiver Geno Lewis is the only other receiver with a touchdown score; tailback Bill Belton has the other two.
Like the Joel Stave-Jared Abbrederis connection in Madison, you pretty much know where Hackenberg is going to go with the football. As always, stopping it is easier said than done. But, if Robinson has a merely "good" day as opposed to transcendent, I don't know if Penn State has enough receiving talent to test Michigan's at times leaky non-Countess corners.
The tight ends, Carter included, haven't showed up much on the stat sheet, but Hackenberg will look to them. Big time recruit Adam Breneman has just five receptions for 49 yards to date, but I wouldn't be surprised to see him get a target or two. Coverage up the seams will have to better than it was on scoring plays against Akron and UConn. In general, Michigan did have a little bit of trouble checking Minnesota TE Maxx Williams, which might not mean anything going forward but is something to think about.
Rushing offense vs. PSU run D. Much of the focus is on the quarterbacks, what with Hackenberg showing promise as a freshman and Gardner having his struggles. However, the ground game will be key; this is still the Big Ten, after all.
As far as run-stopping linebackers go, middle linebacker No. 40 Glenn Carson leads PSU with 39 tackles, 3.5 for loss. Mike Hull and Nyeem Wartman have 15 and 14 tackles, respectively. Joe Kerridge vs. Carson will be a battle to watch.
Both teams boast top 20 rushing defenses, with Michigan at No. 9 and Penn State at No. 20. I wouldn't expect either team to have a 100-yard back on Saturday, but that doesn't necessarily matter. If Fitzgerald Toussaint can put together a Minnesota-esque (or, better yet, a UConn-esque) performance, that should be enough to take the playmaking burden off of Gardner's shoulders.
Of course, Michigan will need to block to make that happen. Brian has talked about this at MGoBlog this week, but it remains to be seen whether Michigan's strategy of putting Michael Schofield next to Taylor Lewan--essentially tipping run in the process--can work against teams with a little more defensive oomph than Minnesota has.
I'm not sure if there any counters available with this look, or if Michigan will just try to mash their way to a few yards per play with this look and hope for the best. Either way, Michigan needs probably 70-80 yards from Toussaint for it to be a relatively successful evening on the ground, plus whatever magic Gardner can produce on scrambles and miscellaneous designed runs.
Rushing D vs. PSU rushing O. On the other side, Penn State has had offensive line struggles of its own but the numbers show the Nittany Lions having a trio of capable backs. Zach Zwinak is the feature back, having carried the mail 84 times for 369 yards (4.4 YPC) and eight touchdowns. He has a long of 38 yards; he's not a big play threat, but if Michigan's playing the generally conservative gameplan I expect they will, I wouldn't be surprised if he chips away at the Michigan defense to the tune of 70-80 yards of his own on 15-20 carries.
Bill Belton has a bit more speed to his game (he returns kicks and punts, as well); he's got 284 yards on 43 carries, good for 6.6 yards a pop. His long of 51 came against Eastern Michigan, however, and he was held to just 31 yards on 10 carries against Indiana. Belton is a pass catching threat, though, so the Wolverines will have to be cognizant of him in the flats and on wheel routes.
Sophomore Akeel Lynch has nice numbers too (35 carries, 270 yards, 7.7 YPC), but he didn't play against Syracuse and managed a combined 39 yards on eight carries against UCF and Indiana. That's not bad, but it doesn't seem like he'll be a major part of the gameplan.
In short, with Ondre Pipkins out for the year, Quinton Washington will need to have a big game up front if Michigan is going to prevent Zwinak from eclipsing his season average YPC of 4.4. One thing is for sure: Penn State will run the ball. The Nittany Lions have a run-pass split of 64:36, which accounts for Hackenberg's 55 attempts against Indiana. The PSU offense will likely have to approach equilibrium against Michigan, but with a freshman quarterback and a pair of serviceable backs, Penn State will look to run first before taking its shot downfield to Robinson, especially if Gardner struggles early on.
---
Once again, I find myself feeling not incredibly confident about beating a team that just took a pretty brutal loss. Michigan has blown out much better PSU teams in Happy Valley than this one, but this doesn't have the feel of a blowout, let alone a moderately comfortable win.
I expect Michigan to have some first quarter struggles. The Wolverine defense always seems to bend and ultimately break on the first drive of the game; if the Wolverines can keep PSU out of the end zone if that happens again, they'll be in good shape.
Michigan won't have consistent success on the ground, but, this game will be won or lost by the quarterbacks, with the ground games serving as ancillary components.
Michigan probably can't match Indiana's passing output or UCF's balanced offensive attack, but I don't think they have to in order to come away with a win. This game will be close, but I'm going to roll with the idea that Gardner's turnover-free performance against the Gophers was the turning over of a new leaf. Score: Michigan 28, Penn State 23.
I will be heading up to Madison, Wis., for the weekend, and I'm hoping to snag a ticket for the Badgers' Big Ten opener against Purdue (which kicks off at 2:30, well before Michigan hits Rentschler Field). This won't be a full-blown preview, just a list of various points of concern, hope, idle speculation, etc.
So, what should Michigan fans watch for as the Wolverines take on the 0-2 UConn Huskies? Here are some, none of which are probably news to you:
Good Devin Gardner vs. Evil Devin Gardner. Unfortunately, this was also a dichotomy that existed during the Denard Robinson era. As we've seen thus far, Gardner has killed Michigan--although not to the tune of a loss, yet--with turnovers, and not even of the understandable kind. Consider the first interception against CMU, the easiest pick six in the world against Notre Dame and a take-your-pick of last week's four turnovers against Akron, and you have a pretty Kafkaesque picture thus far. In short, Gardner needs to go out and have a pretty clean, mistake-free day against the Huskies, not because Michigan is in danger of losing if he doesn't, but because you'd just like to see a little improvement i.e. removal of those Bad Idea Jeans decisions. The season is still young, but the Huskies defense is tied for 66th in the country in forced turnovers, with two fumbles and two interceptions. If there are Michigan turnovers in this one, the odds are they'll be of the bad mistake kind and not as a result of UConn's defensive play.
Non-existent pass rush vs. possibly non-existent UConn offensive line. The Huskies have allowed QB Chandler Whitmer to be sacked 10 times in two games, a number that ties them for 121st in the country in that category; only Idaho has allowed more sacks (a whopping 21 for the Vandals). This is where I kindly suggest that Frank Clark records a sack. If Michigan can't get to Whitmer at all on Saturday, it might be time to really start worrying about the Big Ten schedule, even when Jake Ryan gets back. For what it's worth, the Terrapins sacked Whitmer six times, including 2.5 from the amazingly named linebacker Yannick Cudjoe-Virgil.
Run blocking vs. UConn's defensive front. After the Akron game, citing the following point is perhaps a mark of hubris, but after games against Towson and Maryland, the Huskies are ranked 104th in run defense. They've given up 430 yards on 93 carries, good for 4.6 yards per carry. One of these days, Michigan is going to find a poor run defense it can actually run against: maybe this is the week? I gave the offensive line more of the blame for last week's performance than I did Fitzgerald Toussaint, but after reading MGoBlog's offensive UFR, Toussaint definitely is missing more holes than I thought (and I was already of the mind that he was doing a little too much dancing). Against UConn, you'd like to see those one yard losses go for two yards (at least), and those 4-5 yard runs go for double digit yardage. Of course, this has been the biggest problem for Michigan post-2011, so another mediocre performance on the ground against a bad team would not be a surprise.
Vanilla coverage vs. passing offense. Greg Mattison has stuck with fairly conservative coverages in the secondary thus far, and probably for good reason. However, against a pass-happy team like UConn, it will be interesting to see what Mattison does if UConn's dinking and dunking translates into semi-regular gains of the standard first down variety or, worse, the dreaded big plays (of which Michigan regrettably gave up a few against hapless Akron). Whitmer threw the ball 46 times against Maryland; Michigan's defensive backs must be ready to tackle immediately. Additionally, Whitmer has thrown three picks in two games, so the odds are good that he'll gift Michigan at least one. As long as Michigan's turnover margin is no worse than last week's minus two--which isn't asking a lot--there should be no real danger of losing this game.
As strange as it is to say, this is an important game for Michigan, a sort of litmus test for many of Michigan's starters, if not all of them. While Michigan fans will want to see a smashing Bo-esque romp of a victory, I think a game marked by protection of the ball on offense and few (or zero) big plays allowed on defense will be the ticket for this one. Score: Michigan 38, UConn 14.
No matter how old we get, and how hard we try to convince ourselves that sports are just a game, it just isn't so.
I've spent the last few years disassociating myself from things like recruiting coverage, at first because I found myself increasingly irked by the nature of it all; after all, I'm now older than the oldest Michigan football player on the roster. But, on a more practical level, grad school this past year has cut into my time by a significant amount, so that I almost didn't have a choice to pay attention or not.
With school and the job hunt occupying my mind (and the Chicago Blackhawks' run to another Stanley Cup), this was an oddly detached offseason for me. In years past, an injury to a player like Jake Ryan would have sent me into a frenzy of panic. This time around, not so much. Maybe the "he'll be ready by October" prognosis lessened the blow, but I think a growing acceptance of entropy has more to do with it.
Other than using the occasional one-sentence paragraph (I know, I know), the best thing Medill has taught me over the past year is this: Get to the point.
I haven't been very good at that over the years. For anyone that has read this blog, I have a tendency to, shall we say, expound a bit too much. I mean, this is just football, right? Should I really be writing 2,000 words or more about people I've never met?
I don't know anymore. Maybe that's okay, maybe it isn't. In any case, it's something I think about now that I didn't think about before. I don't know if it can be described as a creeping cynicism about the state of things--the issue of pay-for-play, the NCAA's nonsensical defense of a student-athlete model that is for the most part a serious oddity, the increasingly inescapable sleeper hold of money--but things aren't as they once were in many respects. This is not a bad thing; it is always good to question things. Say what you will about the journalism industry today, but if there is one trait we can all agree upon as the foundation of good journalism (or even good thinking, generally), it is the existential need to question anything and everything.
For the first time in a while, this offseason came and went without much consternation from me. The month of August, as always, is a time warp in and of itself, with days becoming weeks and weeks becoming years...but everything before that
I guess I'm not doing a very good job of getting to the point. Perhaps that is because I don't know what the point really is. I've sat around looking at the schedule, calculating satisfying scenarios in my head: 10-2 would be great, but what if both losses came to Michigan State and Ohio State? What about 9-3, with wins against the aforementioned foes and losses against, say, Notre Dame, Penn State and Northwestern (or Nebraska)? Would that be any better?
I don't know, but thinking about this sort of thing inevitably boomerangs back to one basic thought, one that I've expressed in some form here countless times: college football (and any sport, really), are about people and moments. Years from now, Michigan's 8-5 season will be but a vague memory, a historical footnote. But, Roy Roundtree's catch against Northwestern, Devin Gardner's pyrotechnics against Minnesota and Iowa, Denard Robinson's touchdown run at the Horseshoe...these are moments that will forever live on.
As a 24-year-old pseudo-adult, that's really all I find worth grabbing hold of in this game. The outcome is beyond our control, of course, but the curation of those outcomes is not.
Will Fitzgerald Toussaint bounce back to his 2011 form? I don't know, but I'll enjoy watching him try.
Will Devin Gardner live up to the offseason hype and build upon his 2012 run as the starter? I don't know, but I'll enjoy watching him try.
Will Brady Hoke keep Michigan undefeated at home as Notre Dame, Nebraska and Ohio State roll into Ann Arbor this year? I don't know, but I'll enjoy watching him try, pointing left and right at anything and anyone willing to be pointed in the right direction.
A mere 88 hours remains until the Wolverines run out onto the field again, the 134th iteration of Michigan football. This one will be different than the last, and the next one will not be this one, for better or worse. We have one opportunity to experience this team in its current form. With the constant roster flux of incoming recruits and saddening departures, it's often difficult to separate the macro from the micro.
If you take a step back, the big picture becomes clear, imperfections and all. A clean slate beckons, calling for eyes and ears. Once the old season is over, the slate is cast among the rest, a dusty pile of slowly disintegrating memories.
It's always freshest at the beginning; when the banner is touched on Saturday, so begins a race against time.
Due to a somewhat nebulous snafu, I scheduled a post for this morning over at Maize n Brew that only emerged from the concealed and winding tubes of the Internet in the last hour or so. Anyway:
I talked about the 2012 season to date and the so called Big Picture vis-a-vis the 2007 season. It's by no means a perfect comparison, I admit, but there are some similarities worth pondering in these final coming days before the return of football, in all its glory and terror. I made sure to cater to your sensibilities by not directly referring to 2007's particular brand of catastrophe, but it is mentioned in an oblique way, so be prepared (I hope you read that with Scar's voice from The Lion King in your head). There's also some quality nostalgia-ing in there, which I'm known to do from time to time. Anyway, read it, because it's Tuesday and you just have to have exhausted all potential forms of Al Borges critique by now...right?
After a brief hiatus--UMass being, you know, UMass--I'm back to the Friday morning previewin' game. Given that it is Notre Dame, most of this could probably be whittled down to "Denard Robinson needs to do Denard Robinson things", but...here it is, anyway.
Time: 7:30 ET (NBC) Place: Notre Dame Stadium--South Bend, IN Line: Notre Dame -5 1/2 Mood: Like someone at a craps table, hoping for one more run before retreating into the night.
The Exposition
Making an attempt to explain the last three games in this series is as useless as counting the stars in the sky or pondering the meaning of life: really, they happened and they're there, and that's all you need to know. That doesn't mean that we can't mythologize or look back through layers of intoxicating nostalgia, it's just that these three separate 3-hour events, twice in Ann Arbor and once in South Bend, defy any attempts at empirical or rational reckoning. Try to explain last year's Notre Dame game to a friend and all the clocks within a one mile radius will begin to melt and Salvador Dalí will emerge from a wormhole to smack you across the face and say bastante.
Sure, these past performances certainly will be hanging in the air over Notre Dame Stadium on Saturday, a reminder to ND fans and players of how things can go so utterly wrong, of how deep the abyss is, as well as the concern that there might be even further depths which remain to be visited. Of course, on the Michigan side, it will all be a subtle nod to the power of magic. The power of Denard Robinson, like gravity, is unseen but knowable and therefore some sort of benevolent sorcery, kind of like having Gandalf on your side. You don't know where he will come from and at what point in the proceedings, but he eventually does, and with spectacular results, results that make you feelas if your cause is...invincible.
With that said, the aforementioned is nice to talk about but not as important as many will have you believe. Past performance does not ensure future results, and magical coincidence is more often than not just magical coincidence. When Michigan and Notre Dame meet, especially in South Bend, all layers of reality and preconceived notions are stripped away, which is basically just a roundabout way of telling you to take them there record books and throw 'em out.
Like every Michigan-ND game, there's an unnerving anticipation in the buildup that is only intensified by the 7:30 start time. Although both teams have already faced big tests and marquee opponents, this is still the one of the primary forks in the road in each team's season. Lose and feel the expectations temper and languish. Win and, rightly or wrongly, watch the expectations soar. Michigan Offense vs. Notre Dame Defense
I know that the whole "just do what Alabama did" became somewhat of a meme this week, but there are some similarities between Alabama and ND: they both deploy the 3-4 defense that deploys a rush linebacker sort that goes by a special name. For Alabama, it was the "Jack" linebacker. For the Irish, the position is branded the "Cat" linebacker position, which doesn't seem very cool, creative, or in any topical but okay Notre Dame coaches too busy thinking about football to come up with good gimmicky position names.
While I'm not sure just yet that Prince Shembo is as good as Courtney Upshaw was for Alabama at the JLB spot, he's pretty darn good (and also fantastically named). Shembo had his best game of the season last week against MSU, amassing 9 of his 15 total tackles on the year, including a sack (2 TFLs). At, 6'2'' 250 and sporting the #55, I'm kind of reminded of Brandon Graham, which probably isn't an accurate comparison but whatever. He is a terror, and Michael Schofield (and Vincent Smith) will need to be on their pass pro games if Denard is not going to be Shembo'd into oblivion.
I'm not positive that Diaco will release the hounds when it comes to the defensive ends, #89 Kapron Lewis-Moore and #7 Stephon Tuitt, but the linebackers have certainly been aggressive the last couple of seasons. This has allowed Denard to do Denardian things once he's gotten out to the second level. I think this will need to happen again, as I don't see Michigan's interior line having much success moving NT Louis Nix; again, I'm not sure that Nix=Jesse Williams, but he is definitely very good. As I read Ace's FFFF post yesterday, the section on Nix sort of reminded me of, yup...Jerel Worthy. That is not a very good thing of which to be reminded.
Quite frankly, Michigan will not have much reproducible success running the ball with Toussaint; if any back has success in this game, I have a strange hunch that that back is Vincent Smith. Michigan will find itself in passing situations fairly often, and Smith could prove useful swinging out to the flat and/or filling into the zones which blitzing, hyperactive linebackers have just vacated in the middle of the field. Of course, the only problem with that is that Smith is of course tiny--see: Denard's INT against Air Force--and Denard being who he is will probably lead to some more dangerously errant passes. Throw it high enough but low enough for it to hit Smith in the fingertips and you're looking at a basic tip drill for the D.
Al Borges made a nice point in one of this week's pressers about his confusion regarding the fans' strange insistence that rushing yards only "count" when they come from a running back; against Notre Dame, Michigan has gotten it done on the ground with Denard and Denard alone. Is that type of strategy sustainable? Well, you tell me, 2010 and 2011 scoreboards. However, can it happen again? I'm not so sure.
The only scenario in which I see Michigan having some success on the ground with somebody not named Denard is, you guessed it, by successfully attacking Notre Dame's vulnerable, depleted secondary. Andrew Maxwell and his receivers were not able to take advantage of ND's secondary despite having 8+ defenders in the box with regularity, but I'd like to think that Michigan's QB and receivers are significantly more dangerous than their Spartan counterparts.
In short, yes, I am unironically saying that Michigan should go with the Alabama gameplan this week. ND's defense is several degrees inferior to Alabama's but is also quite possibly the best defense left of Michigan's schedule. I'm definitely not saying that we shouldn't run Denard much for fear of injury or something (as was the theory behind that strategy on 9/1), but running Denard left and right right off the bat is something that ND will be ready for. Michigan Defense vs. Notre Dame Offense
Listening to the MGoPodcast this week, the consensus seems to be that Everett Golson is sort of in his ur-Denard (to borrow Matt Hinton's phraseology) stage as a quarterback: a not necessarily accurate guy who can make big plays but also mess up the basic ones. He is an exciting prospect, certainly more exciting than Rees and Dayne Crist were, but still very much in the inchoate stages of his development.
Like Denard, Golson is not exactly Cam Newton; at 6'0'' 185 (according to his official Notre Dame profile, at least), he's bound to be called things like "slight" and "willowy" and "probably-needs-to-eat-more". Regardless, he has flashed the playmaking ability that is giving me some bad flashbacks of the 2004 Ohio State game in which a young Troy Smith had himself a day against a favored Michigan team. Needless to say, we have to hope that when Notre Dame drops back to pass, Golson's arms turns into a Ramen noodle or something and that Michigan's can mitigate the lack of a formidable pass rush by keeping contain and not letting Golson run around a la Smith circa 2004.
In average passing situations--i.e. when Golson isn't just freestylin' and profilin'--Michigan should be okay. Notre Dame's receiving options don't really worry me, and I think our corners will be just fine. Tyler Eifert is the next guy in a long line of Notre Dame NFL quality tight ends, but Eifert seems to be more of the hyrbrid WR/TE Greg Olsen/Travis Beckum/etc. sort than a traditional pseudo-lineman with clubs for hands that only catch 1-yard play action passes in goal to go situations. Eifert can really play, and will be a matchup problem when going up against pretty much anybody in Michigan's back 7; strangely, however, Eifert did not record a reception against MSU last week.
Otherwise, there isn't a Michael Floyd in this group, although these are still ND recruits and thus capable of doing damage; after all, let's not forget that our starting corners are likely J.T. Floyd, a sometimes maligned former safety and Raymon Taylor, a still fairly green true sophomore. I have great faith in Taylor, and he's been my "guy who I'm irrationally excited about" since he got playing time early on in the 2011 season. Still, the thought of him playing the field corner spot on the road with a taller receiver like DaVaris Daniels across the way from him or a speedster like TJ Jones (who is most famous for doing this). He did also do this last year to make it 24-7, making the situation seem nearly hopeless for the Wolverines:
Similarly, Robby Toma is a tiny, white receiver and is therefore Wes Welker, so Michigan will need to keep an eye on him and Jones on screens and other slowly developing plays (e.g. the above drag route).
Unfortunately, like on offense, Michigan is at a disadvantage up front. Notre Dame has an experienced line that will look to run the ball with multiple backs, with Cierre Wood being the headliner and Theo Riddick and George Atkinson providing quality depth. The Irish didn't have an extremely prolific day running the ball, but they were actually fairly effective, with 27 carries going for 129 yards (4.8 YPC, with Golson's sacks taken out). Two things: a) compare that to how Michigan did against MSU last season on the ground and b) remember that Michigan's defensive front is nowhere near as good as MSU's, and you have two fairly worrisome things going on.
While Notre Dame's receiving corps doesn't necessarily have a star, it's not too difficult to imagine ND racking up a yardage total that equals or exceeds last year's 513. Unless the light suddenly turns on and Campbell, Washington, etc. can finally get any sort of push at the POA, Michigan is in for a long day. Even with a less refined passer in Golson in the game, Notre Dame will still threaten to drown Michigan in a tidal wave of yards and first downs. The Michigan defense's life preserver will once again have to be forced (and unforced) turnovers on ND's part.
What Needs To Happen, Fergodsakes
On offense:
The Rex Grossman philosophy of offense. I'm pretty sure Al Borges is secretly a big Rex Grossman fan, and that will hopefully show on Saturday by going deep early and often. Remember the Northwestern game last season? Michigan needs to attack downfield just like they did against the Wildcats.
Please no I-form running. This goes without saying, but Michigan spent an inordinate amount of time during UTL last season plugging away from under center with no success. I'm pretty sure we've all learned our lesson at this point, and it's pretty apparent that Michigan's interior trio is not moving anybody in traditional running sets.
Accurate Denard, don't be a mirage por favor. Fairly self-explanatory, but if Michigan is going to mitigate the disparity in respective line strength, Denard will need to complete some passes from the pocket early on at every level (dumpoffs, intermediate routes, and deep). Like many teams these days, I expect DC Bob Diaco to keep his ends mostly in contain mode, so rolling Denard out could be asking for a lot of balls harmlessly falling to the turf after Tuitt or Lewis-Moore do their best Dikembe Mutombo impression.
On defense:
Like a broken record...say it with me: BEND BUT DON'T BREAK. This is just simply Michigan's calling card until Michigan's youngsters become upper classmen. ND will rack up yards, they will probably get at least one first down on a given drive more often that not, and they will probably score in or around their 2011 total.
Show me time. With Desmond Morgan looking like he's back in the starting lineup, it's time for him and Kenny Demens to reassert themselves as the starters, especially on the heels of a recent charge by freshmen James Ross III and Joe Bolden. Morgan had a bit of a tough time against ND last season, and he's struggled to start the season and then had a "head problem" that kept him out last week. I would rather not have to see too much of Bolden and Ross on Saturday, and that means Morgan/Demens playing competently. Nobody's asking for big plays or anything--that's what Jake Ryan and Frank Clark are for--but not completely whiffing on the edge and being ready to take on blockers without getting engulfed would be nice things.
BRING. THE. HEAT. Nobody needs to tell Mattison to be aggressive, but Michigan will need to bring the heat from time to time. Golson isn't actually end-of-2004-Troy-Smith yet, so Michigan can make some hay taking a page from MSU's playbook and bringing pressure through the middle, overwhelming ND's interior line, and allowing the secondary to handle their men in single coverage. Michigan will get beat from time to time, but I don't see any way around it: Michigan needs to force a turnover or two, and I don't see that happening without calling in an air strike or two. It is "unsound", sure, but desperate times and circumstances call for desperate measures. Hey, just remember that we were trying to do this with Greg Robinson not too long ago and you'll feel a bit better.
Predictions of Negligible Worth
I, like you, have that faint glimmering hope that Denard will finish his career as ND's ultimate kryponite, and that he has one more soul-crushing, virtuoso performance in store for the Irish. With that said, attempting to accomplish something a third time takes that thing from mere coincidence to trend, and I'm not entirely sure that what we have here is some sort of underlying, fundamental trend. That is, I'm not sure that Michigan can beat Notre Dame, no matter what, just because we have Denard Robinson.
This is essentially a greatly scaled down version of the Alabama game. Notre Dame is not Alabama by any means, but they do have strong defensive talent in the front 7 and they do have a solid offensive line and a deep group of talented tailbacks. They will try to enforce their will on Michigan's decidedly average front, and Michigan has no choice but to hope for mistakes on ND's part from time to time...which, to be fair, ND has been happy to oblige the Wolverines with of late.
I know I said this last year, and I have no idea what ND's final record will be this season, but I think this ND team is better than this Michigan team. The same thing could have been said leading up to the 2009, 2010, and 2011 matchups; of course, that did not stop Michigan from winning each of those games. Michigan has discovered the alchemic route to gold, that being a little bit of luck and a lot of Denard Robinson.
As always, a "prediction" is a defraying of the sum of all predictions. That is, which outcome is the "most likely" to take place? Saying that one thing will happen does not preclude the belief that any other option is also possible.
With that said, I think we are bound for a 3+ hour drive to anticlimax. I don't see Michigan generating enough offense to keep up, and I don't think we are in for Denard Eviscerates Notre Dame Part III. Likewise, I don't see where the playmaking will come from in the Michigan defense (outside of Jake Ryan, that is).
In the end, I think Michigan goes to South Bend and takes a loss in a game that will essentially reflect what probably should have happened last season: Notre Dame accumulates around 500 yards or so and generally controls the game from start to finish. Everett Golson hasn't been around long enough to convince anybody that he is or isn't prone to committing silly turnovers, but it's obvious that he isn't as careless with the ball as Tommy Rees. As such, I don't think that Michigan can expect to be kept in the game with unforced and untimely errors from the ND side. Michigan takes an ugly and only cosmetically close loss in South Bend, a game that will come to be seen as the Godfather III of the Denard vs. Notre Dame saga.
Consider the bar raised. That's not the case with Michigan, the team I like least compared to its lofty rankings elsewhere, in large part because of the schedule: The Wolverines open up Saturday as double-digit underdogs to Alabama, which is only the first and most notable example of how this year's schedule figures to be much harsher on Michigan than last year's. The other obvious example is at the end of the schedule, against a dramatically improved Ohio State outfit in Columbus, which figures to look nothing like the beleaguered Buckeyes that came to Ann Arbor last November; in between, two of the Wolverines' toughest home wins in 2011, over Notre Dame and Nebraska, are both road games in 2012. For a team that may have played a little bit above its head last year to begin with, another 10-win regular season would be a feat.
Nothing too controversial here. I disagree with he notion that Michigan played "above its head", unless he means that Michigan was simply lucky, which they were against ND and VT. I agree with that, but I don't see any other instances of Michigan playing "above" their heads, especially since deciding where some's "head" is in this context is a subjective thing. Michigan smashed its way to 8 wins then made a trip to the luck store against ND and VT. Add in a close win against OSU and two rough losses and that just sounds like a team that significantly raised its baseline level of play and got lucky a couple of times.
Can they do it again? That is the question.
--Alabama released its depth chart yesterday. Nothing is too surprising there, although there are three things that ended up differing from what I wrote about Alabama's personnel in my preview posts:
Kelly Johnson, a walk-on, got the starting nod at the H-back position. I honestly didn't know who he was before this week. That could either be a good or a bad thing re: the quality of Alabama's H-back, but we'll see.
DeAndrew White won a starting role at wideout. I figured that Kenny Bell would surely be a starter considering that he is Alabama's leading returning receiver, but I guess not. It's White, a a redshirt sophomore who made 2 starts last season, Kevin Norwood (who, if you'll remember, came up big in the national title game), and slot Christion Jones. In the end, though, the starter designation is not that important. Alabama will rotate these four players, and probably one or two others as well.
Ed Stinson won the end spot opposite from Damion Square. Stinson was a former "Jack" LB, for what it's worth. He was in a battle with Quinton Dial, a JUCO guy, for the spot. Again, this is another "doesn't really matter" designation, as the indication is that both of these guys might as well be called starters.
Two things, one that will inspire debate and one that inspires exactly zero debate (in a good way):
1) The Fitz Toussaint thing. You've already seen it, talked about it, etc. The MGoBlog thread on the matter raised a lot of decent points on the whole thing, especially vis-a-vis the way other schools do things. A few scattered thoughts:
I'm not sure that Michigan (i.e. Hoke) should be making decisions based on: a) fan pressure or b) the disciplinary history of other Big Ten coaches.
On a visceral level, yes, I would be a little disappointed if he played against Alabama.
I think that Hoke has accrued enough capital in the form of good will thus far that we, as fans, should be willing to trust his decision, whatever it may be. This will be difficult, especially given the irritating hailstorm of HURR and DURR from fans of other teams if Fitz does end up playing. I know this might seem like a shocking revelation to some people, but if anybody is going to be intimately familiar with the details of Fitz's case, it's Hoke...not you or I.
Continuing from the last point: holding your program's disciplinary record over the heads of fans of other programs is generally not a good idea. The fact that things like Fitz's case can happen isn't even the strongest reasoning behind not doing this sort of thing (and really, what Michigan fan, myself included, hasn't taken some shots at other coaches/programs for not being strong disciplinarians?) Bragging that your coach
We have no idea what Fitz has had to do in the last month or so.
I do think that it is the head coach's job, especially one still very early on in his tenure, to establish the basic notion that "if you mess up, there will be consequences." The problem that I run across, however, is this: can any football-based punishment ever truly be commensurate to the most serious sorts of crimes? I'm not sure that a football punishment is inherently unequal to a crime such as, say, a DUI. But, that's what the legal system is for, I guess. Of course, it doesn't end there, and that's why this is all such a dizzyingly layered quagmire of a thing with which to have to deal. The process must eventually find itself at the intersection of The Law, sports, and culture (the fans, a program's reputation, etc.), a place where there is no yellow light, the lights turn green or red almost instantaneously and without warning, and nobody is directing traffic. Also, it's raining, hard, and nobody can see, but the people continue to drive anyhow.
Anyway, any more than that and this becomes redundant. We will find it whether he will be playing or not, sans breathless conjecture, very soon.
So we're off, then. For future reference, yes, I am a hater out to tear down your favorite team, coach and player, despite their always exemplary performance and behavior. You got me! No, this is not quite "journalism." Apologies in advance for the typos.
Sunday Morning Quarterback is back. As someone who hasn't read Dr. Saturday once since Hinton left Yahoo!, I could not be more excited for this development. SMQ is the closest thing to a one-stop shop for comprehensive college football coverage as there is, and I am for one cannot wait to read Hinton's work, unchained from the restrictions of the MSM.
To derp or not to derp...that is the question. Or is it the answer? Ron Zook isn't sure and he's been thinking about it real hard for a long time so you know that this is a quandary of such immense existential weight that it would boggle and possibly even crush the most powerful of minds. In reality, Ron Zook is not a football coach but a water ski enthusiast that happens to coach football on the side. Ron Zook's interests in life: being completely oblivious, running on third and 10, having blustery hair, and taking the wave runner out onto the streets of Champaign. In Ron Zook's world, this is perfectly normal. At any given time, Ron Zook coaches like it's six minutes into the first quarter and the repercussions of the accretion of derpitude stemming from his choices has not already torpedoed his team's chances. No matter what happens, Ron Zook is this on one never-ending loop of lobotomized bliss:
Should I keep going? The fact that he has survived to see a seventh season at Illinois is a testament to man's ability to ratchet up primordial self-preservation instincts in order to procure enough food to survive the day and/or barely beat Western Michigan and Northwestern.
With that out of the way, despite Zook's constitutional devotional to being terrible, Michigan was actually doing things to make the end result what it was. It didn't look great at times, but when you can muster up the bravado to complain about a first half performance that saw Michigan completely stifle Illinois's offense, you know things are probably pretty good. Winningly ugly certainly is more fun than losing really really ugly, and this statement will be included in a book of obvious statements written by Chad Henne and obviously titled "Excellence Is Good."
The Offense
My first impression was one of doom and gloom, but, the more I think about it, maybe it's not so bad. Michigan put up 31 against a formidable defense, more than any other Illinois opponent save Northwestern (qualifier: yeah, those are some bad offenses on their schedule, but it's all relative at this point). This is of course not even mentioning the inopportune turnovers and the Illini's general inability to move the ball, additional reasons to not feel so bad about things. Obviously you can't just take turnovers out, but Michigan could have very easily scored in the 40s, on the road, against a pretty good defense. These aforementioned things in and of themselves aren't enough to assuage any feelings of discomfort, but together they make a convincing case.
It's hard to give the quarterback play a true grade given the paucity of data, but overall it's difficult to be too critical. Denard went 6/9 passing (excising the meaningless end of the first half Hail Mary), and he good on the few opportunities he did get, which including multiple lasers between the hashes and one laudable (if underthrown) touch pass to Koger down the field. As far as the playcalling goes, I think it's obvious that the coaches saw how well we ran the ball, saw how poorly the Illini did anything, and decided not to air it out much at all. It's not a pretty way to win, but it's a way to win. When an opponent as incompetent as the Illini basically obviates the need to pass...don't pass. Yes, it is in fact 2011 and not 1911.
At this point, with two more teams fielding okay defenses and mediocre at best offenses left on the schedule, I'm not sure if the battle plan really needs to change all that much. It's not flashy or exciting and it certainly doesn't get Denard the game reps he needs to become a better passer, but, as I said it's late for that. The time for Denard to throw it around was long ago, back in the halcyon days 6-0 run. Despite this, those who say that Devin should be the guy are, quite frankly, crazy. I have no idea how many of these people are extant, but whoever you are, you're crazy. Nevertheless, Devin did show some nice poise to step up and hit the open Odoms for 6; it's an improvement. Unless we are holding a lot of plays for the Ohio State game, it appears that both Devin and Denard are about as good as they're good to be this season, and that, to me, makes it obvious who should be getting the vast majority of the snaps. Maybe Devin wins the job in the offseason. Who knows. For now, Denard gives us the best chance to win, and that's all that matters.
Outside of the weekly quarterback non-controversy, Fitz Toussaint was busy looking like Mike Hart with speed again /Jackson'd. He ran for a career high 192 yards on 27 carries (good for a YPC of 7.1, a number that is still pretty good even if you take out the 65-yarder on the opening drive). Michigan has seen some times since Mike Hart moved on to the NFL, with Minor, Brown, McGuffie, Shaw, Smith, etc. all getting looks and all doing some nice things at times but never enough to be the undisputed #1. Fitz has done that and then some. I do admit to wondering how different (i.e. better) the offense would've looked in 2010 with a legitimate spread tailback to complement Denard, but as they say it's in the past.
Elsewhere in the run game, Denard did his thing, carrying 12 times for 45 yards, which isn't amazing but it's hard to be upset when two of those carries are touchdowns. The only Charles Barkley turrible moment that I can still recall is that botched 4th and goal, but even that isn't really Denard's fault so much as maybe a nice call by the Illini and poor blocking.
The offense is what it is. It's a work in progress, the Death Star circa Return of the Jedi. Borges is trying to construct something with a pile of Legos and Lincoln Logs and some rubber bands, and whatever is the result of this grostequely inadequate and variable pile of parts is going to be, well...inadequate and variable. As such, one way to mitigate that is to simply go into "just win" mode, which entails throwing 15 times between two quarterbacks throughout an entire game on the road.
The Defense
I can't remember the last time a Michigan defense's performance made me feel so happy. I think the answer is "2006" but I can't be too sure. While the defense looked good earlier in the season, it was more a product of minimal expectations exceeded; solid performances but one saddled by the qualifiers of competition and our own low expectations. Now, Michigan's defense is an absolute good, an entity to count on and consider a strength without irony or reservation. This defense is good.
Again, a certain amount of Illinois derp is at play here, but a good amount of that derp came about because we looked fast and strong in the front 7, with the secondary forcing turnovers, helping in the run game, and overall shutting down the Illini passing game outside of AJ Jenkins. It felt like watching a Michigan defense of old, and for a second it felt like Glen Steele, Rob Renes, Jarrett Irons, Tripp Welborne, and Leon Hall were out there once again: hitting, covering, crushing.
The Illini had a mere 214 total yards of offense (37 rushing, 177 passing). For those counting at home, on 33 rushing attempts, the Illini averaged 1.1 YPC. ONE POINT ONE. Other than Jenkins, the passing game netted 74 yards. Greg Mattison has officially made the desert bloom.
Michigan's only mistakes came as a result of youth seeing the field (Clark) and not knowing how to defend the zone read/option, but whatever. Our top four tacklers (RVB, Martin, Demens, and Morgan) were all front 7 players, which is the way things should be. Four sacks, a Kovacs forced fumble/Gordon recovery, a JT Floyd interception, and an indomitable will to be in the right place and to hit whatever shows up at that place later, and you've got a 31-14 Michigan win in which in the Illini didn't score until late in the third.
Van Bergen and Martin continue to dominate, and man we are going to miss them next year. That said, with how improved the defense has been (including the DL), and the presence of essentially 3 guys coaching the DL (Hoke, Montgomery, Mattison), I'm not as worried as I maybe ought to be. I mean, Will Heininger notched a sack last week in Iowa City. While the depth is still scary and elite talent isn't quite there yet, there's enough there for a solid unit next year.
Think about our back 7 play the last three years (and beyond, even). Think of all the times Michigan did their best Oprah impression in gifting teams cheap touchdowns over and over again. Indecisive linebacker play, coverage breakdowns, abominable tackling, and, most importantly, no sense that anybody was on the same page, let alone reading the same book. It cannot be stated enough: we are so lucky to have a guy like Greg Mattison coaching this defense.
While Michigan did to a Illinois offense what many teams before them had done, the welcoming thought is right there: Michigan did what they were supposed to do. They saw a weak offense and suffocated it, they stared down the Ben Chappell Theory and swarmed it with a tacit refutation that was both coldly efficient and extremely fun to watch. Michigan 1, Ben Chappell Theory 0...the future is bright.
Special Teams
So, another not terrible game here (and by not terrible I mean not like the last few years); actually, it was pretty good. First, Gibbons?
1 for 2 on the day, inspiring neither additional confidence nor additional reasons to worry. Otherwise, Gallon had a dynamic day returning punts: although he didn't break any for 6, he did return one for 32 yards (4 for 62 on the day). Hagerup was sort of mediocre once again, punting four times for 137 yards, good for an average of 34.3 per punt. He had a long of 44 and a 30-yarder that pinned the Illini just inside their own 15 (a good thing, but not for that average).
Miscellaneous Minutiae
Odoms! Anybody that reads this knows how big of an Odoms fan I am, so it's been nice to see him get on the stat sheet last week in Iowa City and this week with the touchdown. As good as Gallon has been, there's always room for quality depth on the field. Here's to a final three games to remember for Odoms (and the rest of the seniors, for that matter).
J.T. Floyd, a week after getting smacked by one Marvin McNutt, looked like a legitimately good Big Ten corner. He was active on the ball, and the interception plus return is just gravy for a guy who I basically equated to Grant Mason before the season started. Nebrask'a group of wideouts isn't particularly talented, so one would expect Floyd to lock things down once again. That's right Big Ten...you don't come in here and throw on FLOYD ISLAND.
Michigan's rushing output exceeded the Illini defense's previous average of 102.9 yards per game by approximately 120 yards.
Denard passed Tom Harmon on Michigan's career touchdown runs list. He also passed Tim Tebow and Dan LeFevour on the NCAA career rushing list. Just sayin'.
Thomas Gordon now has four fumble recoveries on the year after recovering a ball coerced out of Jason Ford's hands by Jordan Kovacs's helmet. Fumble recoveries may be somewhat random, but Gordon seems to be around the ball whenever these things happen.
With Nebraska and Ohio State continuing to look about as potent as Illinois on offense, it's hard not to look at the next two games and reduce our likelihood to win or lose to, yes...Denard.
It still hasn't hit me that we're actually 8-2 with a good shot at going 10-2. Wow. I'll finally be back in Ann Arbor for this week's game against Nebraska for the first time since SDSU...can't wait.
At a certain point in the game, my worldview shifted from one defined by wins and losses to one of practical improvements, of an intellectual inching forward toward something that could be deemed ideal or even not entirely objectionable. It's hard to be mad when you've seen this story over and over again; if you're surprised by the ending then you should probably pay a little closer attention. This is what Michigan has done for years. In the interest of putting a name to it, we'll simply call this the Ben Chappell Theorem; that is, that if Michigan plays a team with multiple glaring weaknesses/an air of general incompetency that has already failed in the face of the opposition of other inferior teams, then, it must necessarily follow, that not only will Michigan not exploit those weaknesses (or what are ostensibly weaknesses, i.e. Michigan State's offensive line) effectively (usually not for lack of some trying, though), they will make certain players look like All-Americans in the process. An enormous shadow of a mouse becomes something much worse in the shifting tectonic plates of light and dark. Just as Michigan made former Indiana QB Ben Chappell look like the greatest thing ever on one afternoon, Michigan continues to make the mediocre look exceptional.
Unfortunately, as nondescript as Iowa football is this year save for a battering ram of a tailback and a receiver with a certain NFL future, it seems that Michigan is probably just as mediocre. Yet, how could we lose to a team that just lost to Minnesota? How could we muster up less yards against Iowa's decidedly mediocre, surprisingly untalented defense than almost every one of Iowa's previous opponents?
Although I figured this would be a loss before the season, I also thought Iowa would've been somewhat decent. There are really no excuses here. At the same time, maybe it's my fault for forgetting about the Chappell Theorem, just like those who touted State's porous offensive line while forgetting that we ourselves boasted a depth-less line with very little high end talent. You could say it's a battle of preconceived notions and reality, a reality which is mostly composed of Big Ten unexceptionalism and crippling mediocrity. We are what we are, which is mostly just as bad as everybody else. If you're expecting a win against Illinois because we are better and this is how things should normally go, you are setting yourself up for failure pursuant to every single clause of the Chappell Theorem.
Even worse than who we lost to and how we lost is the fact that this was a classic Lloyd era loss. We fell behind by two scores then went into "OH CRAP IT'S SHOTGUN TIME" mode, only to advance enough to be able to fall three yards short. We've heard this story before.
The Offense
I mean, honestly. Michigan had some success in the first half on the ground, with Fitz Toussaint bouncing left and right and bursting through holes such with grace and skill that my little sister made a Mike Hart comparison without even being at all aware of the Fred Jackson hyperbole meme (so, that was a proud moment). Overall, though, Fitz only finished with 58 yards on 16 carries, with most of the yardage coming in the first half. After that it was a series of 0 and 1-yard runs until he was eventually knocked out of the game. It seems that Michigan probably did some sort of work on the power game during the last two weeks of practice in an attempt to "normalize" the offense, and it worked in the first half mostly because Iowa's defensive line is not very big and our line was able to push somebody around for once. However, being predictable eventually nullifies that advantage, and we were predictable.
For the second time in a row, Michigan has gone on the road and Al Borges seemingly has forgotten how to call plays. I'm not quite at the point where saying that "Al Borges: Denard Robinson::Jim Tressel: Terrelle Pryor" but I'm getting close. I get that he's not a spread guy, but I thought we were past the under center experiment? I'm sure it was kind of cool for Borges and Hoke to be able to look like a real BIG TEN OFFENSE in the first half (while putting up 7 points), but man it just seemed like a sham the entire time. This is just not who we are and I don't really understand why Al keeps trying it.
There were problems with the playcalling to be sure...I still don't understand Borges's aversion to the bubble screen, and I don't really remember too many screens in general. The dual-QB set probably needs to die. If getting Gardner snaps comes at the expense of offensive continuity, or makes a winnable game less winnable by any order of magnitude, then he should not be playing. I think Devin is going to be a good player once Denard is gone, but he showed once again that he really isn't doing anything that much better than Denard is, which is worse than it sounds considering that they're both, for all intents and purposes, first year players in this kaleidoscopic invertebrate of an offense.
While there are many things to complain about, a few nice things did happen. On Michigan's first touchdown drive, Denard was doing things like going through progressions and checking down, which, you're darn right that's an improvement. It's pretty bad that your junior starting quarterback is just starting to acquire these skills but this is where we are. Even though Denard went a pretty bad 18/38, a decent number of the incompletions were either drops or hopeless long balls that shouldn't have been thrown in the first place. A good amount of the time that Denard wasn't throwing the ball right at a defensive end's hands or out of bounds 40+ yards down the field, he was looking confident and throwing a decent ball, just like last week against Purdue. Of course, this only happened when Michigan picked up the pace in the comeback effort, getting in the 'gun and running play after play while giving the Iowa defense very little time to rest, and...wait a second. This sounds familiar.
I'm not giving up on Al quite yet; while his move from Auburn to SDSU should've been (and is) somewhat of a red flag, I still believe that he knows enough about offense, generally, that we at the very least won't look like this once we have the types of players in there that the staff is looking for. The worry still exists that this offensive attack is nothing more than an amalgamation of plays rather than an offense, but the only other options (running the RR spread or a straight up plodding I-form based run game), are, well, non-options for obvious reasons.
With that said, while Al has failed to get Michigan going in the last two road efforts, some onus has to fall on the players. As for the last drive, I've though about it and while I was initially upset that Al didn't do this or that, in the end what he did do should have probably worked. It just didn't, and that's just a testament to the fact that even a well-laid plan can be ground to powder by the machinations of reality. The Michigan timeout before Iowa's second to last punt came back to bit us hard in this situation, as we still would have had one in hand, probably changing our entire approach to that set of downs. But, with no timeouts, a limited amount of time left, and a quarterback that often holds onto the ball way too long in the face of a rush (in a situation where a sack=death), the way Borges called it is somewhat understandable. Vanilla, maybe, but one of those attempts should have resulted in a score.
On first and goal, Denard completely misfired on that short-ish fade to Hemingway; given how lost Micah Hyde looked on the next play, if Denard had, you know, not thrown it clear out of the end zone, I'd say that Hemingway stood a good chance of reeling in the TD right then and there. But, Denard being Denard, he throw it out of the end zone and the fact that Hyde looked like he was completely lost in the woods was not taken advantage of.
On second and goal, we know what happened...again, if Denard throws this one just a little bit better, Hemingway doesn't need to make a highlight reel play and we have a shot to tie. He didn't but Hemingway still brought it in...until it was ruled incomplete. The fact that MSU's Hail Mary against Wisconsin is a TD but this wasn't...I just don't know anymore. Indisputable video evidence is often an impossibility at times and an enabler of unadulterated referee pussyfooting. Was it a catch? I hate to say it, but it was not, although I'd love for someone to tell me otherwise. In the flow of the game, though, it was understandably pretty easy to coerce yourself into believing that the ball did not in fact hit the white.
On third and goal, Denard masterfully avoided a completely unblocked blitzer coming up the middle to launch a pass to a diving Vincent Smith. It would have been a difficult play to make for Smith, but it was there and he simply didn't make it. There's nothing else to say.
It was fourth and goal, and, being the last play of the game, you could argue that a run would have been warranted (the timeout called after the Roundtree reception essentially eliminated the choice on first through third down). Honestly, would it have been a lower percentage play than a pass (if any lower at all)? Of course, we passed and Roundtree was mauled by B.J. Lowery in what was not the first uncalled pass interference of the game. The slant was there and it's a fairly high percentage play...I can't really fault any of these calls in and of themselves. In a vacuum, each one was fine, especially if any of them would have worked. You can say that we should've rolled Denard out but that risks taking a sack and/or running off enough clock to eliminate an opportunity. Fourth and goal was really the only time you could call it a running play, but let's be honest, Al wasn't going to do that.
It was an old school Michigan offensive effort in a loss...unimaginative and flailingly effective in a just short last ditch effort. For a team being led by a coordinator that "knows offense" and has spiced things up with 2-QB formations, Michigan was predictable and unimaginative when it mattered, just like the old days. Al going into full on "watch these four verts bro" mode on the last drive leading up to the last four plays didn't exactly help the situation. Iowa's defense practically inherently gives up free completions/large chunks of yardage...when was the last time Denard completed a deep ball that wasn't a jump ball?
The Defense
For all the defense's flaws, a rational person just can't be mad at it. The defense is like a puppy that has rolled around in the mud and then proceeded to jump all over you and your white shirt...OH PUPPY DEFENSE I CAN'T STAY MAD AT YOU. Although, there's something to be said (something bad) about a defense that calls to mind the image of an adorable puppy. So, there's that.
In all seriousness, Iowa's offense was who we thought they were: a team with a Dollar Tree version of Beanie Wells--by no means an insult--paired with a strong-armed quarterback capable of making you pay and a pretty good receiver in McNutt. They didn't even have that middle-of-the-field-eviscerating tight end that they normally do.
At the end of the day, giving up 24 points and only 302 total yards on the road is not bad at all. I can live with that, although the trend of Michigan coming out and looking like a complete sieve on the first drive continues. Plays were made, and perhaps the only significant knock was the inability to force a turnover, which Michigan has relied on for sustenance all year. I can't even get mad about Coker's performance against our front...it was kind of expected. Coker carried the ball 29 times for 132 yards at 4.6 ypc. That's not encouraging or anything--particularly in light of our complete inability to bring him down for no gain despite multiple defenders being draped all over him--but it's not terrible.
Martin, RVB, and Roh came through on several occasions with much-needed TFLs. Heck, even Will Heininger got in there and made a play. It's safe to say that Iowa's line isn't exactly great, but it's still nice to see Martin and Co. knifing through the line and making plays.
As we already know, the depth just isn't there (and, needless to say, is overall quality of talent), and, paired with young and slow linebackers, that's just asking to get gashed. Michigan better get used to it, because there are the next three teams we face will look to run the ball again and again and again. Scheelhaase and Ford next week, then it's Martinez and Burkhead, then it's OSU's stable of talented, capable backs...it doesn't get easier.
Back to the linebackers...they are slow. That play on the first drive where Demens pulled up like he got hurt underscored a severe lack of speed and athleticism on his part, a fact only made more apparent after watching the LSU-Alabama defensive slugfest. Even Morgan, who is a clear upgrade over Hawthorne, and Ryan, who has shown some promise, just don't have enough speed to get to the ball at times. It is what it is. We just sort of have to ride with them until the incoming class of linebackers makes their way into the system.
Am I missing something or did Thomas Gordon not even play at all? I understand Woolfolk being on the field (he did a solid job moonlighting as a safety in '09) but did he really deserve to completely usurp the position from him? Unless Gordon was injured and Hoke wasn't saying anything (entirely possible) then I think the answer is no. Other than that, Countess continues to make the case that he's our best cover corner. So, that's nice.
Also, the 3rd & 1 stops on Iowa's last two drives were things of beauty. That is all.
Special Teams
Gibbons?
Despite making his one field goal, the haunting pall of mediocrity looming over everything precludes me from anything representing happiness (e.g. dancing Swanson). Maybe next week. Oh, and there's the botched XP, which didn't really end up mattering because Michigan couldn't score at the end, but was still pretty bad.
Otherwise, Hagerup booted 5 for a total of 197 yards and an average of 39.4 per...he did have a long of 49 but that average is not very good. Hagerup reverting to his old form would be nice, as the defense will take any extra bit of help it can get in the coming weeks. Rounding out the special teams, Michigan defended returns pretty well and the return game the other way continues to not turn the ball over. Odoms did have a nice kick return for the second week in a row that I felt could have almost gone for much more.
Despite a couple slightly better than average returns, Stonum's return next year will provide an enormous boost on kick returns (not to mention his obvious effect on the offense)...I feel like I say this every week.
Miscellaneous Minutiae
Speaking of Odoms...he finally caught his first pass of the season on Michigan's last drive, a clutch catch and run for 13 yards on 3rd and 10. So, even though this year probably hasn't turned out like he might've wanted, there is that. Good for him.
Apparently Delonte Hollowell got in the game f.or the first time this year, notching 1 total tackle. I don't remember when this happened, but it did. I wonder what the motivation for burning his redshirt at this point in the year might be.
Personal foul on Lewan...come on, man.
Understatement alert, but I wish Denard had the sense to know when he should run. I understand the cognitive dissonance of telling a guy "be patient" but also "RUN RUN RUN LIKE YOU'VE NEVER RUN BEFORE" (which is often), but the fact remains that he's still not taking off when it's there, just like last year. It's consistently taking what should be a gain of some amount of yards and turning it into an incompletion, a sack, or a turnover. But, this is what you get when you take an already raw player and make him start all over again.
Just like the State game, Michigan was right there despite looking like garbage for much of the game. The fumble (which led to an Iowa field goal) and the soul-crushing interception in the red zone could very well be the difference in the game. That, and a few questionable pass interference no-calls pushed the win Iowa's way. It always sounds so sour grapesy to complain about the refs, but come on. That last play was a pass interference, period, and to say "oh well we just didn't do enough to win blah blah blah" and entertain notions of "deserving" to win is dumb. The refs did have a negative effect on the outcome of the game. Should Michigan have just not played horrible football and won anyway? Yeah, sure, but a team shouldn't have to overcome the refs to do so, especially when two teams are so evenly matched...I've never really understood the whole "the refs don't matter just play" argument as anything other than a convenient coping mechanism for fans who don't want to think about how their team was just obviously jobbed.
As Brian pointed out on Twitter, Michigan put up less yards against Iowa than this list of glorious champions of football prowess: Minnesota, Indiana, Northwestern, Penn State, Pitt, Iowa State, and Louisiana-Monroe. I am now truly sad having typed that.
The 2-QB system needs to stop, starting this Saturday at Illinois. Gardner is not ready; here's to a great offseason for him and we'll try this thing again next year. As for now, Denard is and should be the guy. When put in the right position, he's proven that he can throw the ball well enough to lead a functioning offense. If they're going to keep doing this, Gardner needs to be on the field for entire drives, not a play here and there.
I'm always hesitant when it comes to saying anything negative about Denard, particularly regarding his speed, but...yeah. He's definitely slower this year. Part of it is definitely the offense, which has him hesitating with the ball in his hands when he'd simply just make people look like buoys floating in Lake Michigan in similar situations last season. I don't know if he's just banged up or if it's the added weight or what, but there's a noticeable difference.
Michigan has seven wins in hand having played two less games than they did at the seven win mark last season (coincidentally, both wins against Purdue). At this point, Michigan is grabbing wins like items at an Old Country Buffet; these things might not be of high quality, but this is America and MORE is better than anything else. Yes, I am comparing the quality of Big Ten competition to the lukewarm comestibles of a buffet chain.
There's not much to say other than that this one was vaguely reminiscent of conference blowouts of old. Despite beating Illinois (which, at this point, might not even have been an "upset") last weekend in the friendly confines of Ross-Ade, I didn't have that sinking feeling about this game that I had before Northwestern. Michigan is a decidedly better team than Purdue and Saturday bore that out from start to finish, a small blip at the onset notwithstanding. It was a cool and comfortable victory, and maybe this is more a commentary on the state of football at Purdue but the entire thing felt like it occupied a level of hype just a touch above that of your average non-conference game. If you looked at the relative emptiness of the student section at any point, you would've almost imagined that maybe Eastern Michigan or Delaware State was standing on the sidelines across the way.
But, even things like that can't really bother you when Michigan is 7-1 and additional wins are not exactly difficult to rationally assimilate into your worldview. Despite not being "home" for Homecoming, what I saw on TV this past Saturday left me in a decidedly familiar and comfortable place.
The Offense
After an abysmal showing in East Lansing, the offense came to play this weekend at home. Michigan put up a healthy 36 points but if things had ever gotten serious they easily could've put up more. A lot of people should come in for praise this weekend: Denard, Borges, Toussaint, the offensive line. Denard looked sharp throwing the ball on a number of intermediate routes, even zinging a few that would be considered nice tosses for a true pro-style guy (e.g., the the 10-yard completion to Hemingway on the first drive). This is encouraging. While I don't think that the MSU game was necessarily an outlier, Denard can throw the ball adequately once he builds up some confidence early in games. He has the arm, and anybody who says otherwise is clueless. Backed up near our own goal line to start the second quarter, Denard launched one that wasn't quite Vick-esque (in that Vick probably wouldn't have had Roundtree pull up much at all) but was still supremely impressive because he felt the Purdue lineman and stepped back into a nice pocket where he set his feet and threw. This might be expected or an ordinary series of events for most quarterbacks, but for Denard it was an encouraging development.
Otherwise, the one interception from Denard was what it was. If Denard can limit himself to one turnover a game then I think most people would be pretty happy. Devin's pick looked like a case of miscommunication, and I guess you can afford to take these kinds of things when you're blowing out Purdue.
Other than Denard's solid bounceback performance, the running game was obviously superb and the number one thing to feel good about. Here's a kind of terrifying statistic: Fitz's 20 carries made him the first non-Denard back to get 20+ carries in a game since Carlos Brown in 2009 against Illinois (yes, that game). That is truly unbelievable (it really shouldn't be given the dependence on Denard in the running game, but for some reason it's still really surprising). Now, Fitz probably won't find that much room against Nebraska and Ohio State (and probably not even Iowa or Illinois), but it was nice to see someone other than Denard carrying the load. This is how it should be. Denard carried 15 times (for 63 yards), which is more than I thought he did but isn't exactly horrible. The failure on 4th and goal was probably the only thing you can complain about re: the ground game...as money as that play is, it was bound to get stopped eventually (especially with our relatively small line).
Having watched a lot of Auburn in the Malzahn Era, I've always sort of been jealous of a running game that is creative in the ways it sets plays up, from pre-snap motion to who is carrying to the ball to ways of delivering the ball to the ball carrier. While we haven't quite gotten to that level of creativity yet, we're getting there. The dual-QB formation is starting to figure itself out. I think that Denard is still good for an effective jet sweep about once or twice a game, but I think it's clear that Borges will make his money by playing off of Denard in that set-up. It did of course help that Purdue is just not that good, but either way I'd have to say that this was probably my favorite game thus far from a play-calling perspective. Then again, everything looks nice when it works.
They ran a couple of things that we hadn't seen them run all year and they had two weeks to prepare an offensive game plan.
Well, isn't that nice. So is this:
Purdue's backers completely overrun this but Fitz exploits this like a good back should; when you force relatively untalented players to defend in space, this is what happens. This wrinkle has the potential to do, well...what it did. After giving it to Denard on the jet once or twice, Fitz will have acres of green to work with on the other side. Obviously this won't always go for a TD, but it's just another example of many "smoke and mirrors" type plays that we will need to get the running game going in the absence of the ability to run traditional power plays (other than Denard Power).
The Defense
After hearing rumors of a knee injury to the Bringer of Light/Competency that is Jordan Kovacs (and then confirmation of said rumors), I was a little worried that Michigan would immediately revert to the sieve-like state it had held since time immemorial. After that initial Purdue touchdown, I'm sure every Michigan fan was all:
NO KOVACS AND NO COMPETENT SAFETY PLAY MAKE MICHIGAN FAN GO CRAZY.
After that, things calmed down and Michigan finished with another solid performance, relinquishing the aforementioned 7 points and then another TD in garbage time when dudes like Beyer and Clark were on the field. Purdue couldn't do much on the ground, rushing for a mere 89 yards on 29 attempts (3.1 YPC) and passed for 222 yards on 27 attempts, with 48 yards coming on the aforementioned breakdown and 48 more coming in the last drive with under two minutes to go. So, while Michigan is obviously no Alabama or LSU, I think we can safely say that we have a good defense. Every time I think about some of the things that might be wrong with this defense, I think of last year in Bloomington, where I was present as we made Ben Chappell look like Peyton Manning. It's a pretty easy transition from the aforementioned to "man, Greg Mattison is the smartest person of all time next to Greg Robinson" given the results thus far. We'll see how Mattison does without Martin and RVB next year, but that's a worry for another day.
Mike Martin was his usual Hulk self, consistently blowing up double teams and notching two sacks along the way. The lack of a consistent space-clogging nose to free him up will continue to be frustrating, but Martin should still be able to make hay against the remaining lines on the schedule. Countess continues to be the precocious freshman that he is (although not without mistakes), and Woolfolk's return to safety was not completely disastrous. Hoke saying that he would like Troy to be more physical at times is pretty valid and not just Hokespeak. On the long TD, both Countess and Woolfolk allowed themselves to get slowed down by pathetic, flailing blocks (Countess by the slot and Woolfolk by a clumsy OL), giving Bush the chance to turn what should've been maybe a 10-15 yard gain at most into a long touchdown. Given the nature of the play itself, I can't decide whether to be more or less upset than I am (which is not that upset anyway, FWIW); it was a screen that is ostensibly pretty easy to diagnose from Woolfolk's position on the field. Okay, so Countess gets sort of slowed up and then whiffs at the ball carrier's feet. It's a mistake but I can live with that so long as the help shows up as it should. Unfortunately, Woolfolk is very un-physical here, as the big guy blocking him does the standard big guy blocking a small guy act (also known as "engage for about a second and then do a Lunogoesque flop") but still manages to slow Troy enough. Another unfortunate aspect of the play is the fact that Floyd isn't quite able to track Bush down from the backside despite seeming to have the angle for a second. I guess that's just something we'll have to live with with him on the field (otherwise he's been about as good as you can expect him to be).
Special Teams
So, special teams were kind of good in general this week, in perhaps one of the best all-around performances of the season. First of all, though...Gibbons?
Gibbons was 2/2 on the day, knocking in 22 and 37-yarders. I still admittedly don't have enormous confidence in him making a field goal in a tight situation on the road but you could probably say that about 80% of college kickers anyway. Elsewhere, Hagerup had a quiet but solid day, booting two for an average of 40.5 (and a long of 49).
However, the kick return game was probably the most notable development in this phase, with Odoms returning three for a total of 81 yards, including a long of 33 that was very close to getting broken for much more. I'm not sure if we'll see this type of production consistently but you've got to think that we'll break a meaningful return at some point this season, and what better time to do it than now as we enter the stretch run.
Speaking of Odoms on returns against Purdue, doesn't that TD in 2008 feel like it happened ages ago? Time flies.
Miscellaneous Minutiae
I don't think Shaw is anything more than a niche player at this point but he was surprisingly effective this week. With Devin at quarterback and Shaw, Denard, and even Gallon all being threats to carry the ball at any given time, I'd have to think this forces teams to be overly edge-conscious, maybe leaving things open for an attack of the middle? Either way, 5 for 56 yards and a TD is not bad for your #3 ball carrier in a given game.
Again, Michigan stifled the opposing offense on third down: Purdue converted a paltry 3/13 on third down. This puts Michigan barely in the top 40 at #39 in third down prevention percentage (36.21%), putting us a couple of spots behind Notre Dame, six behind PSU, and 21 behind MSU (Illinois and Ohio State are also in the top 25 in this department). This is easily the most endearing quantifiable aspect of the defensive turnaround (other than points allowed, obviously). It's hard not to be excited given that we're doing all of this without great depth or even talent at most positions.
Toussaint...Hart with speed? HART WITH SPEED. But seriously, Toussaint is the #1 guy despite Hoke's non-commital Hokespeak on the matter.
Lewan has been: 1) WWE-style arm-barred 2) punched in the face and 3) dinged up in general as a result of the last two games, yet he keeps coming back for more. I think it's fair to say that Lewan is playing with mansome TOUGHNESS.
I just have to, but man...really guy who is in charge of playing piped-in music? At the risk of sounding all ND Nationy, but Seven Nation Army does not need to be played a million times a game. The more indistinguishable the Michigan gameday experience gets vis a vis your average college venue, the sadder I get. I'm not against piped-in music at all (other than certain songs which are terrible coughSweetCarolinecough) but there has to be a certain aspect of moderation to the whole thing. This is of course not even mentioning the fact that it seems like literally everybody else in the conference does it now (I mean, even the Lions did it fergodsakes).
Mike Martin notched Michigan's first safety since the 2003 Houston game...good times. The only thing I really remember about that game is that we destroyed them and the students chanted "Houston's better" after the annihilation of ND the next week.
Michigan's been pretty lucky thus far re: the injury bug, but with Kovacs looking like he's out for at least one more and both Barnum and Lewan looking like they're at least definitely not 100%, Michigan will have to dip into the shallow talent pool for reinforcements. Michigan should be okay without Barnum if necessary (Schofield seems to have been about as good) but Lewan would be an irreplaceable loss.
Hello, Internet. I am Fouad Egbaria, a Michigan grad ('11) and recent graduate of the MSJ program at Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism. This is a blog that attempts to analyze the highs and lows of Michigan football and basketball; I'm just trying to capture the spirit of the thing. I will also write about general Big Ten news, as well as Chicago professional sports (from time to time).
Posts
