Yeah, I'd say your comments are colored by your miserable weather-related experience.
One thing does not seem like a blast from 2005: 9-0 vs. 6-3
This is the last time I am visiting a michigan blog. I thought blogs like these are supposed to make a fan feel proud and happy about his/her team, but mgoblog and michiganzone have really really ruined it for us. When we have a losing season you whine (good we are supposed to). When we have a winning season you whine? still? Come on guys, are we never to be happy about michigan football? Atleast we have an identity as a football team and let it stay that way. We donot need to imitate any other teams offense or defense.
My advice to all those reading these blogs, watch the game and party till u drop for a win, thats a good enough reason. Dont let minor details ruin the win.
GO BLUE!
The English Majors really schooled NW this weekend.
It'd be "Hart" to find "Henne" better backfields than M's, too.
Mwolv, that's the pathology of the Michigan fan.
Brian, DeBord as Jack Morris? As a non-Tiger fan, I love the comparison. Great observation about avoiding disasters vs. fatal disasters.
"Forced to make third down conversions" - that's the feature of any rushing-centric offense. The trick is in having makeable third downs, which good rushing attacks have.
Super Fumble Brothers, awesome.
I'll be interested to see UFR this week, to see if we ran anything other than zone left. It had to at least be 60% of the run play calls.
We better have our robot trainers working on MM's knee. Indiana suddenly looks annoying.
so does anyone have any further info about, 1) i think it was ortmann playing for mitchell, 2) burgess playing very little??? thanks
You know, after last season, I kind of thought that everybody would kill for a year like this. Yeah, we've got our problems. Big f-ing deal, we're 9-0 with 3 weeks to prepare for OSU and work the kinks out. We could not possibly have had a better result than we've had thus far. I don't know about everybody else, but seeing as how seasons like this don't come along very often, I'm just going to sit back and enjoy it. Nothing that's said here is going to have any effect whatsoever on any of the remaining games, unless of course DeBord is a faithful mgoblog reader.
Before the three weeks of complaining or supporting DeBord starts, I invite you to join me for a moment:
Think back to a year ago. What would we have given to be able to complain about "only" beating our 9th straight opponent 17-3?
That said, I'm not worried. Read RBUAS. Put your faith in the Ron English Revolution to get it done -- which it damn well has. The last time this team was even remotely challenged we emerged with a 47-21 BEAT DOWN.
Stop the hand-wringing and nervous hyperventilating. We'll be fine. Do you think Jim Herrmann was ever involved in a moment like this? Ever?
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogg...600/
UMvNW21.jpg
What's up, Matt? How's the house?
Hooray for roommates posting within three minutes of each other, and for me realizing that the mgoblog forum is a quicker way for me to contact you than e-mail.
i think frustration after such a disappointing offense is not totally off-base, but the whole weather thing, and what seems to be the first sign of non-Hart-like looking (peeking? just a little?) ahead seem like plausible reasons factoring into the performance, or lack thereof, on offense...
On the other hand, if you told me back in july that we'd be 9-0 and beat NW by two touchdowns, I'd take it in a "hart-beat" (sorry)
on a random note, i caught myself daydreaming about what the offense might have looked like this season with a healthy Antonio Bass to go with new math, breaston, arrington, & even matthews...
that'd be... "frustration after such a disappointing offensive showing is not"
MZone is much more negative... Brian has got his head on straight.
1.) Hart NEVER fumbles
2.) hello?...40mph winds, 35 deg rain
3.) many more things can go wrong when passing...this is why LWoodley will make millions 8 months from now....and why NW had 5 TOs..2-3 ints and a fumble via Woodley
4.) M has better lineman than NW
add all these up....it means take away the high variance aspects of the game (TO-prone passing ie, NOT giving Hart the ball in a 35 deg monsoon) and M wins....just not by 40pts. This is the game plan they should have implemented. and, oh by the way, it worked as designed.
The Voice of Reason has spoken!
Debord's record at Michigan when the opponent scores less than 30 points is
38-0. That's damn impressive regardless of whther you love him or hate him.
DW, I just took a flame thrower to Yost. I'm done with the MZone.
We're 9-0, it can't possibly be any better. Everybody here is acting like the OSU trolls who are running around seeking validation of their team. It's like everybody needs to see us air it out, run a reverse, and then a flea flicker just to validate that we are, in fact, better than everybody else.
In case everybody hasn't noticed, I'd say we're by far the most physical team in the Big Ten. We're going to line up and attempt to crush you until there is no more air in your body. We play with violent intentions. And yes, the offense is attempting to be physical, too. Sometimes it doesn't quite work out, I know. Its not like we're afraid of anybody. I'm sorry, but I think the physicality alone makes us prepared for any team in the country.
So does Jackson now get the bulk of the carries behind Hart? I think he does and wonder why we didn't see more of him earlier in the year.
Murder most foul? Or just murder?
re: Jackson
I think the coaches are trying to find a long-term solution for the backup/starting RB position. Jackson is a senior with limited upside potential (although I'm now convinced that Grady does not have that much upside either) so he doesn't get a lot of (or any) PT.
They should play him more. He's proven himself over and over again. I hope his performance against NW reminds the coaches of how good he is.
(And here come the haters: JJ will not give us the best chance against O-State. We should play Minor more. Blablabla.)
Can I just say this... wait who am I asking? Anyway, can I just say that it might be the best thing for us to win in an unglamorous, "only the minimum for a victory" fashion for the following reasons:
a) Going into Columbus, a cocky, over-confident OSU is an advantage for Michigan
b) Don't show the Buckeyes the play book might be blah blah blah... but if that's the reason for 17 consecutive Mike Hart off tackle left, then at least the answer isn't pure incompetence
3) Have you looked at Michigan’s record vs. OSU when OSU is favored and National Championships and/or Big Ten titles are on the line? If not, look it up! Michigan being an underdog is HUGE for us
e) So far this season, every Saturday night before I fall asleep I have thanked the god of saggy cheek jowls for Lloyd Carr. That’s enough for me.
re: DeBored - this is the same OC who was heralded against ND for his agressive and unpredictable play calling. He can do it when he needs to. Against NU, there was no need to, so why do so? DeBored's playcalling doesn't concern me. What does concern me is the offense's mind set.
For each game so far this year, the defense has come in ready to play. Not only prepared, but ready, willing and yearning to hurt the other team. That is the biggest thing English has added to this team - the mindset to come in and play every game. The offense, on the other hand, looks like it is willing to sit back and, if it needs to, turn on a switch and start playing (look at Iowa). No one would be pissed off at DeBored's playcalling this past week if the running game was working like it should have been working...
I believe that you most certainly do worry. If you cannot get your offense going against one of the worst defenses in the nation, what will you do agains one of the best? The last three offensive showings concern me a great deal. Manningham is gone and we become one-dimensional? What if we lost Hart? We'd have nothing. N-o-t-h-i-n-g. Breaston defines disappointment and the slew of dropped passes against a weak secondary is problematic. Do you thing they'll be holding onto balls when a punishing secondary is bearing down upon them? Not likely. As for the weather, OSU didn't seem be having much of a problem in their 30-40 mph winds. Its trouble I'm telling you, trouble.
And, hey, that's crap that you can't criticize the failings of a team simply because they're 9-0. That kind of ducking your head in the sand and "don't question" mentality is what gets us into sooo much trouble. I'll quit criticizing them when I watch them play in the National Championship, because I want for them what they expect of themselves: to be the best.
A couple of comments:
- I believe that last year's 7-5 season was a direct result of me opening my mouth at the spring practice and saying, "With Grady and Martin, Hart may be our third best running back." Forgive my lack of faith, tiny god.
- Despite those sequoia-like thighs, I'm about ready to write Grady's name on the list and then strike a line through it. According to my entirely made-up calculations, he fumbles about every 7th carry -- just awful.
- DeBord's offense is like watching Richard III: he tells you what he's going to do, but the observers/opponents are entirely powerless to stop it. After Hart gains good yards on five straight zone lefts, the opposing D tends to get deflated.
- More DeBord: I do believe that he amps it up if he needs to. Our only game where I felt like we needed a huge lead was at ND, because of that potentially-explosive offense. DeBord had no problem calling for an air attack there and getting a big lead. Given the wind and conditions, runrunrun was absolutely fine with me as a gameplan against Northwestern at home. Clearly, the modern-day Albigensian crusade that is our defense constitutes our strength -- why not let them carry us? Once we had a lead, the only thing that would have undone us was a turnover -- like the too-near interception in the third quarter when Henne threw a pass that died in the wind. DeBord's lack of ego shouldn't be held against him.
Brian,
Great analogy about Debord & pitchers with run support -- spot on.
A request: don't put the words "Breaston" and "traitorous hands" in the same sentence anymore. First, if we ignore the problem, maybe it will go away. Second, when you took traitorous hands off the On Notice list, Stevie held on to the ball better. I say let's not tempt fate and jinxes anymore.
GO BLUE!
jiM
Have you looked at Michigan’s record vs. OSU when OSU is favored and National Championships and/or Big Ten titles are on the line? If not, look it up! Michigan being an underdog is HUGE for us
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Was John Cooper factored in or not???
You know, I like the fact that Mike is DeBored, just not defeatist DeBored.
I mean, when I get DeBored I think of creative ways of getting unDeBored, like taking out DeFlameThrower and playing DeTag with DeCat. If that's the equivalent to throwing 60-yard bombs to Will Paul come Nov.18th, I say keep the toys away until then.
Really, doesn't it all come back to Brian posting a kitten when he shouldn't have? I bet without that, the offense would have exploded for 50 more points.
I just want to point out that you should all expect to see something entirely different from the offense against Ball State, and then for it to be used very little while something entirely more crazy gets thrown at Tosu.
One of those two games is going to feature a five WR set. I truly would not be surprised if Hart has less than 5 attempts in the first quarter on the 18th.
I'm just wanting to point out that we will have something completely unseen to throw at a young, aggressive defense. These next two games are going to be complete mindfucks for the sweatervest.
MWolv definitely takes the cake as biggest slappy so far in this comments thread. Blogs are supposed to make you feel good about your school? Go throw on a Ufer CD if that's what you're looking for. It amazes me how many fans are objectivity-phobic. It's really pitiful.
DeBord is pretty much what we thought he would be. Even back in the summer, our images of the new coordinators were that of Ron English as a revolutionary figure (and he has been) and DeBord as a Carr crony. He's certainly not as bad as the last crony to hold a coordinator's job here, but his play-calling is often infuriating. We've been stopped cold on some of the most predictable and stubborn runs ever this year.
I don't care who you're playing and what the weather is like, when you run on first and second down and it only nets five yards, you don't run again on 3rd & 5. And you don't save almost all your passing plays for 3rd & 7 or longer. The NU and Vandy games were almost unwatchable because of these things.
And Brian is totally right about DeBord's record. That's a great number if you know nothing about the game, but most of us know better.
Couple things:
1) With two freshman on the right side of the line protecting my only experienced quarterback on passing downs... I won't feel to anxious to throw it either. Especially after seeing my laser-throwing QB have his routine passes getting knocked down/miss directed by the wind (ala, Third quarter).
2) Play calling. While part of this blame falls on DeBoard (who I don't blame for wanting this game to be over with with a W), I blame the players for lack of execution. If the players had caught the ball and didn't fumble the offense would have looked better, scored more points, etc, etc... It seems more like the right calls have been made, players just haven't been executing.
3) On Jackson: he was injured at the beginning of the season, and is now getting back to 100%. Now, I would say that we have been spoiled by Mike Hart... Cause on any other year, we would be thankful for having backs like Jackson, Grady and Minor in the backfield (minus the fumbles). The problem with these backs is that they are all "feature backs" meaning, the more carries they get, the better they get. They are not flashy third down backs... they are carry the load of the team type guys. Plus, most backs at Michigan usually don't hit the prime until Junior or Senior year. Grady has shown enough talent that makes me excited for what he can do next year if he keeps progressing like he has.
Overall, there are things that need to be worked on... but most importantly we need to get everyone back healthy again. Second most importantly, we need to execute better (elimination of dropped passes, and fumbles). After we have those two things taken care of, I think we will see a physical, dynamic offense that puts up points like we are all wanting to see.
It is truly GREAT to be a MICHIGAN WOLVERINE!
Awesome post Brian.
Hating Debord's Offense doesn't mean that we don't relish our victories. Winning is important but how we win is also a bit important ( which cannot be compared to the importance of winning). We are just arguing the minor aspect of how we should win. NW game should've been a blowout.
9-0 is Awesome! But being the perfection seekers we are, we are just complaining that our O shouldn't put pressure on our D this much! ( Our D wants pressure, they want to go there and hurt people which is a different story. ) So IMO, Ron English should be paid 10 times more than Mike DeBord.
And.. Looking ahead to next year ( allow me please :-) ), in which we would have a huge dropoff in Defense ( Woodley, Branch, Biggs, Harris, Burgess .. Hall..even Crable might leave), Mike DeBord will be really expected to deliver. Because our O will be BETTER. If he still puts pressure on our D to perform, I'll go mad!
Speaking of the D. Did anybody at the game notice late in the game during a commerical Time Out the D-Line and perhaps some of the LB's were in their own little "zone"?
They were in a small little huddle and seemed to be just staring at each other with their heads all rocking back and forth and around in unison. It looked to me that they were proactively attempting to stay "up". I think it was a little before they knocked Bobby Bacher out of the game.
It was pretty cool.
I didn't notice this on other T.O.'s. Anybody else notice this?
Eeks:
Not all of those guys are guaranteed to leave, so that should keep you a bit happier about the defensive prospects next year. Although I wouldn't be surprised if Branch left. As it is, he is being projected as the #1 or #2 DT off the board, so there really isn't much for him to improve on. However, he might want to come back for another shot at the MNC.
I wouldn't be surprised if two or three of those guys leave, but I also wouldn't be surprised if everyone with a year of eligibility left came back.
I agree with Gene. Ideally, OSU will be an eleven point favorite on the 18th. That can only work in our favor. Keep pumping them up, and keep doubting Michigan. The more Michigan is doubted, the better. I don't actually agree with all the panicky reaction to yesterday's conservative gameplan. But if it somehow helps keep people questioning Michigan's right to the #2 ranking, then I'm happy.
Hope you're feeling better, Brian.
Looking forward to the Indiana game.
Matt,
If we win MNC this year, no chance they are coming back. If we don't there is still a big probability they aren't. Especially the projected top picks.
Out of the people I mentioned Branch and Crable have one more year of eligibility.
Branch will be the first DT taken for sure. There's a big chance he might go. I don't know who replaces him ( Will Johnson will be a drop off. Slocum, given the hype, might step up)
Crable, given the fact that he has 2 kids and him being a responsible father, might look at going pro seriously. I mean, he has the type of body to play DE and linebacker. Kinda like poor man's Merriman.
Rest are gone!
Jake Long said he's coming back though.
In the NW game, Michigan looked like a pro team: built around the defense, a running back who's rarely going to get more than about 15 yards per play, but who will consistently get around 5, a possession-type passing attack.
Unless you had bet on a totally unrealistic 30-some point line, you should be very happy. NW was never in the game after the first couple of possessions.
Instead of speculating about O$U, let's concentrate on Ball State this week and savor each and every victory.
Agree about Grady, however. He has an uncanny talent for running into the pile and, unfortunately, too often comes out of it without the ball.
Eric, I saw it. Also, the entire defense did the same thing vs. Iowa late in the 4th quarter. Just swaying back and forth.
Goosebumps.
http://www.the-ozone.net/
footbal...higanmonday.htm
Michigan Monday of O-Zone is up. They are very objective and to the point. They obviously take a swipe at our O :-). But I really like the last line which attacks Weis E. Coyote.
Brian, Thanks for the awesome Bill Simmons like neologisms like "Tacopants" "Weis E Coyote"- new words into my vocabulary. How about making a glossary?
Don't worry about who's coming back. Most likely, none of them are. Branch is not going to pull a Matt Leinart if he's a top-10 pick. I don't think he'd be looking at a senior year of taking ballroom dancing and dating A-list skanks celebs in Ann Arbor.
Long's "I'm coming back" was qualified with the dreaded "as of now" which means he's gone.
And you know what? They should go. A player would be crazy to abuse his body and risk injury for free when he could get paid millions to do it.
But that's for next year. For now, we need all those guys for four more games, dammit!
I agree with Brian's post. But you know what? All of these exact same things were being said about Debord's offense in 1997-1999, so this stubborn crap shouldn't surprise anyone.
There are a number of injuries right now, though, so I'm giving Debord a free pass on this game.
Also, it was the first game after the "gauntlet stretch" and a letdown was to be expected.
But probably the biggest thing was the weather. It was just miserable and NOBODY wanted to be outside, let alone play that stupid game.
Brian - I enjoy the blog. Some Michigan fans are sensitive wimps. Get over yourselves! I would get more critical of them but I guess my audience is missing because they are no longer visiting your blog.
I believe some of your criticisms are accurate. But I need to point out that DeBord's offenses actually help our defense by keeping it off the field. Think of how little the 1997 defense had to play. The same thing is occurring this year. It may also explain at least a little why our injuries seem to be on the offensive side of the ball - they play more downs. Finally, the best way to beat Troy Smith and company is to sit their asses on the bench. We will need to run the ball and “practice makes perfect.”
In regards to the playbook, we have seen four wide sets only once against Iowa, not run a "trick" play (other than Carlos Brown once under center early in the year), and generally have an aversion to patterns over fifteen yards. The screen reappeared this week after being gone most of the season. (Made sense considering the weather.) Why drop Henne back for seven steps when the wind will take the ball anywhere and a mediocre (at best) line is protecting him?
We opened it up against Notre Dame and scored forty. We can and will when necessary but the obvious preference is to control the clock and keep the defense on the sideline. I realize that Manningham is only one player and just a receiver, but a single athlete can make a difference. (How did we do without Hart last year?) Couple that with losing your top tight end and your other top receiver, I’d run the ball a lot as well regardless of the front that Northwestern put on the field. The playbook is not the "Rosetta Stone" that will mystify Tressell but something is behind the curtain. It did not perform well on Saturday and it will never be prolific but this offense can play well enough to score on anybody. Based on the play of the defense, we may not have to score a ton to win out.
Give them a mulligan this week. Some things will never be solved. We will always wonder the name of the mystery defender knocking the ball out of Breaston’s hands on the slant. However, let's hope everybody gets healthy and in-sinc when we need them in Columbus. GO BLUE!!
I honestly believe the conservative play calling is a reflection of our defense.
I am sure going into the game saturday it was a "how can we lose this game" mentality. Is the correct thinking? I dont know, I do know the answer to the question is to not get down early. What if somehow NU scored on that first possesion and then we give up a pick 6 and go down 14-0 in that weather, my guess is we would have lost. I think the idea was a total survive and advance, with the likely outcome that the game would be closer but little doubt we would lose.
Wasnt it the penn state game were it was more in doubt and I think the playcalling was alot more mixed up.
The bottom line is the playcalling is the reflection of our defense, opponet and current health.
If you think you will see this same thing come 11/18, or even 11/11 then you just dont understand the coaching staff. The more its in doubt the more they will adjust the calling, right or wrong.
One thing is not in doubt, at the end of games we have gotten first downs, or at the very least put the team in position to get first downs (remember the pass drop at PSU). Did that happen with Malones offense?????
Jeremy,
You are right about the goosebumps. The "chill" down my spine didn't help my already chilled body.
I wasn't at the Iowa game to see it there.
After watching yet another completely unimpressive outing by Grady, I'm wondering if part of the explanation is that Mike Hart makes our O-line look much better than it really is. I agree that Grady seems to have a penchant for running up the backsides of his blockers, but it also seems that he does not have many holes at the LOS, either. Hart has the ability to make a lot out of a little, but that doesn't mean automatically that our line is really blocking well.
... or does JJ's decent performance mean that the problem really IS Grady?
On the issue of play calling, we had 28 first down opportunities, and ran on 25 of them. Everybody we play orients their defense to stopping the run first, which means that we have a lot of first down runs getting very little. What I can't understand is why we run play-action so seldom, esp. on first down. It's not as though play-action is some wacky concept used only in the WAC and the CFL; it's been a staple of the NFL for decades, for chrissakes. If it's done remotely well, the fake to the RB adds very little to the time the QB has to be in the pocket, and one of the benefits of play-action is that it temporarily neutralizes a hard pass rush anyhow. I hope those who are confident that we'll unveil a different game plan against Senator Tressel are correct, because if we run the predictable oatmeal offense against OSU that blasted NW for all of 17 points we're in for a very long and disappointing day.
One final point that I did not make well in my previous post. Carr commented that players were getting "tired" legs it seemed in reference to the offense. If you believe Carr, I really would rather tired legs on this side of the ball than the other. You can certainly question the coaching philosophy but the staff may believe that last year's defense wore down because they stayed on the field so long explaining causing some of the shortcomings. Perhaps this conservative play calling is a season long view of keeping fresh legs on the strongest aspect of our team. (It comes with risks – Hart is getting way to many carries.)
Out of all the posts and explanations for our offensive frustrations in this game, only one struck a chord with me - Brian's showing of an innapropriate kitten.
In the future, I would hope Brian and others will be cautious and sensitive in their use of kitten iconography. This means no kittens for Ball State, a small, slightly chastened kitten for Indiana, and a frickin chockfull for OSU and Bowl opponent.
Do not tempt fate. And can we replace Breaston's traitorous hands with Butler's traitorous hands and runrunrun playcalling on the Big Board
"We will always wonder the name of the mystery defender knocking the ball out of Breaston’s hands on the slant."
That's it! It isn't Steve Breaston's Traitorous Hands after all. Tacopants has a brother who shadows Breaston and swats the ball away.
Well that's a big point for me. If the plan is to play close to the vest, then why not at least do enough screens to give Hart a rest? Can't we get more carries for Jackson/Minor/Grady/C. Brown. The worrisome part is that the running game looks very pedestrian unless #20 is in the game.
Re: Tacopants' brother -
And he only gets Breaston on the deep ball and on crossing patterns but never makes it out there for WR screens.
Honestly, I'm not concerned. We basically ran 3 plays all day on offense and still won easily.
i think hart is making this new scheme look much better then it is being blocked......i hope we continue to get better, at least hart is around for a while, barring injury of course.
First step in fixing a problem, is acknowledging there is a problem (outside of the blogosphere, that is):
"We should have scored a lot more points than we did," quarterback Chad Henne said. "It's definitely disappointing for us, because I don't think we took a step forward in our offensive play and got better."
-via cbssprtsline: http://www.sportsline.com/colleg...port/MI/
9764927
Also, a few west coast alum are going to be in Columbus for Nov. 18 showdown - any word on where the UM faithful will gather pre/post?
"We opened it up against ND and scored 40"
Hmm, 33 is more like it, with the last three coming from a drive that needed 5 $#&^ing yards for a TD. We have been able to score is about 4 and a FG in big ten play with 86. Against Wiscy, who has a good D and when the game was tied at the half, we managed a grand total of 27 points.This is excellent and combined with our D, is a killer combo.
But to say that we will be just fine on O at the Shoe with a freshmen TE, and a rusty no 1 deep threat, against an excellent D seems quite foolish.
Oh SWEET! I’ve come to the right place. And BRCE, you are just the man I’ve been looking for!!!!! See, I don’t know anything about football and I need to get me some learnin’. I do know something about numbers, though, and that’s getting me into all sorts of trouble.
Let me walk you thru it so you can spot my error. I look at 41-5 and see a pretty good record. I’ll admit, I strive for mediocrity and hope to be average but you can’t be expecting 46-0 can you? Let’s assume not (I hope I’m not bringing shame upon my UM Ph.D. by making that loser’s assumption!). So, the number of losses that DeBord’s idiocy has cost is somewhere between 1 and 5. Which games is it—specifically? Now, there’s a second set of numbers which have me all confused. See, DeBord’s teams are 38-0 when the other team scores less than 30. If my math is right that makes them 3-5 when the other teams scores 30+ which is horrible. UM should never be 3-5--evah! But see, if I was a DC and DeBoring (get it!) told me “if you hold them to less than 30 we’re guaranteed to win. If not our chances drop to about 1 in 3.” I’d be super psyched. Especially if he said (this is so embarrassing but I can’t learn if I’m not honest) “I plan on winning time of possession so the opponent will have fewer chances to get their 30.” I’m probably hopeless because I should know TOP and record are total nooblar stats (OMG LOL!)
See, the way I see it DeBord’s teams win if the defense holds up it’s end of the bargain. Cuz 30’s a lot to give up isn’t it?
I don’t know anything about football but I do know something about science so let me boil this problem down. The hypothesis is DeBord’s record is inflated by the fact that he’s been playing with great defenses and those defenses have carried his lame offense. That formulation is easily tested. If we look back thru the record we should see a bunch of games (max of 5 actually) where the defense was stout but DeBord’s stupidity lost the game. In other words, there should be several low scoring games where DeBord’s conservative style lost the game. Trouble is, there’s not a single example of that in the record. Sample size too small? Michigan about to revert to the mean by losing four 17-10 games in a row?
Can someone teach me how to look past the numbers to see DeBord’s rotten center?
Please excuse the caustic nature of this post. While I am a prick, I try to save that for the OSU boi's. All the hate for DeBord is making me cranky.
I've been a big JJ fan ever since he came into that Illinois game at garbage time a few years back and ran like 50 yards in 4 carries (i know, i know it was Illinois but how much better were they than Ball State is now?)...give the guy more PT against Ball State and Indiana.
I keep having recurring nightmares about Hart limping off the field with some freak ankle sprain in the 2nd half of a meaningless blowout....I'm not thrilled with the "Super Fumble Bros" taking over down the strech. So whats the answer?
Keeping Hart fresh for OSU is key so why not give a semi-talented senior who's been working his ass off the past 4 years an honest chance against two mediocre defenses.
Lmao.......The Doubt only grows....I love it!
Like many who've posted in the last few days, I'm very concerned about the Michigan offensive line. I just think they're mediocre at best. I don't see a single 1st rounder in the bunch. Sorry, not even big Jake dominates games like I remember Jansen, Hutchinson, and Baas doing.
Henne should've had all God damn day to throw the ball against NW but, incredibly, he was hurried, flushed, and pressured on WAY too many occasions. The O-line couldn't do anything right.
On the other side of the ball, can someone find out what the lowest total number of rushing yards allowed in a season has been in the last 20 years? Michigan's D must be flirting with some kind of a record. THANK GOD for English and his defense!
SoJ,
haha. The doubt is whether we'll blow you out like ND game or barely win like PSU game. ;-). Pick one!
That said, I hope your football team has your same attitude. Please.
*** The Doubt only grows....I love it! ***
You should have seen the doubt 10 years ago in November, following horrible losses to Purdue and Penn State.
someone just mentioned this on wtka, when was the last time someone scored a meaningful touchdown against their defense, would say minny.
Tacopants' brother? Ooooh, well, we'll need to do some research into family history to understand where T's name originated, but my best guess is that Breaston's arch-enemy is simply named Quesadillaknickers.
How about simply "Tacohands"?
Brian... Idiocy Parser(TM). Please.
Either that, or I think it's time to start charging some token membership to keep the rif-raff out. I, for one, would certainly support it.
Michigan will be just fine. I believe that Debord will have a great game plan for OSU and the Meechigan deefense will administer a BEAT DOWN on the Buckeyes!!
So let it be written, so let it be done!
Re: On the other side of the ball, can someone find out what the lowest total number of rushing yards allowed in a season has been in the last 20 years?
Dunno about the total, but check this from the Free Press:
"Northwestern (2-7, 0-5) virtually abandoned the run, rushing only 17 times for minus-13 yards. That's Saturday's history lesson: The rushing yardage was only six yards off the U-M record minus-19 set against Oregon State in 1986."
How about Tacopant's brother being named nachoshorts. Much shorter to type.
I hate the whole damn tacopant clan. They suck!
You asked and I am at home today. We have lowered our average yards given up per game with the rush to 28.4. To place that in historical perspective, only three teams allowed less since the NCAA began tracking this statistic in 1937. Santa Clara (1937 - 25.3 a game), Penn State (1947 - 19 a game) and Syracuse (1959 - 19.3 a game). We are the best in nearly fifty years. (You can find the NCAA Record Book on-line.)
Think of all the great defenses and the years before scholarship limitations restricted the huge advantages that traditional powers owned in recruiting and the contemporary diversity in offenses. (Who did Bo and Woody really face in the 1970's before each other?) This team is better with these challenges. The teams of yesteryear did not stop the run as well as we have done this year. I seriously doubt the three teams with better averages against the run played the nation's fourth toughest schedule. (According to NCAA official statistics, our schedule strength is 4th and OSU's is 22nd.) They likely did not even play ten games.
Call me biased but our play against the run this year is pretty amazing stuff. If somebody is really crazy, they can take the list and compare it to how many teams leading the nation against the rush also won the NC (or came close). I’ve already taken to much time and posted to often.
If OSU can control our front seven they win the game no matter what happens on offense and who plays on that side of the ball. From what I have seen of their line, they may have the talent to do it. We won't know until they play.
I apologize for blatant plagarism but Ron Bellamy's Underachieving allstars has two rather salient posts.
The first http://umichedme.blogspot.com/20...game-9-8-
0.html
is an analysis of Debord's playcalling in the Wisconsin and Penn State games (the two toughest run defenses we've faced). In those games excluding run out the clock drives we passed 57% of the time and ran 43%. D
The second http://umichedme.blogspot.com/20...-
senseless.html
which i quote:
"For all of his praise, I don’t think English’s defense would work without an offense that operates as DeBord’s does. What we know about English’s defense is that it’s athletic, it’s mobile, it’s aggressive, it’s violent; apprehension and hesitation are death sentences. In that, we see energy at premium value. Without the offense holding onto the time of possession advantage the way a patriarchal magistrate would his gold pocket watch (which, let’s be honest, isn’t far from what you’d picture DeBord doing if he were alive when pocket watches were en vogue), English’s defense would tire easily; it wouldn’t possess the same demeanor it does now. His blitzes would get there a second too late, his defensive line wouldn’t be able to get to the QB by itself, his secondary would be exposed – the steel plated AR-15 he’s brandished the entire season would fire blanks. What this season has revealed is that the two probably could not survive without each other."
Wolv in OH,
You da man! That info from the NCAA record book is AWESOME. Wow!
"The best rushing defense since 1959." Which basically means EVER, becuase I'm sure most of the boys who played for the 'Cuse back in fitty nine were two-way players, weighed a buck eighty five, and ran 5.2 40's.
Okay, I'm getting greedy here, but what's the lowest rushing defense YPG average in the last 20-30 years?
The offensive woes primarily come down to the offensive line, and their inability to run block with any kind of consistency. This is Michigan and it is utterly ridiculous to think that they have only one back that can run the ball effectively but that is the case, and the only reason he can do it is because he is, well, Mike Hart. Does anybody remember the era when you could throw Ricky Powers, or Ty Wheatley, or John Vaughn, or Jessie Johnson back there, and they would run for 100 yards?
If you think about it, this program really hasn't run the ball well in quite some time. Sure - Chris Perry had a good senior year but that is about it in the past five years until you get to the Anthony Thomas, Steve Hutchinson, Jeff Backes era. You have to point the finger at the O-Line Coach and Strengh & Conditioning Coach on that one.
Finger-pointing aside, Northwestern's defense is not good, and we can all bury our heads in the sand, and hope that the reason the offense struggled this weekend was because of the weather (NW managed to throw for 200 yards in that weather with an inexperienced QB - why couldn't Michigan?), or because Manningham was out (once again, this is Michigan - we have only one good deep-ball receiver on the entire roster?), or because DeBord doesn't want to tip his hand (the ND game is on film, as are all 46 games he has served as the OC so what exactly is he hiding?).
But the reality is that the offense is regressing, and to a certain extent, still living off the 30 points they scored against ND for their No. 2 ranking. Sorry - defensive touchdowns don't count, nor do 4-yard drives which end in a field goal. The ND game was almost two months ago. This team has only scored over 31 points one time since that game (MSU).
Now, perhaps when Eckler, Manningham, and Massey return, the offense will get suddenly explosive but it is somewhat naive of us fans to not think there is a problem. You can't tell me that LC didn't want to be up 40-0 at halftime Saturday so he could rest his starters the ENTIRE 2nd half.
I like this team - their resiliency after last year's 7-5 season is unmatched. But you can only ride a defense so much, and until they prove to me that they can stop Troy Smith, I'm not even sure you can ride them as good as they seem to be.
So the optimist in me wants to believe that this team is - I hate to say it - like the 2002 tOSU team. Physical, fierce, and completely overlooked by the glitzy tOSU (much like tOSU was overlooked by Miami). The realist tells me that this Michigan team is more like the 2003 tOSU team where the fans' mantra was "Tressel-ball is king" and scoring touchdowns doesn't matter because the only thing that matters is getting a "W." I'm pretty sure Michigan exposed that farce in Michigan Stadium that year, including gouging tOSU's No. 1 ranked run defense.
With the game in Columbus, and tOSU appearing to improve each week while Michigan stays stagnant, I
continued....
I'm losing confidence each week on this one. Unfortunately, I'm thinking it might be another long winter in Columbus for us Michigan grads.
I agree with you 100%, Cliff. That's why I'm trying to talk about the defense!
How 'bout those boys, eh?! English has them FLYING to the ball!
And I disagree with your comparison of this year's D to the 2003 Buckeye D. I think our defense this year is WAY better than that unit, and they alone will give us a very good chance of winning on November 18th. If this Michigan defense allows more than 20 points to the Buckeyes I will eat my shorts. Write that down.
CAUP...I certainly hope you are right.
Deep down, I'm hoping that the mantra "Offense wins ball games but defense wins championships" rings true ala 1997.
Nemo and others,
I guess the point is not clearly understood. We are not against an offense which grinds the clock. We are against an offense which is PREDICTABLE. 2 different things. We run on first 2 downs and throw on 3rd down. What I'd like to see is throw on first downs - mix it up which would make our possessions longer, minimize 3 and outs and would be a staple of a great ball control offense.
Against NW, Michigan had 46 run plays and 20 pass plays - understandable. But out of those 46 run plays I am damn sure most of them occurred during 1st downs! Predictability brings doom. Safeties cheat and come in the box which allows LBs to plug the holes with Linemen - ergo no room to run. Also Hart is an indispensable player. By making him run on 8 man fronts, we are increasing the likelihood of an injury!
imafreak,
You don't make sense.
--snip--
"The hypothesis is DeBord’s record is inflated by the fact that he’s been playing with great defenses and those defenses have carried his lame offense. That formulation is easily tested. If we look back thru the record we should see a bunch of games (max of 5 actually) where the defense was stout but DeBord’s stupidity lost the game. In other words, there should be several low scoring games where DeBord’s conservative style lost the game. Trouble is, there’s not a single example of that in the record. Sample size too small? Michigan about to revert to the mean by losing four 17-10 games in a row?"
--snip--
Which is precisely the point. If our D doesn't work; suddenly seems mortal ( like ND first half last drive, Minnesota's airing out etc) and we do give up points, Mich with DeBord as OC loses more often than not.
i.e. If the opponent scores more than 30 points, the probability that we lose is 5/8.
Again, DeBord needs a great defense. If he has a Defense which gives up more points, he doesn't have an offense which scores more points than the opponent. ( inspite of the talent)
Finally, no one is arguing against TOP. I am all for it. I guess we are arguing against Predicability. These two are correlated in the sense that the probability that we run in a given play is more than .5, but Predicability means that the probability we run on a first down play is close to 1. Easy stopping by opponent defenses.
Last 30 (1976) years:
Arizona (1993): 30.1
Virginia Tech (1982): 49.5
Florida State (1997): 59.0
Link to NCAA Record Book:
http://www.ncaa.org/library/
reco...ecords_book.pdf
I admire the comment about our run oriented offense empowering the attacking defense. That makes some sense.
I think Debord will mix things up in Columbus; my concern as stated elsewhere is finding an alternative (and working that alternative in a game) to Manningham during these three games, something that promises to stretch OSU's defense.
If this OSU team weren't squatting at the end of our schedule, I would be rooting Debord on hoping for pedestrian win after pedestrian win.
EEKS thank you for responding: First, if the other team doesn't score more than 30 points then historically they simply will not win against a DeBord team--100%. Think about that. That has nothing to do with the defense.
Second, scoring 30 is, I think, a lot of points. Personally, if the defense gives up more than 30 points in a loss (turn overs and special teams nightmares not withstanding) then the D has done a bad job. I wonder what other teams winning percentages are when they give up more than 30. Do you think it's better than 3 of 8? I don't. I also doubt there's many OC's who can match DeBord's "must score 30" record. Think about it. DeBord has never coached a 17-10 loss.
Look, DeBord irritates me also. The numbers cannot be ignored, though. He's rejuvenated the running game, helped get us to 9-0, and beat the crap out of ND. I am willing to accept that there's a method to his boringness and maybe I just don't fully understand his madness. The data does not lie and it suggests there's more to DeBord than it seems.
EEKS, the defense on the last 1st half ND drive was deliberately soft. English was asked about it in a halftime interview and said "that one's on me."
How lucky is Mike DeBord to have that record as OC? Consider this: during the middle of the 1998 season, we scored 12, 12, 21 and 15 points on four consecutive weeks - and went 4-0.
Here are our season scoring averages under DeBord:
1997 - 26.8
1998 - 27.6
1999 - 30.1
2006 - 28.3
Quite simply, DeBord's offenses do not score that many points. It is not easy to win big with those scoring averages; it basically necessitates a great defense. Luckily for DeBord, we've had one in two of his four seasons.
Sorry to interrupt the DeBord Debate, but for those of us who have moved on, there's a great article about Zoltan the Inconcievable on MLive
http://www.mlive.com/
sportsflash...ist=micollegefb
It looks like it is going to be a very evenly matched game this year. In looking at some rudimentary statistics:
Average rank of defense faced by Michigan: 63.4
Average rank of defense faced by Ohio State: 65.2
Average points scored per game by Michigan: 28.3
Average points scored per game by Ohio State: 35.8
Average rank of offense faced by Michigan: 48.5
Average rank of offense faced by Ohio State: 48.2
Average points scored against Michigan: 11.5
Average points scored against Ohio State: 7.3
It is clear to see that the competition faced by both teams, based on national rankings and averages only, is very similar.
Therefore, all things being equal for the most part, I think I give a slight edge to the Buckeyes due to the higher average points per game scored and lower points per game given up. Add in the home field advantage and the Troy factor, and I think OSU has a legitimate chance of winning. Of course, these are just statistics, what else do you really have to go on, other than analyzing video and deciding if one team has an advantage from a matchup standpoint.
Regardless, this one is going to be a classic, one for the ages, and we all need to enjoy it.
Go Bucks!
Ecker, Massey anyone know anything?
I read much early in the thread about dreams of what the O would be doing with Bass and I too have those dreams. Any predictions on whether he can show up MM next year if he's healthy? Or does he hit in well as a Breaston who doesn't drop it and scores TD's. Also I haven't seen every game on TV have they ran any reverses or shovel passes with Breaston?
Maybe I should read all the comments before I ask this, but is there any reason to believe that Debord had the personnel capable of hitting slants last saturday? Breston has dropped many a slant, Arrington was only playing a limited amount, and the pass blocking with Hart out is sketchy. Why risk injury? When Lloyd and Debord go for deep pass plays against Wisconsin late in the game, everybody freaks out. "Henne could have been killed!! Bad crusty coaches; bad!" When they play close to the vest, and minimie their risk against a rather incapable opponent, everybody freaks out. "OMG, we can't put up 20 against Northwestern. We are officially worse than the Case Western Reserve Spartans!" When Bo was running up the score on teams, it wasn't due to a risky attack. It was caused by a gargantuan talent discrepency, both on the field and on the sideline. That has been mitigated, by all the usual suspects. I think that what Lloyd and Debord are doing this season is just about as impressive as a season could be.
Give me a break Cliff. Some folks have an axe to grind, and they do so regardless of the facts. You say the problems of the offensive line are partly on the strength and conditioning coach. Does he not also work with the defense? They seem to be very strong. You also mention the a long list of great offensive lineman. Guess which S & C coach they worked with, the very same one your questioning now.
While I do think Moeller deserves some blame, here's something else to think about - These guys aren't very good. None of them were 5* recruits, and Bihl, Mitchell and Riley were 3*'s or less. You can only make lemonade out of lemons
As for bemoaning our lack of receivers, you do realize we were without our #1 receiver, our #2 receiver was limited in playing time, and our #4 receiver was lost for the whole year (Bass). That's 3 of our top 4 receivers in Spring Ball out for a game. Add to that the loss of our #1 and #2 tight ends, you might want to cut some slack about the passing game. I know everyone compares us to OSU after each game, but let me know when Smith & co. play a game without Ginn, mostly without Gonzalez, without Hall and without Nicol and Frost, and then we can compare.
In the Free Press, Mark Snyder brings the funny...
"Carr said Mike Hart broke the sideline marker when he fell on it during the Northwestern game, suffering an injured back. But Carr said he expects Hart's back to be fine. He did not give an update on the marker."
Also, MM's practicing.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.d...397/1054/
SPORTS
got an e-mail from my sister, it goes along with the mentality down here in Cowtown, the heading for all e-mails:
osu 2006 national Champions
According to most of cowtown this season is in the books!!
go big blue
Ugh . . . don't call us "Big Blue." That's IBM.
The cheer is "Go Blue."
From the Victors Message Board, a summary of some of DeBord's "work" in 1998, when he had Tom Brady, Anthony Thomas, Steve Hutchison and others:
----------------------------
Michiga Memories: October 1998
10/3: Michigan 12, Iowa 9. Iowa finished 3-8.
10/10: Bye
10/17: Michigan 12, Northwestern 6. Northwestern finished 3-9.
10/24: Michigan 21, Indiana 10. Blowout! Indiana finished 4-7.
10/31: Michigan 15, Minnesota 10. Minnesota finished 5-6.
The Iowa, NU, and Minnesota games each saw Michigan's score aided by an important safety.
------------------------------------
Guys, I'm sorry, but DeBord is nothing if not unbelievably lucky.
dcwolverine...
New Hampshire scored 34 points against NU. Nevada scored 31. PSU 33. The list goes on.
Michigan scored 17. Yes, they didn't have Manningham, Ecker, Arrington, Bass, Massey, etc. but neither did New Hampshire or Nevada. I'm not even sure those schools have Tyrone Jordan.
As for me having an axe to grind against the S&C Coach, I have none. But Hutchinson, Backes etc. were six years ago. You have to change with the times, or the times pass you by. Maybe that finally happened this summer, and we will see fruits of it in the next couple of years. Not sure. However, the line needs to block better so someone other than Superman Mike Hart can gain some yards. I can't believe that Michigan is the only team in the country that isn't loaded with five star recruits on the O-Line.
As for the strength of the defense, I have to give credit to Ron English first.
Hey - I'm as a big a Michigan fan as they come but you can't ignore the poor play of the offense the past three weeks. They need to get it together quickly, and to think that the return of Super Mario and the others is suddenly going to return them to being world-beaters is not realistic. There are deeper problems there.
Youre slapping yourself with your own logic. DeBord is the pitcher who gets 8 runs in support so his record is meaningless. But if his record was bad it would be his fault (and his run support would no longer play into this, aka a pitcher who gets 1 run in support but has a 2.00 ERA is bad).
Also the wind was miserable you had a poncho it blew you around, but if you were on the field you would have been airing it out against Northwestern. Call it an excuse if you wont. Sometimes they are merited.
Ill take your illness as an excuse for these arguments.
Ray, here's another baseball analogy: DeBord is the 2006 Tiger lineup. They hit for a mediocre average, didn't steal many bases and didn't score that many runs. But the team went 95-67 and played in the World Series.
Does the won-loss record that the Tiger lineup was a great one?
DeBord's offenses don't score many points. See my post about 10 comments up for more on that.
Brian, it is for the above reason the Fear/Paranoia Level can never go below 2 when playing Big 10 games. (Maybe it can go down to 1 but no lower when playing MAC teams.) In keeping the games close, there is always the possibility that fluky plays will determine the outcome, e.g. a special teams error, a fumble etc. Henceforth, do not ever post a fear/paranoia level less than 2, (This applies no matter how many points you subtract. And while this is not good mathematics, it is the reality of the universe.) As we all know this is Michigan football and we can never let our guard down no matter what the data says.
You have a valid point MCole. Minnesota was very mediocre in 1986 when they beat our undefeated Wolverines in Ann Arbor. The Gophers wound up 6-6 that year.
Commenting by HaloScan
