Hot, Wet Electricity
by Beauford on Sep 6, 2011 2:04 PM CDT
in Michigan Football
Email
Print
Anyone else feel kind of cheated out of a quarter of football? After a day that was mostly hot and wet, I sat back and tried to ask what I learned from this team and coaching staff. I'm not sure I have an answer on this. Michigan drove the field at times, and at times looked really out of sync. The defense caused me to text "2010 called and wants its defense back" to SCM at one point, but also gave us this:
via mgoblog.com
I'm not sure there's been a better picture of the Michigan Defense since an unconcerned Alan Branch stomped away from Zac Morelli (I think...do I have my PSU QB's right?). The defense scored two touchdowns, which seems unsustainable. The offense sputtered, scored, and seemed about ready to start really imposing their will when the game was called. I'd be a lot more comfortable if I had seen a 21 point 4th quarter explosion. This seemed ready to happen. It didn't, so I remain unconvinced. The rushing stats are OK, but are primarily comprised of two long runs. Do these long runs happen against Notre Dame? Michigan State?
Defense
The defense looked about how I expected them to look. On the first drive, the fundamentals looked improved, even if the alignments and coverages didn't. Check out this Mgodiary for a frame-by-frame of some of the missed alignments. The Western offense came out with some no-huddle, which took Michigan by surprise, and Carder was accurate-as-advertised. WMU moved the ball with ease. What happened next did not happen last year. Mattison, sensing that pressure was going to be the only way to knock Carder off his rhythm, brought the house. At his own 35 yard line (ish) he brought cover 0 3 times straight, sending Mouton [Demens. Mouton is graduated. See comments for shaming purposes] up the middle only to massively whiff on the sacks. It didn't matter as Carder chucked up deep prayers off his back foot that each fell harmlessly to the turf.
Did this happen last year? The last 3 years? That was a mid-quarter adjustment that took a WMU offense surprise (no huddle, quick drop) and neutralized it. Later in the game, Mattison would start mixing his pressures, getting Kovacs free numerous times, and causing Alex Carder to start yelling at his sideline that he needs more time. This is encouraging.
Less encouraging was the pressure exerted just by the front-4. This needs to get better. Against Big 10 teams, and indeed against Notre Dame, there is no way that we're going to be able to go cover-0 3 times in a row and get away with it. We need to be able to generate some happy-feet in the pocket using just a 4 man front from time to time, and I didn't see that on Saturday.
Obviously, the defensive scores were nice. Jake Ryan's play to force that first INT was a special play. It's hard, obviously, to analyze these plays as much more than flukes, however. The team will likely not score 14 defensive points per game from here on out. Herron did well to be in the right place. What was nice, and possibly sustainable, was the 2-0 turnover margin. If we're able to sustain a +2 on turnover margin, that's worth a game or two.
Offense
The offense is harder to judge. First of all, Denard was indeed in the shot-gun the majority of plays. He made some nice throws, Koger had a nice catch, and he threw one hilariously behind Drew Dileo that possibly would have gone for 6 had he hit him in stride. There were a couple long throws that I thought he could have scrambled for the first down, but he looked pretty calm and comfortable out there. What I liked to see was the lack of panic on 3rd down. 3rd and 5 was death to this team over the past 3 years. This offense, while obviously wanted to pick up as many 1st as possible, seems designed to pick that up.
Toussaint looked good when he was in, Shaw looked like the same Shaw that he's always been - deadly fast in the open field, but a little to dancy at times. Both had pretty good games, and were on the doorstep of having really good games before the Lightning Gods saw fit to cancel the 4th quarter. If there was ever a time to say "sample size too little" before making a judgement, this is it.
Special Teams
Ugh
Upshot:
This was a weird game. While I feel comfortable that Michigan would have won in many different ways, the exact way it went down was weird. There were 14 points that the defense scored, the offense never had the ball, we missed an extra point, and only the first TD drive appeared to be a sustainable look at the offense - the other was two homerun runs that probably wouldn't happen against, say, Nebraska.
The bottom line is that our sample size of evidence is small, and made even smaller by the unlikely way in which this game went down. There are things that happened positively. The defensive adjustments were great, the fundamentals were there, and Denard looked fairly comfortable. There were also bad things, like the 3-out, the WMU opening march down the field, general confusion on the defense, and kick coverage. It was an incomplete game in more ways than just the minutes. I feel that it was incomplete as a means to judge this team or reset expectations as well. Next week we go back into the breach against Notre Dame. We'll have a much better picture after that one. Final grade: incomplete.
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Game feedback
I liked what I saw. I didn’t LOVE it, but I think that where they are as a program, the changes, the coaching philosophy, I think that they are on track for a good season. Or as the pilot in me would say, they’re “on glide path.” They did what they needed to do and showed promise, although I think they still have a lot of work to do, as it sounds like all the interviews I saw and read are indicating.
I liked how they were able to move the ball on the ground and didn’t have to resort to the pass a lot, and when they did pass, they were effective. I really liked the pass that connected right before the final stoppage of play that put Michigan well into WMU territory. The O-line got good protection, pushed the opposing D-line back and I saw some good glimpses of Power Football that UM has missed over the last three years.
All in all, a good first game…and I would have liked to see them finish the game simply for the game time reps that all teams in the beginning of the season need. The only upside to that was the lack of film that ND gets to study.
"sending Mouton up the middle"
Mouton wasn’t there, genius. Your credibility is now -100.
No.
Minus 100. It’s probably more apt to say that Beauford has zero credibility. Mouton was not at the game. He graduated. It’s an egregious error on Beauford’s part that made him look moronic. And your “support” only adds more fuel for our rivals. Why would I say that his credibility was 100% if he made a glaring error?
Sigh. Why don’t Michigan fans at least try to sound intelligent? I really don’t know about you guys and this blog sometimes. Did some of you even graduate high school?
by Big House Jack on Sep 7, 2011 5:10 AM CDT up reply actions
Dude
ease up…. I was making a joke. I didn’t realize the “-” as in a minus, but thought it more of a pause. I know what you were trying to say ultimately, but was making fun of you. No need to go on a tirade…
I guess I could have added the obligatory :-), or lol, or something, but didn’t want to come across as a junior high cheerleader. I guess I’ll start so that people realize my intentions easier.
…and I only say this because I care….there are plenty of decaffinated brands on the market that are just as tasty as the real thing….
Jeez...
Big House Jack – it’s been fixed. A thousand apologies, and please feel free to ask for a refund at the door
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."
-H.L. Mencken
http://maizenbrew.com
Incomplete?
Yeah, I think incomplete is a fair grade. The game was incomplete and, like mentioned above, missing those game time reps are something you can’t get back. I was just sick the way WMU moved the ball early on. But on the other hand, they looked like they were ready to have their way with the Broncos. I heard one the anouncers say he thought that early on Mattison may have been sizing up his opponent and then set the dogs on them. Not sure that is the case, but it sounds nice.
It does remind me of the Michigan teams of old in years when they were putting new players in place. They would use these early games to shake out the bugs and would show marked improvement from week to week. If Coach Hoke can do that, I’ll be happy. And in the presser, he seemed aware of the deficiencies and plans on addressing them. He talked about how he would address the special teams. He inferred there may be some new personnel or schemes or whatever and with a smirk said, “It should be a fun week.” That’s coach-speak for “there’s going to be a whole lot of hittin’ going on.” I am reasonably sure that he will be on top of things. I have to be.
"I don't expect to win enough games to be put on NCAA probation. I just want to win enough to warrant an investigation." Bob Devaney, Saginaw native, Alma College Grad ('39), oh, and he did some stuff at Nebraska (11 seasons Head Coach, 101-20-2, 2 National Championships, 26 years as Athletic Director.)
by PreachinTotheChoir on Sep 6, 2011 5:56 PM CDT reply actions
What I learned
I learned that our coaching staff is the real deal.
Defensively, fundamentals were good (nobody blew a tackle), players flocked to the ball. Mattison adjusted his scheme and used his players to best advantage. No, we’re not going to score 2 TD’s on defense every game, but they weren’t utter flukes. They were forced turnovers, and his players were in position to capitalize.
The offense will be fine. RB’s hit their assigned holes. Western doesn’t have an all american DL, but does have a few big DT’s, and our OL handled them. Denard didn’t have to carry the team. Let’s be real, last year Denard was dilithium against UConn and Bowling Green, and a wack-a-mole during Big Ten play. Against Western (a Mac team, but a good Mac team), he was allowed to be boring. He checked down, threw a few too deep, and a few behind his receivers, but he didn’t INT or fumble. Speaking of fumbles, no Wolverine did (even Gallon on a wet day!!!). We had one penalty on the first game of the year. ONE.
Special teams wasn’t good, but it wasn’t quite the utter disaster that last year was. I’m not sure if I was more surprised that Gibbon’s seemed automatic or that Wile didn’t put one in the endzone on a kickoff (he did ok on punts, so for a frosh, it’s still a decent outing).
Are we going to win the B10 this year? Who knows, but I saw a competent coaching staff, and that’s why I’m going to sleep well this year.
For every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand, and wrong.
Just to drive the point home
There’s not enough luck in the world that would have led to Brendon Herron winning B10 defensive player of the week under GERG, or anyone else RR might have hired to replace him. Those players, and Michigan’s future, are in good hands.
For every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand, and wrong.
by MosherJordan on Sep 6, 2011 10:33 PM CDT up reply actions
What you learned...
is exactly what I learned. This is a team that seemed to learn how to actually make a tackle and learned how to stop shooting themselves in the foot. This Michigan team may not be the most talented but it’s well coached. That’s an improvement already.
and quite frankly, I think your analysis is better than Beauford’s. Though, I did learn not to expect two defensive TDs from the same player every game. =D
What would Yzerman do?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
