B1G play starts this week and for the second time in three seasons, the Michigan Wolverines get it going with the Rutgers Scarlet Knights at Michigan Stadium. Rutgers is 3-0 on the season, a win over Northwestern followed by non-conference wins over Temple and Virginia Tech. Is this squad something to fear, or merely coasting against three very bad opponents? We will settle that debate this week in our two part breakdown, starting today with the offense. 

 

The Film: None of these three opponents are anywhere close to the same caliber as Michigan, but being two P5 schools, I decided to pick between Northwestern and Virginia Tech. Both teams are brutal this season, with VT having fallen a shockingly far ways from the perennial 10 win days of the Frank Beamer era and Northwestern is going through a scandal we are all familiar with by this point. Per SP+, Virginia Tech is a bit better of a team this season than the 'Cats and so I decided to lean towards the Hokies. Also, the VT game has the benefit of being more recent by two weeks, which should give us a more accurate picture of the Rutgers offense. Though I charted only the VT game, I did review the extended highlights of the Northwestern game and will use them when appropriate. 

Personnel: Click for big. 

For the second year in a row, the Rutgers Scarlet Knights are led by the still-teenage QB Gavin Wimsatt, who has a bigger arm than Noah Vedral but has been plagued by accuracy issues so much that a chart of his pass attempts looks extremely Vedral-like. Passing problems aside, the major difference in Wimsatt's play compared to last season is the way they've reconfigured the offense to optimize his legs, something we will explore in length later on. As a result of this situation, we have cyan'd half of Wimsatt to represent his passing game but have left the other side alone, representing his running ability.  

The RB position is headlined by Kyle Monangai, a workhorse and the Dangerman for this piece. Monangai has already carried the ball 58 times this season for 357 yards, a yardage total that ranks sixth in the NCAA in total rushing so far. Of the five ahead of him, two are ahead of him by *one* yard and two more have played an additional game. With 5 rushing TDs as well, Monangai has been a beast so far and a player that the Rutgers offense revolves around. The other RBs include Ja'shon Benjamin, a true freshman who had some flashes in the game I charted and has emerged as the clear #2 back on the depth chart, as well as Samuel Brown V, a stand-out last season in his brief trial before injury. Whatever momentum Brown had last season appears to be gone, with just seven carries to his name in three games in 2023. 

Heavy turnover at the WR room means that all three WRs to get starter status on last season's diagram, including 2022 Dangerman Sean Ryan, have left the program. 6'3 Isaiah Washington is now the top outside receiver while 5'9" Christian Dremel is the go-to player in the slot. Washington seldom leaves the field, while Dremel has played about two-thirds of offensive snaps this season. Neither of those two have looked particularly dangerous but they are tied for the team lead in catches with seven. The other outside WR spot has been a rotating cast of characters, JaQuae Jackson's five catches and 94 snaps leading the group but Chris Long and Ian Strong have been in the mix as well. Farther down the list you can find Rashad Rochelle and Max Patterson. 

At tight end we find eternal Scarlet Knight Johnny Langan, preserved from the 14th century to don the scarlet shining armor every season for the rest of the universe's existence. Langan, once a wildcat QB, has been the TE for a few seasons now and is entering his fifth season as a contributor at Rutgers and his sixth season of college football in totality. If Langan can find a way to play more season he can challenge Chris Autman-Bell for the title of longest tenured B1G player in modern memory. Langan is the team's primary TE, having played over 80% of snaps this season, an important check-down target (5.8 yards per reception) and an okay blocker, having a very strong game against Virginia Tech. Shawn Bowman is the second TE who comes on in 12 personnel and has been largely terrible this season. 

Rutgers' offensive line has been a sore spot for years and the projection coming into the season was for it to be as bad as ever, with heavy attrition from last season. Last year's RT Hollin Pierce has slid over to LT and despite getting a cyan last year, he was surprisingly strong in the VT game, a major catalyst for Rutgers' left-handed rushing attack. I did not give him the designation of feebleness on this year's diagram. On the other side of the line, the RT entering the season was Tyler Needham, who looked okay through 1.5 games before an injury against Temple sidelined him for the Virginia Tech game. In his place was Kamar Missouri, who had a very poor showing and earned a cyan. Taj White is the fourth tackle who gets involved every so often, but I don't have a ton of notes on him. 

On the interior of the line, C Gus Zilinskas is both our name of the week winner and the most-used lineman on the team. He came close to a cyan with a poor performance against Virginia Tech, but the PFF grades from his other two games were good enough for me to avoid putting it on him. Kwabena Asamoah starts at RG, a player who I only noticed three times and all three were negative moments. That, plus a track record of subpar play, earned him a cyan. The final guard spot has been a rotation of Curtis Dunlap Jr., Bryan Felter, and Mike Ciaffoni (some of these guys sub in for Asamoah from time to time too). Of these three, I actually liked Felter and Ciaffoni more than Dunlap but there wasn't a massive difference and I didn't get enough snaps of either to get a feel for it. None of them are "good" and all teeter on the edge of cyan status. 

[AFTER THE JUMP: I hope you like QB draws]

 

Spread, pro-style, or hybrid: Rutgers was an entirely shotgun offense in this game: 

Formation	Run	PA	Pass	Total
Shotgun	30	6	14	100%
Under Center	--	--	--	0%

Last year I charted six under center snaps, so it's even more lopsided this year. Not all that much to learn from a table like that! Now for the play type by down chart:

Down	Run	Pass
1st	13	9
2nd	7	8
3rd	10	3
4th	-	-

Rutgers was run-heavy in this game, but the top line numbers are skewed by score effects. When you have Gavin Wimsatt at QB, every throw has a significant chance of being an interceptable throw and thus as soon as the game is on ice, the best thing to do is to deposit the passing attack safely into the garage. They were much more even for the first 40 minutes or so of the game, but the closing sequence was all run, all the time. 

Base set: Rutgers worked exclusively out of 11 and 12 in the game I charted against Virginia Tech, 84% 11 personnel and 16% 12 personnel. This is no different than what I charted from last year and the 12 was pretty sparse until the end of the game, when they went heavier to try and run the ball and finish the game off. A look at 11: 

And 12: 

Basketball on grass or MANBALL: Interestingly, while last year Rutgers was running a lot of gap plays (counter being their base), this season it was all zone. I didn't chart a single play against Virginia Tech where they pulled a lineman(!), so this is as pure Basketball On Grass as you're going to see. Lots of split zone and variants of that play run by the Scarlet Knights. 

Hurry it up or grind it out: Same as last year. Rutgers is a pretty standard team in terms of pace, going up to the line and waiting for instructions before hiking it with somewhere between 15 and 20 on the playclock. They got slower against VT late to grind the game out, but when the score was closer, it's not like they were a break-neck, tempo team. Nothing outside the ordinary. 

Quarterback Dilithium Rating (Scale: 1 [Navarre] to 10 [Denard]): In the game I charted of Gavin Wimsatt last season, QB run was not a feature part of the offense. I wrote the following: 

With Wimsatt in the game against Minnesota, Rutgers didn't dial up many chances for him to run, but he felt comfortable rolling out and if needed, scrambling. They did call one designed QB run later in the game 

I remarked that Wimsatt's legs seemed solid but that because we didn't see much of them, it was hard to conclude anything. As a result, I gave Wimsatt a 5 rating. 

This year, things are very different in Rutgers-land (where you get exiled after multiple attempts to succeed as an NFL/real Power 5 head coach fail). With new OC Kirk Ciarrocca in charge, he has reconfigured the scheme to make Wimsatt's legs a focal threat of the offense, the second-most important thing to watch out for after Kyle Monangai. They ran one play in particular a lot, where you use pre-snap motion from the WR and make him the crosser, then you run play action with the running back (no read that I can see) so that he can be the lead blocker for the QB: 

This was one of two big-time runs Rutgers had in the game and was the best showcase of Wimsatt's running abilities in an open field, flashing some legit acceleration. They run that play on 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down, whatever the situation. The clip I showed you worked because of great blocking, but sometimes it works because Wimsatt showed the ability to break tackles and weave his way for extra yards: 

Through three games, Wimsatt has carried it 27 times for 142 yards, a 5.3 YPC clip, excluding sacks. Only a few were scrambles, so they're calling 6-7 QB runs per game for Wimsatt. For comparison, he has now gained more rushing yards through three games this season than he did in his first 12 games at Rutgers combined. It's a real component of the offense now and with Wimsatt's decent athleticism + a displayed aptitude for running, it looks dangerous. His legs still feature in the pass game too, as getting him on the move through roll outs and the like are inherent to the passing concepts as well. All this has me upgrading Wimsatt's rating to a 7 or an 8, one of the most mobile QBs Michigan will face all season. 

Dangerman: This year we're going with RB Kyle Monangai, who is trying to become the next Isiah Pacheco as a Rutgers back who becomes an under-the-radar Dude appreciated by B1G Sickos like your author and then surprises the general populace unaware of the joys horrors of Rutgers football by emerging as a legit NFL player. Monangai showed off some admirable traits and popped more than I recall him doing in past evaluations, scoring three touchdowns along the way. We'll start with his big highlight from the game: 

That play is mostly an RPS win and not the best Monangai-specific highlight, but it was the headliner. I liked the patience into acceleration he showed on this TD run a bit more: 

He also broke a tackle on his first of the three TDs: 

I also liked this run from the Northwestern game: 

Monangai isn't just a runner, though he showed much more ability to shoulder contact and make deceptive cuts that can achieve hidden yards. He's also a key blocker for the team when they run that Wimsatt QB draw play and does run routes in the flats as another checkdown option for Wimsatt besides Johnny Langan. On a team that doesn't have any major threatening options at receiver, Monangai can help carry some of the load. 

HenneChart: Well here we go. Gavin Wimsatt leads the red chevaliers on offense for his second meeting with the mighty Michigan defense. How has been faring this year? DSR chart: 

Rutgers vs. VT	Good				Neutral			Bad					Ovr
Quarterback	DO	CA	SCR		PR	MA		BA	TA	IN	BR		DSR	Screens
Gavin Wimsatt	1	6	1		--	4		--	-	4	2		57%	1

For reference, his DSR chart from last year: 

Rutgers vs. Minn.	Good				Neutral			Bad					Ovr
Quarterback	DO	CA	SCR		PR	MA		BA	TA	IN	BR		DSR	Screens
Gavin Wimsatt	--	7	1		--	3		--	2	4	3		47%	--

Better? Not sure. Maybe marginally, but Wimsatt feels like a very similar QB to the one he was last season. Wimsatt didn't have as many "uh oh!!!" decisions as last year, but the accuracy problem remains his major weak spot. Here he rolls, has options, but the ball is to no one in particular: 

While I criticize the Rutgers offense for being dink-and-dunk, it's probably a good idea because here Wimsatt would've been better off checking down into the flat for 5-7 than trying this throw to a guy who isn't open: 

And though Wimsatt didn't have as many disastrous throws against Virginia Tech doesn't mean that the player who threw three INTs against Michigan last year isn't still in there. Northwestern tape: 

The biggest thing about Wimsatt right now is the predominance of "marginal" throws, balls that are probably catchable (some are caught, some aren't), but are ones that Wimsatt makes way harder than they need to be. This one is the Joe Milton special, a ball thrown to an open receiver who isn't that far away and is thrown at 110 mph with no touch or feel: 

When you consider that Rutgers' receivers are mostly subpar, a QB that makes it consistently more difficult than it needs to be is an unfavorable combination of factors and is what has led to a passing game completing only 50% of passes for very few yards. Every so often Wimsatt does show off a throw that reminds you of his 4* talent though: 

The result of these predicaments, receivers who don't add anything, a QB who is erratic with his accuracy and isn't advanced in his ability to read the defense, leads to a passing game that merely wants Wimsatt to keep all his targets near the line of scrimmage. Not a million screens like Vedral, but a million hitches, drag routes, etc. Finding Johnny Langan short of the sticks on 3rd down despite strong pass pro is the encapsulation of the Rutgers passing game: 

Pretty anemic right now! 

 

Overview

Rutgers is 3-0 on the season against three horrendous opponents. How did their offense do as a whole? Here's a statistical summary: 

• Northwestern: 73 plays, 285 yards, 3.9 YPP. 29 pass attempts for 168 yards. 44 rushes for 122 yards 
• Temple: 72 plays, 452 yards, 6.3 YPP. 21 pass attempts for 198 yards. 51 rushes for 254 yards 
• Virginia Tech: 50 plays, 302 yards, 6.0 YPP. 16 pass attempts for 46 yards. 34 rushes for 256 yards

Rutgers had their way against Temple in both phases, paved VT but were not effective at all as a passing game, and had limited success passing against Northwestern but were bottled up as a running game. Two teams where they cracked 6.0 YPP and one where they weren't all that successful and were stuck in the mud. 

Based on what you saw against Virginia Tech, how do you make sense of those indicators?

Honestly it just comes down to whether the OL can push the opposing DL around. Against Virginia Tech and Temple, they were able to. A quick review of the Northwestern tape says they were very much not able to in that one. A number of the rushing plays I've shown you already were very well blocked, with the left side of the line + Johnny Langan crushing VT's DL over and over again, caving in the edge and plowing holes. Look at that Wimsatt TD run again: 

LT Hollin Pierce really surprised me in particular after having cyan'd him last season. He was Rutgers' best lineman in this game. Of course it could be (and very likely is) entirely relative and tied to Virginia Tech being terrible. The blocking had some great moments in this game, especially to create the explosive plays that I've shown you already, but I can imagine their rushing success rate in this game wasn't that great because their drive chart had a lot of three-and-outs/first-down-and-out. Rutgers' average yards per rush in this game was really good; the median yards per rush was probably quite pedestrian. There were still plenty of moments like this: 

And another one: 

The Northwestern tape, as you'd expect, was filled with them: 

A reasonable forecast for Rutgers against Michigan and the fearsome offensive line that the Wolverines possess is not much success. I'm basing that on caliber of competition of what I've seen and the track record involved. Rutgers' OLs have been bad for years and there were enough rough moments against VT in between the explosive plays to make me think they will not have success of any kind against Michigan. There's a reason I cyan'd two starters and said a couple more were near the line. 

The same could be said for pass protection, which was largely good against the Hokies, but had some wobbles: 

Only one sack allowed so far this season, aided by Wimsatt's mobility, but I do expect that to change as Rutgers faces better pass-rushers. We know what Rutgers' OL is historically speaking and a guy who was one of the weakest cogs on last year is now the best piece on this line. 

As for more individual players, as I mentioned, not a whole lot from the wide receivers. They all look like guys, with guys being a generous description. This catch from Ian Strong against Northwestern rocked though: 

Against Virginia Tech, there were no highlights I was able to clip. Christian Dremel is their slot who plays a big role blocking on that split zone with WR motion sort of play and is also important as a checkdown guy running drag routes. Isaiah Washington is the player that is most frequently targeted down the field. Doesn't feel like a week where we're going to learn a ton about the corners. 

TEs weren't eye-catching either, Johnny Langan being what he is (okay receiver for short stuff, okay blocker). Shawn Bowman is the TE they bring on for their occasional two TE sets and the way he got bludgeoned by VT's defense on blocking attempts is likely the reason they don't experiment with 12 personnel more. 

Finally, while Monangai will get most of the carries, I did like some of what I saw from the #2 RB, Tr Fr Ja'shon Benjamin. He didn't get a ton of carries and I don't expect that to change much against Michigan without an injury to Monangai, but Benjamin could be a player down the line: 

Another one: 

File it away for future use. 

 

What does this mean for Michigan? 

If Rutgers' offensive line can't push you around and you have a functional offense that doesn't gift them points and great field position, they are not going to do damage. Michigan's defensive line is not going to get shoved around by Rutgers' OL, not the same unit that ran for under 3.0 YPC against Northwestern. If Rutgers can't find success on the ground, they don't have any other weapons to achieve success. This passing game is not threatening because they don't yet trust the QB to throw the ball to a receiver accurately beyond five yards past the line of scrimmage. The QB run is an interesting wrinkle but a lot of it is between the tackles and goes back to the point about blocking. 

Honestly, a primary inhibitor to the Rutgers offense through three games has been the fact that half the time, they don't even try. The lack of confidence they have in their passing game led them to run the ball on 3rd & long multiples times in the game I charted. Against Northwestern, they tried a QB sneak on 3rd & a full 2 yards(!!). They want to gain a first down, but it feels like they are more interested in preventing turnovers, which is fair given Wimsatt's past issues. Maybe they will ramp up the aggression as a heavy underdog against Michigan, but that remains to be seen. In totality, I just didn't see a ton to be scared of assuming the offensive line is a Rutgers OL against non-VT/Temple opponents.