Bill C previews Michigan - Wisconsin
Interesting breakdown. He demonstrates how predictability on offense has been one of our biggest problems this year.
I define standard downs as first downs, second-and-7 or less, and third- or fourth-and-4 or less. Passing downs are everything else: second-and-8 or more, third- or fourth-and-5 or more. Obviously teams run the ball more on standard downs (58% of the time on average) than passing downs (34%), but the Wolverines are far more extreme than the national averages: They're running 67% of the time on standard downs (24th most overall) and only 20% of the time on passing downs (14th least).
Both Middle Tennessee and Army took full advantage of this tendency, blitzing and stunting with abandon. And Patterson was dealing with plenty of second- and third-and-longs because MTSU and Army also knew when the Wolverines wanted to run.
Unfortunately, SP+ picks the Badgers, but that should hardly be a surprise given how things went for both teams in weeks one and two. But also shows the roadmap for winning: mix it up on offense and force Wisconsin to pass on defense.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:32 AM ^
Predictability. When you believe that you have superior talent and that "execution" will do the job.
Bo, Lloyd, Harbaugh ... Pure Michigan.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:41 AM ^
Worked for the first two because they won championships galore.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:46 AM ^
Bo didn’t win championships and Lloyd only won one
September 20th, 2019 at 9:52 AM ^
BIG championships count in the discussion. It was not like a BIG East "championship" back then. Winning the BIG mattered and it still matters. A BIG title would be massive for Harbaugh.
September 20th, 2019 at 11:10 AM ^
No they don't. The big ten was a joke during Bo and unbalanced schedules meant a lot of split titles. Carr won two non-split titles, if the rules were the same Michigan would have had a 3 way split big ten title last year. Bo came up small in the Rose bowl and it will always tarnish his legacy as a truly elite coach.
September 20th, 2019 at 11:16 AM ^
Wow. For the most part I really like the discussion you bring but that is just a really depressed take.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:57 AM ^
This game plan worked for a season...for sure. These Coaches achieved success...absolutely. But the complete and total "marriage" to this philosophy and stubborn unwillingness to change is partly responsible for where we are as a program.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:54 AM ^
*mirage
September 20th, 2019 at 9:42 AM ^
Correct, that mindset and attitude has been Michigan's Bane.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:47 AM ^
8/27/1998
"We talk at Michigan about the expectation is for the position. That's, in my judgment, a very important part of our program. You compete everyday, you get better because you don't know what's going to happen".
Lloyd Carr
September 20th, 2019 at 9:51 AM ^
I THUMBSED THIS UP, BUT WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT I LOVE ALL 3 OF THOSE CRAZY BASTERDS.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:34 AM ^
I'm really counting on 'weird football circumstances' as the cause behind these stats. The MTSU second half seemed to be experiments in one-off plays that we haven't seen again. Army became a sludgfart because of 3 fumbles in 4 possessions, and just the general Army-ness of Army.
If good weather can hold, I see Gattis finally getting a chance to open up and move the offense into the upper gears. But if the weather keeps him in first or second gear, it'll be a run game duel of defenses.
Lets pray for the 40%!!!
September 20th, 2019 at 9:54 AM ^
How meaningful are those run/pass stats in an RPO heavy offense?
Is Michigan an RPO heavy offense?
September 20th, 2019 at 11:07 AM ^
FanNamedOzzy posted a two-part diary breaking down the various option plays in the Army game. I believe there were 13 called RPOs (at least according to those diaries). They ran something like 76 plays, so about 17% of their plays were RPOs. You're right that RPO teams don't get to choose whether a play is a run or a pass, but Bill C's point is that running on standard downs is less successful because the defense knows it's coming, and presumably is set up to stop the run. If that's the case you would expect an RPO call to skew towards pass, since the defender being read is more likely to be in a position to stop the run.
September 20th, 2019 at 12:19 PM ^
Thanks for the numbers.
I agree with your last point in general, but I'd also expect the numbers could be very opponent specific depending on the DC's approach.
I guess the standard caveats about small sample sizes count for more than anything.
September 20th, 2019 at 12:13 PM ^
This was my question too. If lets say that 30% (I'm not a football expert, never played, hence my question) of the play calls are RPO's, and the wrong read was made, that can't be on the play caller, and the run pass ratio could bounce all over correct? Player development can be put on the coaches if Shea can't read correctly, but Gattis would then be making calls based on what he sees with the defense. Unlike the NFL, though, he can't speak with Shea during a drive to let him know what he sees.
September 20th, 2019 at 12:39 PM ^
Patterson and McCaffrey actually did a pretty good job on RPO reads. They were correct on 85% of RPO reads (according to FanNamedOzzy's diary posts), but only correct on 55% of read option run plays. Accuracy and timing were the bigger issues on RPOs. They were 2 for 5 on RPO passes, with at least two of those being errant throws.
September 20th, 2019 at 2:30 PM ^
If your QB makes too many wrong reads, you will eventually call less options for him.
A DC can run a system where he overplays against the pass or the run. It could be because that's how he prefers to defend against RPOs or maybe just focuses more on taking something away from the opposing defense. If you're worried more about their star RB, maybe you treat 2nd and 10 as a running down. That could skew the numbers for an individual game.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:38 AM ^
Is it possible that Gattis simply isn't as good of a play-caller as Jim Harbaugh? I don't think that's an outrageous take. While Harbaugh's offense isn't particularly modern, it has proven to be very efficient and the identity is obvious.
I believe that if we were running the same offense as last year that we would look much better at this point. I think Jim Harbaugh is a better OC than Gattis. He just needed to throw the ball downfield more and use his WR advantage as opposed to turtleing up in close games.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:39 AM ^
Underutilizing our stud WR corp is possibly the biggest sin, but that goes beyond Gattis IMO.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:46 AM ^
I think that Harbaugh has probably been irate with the turnovers and gave Gattis a very short leash against Army. Harbaugh was raging pissed after the first fumble, and I cannot believe the second two did much to assuage his frustration. I don't think we have seen much Gattis offense so far because my guess is that Harbaugh has not responded to those turnovers by giving Gattis increased autonomy, at all.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:13 AM ^
Lol you have short term memory loss
September 20th, 2019 at 10:30 AM ^
I totally agree with DJ. The problem wasn’t the offense, the problem last season was the OC.
How many OCs has UM had the last five years?
September 20th, 2019 at 9:38 AM ^
SP+ picks Wisconsin 27-18.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:47 AM ^
Why even play the game at this point?
September 20th, 2019 at 12:32 PM ^
I was merely stating that because OP did not yet referenced SP+.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:48 AM ^
the play selection stats are depressing
September 20th, 2019 at 9:54 AM ^
Are they surprising though? One of the things we all really hoped Gattis would bring was an unpredictability to our offense and to date we've not seen that.
What I find interesting is both Middle Tennessee and Army sold out guessing (correctly) on our predictability. Almost like they both guessed (correctly) that even with a new OC, our offense at its core wouldn't change.
Hmmmm. I wonder why that is? I wonder what the constant has been that leads to that predictability?
Hopefully that goes away tomorrow.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:00 AM ^
Turnovers, plain and simple. Think about it like Harbaugh riding along with his kid driving for the first time and being all kinds of nervous because this is weird and the kid proceeds to run a red light, knock into a construction barrel and shifts the car into neutral while moving all during the first time around the block. I think he gave into his natural inclination to grab the wheel and play it safe. Not a lasting formula for success, but we are 2-0 in a game where the offense showed an astonishing propensity to shoot itself in the foot early and often.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:19 AM ^
This is a horrible analogy. One thing Gattis emphatically does not control is fumbles, unless he is calling something truly baffling like, say, handing the ball off to a tight end. Purely hypothetically.
All of the fumbles so far have been of the garden variety. Shea fumbling in the face of a blitzer he was staring down. Shea fumbling on a chunk run. BVS fumbling on a standard down run play. A dropped punt, etc.
That's not Gattis running a red light or screwing up. There's not much he can do about that.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:24 AM ^
That is not the way it would register in Harbaugh's head. If what he is trying to do is give Gattis autonomy, from his perspective it would not matter exactly how the turnovers were happening, only that he was ceding authority and it was resulting in disaster. If you want to believe that Gattis called the second half of the Army game you are free to but there is no way that is the case.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:29 AM ^
I know we are in the minority right now in believing Harbaugh is heavily involved in play selection but I'm pretty sure tomorrow will answer the question one way or the other.
If we go predictable and run constantly on first down into that D line, with the weapons we have at WR, I think the most ardent believers in Gattis's autonomy would have to rethink things.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:33 AM ^
That is why the weather forecast sucks. We could turtle on offense tomorrow and there is the chance there would be a completely plausible reason why were doing so. I wanted this to be the game where the offense, whatever it is going to be, was rolled out and it was just sink or swim time. The fact that a minor hurricane appears to be rolling through Wisconsin tomorrow may complicate that considerably.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:35 AM ^
I don’t understand why Harbaugh completely dumped the FB. If Harbaugh is going to run ZC 30+ times, why not give ZC a lead blocker?
September 20th, 2019 at 10:40 AM ^
That is why I am virtually certain that Harbaugh just grounded the offense at halftime two weeks ago. Presumably Gattis has a "vanilla" of his own that would have at least had a coherent design if he thought he needed to play more ball control. The second half offense against Army just looked like Gattis personnel with Harbaugh rage yelling "handoff!" into the headset before every down.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:38 AM ^
You’re basically calling Harbaugh an irrational idiot. The turnovers had zero to do with play calling.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:43 AM ^
No, I'm not. I'm calling him a football coach. They tend to be a bit on the edgy side.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:59 AM ^
“That’s not how it would register in his head.”
You’re saying he can’t discriminate at a basic football level between cause and effect.
September 20th, 2019 at 11:08 AM ^
No, what I am saying is that if Harbaugh has always had a very big say in play-calling at Michigan, and all of the sudden he didn't and we were turning the ball over incessantly, it would be a very basic and predictable instinct for him to take some of the authority back, particularly in a game like Army where he saw the margin for error shrinking with every possession.
It is also worth noting that Patterson almost never turned the ball over last season, and that it is very possible that the new scheme that Gattis is installing was resulting in him not paying attention to some basics like holding on to the damn ball. I don't know how that would be a controversial take, nor do I think it would necessarily be the wrong decision by Harbaugh.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:44 AM ^
I do not believe that Gattis called the second half of the Army game. It was a "Tale of Two Halves" in terms of the playcalling.
But it seems to me much more likely that Harbaugh's calculus was less about Gattis and more about the players. I don't think it had anything to do with Gattis' performance per se. And Harbaugh was still very, very close to being disastrously wrong.
I guess we are arguing semantics, though. We seem to agree that for whatever reason Harbaugh inserted himself into the offense.
Let's hope the team plays with confidence tomorrow and starts executing those plays that were oh so close in the first two games, and the offense can let it rip.
September 20th, 2019 at 11:23 AM ^
So in your world if anything goes bad it's on Harbaugh and gattis gets only credit? Okay then sounds objective.
So there was no way if Michigan came out running a lot esp in predictable spots that would be gattis calling those plays?
September 20th, 2019 at 11:56 AM ^
FFS I am giving credit to Harbaugh for the Army game! We were turning the ball over like crazy, went really conservative and ended up winning a game that looked like a loss for much of the game. I think Harbaugh was the driving force behind a change in philosophy on that day that stole victory from the jaws of defeat.
September 20th, 2019 at 12:18 PM ^
Not sure if you're responding to me, but that's emphatically not what I am saying.
What I am saying is that (1) Gattis isn't to blame for the fumble issues and (2) it's very clear to me on re-watch that the offensive strategy changed dramatically at halftime and that it seemed Harbaugh-influenced because, well, it sure felt familiar. And if so, Harbaugh was right to insist on that approach, but it easily could have gone differently.
I have real reservations still about Gattis's ability to counter in-game and react quickly to what defenses are doing. What was disappointing and most surprising to me in the second half of the Army game was the lack of diversity in the blocking, etc. Hoping to see a more varied scheme tomorrow after the bye week.
September 20th, 2019 at 12:32 PM ^
Here's what I don't understand:
If you believe Gattis when he says he wants #SpeedInSpace, why don't you believe him when he says he has 100% control of play calling? Why do you choose one of those claims to believe, but believe he's a liar about the other one?
September 20th, 2019 at 1:07 PM ^
I don't believe any coach when he says he wants to get "speed in space" because that's just a thing coaches say. Like how every new DC in the history of ever will say the new defense will be more aggressive. Ho-hum.
Another simple answer: Coaches lie all the time. The coaches also said Shea made all the right reads in the run game against Army. Should we believe them? They are cagey about whether certain players have practiced. Do they not know?
As for playcalling, there is approximately a 0% chance that the coaches would publicly admit to any change two weeks into the season after spouting all offseason about how Gattis was given the keys.
And then there's the fact that the offense has looked radically different from half to half. In MTSU you could chalk up the second half to Shea's injury. That Army half, though? Not so sure.
Anyway, who knows really. I am just a fan with theories, same as anyone.
September 20th, 2019 at 12:22 PM ^
Didn’t Bo used to soak the football and make the RBs practice with a slick ball to remove fumbleitis?
September 20th, 2019 at 12:00 PM ^
I’m convinced that what made MTSU and Army able to sell out so successfully on defense and seemingly guess correctly on so many read option plays is because we ran no constraints to the formation we were in most of the time: One RB lined up to the side of the QB. This formation dictates which is the playside and backside on zone reads and RPO’s (unless specifically constrained). If the RB was to the right of the QB, for example, the playside is to the left, the backside is to the right, and vice versa. We didn’t deviate once from this pattern IIRC. We made it too easy for the defense to force a give or pull to suit the defense’s strengths then being able to scrape exchange or zone blitz or to call a more exotic play (ie—corner blitz) that comes from having confidence in knowing which side has playside responsibility and which has backside before the snap. All I want to see against Wisconsin (besides a win) is that we’re not so predictable.
September 20th, 2019 at 9:51 AM ^
I like being the underdogs for a change
September 20th, 2019 at 10:41 AM ^
I don't, because it doesn't bode well for our chances of winning.
September 20th, 2019 at 10:12 AM ^
For a brief period—I don't think it for more than a game or two—Schembechler was up in the booth as an analyst or color guy on NFL broadcasts. I still remember hearing him criticize one team's play calling for being too predictable—that they needed to throw the ball more often on first down because the defense was too successful at anticipating the run.
I was driving at the time listening to the broadcast on the radio and just about hit a light pole when I heard Bo say that.