College Football Nerds (Formerly SEC Fans) posts Michigan Preview
August 13th, 2019 at 10:40 AM ^
You the face man or the numbers guy?
I'm gonna assume face man but either way, nice job, thanks for that.
I really don't agree with the "all new offense", RPO is mostly what all high school players do, so adding that shouldn't be earth shattering. Plus #speedinspace is a passing game element based more on route combinations and specific athletes.
I think the largest improvement Gattis will make is more aggressive play calling early on. Harbaugh realizes you need to score early on a consistent basis to both put inferior teams to bed early plus score early AND often against the elite teams. Gattis seems to get that and that's why i think he's at UofM instead of an experienced OC.
Your fear if the unknowns is valid, but every team has them.
As a fan this is the first time I feel all the unknowns have better possible solutions than what was there last season.
I don't know but ......I might be more fearful of the "known" if my team retreads on old OC ......ya know, like Sark at Bama ;)
August 13th, 2019 at 10:55 AM ^
I'm the guy on camera, but we're both numbers guys ;)
RPO isn't what UM did, though. It's going to be familiar to Patterson from his days at Ole Miss, but there's still some retraining mentally that will have to happen. It's also an upheaval in how UM will utilize position players (e.g. no more FB, 1 or 0 TEs).
Every team has them, and I think one could be a positive (Gattis) but I'm having a hard time seeing the other (lost production from key players on defense) isn't a negative, even if only a small regression.
Sark at Bama will be a significant upgrade over Locks, IMO. Gattis game planned for Alabama, but Locks called the plays and showed an inability to adjust to in-game scenarios. I actually think that had Locksley not gotten the job at Maryland, he would have been demoted in favor of Enos or possibly Gattis at Alabama.
August 13th, 2019 at 11:46 AM ^
Cool, thanks for the response.
I will add a little "feelingsball" and say that one positive that I think will overwhelm the loss of production on defense is the addition by subtraction of Coach Mattison.
Regardless of what he had done previously, I can't imagine the impetus to leave and go THERE only manifested after the loss. Dline room was probably a little uncomfortable last year, that's why i give Chase much credit for going out there with "the revenge tour" to keep them motivated.
This year will probably feel like a weight has been lifted.
August 13th, 2019 at 11:57 AM ^
This SEC guy just told SC Wolverine, "keep my name out yo mouth, bitch".
August 13th, 2019 at 2:16 AM ^
I like nerds. Especially those who predict 11-1 seasons for our boys. Will be there to kickoff the season. Go blue!
August 13th, 2019 at 2:16 AM ^
I'll take a 11-1 season with a win over OSU, B1G championship, a playoff spot or the Rose Bowl. My big concerns this season are the secondary and D-Tackle depth. Our toughest games will be @ WI, @PSU, ND, MSU and OSU. If we go 3-2 and we beat both MSU and OSU, I will be happy with a 10-2 record. Now if the offense truly become high octane and transforms into a scoring machine, I think we could run the table even if our D may be a bit weaker this season. So the ceiling is 12-0 our support would be 7-5. I'll go 10-2 and we lose @ PSU but win the remainder of our tough games but we lose a dumb game, like to IA by a last second FG. I think we'll clubber the BIG west division winner. 11-2 may not allow us to make the playoffs but the Rose Bowl against OR would be fun.
August 13th, 2019 at 8:15 AM ^
I just haven't figured out a reason to be worried about PSU, yet. I mean, it's not like 'FG Franklin' means Field General - it's Field Goal! And honestly, I'm not convinced the guy takes his team into next years Spring Game...
August 13th, 2019 at 8:20 AM ^
If Michigan goes 11-1 and wins the BIG10 championship they will be in the final 4.
August 13th, 2019 at 10:28 AM ^
Undefeated Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma and ND keeps us out of the playoffs with our only loss being ND.
August 13th, 2019 at 8:16 AM ^
I really hope our defense focused on crossing routes and how to defend them... I am not going all in like I did last year but then again it is only August 13th... My heart is still healing from 2016...
August 13th, 2019 at 2:27 PM ^
Hopefully they do. From what I hear, the defensive staff still feels like it was a solid game plan. They apparently DID switch schemes & coverages, but the guys were just rusty running them in live-fire action.
I know one school of thought is salt certain schemes away so the opposition can't see it on film. But hind sight being 20/20, part of me feels like I'd have gladly sacrificed some of the gaudy defensive stats in earlier blowouts in exchange for the D running some of the other coverages in live game action so they'd be less rusty when it came time to roll the different looks out against OSU.
Plus, if Fields isn't great at the quick throws & is a run first kind of guy as the CFB Nerds say, it's possible the OSU offense will look more like 2017 OSU WITHOUT having a Haskins waiting in the wings to carve us up half way through the game. If that's the case, then imagine how we'd do if you took that same 2017 game, removed Haskins as back-up, inserted 2 year fully weaponized Shea Patterson in lieu of JOK, and also significantly upgraded the OL.
August 13th, 2019 at 8:19 AM ^
I don't know how accurate these guys are. Haven't the coaches already said Sainristil is going to start?
August 13th, 2019 at 8:40 AM ^
Preseason depth charts are notoriously challenging to put together. We had to piece together information from ourlads, preseason magazines, school websites, and 247 articles. So there will never be a depth chart we put out in a preview that will be 100%.
Also we do them for 20 or so teams.
But by rule we don't slot in true freshmen as starters preseason, even when they're 5 star everything. More often than not, fans tend to gloss over their loss of production, or a weak spot from the year prior by pointing to an incoming freshman who hasn't seen the field. (Not saying you're doing that here).
But further complicating things is that UM is employing an entirely new offense. Harbaugh said Sainstrill will be the starting "H" WR. Which formationally probably won't be your base offense, but rather a package (4 WR no TE) . And we're not listing him as a starter in the Z/Y/X spots as those are incumbent starters, all future NFL guys if they stay healthy.
He's similar to what Jalen Waddle was for Alabama last year. Technically a backup (Waddle backup Z Sainstrill probably backup Y), with a "starting" role in specific formations.
August 13th, 2019 at 8:44 AM ^
Also, for those of you wanting to read up on the "H" position that will come with this new offense, here's a good read on it:
August 13th, 2019 at 10:28 AM ^
Thanks for the link. That was a great read!
August 13th, 2019 at 10:29 AM ^
Stop by this place anytime, nerds.
August 13th, 2019 at 11:12 AM ^
Oh we intend to :)
August 13th, 2019 at 12:12 PM ^
Thanks for sharing. These offenses are all using the blocky-TE type at the H position. Even if having Mason/BVS there is our "base" it sounds like we will be using Sainristil quite a bit. Can you recommend anything about how WRs fit into the role?
With next year's personnel (departing WRs and Mason hopefully not needed on defense), I could see us mixing in some of the Lincoln Riley look. Too early for Mark Andrews comparisions, but if the Erick All hype is real he could fill the spot with Sainristil/Jackson operating the "tiny and fast" X position.
August 13th, 2019 at 11:27 AM ^
Thanks again for the video.
Assuming you're the numbers guy:
Is there any solid data on the effect to the defense of "lost tackle production" year to year? It's so much easier to reload on defense, especially if you got real athletes who have had time to learn their assignments.
For example, UofM lost a lot more tackle production from a really elite defense in 2016 and only dropped off .3 yards per play; this year they lost less of a percentage of tackles from a not quite as elite defense ... so maybe a .1 yard per play or .2?
I personally feel the Dline will out preform last year's version, LB will probably be close when it's Ross/McGrone compared to Bush/Gill Hudson will put up the numbers and the inexperience in the DB group will be mitigated by better QB pressure and turning the O "one dimensional" by getting leads with more aggressive play calling .
Either way good call on Shea needing time to adjust to "pro style" and i'm hoping they let him loose more this season.
August 13th, 2019 at 8:38 AM ^
This was interesting. These guys know what they're talking about. Thanks for sharing!
August 13th, 2019 at 10:19 AM ^
I'm not sure what Wisconsin, PSU, and MSU are going to be this season. I'm leaning towards 8-4 type teams, good enough to beat you if you don't show up but not lighting the world on fire.
I think Iowa could be a sneaky tough game. But it is at home. Also get MSU, ND, and OSU at home. The schedule could be tough but 4 of the 6 toughest games are at home. UM really has to take advantage of that.
I will say that even though I'm not a believer in MSU, PSU and Wisconsin this season they will be looking to the Michigan game as a statement. Especially after UM talked quite a bit last season.
I feel ike that if UM can jump out to a decent early lead against Wisconsin, MSU, and Iowa they can sit on the lead and to a victory. If UM's offense turns out to be the real deal I wouldn't be surprised if UM won all three by low double digits. But if UM plays a 10-7 type game deep into the game then anything could happen. That is where these teams want to be.
I think ND will be the second toughest game.
August 13th, 2019 at 11:44 AM ^
Michigan is going to crush Iowa. That game is right in our wheelhouse: top-25-ish opponent at home mid-season.
If you look back, U-M has run the ball much better at home against this caliber of competition than they have on the road. The 2017 IU overtime game was the last time Michigan netted 200 yards rushing in a true road game, in fact.
At home, Michigan tends to bomb teams like this because the run game clicks and U-M fears the opponent enough to open up the playbook. Fully expect to see a replay of last year’s Wisconsin and Penn State games here.
August 13th, 2019 at 2:04 PM ^
Thanks for dropping by, Nerds! Really enjoyed the video. Thoughts in no particular order:
- The Brian, Seth & the other guys on MGoBlog are very analytical and nerdy too. It'd be great if they'd have you guys on as occasional guests to discuss teams outside of the Big Ten and/or to get an "outsider's view" of Michigan/Big Ten teams.
- I was surprised that both of you predicted 11-1 this year. It just seems to me our current plateau is at least 2 regular season losses. I could see it being both ND or OSU this year, but usually we end up dropping a head-scratcher to a Big Ten West team. So, it could be dropping Iowa & then either ND/OSU. Hopefully wrong though. It is frustrating that the Big Ten East is so radically imbalanced compared to the Big Ten West. In our division, if you lose 1 game, you could end up going 11-1 on the season, be clearly one of the best 2-3 teams in all of CFB, yet not even be able to compete in the conference championship game.
- I 100% agree with other Michigan fans. If you offer me a 11-1 season, beating OSU, winning the Big Ten, but missing the CFP, I would take that in a New York Minute.
- I really do think that attrition and injuries are a big thing as the season goes on. Our top level talent is as good as Ohio State's, but they simply have more uber-talented depth than we do. I think this manifests in two ways. First, injuries. Second, OSU is so insanely talented, I think they can & do look past their easier games due to their talent, despite what they might say officially. Yes, sometimes they get shredded by an Iowa or Purdue, or almost lose to a Maryland. But it allows them to allocate the prep time for some tomato can games and focus on Michigan & other key games way ahead of time. I don't feel like Michigan does that at all, or at least not nearly to the same extent.
- As far as depth is concerned, a big part of our season rests on our depth at DT and our defensive backfield. If we have one or two major injuries there, we are in DEEP trouble. Similarly, I've heard that Ohio State pretty much is Justin Fields or bust. I've heard he has trouble reading defenses. Was that his reputation in the SEC as well? In any event, if Fields either struggles reading defenses, can't kill Brown with quick-strike crossing routes, or gets injuried, I think Ohio State might be very beatable this year.
August 13th, 2019 at 2:52 PM ^
I liked the content. I was a bit slow. I think they could have made it 10 minutes. TBH, though, they did a decent job being objective. Pretty good analysis from a non-fan forum.
August 13th, 2019 at 7:34 PM ^
Was I the only one surprised to see the actual Urban Meyer with multiple entries in the comments? He apparently has some serious free time!
August 13th, 2019 at 8:30 PM ^
I'm old enough to have my initials as my UM email address. I was a freshman in the fall of 1990 and vividly remember using Pine in the fishbowl computing center, bitching about connectivity issues on my 2400 baud dialup connection, etc.
I still have my initials @umich.edu email, and years later, people I knew in undergrad know they can find me at that forwarding address.
August 13th, 2019 at 11:31 PM ^
Wait a minute!
Beep ....Beep ....Beep
Back the fuckin truck up!
OK, I was willing to give their schtick a listen, but as soon as they stopped responding in this post I suspected it was BS so I took a listen to their OSU Preview
OSU replaces a Head Coach, OC, DC, plus 9 NFL draftees, including a starting QB, 2 WR, RB and 2 from the OLine, plus 78 tackles from a suspect defense and I heard the word "unknown" ONCE and that was from the OSU insider. LOL
But somehow for UofM hiring Gattis and losing 4 starters on Defense and, suddenly, it's UNKNOWN, UNKNOWN, UNKNOWN.
Let me know when you guys can actually cough up some objectivity, till then we'll assume you'll be worshiping at the "Sark Shrine" since he's "better than Locksley".
Hey, didn't your nerd say Gattis might be better than him too?
August 14th, 2019 at 11:00 AM ^
We didn't stop responding. We just created an account to reflect our actual branding "College Football Nerds" (see our many posts in this thread while your truck is in reverse)
We did say Fields was an unknown (someone neither Josh or myself are high on). We also mentioned specifics of how Fields style of play could play into UM's hands schematically in our UM preview.
Ryan Day is an upgrade from Urban Meyer, especially from an internal lockerroom makeup. They're not changing their offense schematically, and their defense sucked so any change will likely show an improvement.
Michigan hired someone to run their offense who has never called plays, ever. It may turn out great. But if you don't think that's more of an unknown than Ohio St's crappy defense changing coordinators and losing crappy players off a crappy unit, I don't know what to say.
UM didn't just lose 4 starters on defense. They lost 4 tremendous players on defense. OSU lost players like Sheffield who couldn't see the field at Bama, went in the 4th round, but ended up being one of the best players on their defense. They also lost Nick Bosa in the 2nd game, so counting him as a loss for this season is a tad disingenuous. (We also mentioned his loss on the OSU preview).
I didn't "worship at the Sark shrine" I said he'd be an upgrade over Locksley - whom I was never high on. Sark produced the 6th best offense in the NFL last year and proved himself in college as a good offensive guy. We articulated specifically the shortcomings of Locksley's offense in our Alabama preview if you'd like to watch it.
And I don't know how you can accuse us of lacking objectivity when we are neither UM or OSU fans. And we didn't trash either team. If you'd like to debate the merits of the points we made in either video, that's fine. But if you want to question our objectivity, you should at least be equipped with enough information to know why we said what we said...
August 14th, 2019 at 1:15 PM ^
First off, I'm just shining you on about Sark :)
Secondly, no one responded to my question if there is any hard data on what regression happens when you lose a large percentage of your 'tackle production", which is kinda important since you're basing some "unknowns" on them.
And I will call out the lack of objectivity when you are obviously using two completely different metrics to measure the exact same thing. You said it best, disingenuous:
OSU hires new HEAD coach (who hasn't been that EVER) = big improvement over Meyer! (reservations? "unknowns"? I guess it must a breeze replacing a "legendary" coach)
UofM hires a new OC to improve their crappy passing game = BIG unknown because he has NEVER called plays (although has designed some of the most prolific offenses in the last few years, is an actual HUGE upgrade from the previous coach, and the passing game sucked anyway so "any change will likely show improvement")
OSU, new DC = they sucked "any change will likely show improvement" (ya don't say)
Plus the fact that you seem to be willfully ignoring everything OSU lost on OFFENSE, not to mention the fact that it's much easier to reload defense.
UofM is reloading those four defensive positions with upperclassmen and top150 players (before Thomas got ill), all "knowns".
But somehow that's still more of an "unknown" than having only two QBs, neither was even with the program a year and a half ago, one might be a headcase ......plus you have to replace 2 on the Oline, 125 receptions/ 23 recTDs, 954 yards rushing and ............
But UofM has more unknowns? Wha?
Fields is at the most important position and he is a complete UNKNOWN.
Plus I already told you that our defensive line is going to have a huge year now that Disgruntled Mattison is no longer leading the group, especially from the "internal lockerroom makeup" standpoint.
I guess I can't get my mind around the cognitive dissonance that says even though OSU has been dominating the rivalry all change is good for them and bad for UofM.
Since fans want the results to change, any change probably ends up better for UofM.
August 16th, 2019 at 2:05 AM ^
I saw this. They're optimistic. But they have just a laymans view of things. It seems I know more about football than them. And I know I'm only a layman, but older than them.