I say we just focus on the bacon-wrapped brats.
How serious is this Artis Chambers situation? I have no idea if he's made any plays on special teams or not, but to have to potentially forfeit two games because we assumed he was eligible is disgusting. The other alums out here think I should lay off on the coaching staff, I think they're the reason we're facing another year of major embarassment. Lloyd has always kept us good but prevented us from being great. Whether it's on the staff or the AD, if the NCAA holds an inquiry someone should have to go.
No defense of the coaching staff, but a question. How do we keep getting great offensive recruits that partially come to UM because of Lloyd (and may potentially not come if Lloyd leaves)even though our play calling is as bad as you described (and I agree with your descriptions).
Go Blue!
"I managed to not spend the hour before the game screaming "why didn't you pitch the ball?" until I got cold-cocked, so I've got that going for me."
This is a level of restraint that is both unimaginable to most of us who endured that terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day, and is also probably unequaled amongst all men throughout the entire world this past saturday...
amazing brian.
You showed more restraint with Ecker than I would have. Pitch it, you fucking dinosaur! Pitch it!
This was my first time at Northwestern and I was pleased as well. I loved how close the fans are to the field, how you could watch the Michigan players leave and enter the field from the locker room, and the little girl who picked up the tee after the second half kickoff. I did not like the endless shilling, but what can you do.
But have you seen Mike DeBord's rock? What a lovely rock it is.
You must respect this rock.
I'm glad I spent the entirety of the game in a scotch-induced haze, only to wake to hear the final score.
P.S.-
Did you see Mike DeBord's rock?
Constructive:
It is very exciting to not know if you are going to win any given week regardless of the opponent.
No - its not Notre Who - my name that is - is the other U of M - North Dakota - just to clear that issue. According to the GR Press we 'might' forfeit the Penn State game. Any news?
Mike
It will be a while for ruling on the ineligible player.
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/
...s_for_pena.html
I was at Ryan field too, a really nice place, perfect weather, right next to it is the lake, only thing that wasn't good was our team's play!!
As i said in one of my previous comments, "i hope our team continues to lose, so that the cheats in our program will be exposed", i originally felt bad about posting due to the "troll" nature of the comment, but after this game i don't feel bad at all!!
I seriously would love to have a dream that includes Nick Sheridan and a reference to the high school team of one of our recruits. Is Sheridan the 6' 6" walk on QB?
Just get rid of Carr and Debord already. I don't care what you have to do. Really.
From what I heard on the radio, the Chambers situation is neither on the coaching staff nor the AD. It's on the Compliance office. They are the ones responsible for determining whether a player is eligible or not and they screwed up.
It's days like Saturday that I'm thankful I don't have BTN.
Can someone get Ronnie on the horn to USF's defensive coordinator?
I'd be pretty shocked if the Big Ten took the PSU win away from us. I just can't see them disciplining the team for a purely administrative mistake.
It must be really frustrating to be a Northwestern fan and to have fewer than half the fans at "home" games against Michigan.
"There are dozens of us! Dozens!"
Also, Logan may be the linebacker version of Englemon. And who the hell taught Chris Graham to tackle? He's going to seriously hurt himself.
In any case, your tirade was pretty much the same one I made to my uncles at the game. DeBord is the formal perfection of stupidity.
Fear Purdue.
Fear Illinois.
Fear, fear, fear.
Welcome aboard, Brian. I hope DanK and imafreak and all other playcalling apologists read your brilliant column 79 times.
Oops, no spleen. The redcoat metaphor is priceless.
What is more telling than our playcalling problems is two things:
1. That Lloyd hasn't functionally removed Debord from playcalling responsibility, and
2. That Appalachian State was not enough to get Lloyd to say, "Fuck it," and cut his offense loose. Answer here: He cannot compute such an offense.
Brian Kelley, people. Brian Kelley.
hard to believe they would render all michigan games the rest of the season meaningless making them forfeit, a more likely senario is a fine. Some might say they are meaningless already.
Should we not root to lose these games if we want a coaching change?
This was just another in the long line of stink bomb offensive performances under Lloyd Carr.
DeBord is awful, and there's really no arguing that, but it really goes back to Carr. None of the OCs he's had have been any different (actually Fred Jackson might have been even worse, though he didn't have anything close to the weapons DeBord has had).
So..whatever scenario - winning out (riiight), losing out, tying out, whatever leads to Lloyd Carr not being Michigan's coach next season is a good thing.
Although I've heard from a couple different "insiders" that Ferentz is going to be offered the job, and that doesn't make me feel much better. He's better than Carr, for sure, but at this point almost every coach can claim that. Iowa is in sharp decline, so paying $3 million per for a coach that couldn't sustain success really makes little sense to me.
@2000Blue
Don't you think UM recruits itself? I would not worry about a drop-off in recruiting in the post-Carr era.
Trade in the old Carr for one with Les Miles!
LOL at "only three things can happen when you throw scissors and two of them are bad." Great analogy.
The kicking situation is beyond baffling. Lloyd says in post game that he has "total confidence in the kicking situation and isn't planning to make any changes there". Hey Lloyd, this isn't baseball- .333 average isn't too good. Why on earth doesn't Wright get a chance on place kicks? Why on earth doesn't anyone else get a chance? I have zero confidence on any FG attempt, and probably only 50% confidence on XP attempts.
God help me if Ferentz is offered the job. Iowa looks positively awful this year.
Did anyone see Jeff Tedford slow down the Oregon spread? They don't have near the talent we do, but they have a coach. LC please step down...you are killing the program. Mike Debord, go jump off a cliff.
Any chance we could lure Norm Chow from the Titans? A great playcaller, but not batsh!t crazy like Brian Kelly.
Chow is in his 60's. That is a little too old for my liking. Tedford, Kelly, or I guess...Les Miles. I would do anything to see Tedford come to AA.
I should have included the standard "insider" disclaimer - They all have their own agenda, and if 'their' guy isn't hired (or retained), bye bye internet hero status.
ARRRRR it's sucks that your pre-game predication were dead on. DEAD ON. It's embarrassing how predictable this team is. Northwestern? We had to battle it out with Northwestern? Why? Why? Why? Stupid coaching. Did you notice how much room Manningham had ALL DAY? Has Debord ever heard of exploiting a defenses weaknesses? Uhh, like EVERY TEAM does to our defense (except Notre Dame, because they suck, and Penn State because they actually have a coach older than ours).
@ Stillafan...
I know it is a difficult concept for you to understant that one can be both a fan of a team and critical of the way things are run. See (Still loving your country but criticizing its policies). "Stay the course" clearly hasnt worked over the past decade for this team. True fans want the best for their teams and their players. It doesnt make you a better or more loyal fan by turning a blind eye on all the unresolved "issues" that have surfaced in past years, it just makes you a delusional apologist. Yes, I know. I am the "annoying asshole that just likes to complain, unrealistic, reactionary", etc. But you are the delusional douchebag that needs the comfort of the other enablers of mediocrity on this blog by talking of Mich tradition and being leaders and best and maize and blue, etc. Sorry, some of us choose to live in the present and reality.
Memo to Coach Carr:
Please do the following this week:
-Wake up and turn on an NFL game once in your life. See how real coaches coach. Maybe you can watch your own team get beat by USC and OSU? Do you see what they are doing? Try That.
-Also a good strategy against a bad team is to start your regular QB until the game becomes a blowout and then put in your backup to finish the game. You might have this strategy backwards. I can white board it for you if you don't understand.
-We have a lot to work on this week. You saying you haven't lost confidence in your kicking game worries me you not getting this Head Ball coach thing.
-Last but not least you hired the wrong the CMU coach to run the offense, Brian Kelly can be reached at a 513 area code.
See you next week.
Brian, that was brilliant.
I hate that we aren't fun to watch unless we're down 14. Fvck you, DeBored. That said, we own Evanston. I love that trip and have made it 4 straight times. Though, I did have to endure some "You lost to App. State!!!" comments from NU students... and that was after the game. I gave the kid that said it a wedgie, while the other guys in his group were like, "Hey, you know this guy? Should we jump in?". Nerds.
Brian, the blog is freezing firefox with 100% consistency. Please fix. Sad face.
best post ever.
period.
Okay, I'll bite:
I think this analysis is unfair. In general, I've hated the coaching/play-calling this year, but I think that this game was reasonably managed given the circumstances (our first road game, a frosh QB, etc.). My main points:
1) The offense was not conservative when Henne was in. They ran 55 plays, and 27 of them were passes. BUT ... we ran (I think) the last 8 plays of the game, when it was decided. So, when the game was still "on," and Henne was QB, we essentially passed 27 out of 47 times -- 57%. I don't any of us want to throw every down -- and, arguably, you could have thrown slightly more. But it's not as though we ran into a stacked line when Henne was QB (at least, not all of the time).
2) I don't know enough about the psychology of sports to determine when you should give a frosh more rope. I don't know how much room he has to call out of plays. But I do know that there are only a handful of true freshman playing on good teams -- and that's for a reason. Mallett is developing, but I think there's something to be said that confidence develops by easing into things. If he doesn't play another snap this year, Mallett will be able to say that he won two important games and did not lose another game. I guess that sounds Deboard-ian, but I guess my thought is that none of us really know how much we should pull back a gameplan for a true frosh -- and Deboard wasn't conservative with his experienced leader.
3) On defense -- the difference between Ezeh and Thompson at this point is stark. I suspect that when brian does his review, he'll find at least 7-8 whiffs by Ezeh on plays in the first half. It seems, again, a bit unfair to criticize a defense, which, in general, is playing much better when it's being presented with obvious challenges: in this case, your middle linebacker (who now, seemingly, is good).
4) I still can't stand the fact that we play 4 DLs and 2 LBs against the spread. This feels to me like a recruiting problem -- other teams are able to play safeties as linebackers in this situation, but I don't know who we'd use here? Mouton? He's injured, I think. Williams and Stevie Brown seem too small? Perhaps it would make sense to create packages where Adams gets closer to the line, and Steve Brown works back into the good graces of Bedford, or something. Ezeh was quite bad, but in general are linebackers seem to be expected to do far too much.
5) Lastly, say what you want about Carr (and I, too, think it's time for him to go), but his teams never seem to quit. And the difference between us having a terrible 7-5 year and a 10-2 year seems partially due to luck, scheduling, and other circumstances. There's too much parity in college football right now to simply call our coaching idiotic and to assume that a coaching genius would present a flukey loss -- Florida and Oklahoma have these geniuses, and they were zinged. (And, in fact, if Michigan had just lost to
I second Yim's statement.
I run OS 10.4.10 and Firefox. It is crashing 100% of the time, much like it was during PSU week.
Damn, Brino, that one had some mustard on it!
But, as the kids say, "stop him when he's lying!"
And to rebutt Chris: the last OC, Malone, wasn't a sooper genius or anything, but his offenses from 2000 thru 2004 were really pretty good (2003 offense = most prolific in Michigan history **yeah, yeah, insert grain of salt here**)
and I've always wondered why he was thrown under the bus when it was clearly Herrmann and Hennebriation that caused the Year of Infinite Pain.
Going from Malone to Debord was CLEARLY a downgrade. Gee, thanks Lloyd!!
And at least English was an upgrade to Herrmann, but then again, that's not saying much.
And sorry for the typos. Yikes.
If anyone has ever played a lick of Madden or NCAA Football, you'd know that running the left on EVERY first down, and gaining only 2 yds each time, is asinine. Why not play action fake to the left and throw a post to a single-covered, safety-less Manningham or Arrington and get a touchdown? Seriously, the playcalling is an utter joke. I honestly could've been more creative playing against 8 or 9 in the box the whole day. Ridiculous, just ridiculous. And drags for 4 yds on 3rd and 10??
Another historical analogy: the Spanish Armada.
In 1588 Spain was the biggest, richest kingdom in Europe, with tons of gold from the Americas. England was a small, poor kingdom. The two were at war and Spain decided to invade England and take it out for good. An "invincible" Armada, a fleet of 130 huge warships, set sail. The ships were big and heavy, and didn't maneuver well - they were basically obsolete - but against a little minnow like England, it wouldn't matter, right?
The Armada sailed into the English Channel - only to have the English navy, composed of small, fast ships, sail circles around it. The Armada suffered a humiliating defeat and Spain itself never fully recovered. It gradually declined, overtaken by other, emerging powers. Hopefully Michigan football does not meet the same fate.
Love the rock, rock, rock.
ESB, "passes" are not equal to "not conservative."
I will defend a few actions from Saturday, though.
*Every team is down for a few games. You wouldn't think this team, losert to Appy statem, would ever be "down" again, but it happens.
*Henne clearly is still a bit gimpy and may be risking further injury. I'd have started Mallett and played him the whole way through, but with a real playbook. Plays that require a four-year starter to run are not plays that we need.
* I love play action, but this may not be the team for it. I am sympathetic to the notion that we don't want Henne to turn his back on the D. Mallett has too much trouble just receiving a snap and dropping back to make play action particularly feasible for him, now. I expect it will be a staple for him in the future.
ESB, you are insane. The passing from Henne was necessitated by horrific play calling in the first half. If I see one more "distribution" chart that tries to argue we pass enough, I will scream. It has nothing to do with passing enough - it has everything to do with WHEN we call plays and HOW we react to what defense is deployed against us.
Brian used the ROCK/PAPER/SCISSORS analogy for a reason - that is a timing analogy. We should approach a game with some sense of reacting to what other teams do. If a team puts ZERO DBs in a game and has 6 DLs and 5 LBs, do you run the ball? Michigan would because it's philosphy is to execute and not adjust. I am here to tell you a fact: Michigan WOULD run into that defense without DBs. They would try it.
Sane coaches would throw against that defense. The 8 in the box scenario is a less retarded example of that same thing.
You're given credit to a drunk who is sober five days out of the week; if you're in jail or detox for those five days, YOU DON'T GET CREDIT. OK, that was a crappy analogy, but you get the point.
That's why you put Mallett in the shotgun and have him do playaction from there. He can hand the ball off if it's open, and he can keep his eyes on the line to throw a quick pass, drop back, or roll out.
SIMPLE
i've never had a firefox problem.
Not that I especially want to defend the coaching staff right now - far from it - but it sounds like Henne was in danger of exacerbating his injury by playing so much. That's why they waited so long to but him back in.
The play calling with Mallett in was nonetheless inexcusable.
"Michigan WOULD run into that defense without DBs. They would try it."
That's just hyperbole; calm down and make your point with facts.
Well, at least we still have enough respect for NW to put Henne in the game.
That's not hyperbole. Let's take a vote. Who thinks that Michigan would always check out of a running play into a pass play if the other team had 6 DLs and 5 LBs?
Be honest.
Even if it was hyperbole, it makes the point. Michigan will run independent of the defensive set.
They obviously would pass. You should be making your point with facts because you CAN (see Brian's post).
FWIW, Neinberg, Brabbs and Finley....er....Gingell, Lopata and Wright are listed as co-starters in this week's depth chart.
"Eventually it rained."
I'm assuming Hemingway was involved in the dream? Ernest or Junior?
I found myself at a party once with the safety who tipped Kordell’s pass so Westbrook could catch it just over Law—I think it was Chuck Winters but I can’t remember and I’m certainly not going to rewatch the play—and because I was very very drunk I thought I might ask him about that play. I mentioned this idea to my roommate’s girl friend because I’ve learned that when I’m really drunk it’s a good idea to run these ideas by someone else. I believe her exact words were “don’t do that because I don’t want to have to leave this party to take you to the embergency room.” After some reflection (seriously), I decided she was right.
I’m certainly not going to defend DeBord because he sucked this game and I don’t want anyone to think that I’m a Buckeye plant. But why does every start with hating on DeBord and soft shoe the fact that defensive staff still cannot find a way to stop a spread offense even when it’s run by completely inferior athletes? In the bad games, DeBord has been light years better than English—which isn’t saying much. Yeah, yeah, I know that everyone should know by now that defense can’t stop the other team so score score score. But THE DEFENSE CAN’T STOP NORTHWESTERN AND THEY SUCK.
I, too, had a great time tailgating. Waaaaay more UM folk than NU folk, however.
Honestly, I think they were annoyed with our yelling and flip-cup playing and general rising level of drunkenness. Isn't this college?
I did make one NU student feel stupid when we figured out my SAT score was higher than her's. (Ha!)
Can we attribute most the playcalling from the last 3+ games to the complete and total lack of confidence in Mallett's abilities?
They sure as shit are gonna open up the playbook and balance the attack (for DeBord standards) when Henne is back and healthy.
I am certainly not going to die on this hill. It's stupid. But hyperbole (or not) is a very effective debating tool.
Michigan would eventually attempt a run if presented with that defense. You disagree. That doesn't matter because you can take this absurd position and add 1, maybe 2 DBs and eventually we arrive at reality: that Michigan does run against insanely stacked lines. This is to counter ESB's point that a simple run/pass percentage is relevant. It matters when you run.
It was not designed to get a good debating grade from you.
"Poor predictable Bart. Always takes rock."
A stat that I hate:
DeBord-coached offenses are now 43-0 when the opponents score less than 30 points.
That just means he doesn't learn, because he doesn't have to. The offenses do just what it takes not to lose, and not a shred more.
But goddammit, just because we out-execute their rock doesn't mean we should keep throwing it. Do quick slants turn upstanding Michigan Men into criminals?
i had bought 3 tickets on stubhub for the game and drove out from aa on friday night...maybe i was drinking at the same place with brian.
walked up 10 minutes before kickoff to the ticket window..needed another ticket for my brother who showed up..wanted one in the same section..but the ticket guy offered to take my three and give me 4 together in a comparable section...35 yard line on michigan side...woohoo...perfect.
like that could happen at michigan?
i loved the small towness of the place...
the shame of it all is that, yet again, Hart's proving that he's the best player in college football and nobody's talking about him this week. it's a damn shame. i'm gonna miss him so bad.
As a Michigan fan with NU season tix (seriously, don't laugh, I pay $90 per seat for THE ENTIRE SEASON!!!) I have seen NU play twice this year prior to this weekend, Nevada and Duke. I never watched any film, just the two games live.
If there was one note I would have about the NU defense, it was that their corners suck. They can't cover guys 1 on 1. How does Michigan not take a shot deep in the first half? They could have gone deep with Mallet, there was nothing to lose. One long TD pass to Manningham, the run game opens up, and we win by 40.
I know we have beat the playcalling thing to death, but it's unacceptable. If they honestly watched film all week how did they not see that they can't defend the pass?
EBS :
Again.. this is the umpteenth time.. The issue is NOT passing or running.. Brian has a brilliant metaphor. It's about deception...
As Larry Johnson, the chiefs running back put it 1 week back
"Football is simple. It's not chess. It's checkers. You run when the defense expects you to pass. You pass when the defense expects you to run."
No one can put it more succinctly.
It's not "WE SHOULD PASS MORE". It is not. It is all about deceiving the defense.
imafreak:
"THE DEFENSE CAN’T STOP NORTHWESTERN AND THEY SUCK." Agreed. But you are just shifting the blame.
The Defense allowed ONLY 16 points! You can't shut out a team which relies on spread attack like NW.
The offense could have scored 50ish if DeBord was good.
---
And for F's sake.. I KNOW for sure that when #21 Junior Hemingway is in the field we are going to run.
Yet another instance why DeBord's offense is sooo predictable.
Can we keep up the discussion about how bad both of these polls are? We all know that the polls have been less than stellar for years, but it seems that ever since last year when the chose UF over Michigan for the National Title game last year, and UF showed the pollsters their "errors" for giving OSU the number one ranking all year, the poll has been too reactionary and too biased. In the coaches poll, UF was the team that fell the least among those in the top 10 that lost. This despite the fact that UF was favored by three TDs, at home in the Swamp, and facing a team that had lost to USF (up-and-coming) and Miss State (down-and-leaving). The fact that it's an SEC game is BS...Auburn outworked the Gators and lost, as it shood have. How can West Virginia drop further, losing on the road to a ranked, undefeated team? It's digusting. Georgia ahead of South Carolina? No explanation needed. Kentucky in the top 10, who's only win was against a SEVERELY overrated Louisville team in the last second. I think the pollsters are lost and groping for anything...hence the reason UF, despite being a totally different team than last year, has moved the least. Call it the National Champions Resistance in Change...
The polls shouldn't even be constructed until the final 3 weeks of the year.
We had ZERO pass rush in the first half. It was not the spread option that was killing us, it was letting Bacher have all day.
On the flip side, the offensive line was terrible in the first half.
Even when Henne came in, the game did not open up, he just executed his long handoffs and 5-7 yard out passes more effectively.
There was no passing game between the hashes or beyond the sticks save a few isolated plays. But for Henne's excellent touch and accuracy, and good YAC by the receivers (the whole out executing thing), we would have been in huge trouble. Mallett was checking down to his third option on nearly every pass (well short of the sticks).
Arrington was the best player on the field for Michigan. Henne right behind him. Hart missed a chance to cut back his run to the one and ran himself out of bounds by a rare bad read.
M did not run one play action pass all day. Even the dionsaur Michigan fans I was sitting with who were boisterously yelling down in front, even at another team's stadium, were grumbling about play action.
Took my four year old to his first M game. He told me during the first half: "daddy can I switch and cheer for the not-michigan." Ouch. When youv'e lost Cronkite and 4-year olds, you've lost America.
Mike, the polls don't excite me personally because Michigan is not there in it. While talking about DeBoring offense is relevant.
They would run into the line against a Defense with no DB's. Back in 90 or something Michigan played in the Alamo Bowl against a Texas AM who had the top ranked run defense in the country - we tried to run into it nonstop and lost. What another example - look at our offense against USC last year in the Rose Bowl, nice game plan. (Ok, I also know PSU had a top running D in the country last week – as we know now that was not a legit stat)
Play action at least once a game! Please!!! Purdue and Illinois is going to give us a ton of problems.
Perhaps the coaching staff is waiting to unveil the play action for OSU. You know, "they'll never expect it and we do it, bam(!), 15 yard pickup to our TE". "Great thinking, DeBord!".
At least we won. Thats something Tommy Bowden can't say.
i just looked at the updated depth chart for saturday, and the starting TE is McLaurin and not Butler&$@!$^&*$@%
what the hell are these coaches doing?
^^^boom goes the punt^^^ There is only one thing which would explain. The staff are taking EMU lightly.
DeBord chooses vanilla or less-vanilla depending on the opponent... and against EMU, no way they are going to come out with creativity and intensity. This trickles down to the players who think they are too good for EMU.
EMU is going to keep it close at the end of First half. And like the stereotypical Michigan fan, we are left with that sick feeling in the stomach.
The last time we were arrogant was against Appalachian state.. a team we would beat-down if we came out with intensity and creativity. A team we would beat 70-20ish if Brian Kelly coached us.
If we lose to EMU ( and we won't.. but we'll keep it close ) I just feel sorry for the Ann Arbor residents who'll take crap from Ypsilanti'ers.
Obligatory Brian Kelly watch: Against Rutgers on road. Last time Dantonio beat Rutgers at Cincinnati and the Scarlet Knights are looking for revenge. If Brian Kelly pulls this one off, he would separate himself from other candidates in my book.
Tyler Ecker reference, what pitch? Thanks
"Wake up and turn on an NFL game once in your life. See how real coaches coach. Maybe you can watch your own team get beat by USC and OSU? Do you see what they are doing? Try That."
Ummm...if Lloyd Carr turns on the NFL he'll get a Lions game...
Thank you so very much...I'd begun getting sick at the stomach listening to the pie in the sky, overly optomistic to the point of being insane and just plain wrong view of the Michigan coaching staff over the last few days. This encapsulates just exactly what a few of us have been saying, and others have been trying to refute as the truth about the state of the program...very well done Brian
...and couching the message in the rock, paper scissors metaphor was soooooo funny to me, lol
\Should we not root to lose these games if we want a coaching change?//
Only Mike Hart keeps me from feeling that way...he doesn't deserve this, and I know that every loss he suffers kills him a little more.
With apologies to Brain here, the greatest thing I've ever read on a sports blog is from Ron Bellamy's Underachieving All Stars RE: Hart:
\Maybe he's hurt, maybe he's scarred, maybe he's lost a thing or two he came back for. But if your eyes look in his eyes, turn your head and walk away. You haven't earned the right to.//
Dudes, I read that and I look at #20 and I start crying like I haven't since the first time I watched "Do You Believe In Miracles?"
my wife made me watch Private Practice the other night (i know i know) and a guy croaks and his wife and girlfriend fight over his sperm. all i could think...i wonder how many people will fight over mike hart's swimmers? the good news is that it should only take 1 of his...it would bust right through a condom like it was the notre dame D-line...
I wasn't trying to shift blame nor do I consider myself a Carr apologist. However, I believe, and am backed up by actual data, that when the Buckeyes come to town DeBord will have at them. I also think the play calling will be more creative with Henne back under center. I wonder, and am backed up by observation, if English will have a clue what to do if the Buckeyes reprise last year's game plan or have a gameplan any more creative than a Paterno Time Capsule. Because right now, I have no confidence UM can stop a spread offense that refuses to turn the ball over 5 times in a row.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=c5w-rZ4s4_M
I threw a rock.
caup, i agree about the weirdness of letting Malone go after 2005. seemed unnecessary, and just, strange.
listen, i don't think the coaching staff should stick around. i came to that conclusion after 9/1. i just have different reasons that mostly have to do with defense and special teams (that ST shite in 2003 was freaking dumb- and then the ST coach gets a leave of absense? did he have mental/personal problems or something?).
but i do think handing a true fr. QB the full playbook is not a good idea. letting him check off into passing plays might be fine, if the passing skeme is simplified (no throwing into LB coverage, etc).
i think the main skism(?) between what i think and what most people seem to think is this:
A) the GLOBAL perspective: questioning the stupid attitude of the staff in that they don't feel the need to apply the offense (and D i guess) at 100% vs these crappy teams (ASU, EMU, NW). in this NW game it comes down to playing henne or not playing henne. if he's good enough to go then play him & put the game out of reach early. then get mallet in there and take hart out, etc. W(hy)TF keep henne out untill the 2nd half? hey, at least they adjusted then....this is clearly NOT the way to go about football these days.
B) the LOCAL perspective: they should have called a waggle on 2nd down & 8 on the NW45 in the 1st possesion of the 2nd qtr. this is horseshit, imo. every individual play that doesn't work == MDB is an idiot. every one that does work == talent overcame the idiositude (idiotic & ineptitude) of MDB. this is why i have a problem w/ brian's bullet re: the Henne errr...bullet for the AA TD. maybe NW *was* stacked up to stop the run on those 2 prior plays specifically. in that case, sure he (I, and everyone else) has reason to question the calls. why didn't henne check to a pass? do they let him? do they still give Henne 2 plays to call? are they both runs forgodssake? who the hell knows? but let's not pretend there is only one way to skin the cats. there are dozens of playcalls that lead to +yards and dozens that lead to -yards.
so, should we run into 7-8-9 man fronts? of course not. should we use more play-action? uhhh yes, please. what i'm saying is that the offense struggles b/c of the global idea that M can win with superior talent and a simplified playbook (this is akin to why we all hated the herrman era of D: don't disguise the D formation...we're in a zone, so beat us if you can...whoops you did, TD). in the NW game this was manifested by putting mallet in there when Henne was Ok to play. we can win anyway==mallet == not very good w/ a smaller playbook == more runs == arrrgggg. i say that b/c mallet was pretty bad for most of that 1st half: innaccurate, not throwing to the open WR, terrible mechanics at times. i think he had one good series, and that led to the missed 27yarder, aka the 'gingel special.'
i just hate hearing how the playcalling sucks when mallet is in there...he's not a good QB right now. we shouldn't be throwing on 1st & 2nd down b/c odds are we'll be 3rd & 10. then the whole offense that series is mallet, and hart is removed from the game. sure, throw on 1st, run on 2nd, mix it up more. that's fine. the playcalling sucks b/c mallet is in there...so rip the coaches for being too stupid to put henne in. that's the real source of the stupidity. not running on 2nd & 7 in the 3rd drive of the 2nd qtr or whatever.
iamfreak ,
I also believe, and am backed up by actual data, that in the last few years recruiting... we've had far better success recruiting better athletes on Offense than on Defense.
Our failure to stop spread-option is due to scheme + athletes while our failure in putting zillion points where we have a 4th year senior at QB, RB and LT and 3 awesome WRs can just be attributed to our antiquated offense philosophy.
----
We won't be able to stop Purdue or Illinois. But these teams are prone to turnovers. We need to be super-efficient on offense ( reason: same senior players I was referring to ). The jury is out whether we'll see a brilliant performance on offense or we sputter.
Personally, I think Purdue is a tossup while Illinois is a probable loss.
"i just hate hearing how the "he's not a good QB right now. we shouldn't be throwing on 1st & 2nd down b/c odds are we'll be 3rd & 10." "
I disagree... Mallett to Carson Butler waggle always seems to work because Mallett is simply better when throwing on the run ( Henne stops to throw.. while Mallett throws on the run ). It'll keep defenses honest. It's a high percentage throw. Mike Hart running on first downs ( NW game ) also gave 2nd and long and 3rd and long.
http://mgoboard.com/blogmedia/vi...igan_raw-
07.mpg
This is the play, man. Why we don't use it in more first downs beats me. You can look at how low-risk high-reward this is.
If we do this two times in a row, the Defense will be full of doubt what we are going to do the third time.
Yes the D is bad, but why the #$%& can't the offense bail out the D, last year we were oh so content to ride on the D and #$%^ around on Offense. When we lose to a good offense its always "the D lost us the game", when was the last time teh O helped us win a game, i can only think of two/three Minny 03, MSU 04....seriously.
As much as the D fails against a good O, our O simply implodes against a good D!!
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/...s/
s_530263.html
Dont know what to think about this
EEKS, i agree that the waggle/bootleg thing to butler would be great to see more often. it seems to work effecively, and you're dead-on re: mallet throwing on the run. henne is bad at this, which is why we haven't seen the bootleg in several years. imo.
but i don't think the loss to Ore was on the offensive philosophy. henne was hennebriated, and turnovers, etc. remember, we 1st saw that butler play vs Ore early in the 1st half i think.
brian, how could you miss the simpsons reference on this one?!? it's a total layup, dude
"poor predictable bart. always picks rock"
"good ol rock, nuthin beats that!"
^^ This sucks because we might not be bowling. We'll be 2-3 if we forfeit.
EMU - W
Purdue - Tossup
Illinois - Probable Loss
Minnesota - Probably Win
MSU - Tossup
Wisconsin - Probable Loss
OSU - Probable Loss
We might be 6-6.. Do we qualify for a bowl game if we are 6-6 ?
DanK, Michigan's passing playbook features predominantly slow developing patterns, correct? We are famous for that long out pattern, or the out and up that Manningham has owned. Maybe deep seam passes.
Mallett looks bad because these patterns - taken under center where he is still uncomfortbale - require perfect execution on the part of the QB. Our point is that feature more of the "safe" pass. I am not foolish: I know this is not a panacea or that the defense cannot blow up these safe passes for 4 yard losses. But NW did not have a posture to cope with any pass, let alone a safe one. With some of these under his belt, I would suggest Mallett gets more comfortable and you can then mix in something tougher.
Does anyone think that being in a 3 and 8 and calling a deep out pattern is the way to calm down young Mallett?
The bottom line is this. Ten yard cushions should demand that you pitch and catch with 5 yard stop patterns until they make an adjustment. To IGNORE 10 yard cushions from bad DBs all because diaper boy Mallett can't yet color inside the lines (false) is moronic. It's not Mallett or Henne, it is putting a Mallett or Henne in the right position.
Yes. As I've always maintained, our Offense with Mallett is NOT bad as they make us believe.
If we had a better scheme, Mallett being the blue chip recruit he is, we can be much better. In fact, I think our scheme is counter-productive. It robs the confidence from Mallett.
it kills me to think what a disservice debord has done to henne, hart, and long in their senior years. they all deserve better. what message has he sent to the juniors on the team (esp. manningham) who are considering leaving early for the draft?
Given the nature of the mistake with the eligibility issue, forcing Michigan to forfeit the PSU game would be a rather harsh puishment. One that does not fit the crime.
UM will certainly be punished, but it will be something more in line with making a simple inadvertant administrative mistake.
UM could forfeit the game. I could win the lottery. Neither is likely.
MDan, i understand...but these "Ten yard cushions should demand that you pitch and catch with 5 yard stop patterns ..."
mallet thew at least one of these, and it was a terrible throw...didn't set his feat, rushed the throw: ball ended up at AA's feet. i think this was the drive that led to the 'gingel special.'
i don't think mallet is very good at anything right now, save the shotgun of course. maybe we should put him in the shotgun 100% of the time? maybe that formation hinders our offense somehow. lord only knows, i guess. but mallet was 5-11 for 67. and one completion was to MM for like 25 yards (that one along the sideline that was reviewed). maybe you're right that mallet sucks partly (mostly?) b/c of the long passes out from under center. but 5-11 for 67 is not good no matter what the passes are. not against a NW D that was stacked to stop the run.
man, i don't know. i get the feeling that, had the coaches put more of the offense in mallet's hands (with short routes/shotgun even), if he throws a pick or 2 and still looks really bad, people are ripping the coaches for not using Hart enough. sure, fine...pass to set up the run. but if they do that and mallet throws a couple picks, and we're down 21,24-7 at half, then what? there's no accountability in these hypothetical alternatives. i mean in stead of, 'we're gonna run, try to stop us, oopps you did, let's punt,' it could be 'we're gonna trust our true fr. QB, try to stop him, oopps you did, pick 6?'
can you agree that, to a certain extent, it's a 'damned if ya do, damed if ya don't' -type situation? i mean, in all these hypotheticals about alternative playcalls, everyone assumes that whatever call MDB DIDN'T make would have worked like gangbusters.
when henne was in there, the playbook did open up, hart got some more room, and the offense was effecient. i think the coaches are stupid for not putting henne in to begin with. you think the coaches are stupid for not letting mallet have more room to make plays. maybe those are the same thing, but i don't think so.
It is damned if you do, damned if you don't. But it is also a philosophy of life. Carpe diem. I am so tired of trying to back into wins. I'd rather die trying.
michigan's handling of mallet (if it continues similarly) is a perfect representation of the coaching staff's mentality. mallet's better out of the shotgun, but we don't throw out of the shotgun, so force him to learn "our" way, even if he's not as effective.
DanK - I think your 'damned-if-you-do..." argument is irrelevant if we come out firing to begin with. We should have been able to put 17 to 21 points in the first quarter on their D with some play action to MM mixed in with nonpredictable playcalling and Mike Hart's general badassness. If they want Mallet to get some meaningful experience, Henne should be used like we want to put up a lot of points quickly, and not like he's going to be in there for four quarters.
We don't need to be afraid to throw passes early in the game just because one might be intercepted. Carr and DeBord are frightened old men who play not to lose instead of play to win. With this philosophy, you keep a lot of bad teams in games that they have no business being competitive in.
We lead that game 7-3, the defense forced a three and out and instead of trying to bury an inferior opponent, we go predictable run, run 3rd and long pass, punt. NW proceeds to score a TD and take the lead. How is a hypothetical interception any worse than that result?
OT: anybody see breaston's punt return touchdown against the steelers yesterday?
re: mallett and the shotgun
Taking snaps under center is important because it allows for more deception in the play-calling later on (ie: play-action, etc) versus the shotgun. This is why most pro-teams only use the shotgun in obvious passing situations because the the front seven are going to be focusing on the pass anyway. Also, one of the best things michigan has going for it, recruitment-wise, is our reputation for developing quarterbacks. This is one of those things mallett is going to have to learn and he can either learn it now and prepare for the pros, or can try and learn it later like vince young (who played his collegiate career from the shotgun) who still struggles as a passer when taking snaps from under center.
more and more pro teams are switching to the shotgun as a standard package. allows the quarterback to view the field better, and can still hand off.
AND...that argument doesn't make sense, because michigan hardly does play action...that would be a paper...we only like rocks.
Yeah, I don't buy the idea that you can't be as deceptive from the shotgun. College teams routinely run effectively out of the shotgun (see OSU last year), and there's no reason I can see why we couldn't do the same.
At least in 1978 Michigan occassionally ran the ball with the fullback, and at that time Michigan had a pretty darn good one in Russell Davis and at times Lawrence Reid. When was the last time Michigan ran a play that meaningfully involved a full back? Probably around the epoch of BJ Askew, but still that was ages ago.
I agree with your observation on the chronology of the Michigan offensive attack, which usually goes something like this: "run, run, pass, punt".
With the talent at WR and TE that Michigan has (comparative to other Big Ten teams) this seems like a complete waste by DeBord and Carr.
A better question, however, might be to ask what would Michigan do on Saturdays without Mike Hart? Hart is outstanding and has basically single-handedly won the last 3 games for Michigan. The kid is durable, but running him into the line 40 times or more a game is just insane even if you were playing football in the 1970s and early 1980s when DLs, as you correctly put it, weighed only 190 to 210 lbs and were slower than molasses. DeBord's actions might save Henne only to destroy Hart later on. There is no reason for this approach. Other backs (and yes even fullbacks) should carry the ball. Otherwise, just key on Hart and you'll shut down 90% of UM's scoring and offensive output.
Michigan's offensive philosophy of out-executing the opponent's defense is very troubling. It hails from the Bo-era, but is not going to work when you're down by 10 or more points. (See any Rose Bowl coached by Bowl except for the 1989 game vs. worst injury-plagued USC defense ever). I, for one, am very worried about the Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan State games this fall.
Did he say "allows for more deception"?
"How is a hypothetical interception any worse than that result?"
at least the D had the opportunity to stop them. or get a turnover of their own. or hold to a FG.
and i also would hope to see more play-action. they ran a few draws on 2nd down (a blitzing down traditionally) but to no avail. the absence of play-action was glaring, imo.
and we do use the shotgun w/ mallet. just not 100% of the time. i've got to assume there's some reason M doesn't just scrap everything so mallet can be in the shotgunn literally all the time.
with this coaching staff, i assume there's a reason for not putting Mallett in the shotgun fulltime, but with this coaching stafff, i assume it's not a good one.
I think that you're being a little hard on the coaching. College football has changed. Anyone can beat anyone. What about LSU and Tulane at half time 10-9. Does that mean that LSU coaching was aweful because they couldn't put up more points. How about Oklahoma v. Colorado 17-7 at half and only scoring 7 more in the second half. Does Oklahoma have terrible coaching and bad play calling?
On another note, how does Okahoma go down to Colorado who lost to a Div IAA school and Oklahoma only drops to 10. Michigan fell off the charts, what happened? Why isn't Oklahoma out of the top 10. Why isn't Florida, why didn't the other teams losing to unranked fall like Michigan. And especially, how is Penn State still ranked ahead of Michigan.
I still think we have a great chance to win the Big 10. In fact, I'm more worried about Illinois and Purdue than any of the other teams right now. We will beat the buckeyes this year and Wisconsin will fall as well. The coaches will do what they need to do to win each of those games.
it's not a matter of simply running out of the shotgun vs under center. A good play action fake freezes the linebackers or draws them back to the line of scrimmage which opens up holes in middle of the field for receivers.
The shotgun is now popular among sports writers (TMQ in particular) because the two best teams in pro football (the pats and colts) are using it frequently. They are exceptions because of their wide receiver corps and offensive lines are two of the best in football, while both have young running backs. Not to mention Brady and Manning are the two best quarterbacks in football. If you went back to 2004 you would see article after article on Manning's and Brady's play action ability because they both had dominant runners in Corey Dillon and Edgerrin James that could gash defenses.
Michigan has a great offensive line, a great runningback, and two awesome receivers. Play action fakes and waggles make a lot of sense for this team. Not to mention the flea-flicker which is still the coolest play in football.
When was the last time Michigan ran a play that meaningfully involved a full back?
what game was it when M got a 5 yard penalty for delay of game or something (out of a possesion change no less!), just to come back out and throw a 2 yard out to moundros? lolz....must have been ASU..../lolz. sigh....
Colorado lost to a 1AA school last year, not this year
Does this make Michigan's offense "The Avalanche"?
http://www.worldrps.com/index.ph...id=20&
Itemid=33
Toss in some sort of adjective (or maybe just your expletive of choice) to indicate an ineffective avalanche rather than a devastating one and you might have a clever nickname to work with. "Avalanche mode" could be of use, too.
Hey, let's put something to rest right now: the idea that deception is the reason for keeping a 6'11", 300lb lumbering Mallett under center. Please. They keep him under center because that's our playbook. Period.
And this is why the coaching is bad, WolverRoudy. It's not because a good coach never loses, it's because a good coach never beats himself.
That "43-0 when the D gives up less than 30 points" stat is impressive, I will admit. But what's Debord's record when the defense gives up 30+ points? 0-43??? Can that old motherfucking dinosaur win a shoot-out EVER??? Especially when the entire free world KNEW Michigan would have to outscore a few teams until their young defense gets it all figured out!!! Like, how about Appy State. The fact that Mike Debord couldn't score more than 32 points on a D1aa team that lost to SWOFFORD (!!!) is enough to make me PUKE!
If Michigan wins that game 55-34 nobody bats an eye!!!
Fuck you, Debord. Fuck your precious 43-0 stat. Way to hang the D out to dry when they're playing 7 new starters, you asshole.
And fuck you too, English.
The purdue game will be the true judge of the rest of our season. If the playcalling is good, which entails adjusting to the D alignment, manningham deep, hart right occasionally, the zone play up the middle w/ TE seal on backside DE, butler cross of PA, then we will bode well for the season and the Offense will be fixed. There should be no more babying of the QB w/ Henne fully healthy. On D, we have to blitz painter. Our secondary cant hold up in coverage 2 long, Painter wont scramble, so we dont need contain as much, and we will force TO's off of it. It will be up to our D-line, and LB's to stop Sheets running w/o saftey help, thats the key to the game, cuz we cant afford to bring up a safety to stop run, their pass O is 2 good. Crable should be blitzing every all day and BGraham is a beast.
UM CAUP, damn that was therapuetic! Thanks.
Anyone share this impression about the defense: Our D-Line is fine, even very good. Our corners are actually OK. I don't think that Warren and Trent are deficient in coverage if they are not left hanging too long. Engleman and Adams are adequate. Crable, if in the right situation, is a monster.
That leaves utter suckitude for 2/3 of our linebackers. That would suggest that the clock is ticking every play; that the middle of the field is going to open like a oozing sore within a couple seconds of the snap.
Would this not argue for tight coverage and a frantic assault on the QB - anything to prevent the dissection of our middle of the field weakness?
WOW! You just put everything I have been thinking about this coaching staff for the past 3 years into one piece!!!! Why do they not throw when we have 3 great recievers and two guy that can sling it from corner to corner? WHY?!?!?! Mike Hart is good! Run with him, and then bomb the shit out of it with super freaking MARIO!!!!! (Sorry for the annoying !!! but I am excited to see that you are in anger too!)
de nada. it was meant to be an over-heated, cathartic rant. glad it worked.
BTW, Michigan is currently ranked 80th in scoring offense. 80th!
Nice work, Debord.
Also, Michigan is 9th in the Big Ten in scoring offense. Ninth. Wow.
With Hart, Manningham, Arrington, Long, Kraus, Butler, Mathews, Minor and Henne/Mallett this is grounds for malpractice.
Thanks for summing it all up Brian. To not have scored 21 points (hell, even just 14 points!) in the first half is nearly criminal. Until that game I really thought that we could take OSU, not any more.
Reminds me of this Seinfeld Exchange between Mickey and Kramer:
KRAMER & MICKEY: Rock, paper, scissors match.
MICKEY: all right, rock beats paper.
(Mickey smacks Kramer on the hand for losing)
KRAMER: I thought paper covered rock?
MICKEY: Nah, rock flies right through paper.
KRAMER: What beats rock?
MICKEY: (looks at his hand) Nothing beats rock.
KRAMER: all right come on.
KRAMER & MICKEY: Rock, paper, scissors match.
KRAMER: Rock.
MICKEY: Rock
KRAMER & MICKEY: Rock, paper, scissors match.
KRAMER: Rock.
MICKEY: Rock.
Speaking of the polls, Wisky is ranked 5th, the Illini aren't in the top 25, but Illinois is a 3 point favorite this weekend.
totally agree with your comments. Michigan calls a ridiculous offensive gameplan. I would say early 1970's. Bo even changed things up later in his career.
Watching Michigan play anymore is like caring for a terminally ill family member. You want everything to go right and get better knowing all the while that any improvement is just a prelude to another painful decline. Its time to withdraw care, start the morphine drip, have one last moment of sorrow with regard to the passing of a once vibrant loved one, and go back to enjoying life. Lloyd thank you for all you have done and enjoy your retirement....I know I will. GO BLUE
1000% agreed, Brian. I'm starting to wonder how good we've actually been the last 4-5 years as well. Are we only good against run-first Big 10 teams (ie. Paterno/Ferentz/Alvarez), or are we good all around, except against the spread?
Our coaching staff is too AROGANT to realize that they CANNOT always control the game, and too uninspired to use the weapons they have.
Aren't we supposed to have the best receiving corp in the nation? Manningham, Arrington, Matthews, Hart, Butler, etc?!?! Yet our staff is content to attempt to eek out a 3 point victory over all comers. If they happen to lose due to a flukey play ot a couple of well placed tosses in the flat, or a missed field-goal, oh well, it's "execution". With the talent Michigan has, it shouldn't come down to execution in 9 out of 12 games, not App State, not Northwestern, not Purdue or ND or Indiana or even MSU and others. Michigan has the talent to hit you with from every angle, but we always settle for pushing the other team around as our mainstream option, and it obviously cannot be a strategy for success against all teams.
Lloyd and the conservative playcalling turns what should be 45-10 wins into 24-17 wins and 24-17 wins into 17-10 losses. This coaching staff consistently puts the team into a situation where they are at risk to lose 2 games a year. Sometimes the players overcome. Sometimes they execute to near perfection when they have to. But those 2 games each year are the difference between 1 "shot at" the National Championship (that we thankfully won) in the last 11 years and 4-5 "shots".
"Hey, let's put something to rest right now: the idea that deception is the reason for keeping a 6'11", 300lb lumbering Mallett under center. Please. They keep him under center because that's our playbook. Period."
I get it now. The coaches were supposed to install an entire new offense last spring practice and this summer to accommodate this year's second string quarterback.
I love your Rock, Paper, Scissors analogy.....I found this for you......if we can't win the Big 10....maybe we have a shot at this????
Hmmm...the link didn't show up....I will email it.
rdlwolverine, if you follow the thread, the comment relates to the idea that, in general, it is ludicrous to suggest that Michigan loves plays under center because of the potential for deception. They love those plays because...they love those plays...and Bo ran them. Mallett happens to be the most striking example of its failings at the moment.
But let's see, might there have been any, I don't know, recent CLUES that the shotgun would be a better formation for Michigan? Like maybe the USC game? And a QB who can't handle pressure (Henne)?
I am glad you get it now. That the coaches WERE supposed to install an entire new offense last spring practice and this summer to accommodate all their immobile quarterbacks and the book that is out amongst our opponents that the one way to stop Michigan is to pressure the QB, Henne OR Mallett. In fact, the coaches SAID they were going to do that, to use the shotgun far more. Good idea to add that and not use it with a QB who took all his snaps in the shotgun in HS and happens to be bigger than a Power Rangers Megazord.
Otherwise, you might have the 80th rated offense despite 7 future NFL players.
MDan, i don't really have any interest in getting back into this fight, but they do put Mallet & Henne in the shotgun. just not 100% of the time. i haven't cared to count, but my impression is that it's someting like 30-40% of all passes are from the shotgun. that may be higher if you just look at the mallet passes.
and i agree about the defense....the LBs are the weak link. i'm not sure that blitzing all the time would be the solution however.
Seems to me a lower percentage. Looks like 15 out of 84 against Penn State.
Okay, I looked it up: Debord has a 3-9 record when our defense allows 30+ points.
Should we be so angry with Debord? Heck, I don't know. It just seems like with all that damn talent, the offense routinely underachieves.
So I guess the correct emotion is not anger, but frustration.
Debord does have a pretty strong rebuttal, though: if you asked anyone if they'd hire a guy who was a staggering 43-0 when merely asking the defense to yield less than 30 points, they'd almost all have the same 3-word answer: HIRE HIM NOW!
Let's just say that you have a coaching philosophy that you have been wedded to for 30 plus years and you were taught by a legend and that philosophy has allowed you to, more often than not, compete for the Big 10 title, is that not a good strategy to stick by. I mean it isn't like you can honestly believe Michigan hasn't evolved. Think about the QB position, every new one coming through here the last few years breaks the most recent records. Seems to me we must be doing something different from the Bo years. And, I do agree that it is almost an unforgivable loss (App State), but Oregon certainly isn't unforgivable that early in the season. How many programs win every game every year. It isn't a reasonable goal. You need to build a team to win the most games possible based on who your standard competition is (Big 10). So unless the Big 10 changes, then we don't want to change, because it means nothing if you win against App State, and Oregon -- only to lose to Wisconin and Michigan State (or take your pick). I just can't believe that people don't give Carr more credit for the program he has built. Yes, we aren't risk takers, but look at Charlie Weiss, the genius, he has no clue how to right his ship. At least with Lloyd and crew we know that we at least have a chance to win in every single game (put aside the Oregon fiasco), we have actually competed in every game against running qb too. People are too quick to forget, but Michigan played an incredible game in the Shoe against the Buckeye's last year. We weren't out of that game. They also had Vince Young and Texas beat in the Rose save a last second field goal. And, don't go with play calling bull because of those losses, we were in the position to win or be in those games because of our play calling all season. We reach down when we need it. I'm going on record to say, WE WON'T lose another game this season. NOT ONE. And when that happens, everyone will still be complaining about play calling of Debord and English. Carr is one masterful CEO, Coach, and CEO is really what you must be to be a head coach these days. Look at his program, look at his record. Is there any other program in the nation that has such proud fans. And I mean all around. Yes a handful, I'll give it to Tressel. But, really except for Michigan and Ohio State, who has been there more consisently year in and year out for 30 plus years. No one. People come and go, seasons come and go, coaches come and go, and guess what we've never had a fall off like a Miami or Florida State, or Penn State. Never. We are still a huge target for every team we play. It isn't about anhiliating opponents. It is a marathon to maintain a program such as ours. Even this year when everybody wrote us off early, now you look at some of the other teams that lost last weekend and go oh, yeah, it can happen to anyone huh. I still know that we are a team built to compete for the big 10 championship, the the N
Sorry WolverRoudy, but your analysis acts as though you can't put together a team that will win both in and out of Big Ten play. "Who cares about Appy and Oregon," you say, "every year most of our games are in the Big Ten, and the game plan we have allows us to win in the Big Ten." Point taken. But the fact remains that there's no reason we can't aspire to something greater, and there are examples of teams who do so. Look at Tressel's Buckeyes. They have CONSISTENTLY been better than we are ever since we arrived, both in Big Ten play and outside. Wait, they're winning both in and out of the Big Ten? Why don't they just focus on winning the Big Ten? Because winning the Big Ten is a consolation prize, winning the NC is what every team shoots for in the preseason and our gameplanning should reflect that. Look at Carroll's Trojans - they beat teams from every conference, and how do they typically fare against Big Ten teams? Very well. USC's game planning would do just fine in the Big Ten.
So I ask you...is there ever a time you should abandon a game plan that's averaging you 9 wins a season? Yes. When you find one that can average you 10. And they're out there, and being run by teams no more talented than our Wolverines. The only reason we're not running them is that our coaching staff are dinosaurs.
Oh, and WolverRoudy...if you really think we can beat Tressel with such a well-defined weakness on defense...if you really think he's not going to install, nay has already installed some spread elements to his offense JUST FOR US...I want what you're on. We're being outcoached, my friend, and that's never going to change until we get some new blood and an offensive coordinator who's not a CMU reject.
As for shotgun versus under center- some QBs like it, some don't.
Disadvantages to the Shotgun include more difficulty making checks at the line; the QB most take his eye off the defense post-snap to see the ball (under center, he can read the safeties and coverages and reconfirm his pre-snap reads); the Zone play is mostly effective one way (rather than both), unless you have a running QB who can do the Zone Read; the RB on the Zone is faced in one direction so his vision is reduced.
The real question is:
How effective is M. Hart running the Zone in similar D&D?
In spite of what some people like to think and post, Michigan does NOT "recruit itself". Since Bo left, Michigan has been able to recruit well offensively in large part based on the fact that it develops skill position players in a pro-style offense, especially QBs.
Perhaps one thing for fans to take from this game and remember in the future is the difference that experience makes (especially at QB). The unwashed masses always scream to "put the new kid in", without understanding or appreciating what such trade-offs entail schematically, psychologically and otherwise to a team.
Playing Henne in only the first drive and keeping him out the rest of the first half was a calculated risk weighing present versus future needs, and the physical and psychological health of the QBs as well.
But just how quickly we forget Mich lost to OSU in the Shoe last year going in with a perfect record. Weren't they competitive enough for you. Did we really get out coached so bad didn't tressle get equally outcoached on offense by Debord who everyone now hates?
WolverRoudy, you must be nuts: our talent got us those 39 pts vs OSU last year. coaching had nothing to do w/ any success M has had since 1995.
Kurokawa, you're last point really hits home: the coaches knew there was an inherent risk in not playing henne. they obviously felt that risk was worth it compared to potentially sufferring further injury to him.
DanK, I think you are overstating your case. WolverRoudy does have a point.
Michigan did move the ball well versus Ohio State, especially when it needed to. Whereas late rallies used to be almost non-existant, Michigan has become quite proficient at "two minute offense" (Brady possibly being the best). That requires coaching.
I don't think Crable's late hit (or the slips on the now-replaced turf) can be blamed on coaching, either.
Actually, one could make a case that the original game plan- starting Henne only at the beginnning of both drives, and taking the risk by letting Mallet take over to spare Henne the risk of further injury- showed a certain amount of creativity and flexibility in thinking on the part of the coaching staff- at least in regards to using personnel.
And we should give them due credit for not be so stubborn as to stick with it, but altering the game plan instead in the second half.
Not that I am enamored of everything this coaching staff does, but I am sure there is a lot more to the decisions that are made than some make it out to be.
i should be more explicit in my use of sarcasm.
Clearly, statistical evdience will support the fact that Mike Debord is not the WORST offensice coordinator ever. Sure, he's too conservative. He's too predictable.
Basically, he causes us undue stress.
So we lambast him for putting us through what we deem is unnecessary emotional pain. But bottom line, he's RARELY the main reason why Michigan LOSES football games.
Let's take a closer look at his first 4+ seasons as the OC:
1997: obviously can't complain too much other than the lack of "style points" may have caused the voters to split their vote. That's a pretty weak argument, though.
1998: Lost to ND by not putting them away in the 1st half. Maybe a Debordian casualty? This guy NEVER seems to keep his foot on the gas. We settled for too many FG attempts due to vanilla play calling. We mised 3 FGs and lost 2 fumbles in this game, but I still think Debord should share some blame here.
Syracuse: I don't care how many points we put up, McNabb would've put up more on our hapless defense that day. No Debord blame here.
Ohio State: we got waxed by a far better team. I don't think coaching caused this outcome.
1999: Michigan State: I have to put this loss on Carr for stubbornly using Henson until it was too late. A heroic Brady comeback effort came up short. Platooning Henson in with one of the greatest QBs in the history of the game in his SENIOR year (!) will go down as one of the all-time coaching blunders in Carr's career.
Illinois: This was a horrific defensive collapse, blowing a 20-point 2nd half lead. Can't hang this one on Debord, but again, he took his foot off the gas after we were up 27-7.
2006: Ohio State: I can't blame Debord for this loss. It was all on Ron English and his SPECTACULAR pass coverage schemes. 39 points should win you this game.
USC: I can and will blame a huge part of this loss on Debord. He never opened it up with a talent-laden offense. No shot-gun until it was too late. Did he think this was going to be another PSU slugfest, since it was 3-3 at the half? Well, Carroll opened up his offense while Debord stayed scared. Michigan should've been able to score 35 points on last year's green USC defense.
2007: Appy State. Poor coaching on both sides of the ball caused this loss. But considering English was working with a bunch of newbies while Debord was loaded with vets, I place 65% of the blame for this loss on his shoulders. You should score more than 32 points on a D1AA team!!
Oregon: Much like the 1998 Syracuse game, I don't think we would've outscored the Ducks on this day, so primary blame goes to the defense.
CAUP...very interesting read. my only dissagreements:
ND98: 2 fumbles and 3 missed FGs, but still the blame to MDB/playcalling? that's alot of points essentially taken off the board. i can't put too much on coaches when the FG kicker misses 2-3 over the course of the game and the RB has butterfingers.
ASU07: again, how many turnovers did they have? henne played like a freshman, no? when a safety (S Brown) is accountable for 14 of the oppositions pts, and Henne played the way he did, i can't put too much on the OC there. hart was hurt too, thus minor and the fumble(s?). yea, the gameplan was vanilla...but they still averaged 7-8 ypc vs a D stacked to stop the run. plus the stunting Dlinemen, and TT67 as a spy? those were laughable decisions make by the D. the vanilla O skeme was at least understandable.
Ill99: I'd like to see the offense still scoring late in the game too, but all they asked of the D is to hold a 20pt 4th qtr lead. that's a fair request, as long as the offense doesn't turn the ball over. the botton line is, when you have a 17+ pt lead, reduce the # of possesions in the game so as to limit the chances for the other team to score. no one wants to hear this, but throwing the ball increases the chances of a TO and tends to stop the clock. i'm just telling you how they think.
finally, i think there's alittle revisionist history going on re: brady. yea, he was a good QB. but no one at the time knew brady was even going to get drafted, let alone start a game, let alone become SBMVP 3/4 years and the best QB since montana. while it wasn't the case that people were demanding henson play more, or that brady sucked at M enough that henson took 1/2 of the PT (like the weis drumbeat used to espouse), if people put money back then on who would become the better QB, 99% would have said henson.
alot of people tend to put all the success Carr had in the 90s on having 3-time SBMVP brady and woodson. woodson was great that year, but he was neither the whloe D nor the whole team. and brady was't a SBMVP back then...he was just another very good college QB slated for day 2 in the draft. honestly, i think alot of coaches would have gone w/ henson over brady MORE than Carr did.
There's definitely some revisionist history with Brady, I'll agree with you there, but many even at that time thought Brady shouldn't have been platooned with Henson. It ended up biting Michigan in the ass. Down the stretch Brady took virtually every meaningful snap. Proof of the error.
I'll concede the ND amd ILL games weren't on Debord's head.
Appy State game: Sorry, but when SWOFFORD can score 41 points on that team, we should score SEVENTY!! Tactical errors on the defensive side of the ball does NOT excuse failures on the offensive side. The only good thing about the Appy State game was that it insured the next HC wouldn't be Debord or English.
It is a wierd phenomenom with the general attitude out there regarding Debord. Since he doesn't ever light it up, he doesn't get any WOW! factor votes of confidence. So he just muddles along, getting very pedestrian wins. This openes him up for harsh criticism in the event of a loss, or even a near-loss, since there aren't any dazzling offensive pryrotechnic memories to draw upon to counteract peoples' immediate distaste after watching a poor outing.
Debord started to get some goodwill momentum after last year's ND game, but then the PSU-IOWA-NW stretch in November reminded everyone that Debord only does the bare minimum to win the ballgame. People despise this approach because it opens up Michigan to an unnecessary risk of losing. The Rose Bowl sapped a lot of Debord's good graces, as the game plan was widely lambasted for being predictable and costing them any shot at winning the game.
Carr and Debord seem to always have too much confidence in their defense. This manifests itself in an overly conservative red-zone offense, and settling for FGs too often.
Sometimes I think it's a good idea to have your kids go ape shit on another team. Remember, these are just kids and anything to get their confidence sky-high would be valuable.
Fielding Yost did it all the time, so I don't want to hear that it's not becoming of a "Michigan Man."
yea, that ASU game...they had TOs on offense & missed FGs too. i want to say they left ~9-10 pts on the board. still, any one thing, done differently, wins that game. plus, they (and anyone else on the planet) figured they didn't need to score 40 to win. i guess i'm just a defense-oriented type guy. i mean, i can at least understand why they are so vanilla vs these crappy teams. hold some back for the big games, practice the 'basics,' prevent TOs. but there's no logical reasoning as to why one plays even fronts, stunts the Dline so much and drops TT67 as a QB spy vs that spread. what a head shaker that game was.
"but then the PSU-IOWA-NW stretch in November 06": the PSU game was a brilliant gameplan, imo. it relied on the QB, which is NOT what they generally do. they didn't score alot, but they were effecient and i think PSU is notorious for dropping 2-3 deep safeties, so downfield passing is always at a minimum against them.
"Carr and Debord seem to always have too much confidence in their defense.": i don't know. sometimes maybe. but i think that it's really a lack of confidence in their QBs (unless they are seniors/really experienced) or a lack of faith in the passing game in general. a lack of faith relative to the running game when you have hart, anyway.
brian's book had a really good chapter on the OCs over the last few years. basically, MDB's offenses score more against good teams/defenses than any other OC they've had under Carr. but, they score MUCH less vs the crappy teams/defenses relative to other OCs. clear evidence of how MDB operates.
and i think it's wofford.
Commenting by HaloScan
