What's to Blame: Lack of Playmakers, OL, Scheme (or all of the above)?

Submitted by Kevin Holtsberry on

As I was attempting to work myself out of my depression about another ugly Michigan loss and sort through the emotional reactions from other fans, I landed on what really has struck me about Michigan this year.  The lack of playmakers.  When the game is on the line and you have to make a play, there is no one that comes to mind.  Someone who can singlehandedly change the game, make the play, or spark the team.  There is not a go-to play or player that you can count on with the game on the line.

I am a Pittsburgh Steelers fan.  And the obvious example this year from the Steelers is Antonio Brown.  Both early in the season when they were trying to get a talented offense in a rhythm and on the same page, and in October and November when they went on an 8-game winning streak, Brown made critical play after critical play to help them win games.  Many times, this came during ugly games against inferior opponents. The Steelers found a way to win close games late; in large part due to AB.

Now, I know what you are thinking.  How can you compare a talent laden team like the Steelers to a young Michigan team?  Well, the point isn't to compare rosters but to point out that winning teams have players that they turn to with the game on the line and who make plays even when the team is struggling.  The Steelers easily could have lost 3-4 games if not for Brown’s clutch play.  When they absolutely had to have a first down or a big play you knew who they were going to turn to and he made the play.

When I look around at the Big Ten and beyond I see the same thing.  Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, even Michigan State have playmakers they rely on when the game is on the line.  Obviously QB is critical.  And all those teams have QBs who have handled pressure better than any on the roster at Michigan.  And those teams also have quality playmaking ability at RB. Frustratingly, OSU and UW have freshman RBs who have been game changers.

This was never clearer than in all our losses this year (and in years past as well).  When Michigan had to have a play, no one stepped up.  The QBs weren't good enough.  The RBs or WRs couldn't make a play (think critical drop against MSU). In key situations, instead of making plays we had turnovers (five against SC!).

You could, however, argue that it isn't so much the playmakers but the lack of a consistent offensive line on which to build.  It is hard for QBs to make plays when pressure is constantly in their face or when they are getting knocked out of games.  It is hard to make plays when there is no room to run, or openings for the RBs, etc.

And I definitely think if Michigan is going to play at the highest level, particularly with Harbaugh's offense, they will have to develop a quality offensive line.  I don't think it has to be dominant, but it must be competent; it can't be a glaring weakness.

Others might point to scheme as the culprit.  Harbaugh's offense is too complicated or too old fashioned (requires pro style QB etc. when spread is dominant at HS).  Or maybe play calling is to blame.  Why throw in a monsoon?  Why handoff to TE on 3rd and 1 in critical point in the game?  Why throw deep on 4th and 1?

I am not an Xs and Os guy but am open to criticisms of the play calling.  And there is a sense that Michigan's offense lacks an identity; something they can hang their hat on.

But if I had to pick an explanation, I would still go with the lack of playmakers.  Michigan has come up small in big games this year repeatedly. Whether it is the QB, the RBs or the WRs, when they had to have a play no one stepped up and made it.

At critical junctures yesterday, far too many players made critical mistakes when the game was on the line.  Karan Higdon fumbled in the Red Zone. Brandon Peters threw an interception in the end zone. Donovan Peoples-Jones muffed a punt deep in our own territory.  Given chance after chance to put the game away, Michigan instead gave the game away.

The one element not discussed yet is experience.  As noted above, and by many on the board across the site, youth has not prevented other teams from making plays.  Note the fantastic years of J.K. Dobbins (OSU) and Jonathan Taylor (UW). Heck, for the second year in a row the National Championship Game will feature a freshman QB! So hard to say experience alone is to blame.

I think it is likely a combination of talent, experience, and situation (scheme, play calling, etc.) that has resulted in the misery of Michigan football in the Harbaugh era.  The question is whether the current roster, or as it will look in 2018, has the playmakers to win big games.  As has been noted ad nauseum, the schedule will offer a great many opportunities to find out with road games against ND, MSU and OSU.

If I had to rank the concerns I would list them as QB, OL, WR, RB.  We don't have the QB who has the athletic ability or mental discipline to win games.  Does She Patterson change that?  Our OL, both in terms of talent, injuries and experience, has contributed to the poor QB play and limited the running game.  A young and depleted WR corps has also turned the passing game into a joke.  I think the RBs played quite well at times despite the mess around them.  Hard to find holes when the OL is poor and the downfield threat is non-existent.

To me the QB and OL or the unknowns. I can see the line improving some just through experience but how much better?  I can see the WRs improving quite a bit as that is often the case with that position (learning the offense, running better routes, etc.).  I don't think we have a game changing RB but I can see them being reliable components of an effective offense if there is a passing game to speak of.  But having a true leader at QB who can make the plays with the game on the line looms large.

What say you?  Is the primary problem talent, the OL or the play calling?  And how confident are you that things can come together next season?

Comments

BornInA2

January 2nd, 2018 at 2:44 PM ^

Agreed: I'd love to hear a rational explanation for how Jay Harbaugh is qualified to coach running backs. Blatant nepotism while going on and on about competition and meritocracy is not good leadership.

And yes, Drevno and Hamilton just didn't get it done this year. I can understand starting with youthful/inexperienced players, sure, and at the end of the season they should be better than they started. Failure to improve is, IMO, the most damning issue with the offensive coaching this year.

Footdog

January 6th, 2018 at 1:12 PM ^

I agree with you but only sorta. Jay was doing a good job with the TE's before moving to RB's which i didn't understand AT ALL. He is also a decent recruiter. Move him back to TE's.  jmo

Nemesis

January 2nd, 2018 at 2:48 PM ^

.....and that these things are all related to one another.

 

The scheme is too complex and makes guys play slow..  Slow players REACT to the defense insteading of IMPOSING THEIR WILL on the defense.  Slow players cannot be playmakers.

 

I actually think the OLine does well on a play to play basis, but when it breaks down, it breaks down CATASTROPHICALLY.  Again, our offense is too damn complex.  If someone does not hear a call or if two players do not make the same read.....disaster. 

 

Watching OSU's offense, one can literally see the defense buckling.  The defense is being stretched and attacked.  There is misdirection.  Plays are quick hitting and simple.  You get the sense that it is only a matter of time before the defense breaks.  And then it does.  I get the sense of a rickety dam filling with water.

 

Watching our offense, any success is plodding.  It is the opposite.  Success feels improbable.  So many things have to go right.  The offense is not quick hitting.  Plays develop slowly and many things have to go right to move the ball.  You get the sense you are watching a clunky machine with many steps in the process.  At each step is a probability of failure.

schreibee

January 2nd, 2018 at 8:37 PM ^

Trying to compare the Michigan offense to osu's leads me to bring up something they (and others) do that bugs the crap out of me: Rushing to line up on O at the end of a play, forcing the D to follow suit & preventing substitutions, then not only NOT snapping the Ball, but the QB going into foot stomping, head bobbing, hand clapping gyrations while the OL sets, stands, resets, rinse, repeat. A) how is all this movement legal? B) how can it be made illegal, or get it called if it already IS a violation? I cannot understand how JT isn't being called for false start every snap? The QB is not excepted from this rule, they USED to actually call them for head bobs, etc before the RichRod offense seemed to change all these rules. Any insights on why all this movement is legal, and how to put a stop to it?

schreibee

January 4th, 2018 at 2:33 AM ^

Well, it took two days, and it wasn't technically an answer to my question, but...

I do believe you're on to something Hail!

If Michigan started doing all that stomping, clapping crap it would summarily be classified as "Intent to deceive" and the refs would be all over that shit.

Let's give it a try!

But still, if anyone can explain why it isn't currently called, I'd LOVE to hear it!

sports fan

January 3rd, 2018 at 8:08 AM ^

IMHO a head coach has three jobs, (1) recruit, (2) teach, and (3) take the results of (1) and (2) and (3) put them in a position to succeed.  I do not know enough about (1) and (2), but Harbaugh seems to fail at No. (3).  Passing in the rain is not the way to put your players in a position to succeed; i.e. make plays.  All the examples above are examples of putting your players in a position to fail. There are many more; i.e. run slow developing running plays against South Carolina's defensive front.

As an aside, this is an area where Dantonio excells, and Chryst. Take the talent level of your players and teach them, and design plays for their skill levels, and put them in a position to succeed.  Meyer, not so much. Even with his high level of recruits, he manages to screw up at least one game a year, most years.  And OSU seems to play lackluster football (compared to talent level) much of the time.

Harbaugh seems to believe that he can take the players he has recruited, train them the way he wants them to play, line them up and play the schemes, systems, and plays he wants to play.  Sometimes (oftentimes) what you have to work with cannot play the game you want them to play; i.e. make plays.  All three facets have to work together.  (1) an (2) won't matter if you can't do (3).

 

gruden

January 8th, 2018 at 11:24 AM ^

I'm wondering if the years Harbaugh spent at the 49ers fundamentally changed how he coached.  He's stated he wants M to be like the 33rd pro team and seems to be trying to make that happen with young guys who aren't quite ready yet.  Maybe it's time to simplify things a bit then work back to that later as he builds up the program.

Nemesis

January 2nd, 2018 at 11:50 AM ^

....Mark Dantonio "complimented" UM saying the team was "well coached" because it fielded 30 different formations in the first half of the game.

 

Obviously, this was not a compliment.  It was a thinly veiled insult.

 

Our complexity is garbage.  We fool no one but ourselves.  If our complexity resulted in receivers running wide open, mismatches in man to man coverage, or linebackers being sucked out of position, I could live with it.  But instead, these things never materialize and our guys just look lost.

 

I feel so bad for our defense.  To play so well all year and lose because the offense is effectively as good as a MAC offense.

tybert

January 2nd, 2018 at 12:44 PM ^

The ugly 2012 loss at ND - Hoke tried to fit Denard into a pocket passer and he was overwhelmed.

Devin was never a pocket passer and Hoke blew that one too.

The O this year was only going to work if we had a Henne or Jake or '03 Navarre. Too much to process in a short amount of time. That was obvious on the EZ INT. 

I think getting Jedd back to help the QBs  and simplifying the offense to be more like Tressel ball may be the only course until we get a bonifide QB. Boring? Yes. But the turnovers speak to guys being over their heads. 

maize-blue

January 2nd, 2018 at 12:13 PM ^

There's no playmaking ability on the offense currently. Any misstep in play execution will kill a drive. They do not have the ability to overcome any mistakes.

I say currently because it remains to be seen how and when the WR's, QB's and RB's develop. 

Higdon and Evans are fine RB's but only complementary to each other and not prime time, feature RB's. They need to land a big time RB (a la Najee Harris) in one of these upcoming recruiting cycles. 

I still believe in Peters but he looks like he still needs time to get better/mature as a player. I was hoping it would happen as soon as he took the field. Harbaugh had zero intentions of playing him at all this season.

The WR's need help, in the form of a dedicated coach. Black is a dude, but got hurt. DPJ is super raw, even still at the end of the season. Collins played very sparingly, I think he'll be good. Martin did not play. Crawford is out there by default, I guess he is a decent blocker.

I actually think the O line perfomance against South Carolina wasn't too bad. It looks worse because Peters is not mobile enough to escape pressure and tends to hold on to the ball too long. Will Patterson aleviate some those problems? We'll find out, I guess. That's assuming he can even play in 2018. I think the line put together a winnable performance against OSU as well. It is slowly coming together with this group.

My own personal opinion is that there is more than enough talent currently on the roster to create a competent offense.

Harbaugh and his coaching staff, whoever it ends up being, have a lot of work to do to create explosiveness in this offense.

tybert

January 2nd, 2018 at 12:37 PM ^

During 2015 and 2016, think how many times Chesson, Darboh, and Butt got open and made critical 3rd down plays. That alone made Speight look good. I think back to the win at Minnesota in 2015. 

If we have any intensity and talent at WR, those guys will hopefully see the opening and step up during the offseason.

I'm actually happy with the TE talent - but puzzled why we only use it sparingly. 

maize-blue

January 2nd, 2018 at 12:43 PM ^

I admit, I severley overestimated what true freshman could do. I didn't think there would be any drop off from Seniors Chesson and Darboh to the current guys. I just hope they make a big leap in 2018.

Last of the Me…

January 2nd, 2018 at 9:29 PM ^

I think part of that is scheme. I mean other schemes, which appear simpler, have freshmen who have instant impact. CeeDee Lamb for OU had a solid season. Note in that example on top of scheme he also has Mayfield throwing to him.

panaMark

January 2nd, 2018 at 12:16 PM ^

Good writeup, but in the end it is the coaching that is accountable. There are many examples of teams out there this year that did not recruit as well as Michigan, but the coaching made the difference. Heck, look at Stanford when Harbaugh took over. Somehow he did it then.

We lost yesterday because of poor coaching. Too many turnovers?  Poor coaching. Poor play calling (crowned off by wonder-full cute TE plunge on 3rd and 1)?  Poor coaching. Inexperienced players not being developed? Poor coaching. Hello UCF!  I guess I have fallen off the Harbaugh wagon and now am just stumbling along behind examining the pieces that fall off. I will always be a Meechigan fan, but as Toomer said we will need better than this. How many times can we say "there is always next year!".  I am sure I will be saying it soon too, but for now it is just sad reality.

JFW

January 2nd, 2018 at 3:46 PM ^

but to me it's the lazy answer. You could just as easily say it's all on the players and execution. This is a program with a history and reasons behind the things that happen. 

Did Harbaugh forget how to coach after San Diego, Stanford, and the Pro's? That's as unlikely as a player forgetting how to play football. 

 

The 'It's the coaching' excuse as the *only reason* leads you to end up in endless searches for the right guy, who is going to make you a champion with his right guy magic. It covers up the uncomfortable truth that we haven't been as good as we think we are, and have had major holes that existed, and new ones that opened up. 

If you are a DBA and you come in to manage the transformation of your company from a bunch of access databases to Oracle, and it takes time, people could say 'UGH. IT STILL HASN'T HAPPENED! MY WIFE'S COMPANY DID THEIR ORACLE FROM A COUPLE OF SQL DB's UPGRADE IN A  YEAR. WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH OUR DBA?!?'  It would be true on the face of it. But it wouldn't reflect all the crap you had to muddle through to get the data clean enough to migrate. Crap that wasn't true in the other environment. And Firing you and bringing in another guy won't just make all that crap go away. 

At this point we are dealing with years of sins and mediocrity, as well as a minor coaching carousel. In the meantime we have posted some pretty good records. Records that in the 90's would have been fantastic or good enough (I still hear people talk fondly of Moeller), even against a weaker B1G.  

We all need to Chill and enjoy the ride, with all it's ups and downs. 

Tuebor

January 2nd, 2018 at 3:48 PM ^

The Harbaugh honeymoon ended for me after the Iowa game last year.


After Maryland Harbaugh claimed that Speight was a heisman candidate, then he called the Iowa game like he actually believed it.


The coaching staff completely wasted Peppers talent on offense. The pepcat ended up being two plays, zone read and qb sweep.   

tybert

January 2nd, 2018 at 12:51 PM ^

I know, I hate to think about OSU, but Tressel really didn't have much in the way of offense until Troy Smith came along. They found ways to win with D and special teams and avoid turnovers. 14-10 games aren't exciting at all, but if we win, who cares?

Clarett was only around for 2002 but Tressel was able to piece together good teams with the talent on hand.

We have an offensive philosophy that doesn't match the talent and experience. 5 turnover games are a sign of guys being overwhelmed by the playbook - even the line probably didn't know who to block and when - given how many times simple stunts killed us and our QB.

 

WolverineMan1988

January 2nd, 2018 at 12:57 PM ^

I would simplify it even further and say that Michigan, especially this year, has a losing mentality.  When you have a losing mentality, bad things happen.  As an athlete, if you don't have 100% confidence in yourself, your teammates, and your coaches, you open yourself up to mental lapses (the ball clanging off DPJ's helmet being my best example) and therefore lack of execution.  I look at yesterday as the prime example.  I can point to anything you want pretty much as the culprit, but I would say that it was a lack of belief that they were actually going to win the football game.  The defense began allowing big plays that had not happened all game and the offense began making mental mistakes that made us all scratch our heads and just want to scream, "WHAT THE HELL IS HAPPENING?" 

I agree with the idea that Michigan lacked a go-to playmaker on offense this year.  However, is it because no one on the offense is talented enough to be that person?  Hardly, if you ask me.  Being a playmaker and the go-to person requires talent, of course, but even more so it requires the mentality and the belief that you are a playmaker and that you absolutely want the ball when a crucial moment presents itself.  

It's up to the coaching staff and the players for that matter to develop a different mentality in the offseason.  Otherwise, I do not think anyone should just expect next year to be better because we will have more experience, depth, talent, yada yada yada.  Those things might help them win another game or so, but it won't put them over the top.  

WolverineinDallas

January 2nd, 2018 at 1:23 PM ^

I think most of the issues probably come down to poor coaching. I am now honestly wondering if the innovation of the Standford offense was more due to David Shaw or Harbaugh. I have no clue. I think the coaches probably feel like their hands are tied with the youth at wide receiver and the constant rotation at quarterback. It is probably true that the offense they try to run is more difficult to pick up for younger players than most of the other offenses around the country. Based on the comments from that USC player after the game, however, it seems like the staff is trying to adjust to the youth on offense by running really simple stuff. This begs the question: is the offense too complex right now or too simple? Either way, the problem seems to lie more with the coaches (including the current coaching configuration) than the players--as flawed as the offensive personnel may be. At the very least, UM needs a full time WR coach and one full time OL coach. Otherwise, I am affraid that the wideouts (who have all the potential in the world) will not develop properly and the OL will continue to be inconsistent. I think we may need to consider bringing in a full time QB coach as well. Michigan's odd coaching configuration has not been working. They need to go back to a more traditional configuration. It just doesn't seem like our players are being coached up on offense right now. Peter's problem is mental, not physical; he is slow making reads. Based on recruiting profiles, I think the same is true for the wide receivers. This team is no doubt young, but they are also poorly coached. Changes with the offensive coaching staff need to be made.

Jon G.

January 4th, 2018 at 8:19 PM ^

No matter what offense you run, turning the ball over 5 times usually results in a loss. Peters threw interceptions because he's inexperienced. The fumbles and muffed punt were just bad mistakes that shouldn't happen this late in the season. Oh well, there's always next year and a more difficult schedule with Notre Dame and Northwestern. Plus the usual problems with MSU and Ohio State. 

wsumichigan

January 2nd, 2018 at 1:26 PM ^

The coaching staff wants to run a pro style offense. But the reality is that high school programs across the country are running spread offenses (different variations) with basic route tree concepts and reads that put the ball in the hands of their playmakers. So when we get these guys on campus we literally have to break those ingrained tendencies and style of play and teach them a new much more complex scheme. I know that people will point out Wisconsin and MSU and say they can do it. These programs have proven to be vastly better at identifying guys that fit their system and develop them over a few years before hitting the field. We don't have the luxury having them redshirt and sit for a few years and absorb the playbook. The team is heavily relying on young guys to contribute. I've never cared about many stars a guy has. Does he fit the system we have. Will he fit a certain role on the team. Bobby Bowden and Mack brown both stated that they had a roster full of four and five star guys but they were obviously weren't the right guys for their system. I think the coaching staff has done a great job identifying defensive recruits. The verdict is very much out if the offensive staff can do the same.

OwenGoBlue

January 2nd, 2018 at 1:53 PM ^

I'm thinking in terms of what weaknesses can improve rapidly and that's obvious. They need leaps from young WRs and OL as well as a solution at QB. I think the WRs will be much better. OL will be good to great inside with better pass protecting tackles than this year. None of it will matter that much if Shea isn't eligible/as advertised, D-Caf doesn't break through, or Peters doesn't show us something he hasn't shown yet. I like the chances of one of them working out but the Outback definitely threw a wet blanket on any Peters hype. While many (myself included) anticipate some staff changes the overall scheme isn't going to change dramatically. If you think Harbaugh, a well-regarded coach in his prime with plenty of options, is going to shift to a CEO-type head coach and give up control of the offensive scheme because he's "only" won 28 games in 3 years you're fooling yourself.

JTGoBlue

January 2nd, 2018 at 5:07 PM ^

And why the panic is unwarranted. Young team this year with injuries especially at QB.

Next year looks great (again barring injury) and from there recruiting and continuity in the program keeps it on track and competing for championships every year.

Mannix

January 2nd, 2018 at 2:29 PM ^

The coaching staff had the most dynamic athlete Michigan has had since DRob and could do no more than put him in Wildcat formation and say, "do your thing".

This is all about coaches coaching the players they have, not forcing them into some archaic manball scheme.

I have no idea how complicated it is, but it seems to be the new explanation of why the QB play is terrible. If the scheme is too complicated, maybe do something that isn't too complicated.

But I think that's too simplistic. These players got into Michigan, so they've got to have some congnitive ability.

Mgrad92

January 2nd, 2018 at 2:51 PM ^

Read this (or re-read it). Bill Connelly's S&P+ season preview projected 8.9 wins for Michigan this season way back in July. Late in November, he wrote that he'd have adjusted that to 8.3 wins if he'd known Wilton Speight was going to get injured. It turns out that was eerily accurate.

(If S&P+ was so accurate this year, what's it projected so far for 2018? Much better things.) 

So, the question isn't who or what to blame for a travesty, it's why our expectations were so far out of line. Maybe they're right, and we really are arrogant and entitled. Maybe we have short memories. Maybe we're just not paying attention closely enough. Whatever it is, it's probably different for each of us. How many Michigan fans screaming HOW CAN WE NOT HAVE A QB?! this morning remember the two-year span under Hoke when we recruited exactly one of them? (Or that it was Shane Morris?) 

Does that make 8-5 acceptable? I can't tell you what you should accept. No one can, really.

For my part, I'm pretty proud that Michigan has the winningest program in college football. That means Michigan averages just 8.76 wins per 12 games. (No, seriously, look it up.) 

If .730 is the ceiling for sustainable winning percentage (138 years is a pretty good sample size, after all), why should someone blame anyone but themselves if they demand only 12-1, 11-2, or 10-3 seasons and can't tolerate the 7-6, 6-7, or 5-8 inevitable seasons that will balance those out?