Nussbag: Nuss This, Nuss That, Nuss The Other One It's Got Bells On Comment Count

Brian

hqdefault[1]

the solution to Michigan's OL issues is clear: get the mustache back

Yeah but all those other guys.

Brian,

I am shocked that a discussion regarding Nussmeier working with last year's assistant coaches has not yet been brought up.  Besides being forced to run a system for which they were unfamiliar, one of the assumed major downfalls of Scott Shafer and Greg Robinson's tenures was that they did not pick their assistants.  

First, would you assume that Nussmeier was given the opportunity to make changes to the offensive staff?  Why wouldn't he choose assistants he has worked with in the past?  Are Borges's and Nussmeier's offenses similar enough that the assistants' philosophies are in line?  Why are we putting so much faith in assistants (esp. Funk) that fielded such underwhelming position groups?

Looking forward to your response,

Dazed and Confused (Brad)

Most coordinators do not sweep out the assistants en masse and replace them. OSU just hired a new guy after Everett Withers left, but hired their DL coach before the DC and then picked up the DC. Alabama did not make Nussmeier-initiated changes when they hired him and did not make Kiffin-initiated changes when they hired him. Notre Dame is replacing both coordinators; neither will bring in a new staff with them. For whatever reason, the "mass firing followed by a totally new regime" thing is just not done.

Those reasons include recruiting, which is somewhere between 20% (OL coach) and 80% (RB coach) of any particular position coach's job, as well as familiarity with the players, continuity, and the difficulty of hiring four or five coaches all in one swoop who will all work together well and get along.

Meanwhile, the OC is near-irrelevant for Jackson and Hecklinski, who will teach their guys the same things (don't fumble, catch the ball, run to the hole, follow these rules on zone runs) in just about any system. There is an art to the zone that is different than running power, but Jackson's coached an awful lot of stretch and inside zone over the last decade—the fit is fine. I'm not even sure what Ferrigno does with the tight ends that couldn't be split between Hecklinski and the OL coach, so whatever.

The big fit thing is with the OL coach and the OC, as the things the OL can do affect the things the OC can call and how he structures his offense. All offenses do everything and teach everything; all offenses should have a bread and butter that they stick to. Nussmeier ran a lot of shotgun power and inside zone at Washington, and did much the same at Alabama, albeit with more under center stuff. When Funk goes to coaching clinics he gives three hour presentations on inside zone minutia. I think the fit there is good.

As for the thing about firing the OL coach after a couple of years of really disappointing performances, I don't think you'd find a guy who would object if Funk was cut loose after this season. Hoke's hanging his career on his evaluation of his OL coach. I liked the guy myself and shudder at the hand he was dealt; even so, last year's performance was alarming. We'll have something definitive either way next year.

Yeah but what about the defense?

Brian,

I'm as excited about the new OC hire as everyone else, but I think it may be overshadowing an equally concerning issue.

In the last 2 years, Michigan's defenses have not done that well against good offenses, and sometimes have been lit up by mediocre offenses. To my untrained eye, it appeared that in the bowl game we consistently put overmatched CBs on an island against their sole elite WR with disastrous effects. Isn't that the DC's job to get them some help? In his first year, Matteson used the blitz masterfully when he had a front 4 that couldn't get consistent pressure, but since then it seems that he's often content to rush 4 and get no pressure. I realize that the leading edge of our top notched recruiting classes were only true sophomores/red-shirt freshman last season, but it seems like seeing player and scheme development this next season is just as critical on the defensive side as the offensive side.

Rod [ed: not that Rod]

It is the DC's job to get them some help but that's the thing about offenses that consistently threaten you with the QB as a runner: it's hard to give guys help. If you put two safeties back you're asking your overmatched defensive line to hold up short a guy. If you bring a safety up he has to stay in the center of the field and Tyler Lockett can roam down the sideline with impunity. That is a choice you have to make. Michigan went into that game betting that their corners, who had performed well all year, could handle Lockett and tried to cover up for the issues in the front seven. They chose… poorly.

When you have a guy who can cover Tyler Lockett, you're good. No one has that. When you have a front six that can beat seven guys, you're good. Michigan did not have that. The spread is relentless. It forces you to win one on one matchups. Michigan did not.

I'm disappointed, sure, but Michigan just did not have the horses in the final two games against the best rushing offense in the country and the best WR in the country. Before that the schemes were holding up as well as you could expect the personnel to do so.

While I'm as disappointed in the passivity of this year's defense as you are and as concerned about Michigan getting ripped by spread teams as you are, on defense it was more about a severe personnel deficiency at defensive tackle and safety (remember Jarrod Wilson was out for the OSU game with disastrous results) than the chaos that reigned on the other side of the ball.

Head asplode rating.

On a scale of 1-10, how much did the Borges firing blow your mind?  I would have bet good money against it.

Thanks,
Jerry

I don't know. On the one hand, Michigan finished last in TFLs allowed this year and rushed for negative yards in consecutive games and that's aside from that game where the top tailback ran 27 times for 27 yards. So 1.

On the other, I'd heard from various people that a change was not likely, and Hoke said he didn't anticipate any changes a month ago. So, like, 8. I do wonder if Nussmeier's unexpected availability moved the needle there, that Brady was grudgingly content to move forward with Borges until a confirmed QB guru who'd run pro-style offenses (shhhh) was suddenly on the market.

lwx9viijpqic5x125z9s[1]

No.

Can Heiko ask Nuss about bubble screens.

No, because Heiko is going to be a doctor. And given what I've seen from Washington's 2011 campaign (post on this forthcoming) there will be no need to badger the OC to throw a WR screen from time to time when the OL is terrible. Washington's 2011 OL was and Washington tried to run every WR screen in the book.

NO.

m a sports debater person on the University's student radio station WCBN. Yesterday on our daily sports report we discussed the possibility of Gardner switching back to WR next year to prep for the NFL and then a QB battle would ensue between Morris and Speight (one of the guys on our show also threw out the idea of wildcat sets and all the yummy trick plays that go along with having 2 or 3 really good QBs on your roster).  Does the Nussmeier make the possibilities of the Gardner move more or less likely?  Does Michigan stay their current course with DG as the signal caller and then transition after he graduates or do they make that jump during this offseason?

-MGoTribe

Seriously did we not learn our lesson about going into a season with like 1 quarterback on the roster last year? And I mean seriously what about the six points Michigan scored before the bowl game was over makes you think that Devin Gardner is a worse option? Do you know how hard it is not to put this response in all caps? Super hard.

Over the last one and a half years, Devin Gardner:

  • Completed 60% of his passes.
  • Averaged 8.9 yards an attempt.
  • Had a 32:16 TD:INT ratio.
  • Had this combined statline against Notre Dame and OSU this year: 53 of 78, 68% completion rate, 9.6 YPA, 8 TD, 1 INT.
  • In 2013, ran for 751 yards on 130 attempts, 5.8 yards per.
  • Did this behind a line that gave up 36 sacks.
  • Did this without any run game whatsover.
  • Did this with a damaged shoulder, hand, rib, foot, and soul.
Devin Gardner is not getting replaced by a true sophomore. Repeat after me. Or I swear to God I will come to your radio station with a posse of boxing kangaroos, and you will be sorry.

Comments

MGoCarolinaBlue

January 14th, 2014 at 7:16 PM ^

>Crazies call for the back-up, freshman QB at nearly every program, regardless of race.

Right on, that's a pretty good point.

I tend to define racism as systemic inequality whereas most people define racism as blatant personal prejudice or hatred.  I would love to try to expand the way people think about race, and I think that it is an issue in football that won't go away on its own, but I can see that trying to force that discussion on this board will probably not be very constructive.

Reader71

January 14th, 2014 at 8:57 PM ^

I'm with you. I have heard people say, "I can't wait til Michigan has a white quarterback again." I've heard it on at least 10 occasions over the past 2 seasons. From different people. Strangers. I'm not saying that everyone who advocates Shane starting is a racist, but those people exist. It's a fucking tragedy.

fergusg

January 14th, 2014 at 6:25 PM ^

...is learn to throw the ball away. If he is more judicious on when he throws away vs trying to make a play he will be better than fine.

Fwiw, My hypothesis is that a high percentage of the sacks this year was due to his propensity to hold onto the ball (analysis to prove/disprove appreciated).

Sugar Shane, by contrast, looked good because he stepped up in the pocket and threw it away in the slightest whiff of trouble.






MGrether

January 14th, 2014 at 6:27 PM ^

Um.
NO.
Dear God, no.

The fact that people have said, " I miss Denard" puts this argument to rest... Unless you are implying that Denard was secretly rich and White while he was here.

How about people put credit for performances on those in charge. On offense, that is the QB & OC/HC. The avg person does not see the whole picture. It is why we have the saying, " The most popular person on the football team is the backup QB." Thus, with an awful year offensively, we have fired the OC and people are now calling for our strong armed second string savior to step in.

Race has nothing to do with it. Unless you keep wanting to think it does.

ryebreadboy

January 14th, 2014 at 6:42 PM ^

Yeah, it wouldn't go with race. There's a subset of misguided people out there who actually think Gardner is not a good QB based solely on this year's early season interceptions and losses to MSU/OSU the last two years. These are the sort of people who plug their ears and yell "NA-NA-NA-I-CAN'T-HEAR-YOU" when you try to argue with them, which means they'll be around awhile.

GoBLUinTX

January 14th, 2014 at 11:44 PM ^

when folks thought Greise should start ahead of Dreisbach, or that Dreisbach should start ahead of Greise?  Was it racism when people thought Brady shouldn't be granted a fifth year to clear the way for Henson?  Was it racism when idiots thought Navarre should start the entire 2000 season after lighting things up against Bowling Green and Rice?

Sometimes people are just idiots.

mgoO

January 14th, 2014 at 6:52 PM ^

Tyler Lockett is great but he's not the best WR in the country.

There is a tendency to think because Michigan gets blown up by someone that they're better than they are,

Ron Utah

January 14th, 2014 at 7:36 PM ^

But Lockett is great, and certainly deserves to be in the conversation for best WR in the country, especially when you consider the system and the talent around him.

K-State averaged 224.7 passing yds/gm, 75th in the country.  Lockett averaged 105.2 yds/gm, more than twice as many as the next guy on the team.

You are probably right in that there are a few guys I'd pick before Lockett, but he's definitely top ten, and we're talking about a difference in degree of greatness at that point.  There certainly isn't anyone that is head-and-shoulders better than Lockett.

 

Eskimoan

January 14th, 2014 at 11:33 PM ^

I couldn't agree more, the notion of Gardner moving to WR is asinine. Devin is a pretty darn good QB. Yes, he made a few bad decisions last year, but we don't win half our games last year without him. It's going to be a pleasure watching him with solid protection and a running game to take pressure off of him.

west2

January 15th, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^

At 5'11'' 175 Lockett sounds a lot like Jeremy Gallon.  Lockett has sprinters speed and his numbers for the year: 81 catches/1262 total yds/15.6 ypc and 16th nationally in total yds/ 11th ypc.  Compared to Gallons numbers: 89 catches/1373 total yds/15.4 ypc and 8th nationally in total yds/15th ypc.  Lockett, similar to Gallon is likely projected as a kick returner and slot recieve in the pros.  A top 10 pick? not likely but likely a 1st or 2nd rounder when he goes pro.  Obviously, the strategy that KS and sparty used on Gallon-jamming at the line, would have been the best way to slow him down and this obviously was not done for reasons discussed previously, issues at safety, size of corners etc...  Clearly Lockett is an emerging player nationally that matched up well against M in the bowl game and its safe to say he is an elite talent.

 

Per suggestion of DG at reciever?  Why on earth would anyone suggest that?  Gardner won games on shear talent this year.  Did any of you watch the Akron and Uconn games?  Without Gardner Michigan would have lost to Akron without question.  Michigan would have been under 500 without him this season.  Y'all are crazy, DG is the 2014 starting QB....end of discussion!