Phil Steele on 247sports radio
Offseason, so what the hell. I like his magazine, which should come out in a few weeks. He was on Bill King's show on SiriusXM (used to have a RivalsRadio show). Love me some BK
He says M's defense will be much improved, maybe the most improved in the country. Talent returning on that side of the ball, and the Spread won't be there to keep them on the field. Offensively, he thinks we'll go MANBALL vs. the weaker competition early or if we have leads, but revert back to Denard/Spread if it doesn't work (which kind of contradicts what he just said about the D, NTITAI). Anyway, I believe he may be right about that. He actually pointed to the Spring game as encouraging, in terms of Denard still breaking runs. But he thinks the O will be less potent than last year. Overall, a much improved team.
He then shat upon an ND caller's claimed "impressive" defensive performance in their last 4 games, saying, variously: Utah was deflated after being obliterated by TCU the week before, Army's offense is terrible, USC was missing their starting QB, and Miami shrinks in cold weather (it was freezing at UTEP, almost literally). Likes their recruits tho.
A Sparty mouth-breather phoned in but didn't speak up, so no breakdown, but Steele did mention he's got them at #28.
I couldn't listen any longer for any other B1G or opponent breakdowns. Dee Hart will get 25% of 'Bama's carries as the #2 to Richardson, FWIW
When did 247 really take off? I only started hearing about them relatively recently, and I even think I may like them more than rivals and scout.
I think they started up last summer, but they were really small at first. It seems like they're gaining a little bit of momentum, which I think is a good thing. They're more up-to-date than ESPN, and it will be better to have three recruiting services rating recruits rather than just two (Rivals and Scout).
The people who started 247 used to be affiliated with either Rivals, Scout, or Bucknuts, I can't remember which. They then got out of the recruiting business for a little while and then got back in. They know what they're doing to the extent that any of these sites do...Bucknuts is now part of the 247 network.
Do you think they will make an offer to Brian? I wasn't able to find any Michigan associated Blogs.
The above post includes the extent of my knowledge about 247.
I would like to see 247 get a dedicated Michigan site. Those guys seem like they are good at pumping out information.
a 247 Michigan site is in the works.
I read that the Michigan rivals site (TheWolverine) was thinking about moving to 247sports and then there was a blow up about already paid dues to rivals and such.
I think it's the same guy who helped to start both Scout AND Rivals.
Thanks for filling us in.
I'll be interested to see how Demetrius Hart does over the next few years. I have a feeling that he's going to be putting up some big numbers down in Tuscaloosa when he gets the opportunity.
...the one that got away.
I hope he does well. I would hate to see him become the recipient of a "Saban Honorary Medical Scholarship."
I agree, and to think he could possibly getting 75% of the carries in AA, if he did not decide to go elsewhere. The kid will be a stud. I cna't help to think about Dee and Hopkins in the same backfield, that would have been exciting.
I thought Hart was going to be playing DB for Alabama? Or was that a lot of Michigan fan rabble, after he switched commitments?
(I harbor no ill-will towards him and wish him the best, aside from the UM-Bama match up. He was pretty straight-forward in that he was committing to play for Rodriguez and that the coaching situation drove him away.)
I don't know if that's accurate about the coaching situation driving him away. He stated that he didn't care who the coach was because he felt he could play in any system. Maybe the uncertainty was, in the end, an issue...but it seems like (with all of his back and forth) he might have been destined for Alabama from the start. Oh well, we'll be back to producing star RBs in no time.
You know, I think you're right that Hart didn't say that he was specifically committing to play for Rodriguez. But I am pretty sure that he specified that the coaching uncertainty was an issue. Regardless of his specific comments, I do remember not being surprised when he de-committed, given what was going on with Rodriguez.
Hart was pretty explicit that he would remain committed even in the face of a coaching change, but recall that he committed to an undefeated team with the hottest player in the nation (he said during his commitment interview that he thought Denard would win the heisman). He later decommitted during the 2-5 tumble.
I think his eventual decommitment had more to do with on-field performance than the coaching change.
Add in his friend Clinton-Dix commiting to Bama along with St. Nick's generous upgrade to Dr. Phillips football facilities when Bama was practicing in Orlando for the Cap One Bowl (still wonder if that is O.K. with the NCAA) and I think it was pretty clear that Hart was going to end up at Bama even if RR had been retained.
(NOTE: There were also rumors that Ricardo was not encouraging Hart to come to AA at the end of Hart's recruitment. Again, just a rumor that I recall seeing on the interwebz.)
There was some talk that he would be playing cornerback (which never made any sense to me). I don't follow the happenings in Tuscaloosa very much, but perhaps the departure of their Heisman winning starting running back had something to do with it.
I've been inclined to think that the defense won't improve that much this year because the personnel isn't going to be that much better. I'm starting to re-think that, though. It's possible that the D was so poorly coached last year and that Mattison is so good that the maxim about "Jimmies and Joes" trumping "Xs and Os" may turn out not to apply too much to Michigan this year.
Look at the situation at Illinois. Turrible one year, then significantly improved the next year. Technique is undeniably important, and frankly, learning how to tackle can only make them better.
Well, I think we're improving or at least staying static at just about every position on defense. Woolfolk will probably be replacing Rogers. Campbell will (for all intents and purposes) be replacing Greg Banks. Carvin Johnson is replacing Vinopal. Demens is sort of replacing Ezeh.
The only position we might be worse at is weakside linebacker (Mouton to Evans/Jones/a freshman), but I think Evans looked pretty good in the spring.
We're not going to be great, but we should be competent.
I've started to apply Murphy's Law to Michigan's defense as a knee-jerk response in the past three years. Part of me thinks that Mike Martin and RVB will be lost at sea before the season starts when an angry sperm whale rams their boat.
Seriously, though, what worries me most about the defense is the safeties. I'm not convinced that Furman and Robison really know how to play those positions.
look to be the starters at FS and SS, respectively
And I think CJ will be much better than Vinopal or Cam were last year. But no question we'll have to expect some mistakes.
My concerns remain, though, b/c of the lack of speed in that pair.
Kovacs is short on speed, but I was impressed with Johnson's pursuit angles, if not his pure speed in the spring game. I don't think he'll be a liability there based on the spring game, but we'll see. Kovacs will always be a liability if he has to chase things down from behind (hint: he won't catch anyone), but he does a good job of staying in front of plays. He can't be your starting safety in an elite defense, but he can in an average one.
The inability of Michigan's safeties in the last half-decade or more to take proper angles has made me swear at the TV roughly 1,000 times.
To WolvinLA: Don't get me wrong, I like Johnson, Kovacs, Furman, and Robinson and hope they have fantastic years. I've just reached and passed that point with Michigan's defense where, in the words of Raoul Duke's attorney, I'm starting to get The Fear.
If only for the reason that they will be compitently coached. They were in terrible positions to make plays over the last couple of years. Add that to the pressure of being young, and you have a recipe for disaster. With better coaching, they will be more confident as a defense and will make drastic improvements.
I stopped factoring that in when I watched Ezeh play 3 years and seemingly make no improvement, when Mouton showed flashes of greatness as a sophomore and seemingly regressed or remained static his last two years. Has Floyd really improved much the last couple of years? For all of the talk about Roh it seemed like he had a better freshman year than sophomore.
Now maybe all of that is because of the lack of/poor coaching but I seem to remember that after '08 and '09, the refrain was the defense can't be any worse...but yet the next year they were worse. I have a lot of hope and faith in the new defensive staff but I'm jaded after the last few years to think that just because a guy is a year older/stronger that means they are going to be better.
Okay, this year the defense can't be any worse.
doesn't change that college players, in general, will still get better.
I would agree that it had become kind of silly to keep bleating out "well, we can only get better next year" when we, in fact, kept getting worse. However, there are four factors which I believe will lead to that statement actually being true this season:
1) UM gave up over 450 yards and 35 points per game in 2010. I honestly believe that they wouldn't get any worse than that even if the old staff were still here (including GERG). Those numbers are so epically awful that the mind simply can't conceive of a worse showing.
2) Fortunately, the old staff ISN'T here any longer and we might actually have competent coaching on the defensive side of the ball for the first time since Carr retired.
3) Last season, UM's defensive secondary consisted of: James Rogers, a career third stringer who bounced from one side of the ball to the other; Courtney Avery, a true frosh who played QB in high school; Cameron Gordon, a 6'3 220 lb Linebacker the staff inexplicably had playing FS; Ray Vinopal, a lightly recruited true frosh and Jordan Kovacs, an unathletic, gritty former walk-on. This was effectively the equivalent of UM's 2008 QB and OL situation. Even the old staff would have been working with better tools in the secondary in 2011.
4) UM's offense will no longer be exectued at the "play like your hair is on fire" pace it was under RR. RR's offenses had a tendancy to either go 3-and-out, turn the ball over or score pretty quickly. I think the new staff will play a slower, more conservative pace on offense at least partially to protect the defense.
I anticipate UM's defense will give up about 24 ppg and about 350 ypg in 2011. Those numbers are still below average for a typical UM squad but will probably be good enough for UM to win 8 games.
Magnus, do you think the change in scheme will help on top of the experience/skill, since the defense will apply more pressure and we will not rush 3 and sit in a zone??
Absolutely. I thought we were better when we ran a 4-man front last year, and our personnel (Craig Roh, in particular) fit a 4-3 better than it did a 3-3-5, anyway. The fact that we rarely blitzed out of the 3-3-5 made it absolutely useless. Greg Banks couldn't get a rush, which meant it was essentially Ryan Van Bergen and a hobble Mike Martin trying to put pressure on an offensive backfield. That was f***ing ridiculous.
I'm not against the 3-3-5 if it's run properly, but it wasn't. Even as a high school staff, we're more aggressive with the 3-3-5 than Michigan was - and we only run a 3-3-5 approximately 5% of the time, if that.
Anyway, yes, I do think that change in scheme - but more importantly, the attitude - will help us going forward. Attacking defenses are almost always better than defenses who sit back and try to react.
I know the offense wasn't playing very well, but it was encouraging that Mattison said that he was told to "call off the dogs". Definately a different vibe in this years Spring Game then last years when our defense couldn't stop the walk-ons.
All I can say is, go back to the article from earlier this year. The writer, (can't remember who it was,) wrote when RR was here the D was used to make the O better, and now it is all about getting back to the fundementals as a whole. To me that speaks volumes to what this staff will do come September. I am excited to see a D that has learned to take the proper pursuit angle, and knows how to open field tackle. This D will be much improved. We have the talent, albeit much of the personnel are undersized for the MANBALL mentality, but they now have experience at the college level. The only missing link was proper coaching.
Needless to say, you could do worse than Phil Steele.
Still ...
"... the Spread won't be there to keep them on the field." Stupid. Priceless.
Phil is also the guy who picked Keith Nichol (2010: http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/_/id/232165/keith-nichol) over Roy Roundtree (2010: http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/_/id/381789/roy-roundtree) for his preseason 2009 All Big Ten team (http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/12638/phil-steele-names-presea…) even after Roy's impressive finish to 2009 and Nichol's underwhelming (to say the least) two catches that year.
I tend to agree with his comment, Michigan's offense in terms of Time of Possession was terrible, we often scored very quick. Michigans defense was on the field a lot of minutes. If ToP is improved this year it will definately help make a difference.
If the defense is worried about playing too much then they need to get 3-and-outs. It's that simple. Don't rely on the offense to have 9-10 minute drives to keep you fresh. If your defense sucks they'll be giving up long drives anyways.
That's true, but so is the flip side--get 3 and out, offense scores quick, you get no rest. Playing defense is incredible tiresome as it is all reaction rather than pre-planned actions. Sustained drives are important, you can't expect to have your defense out there for 40 minutes a game and be able to stop comparatively fresher offensive players.
You could point to anyone who does predictions and find times where they've made mistakes. Brian's done it, I've done it, Phil Steele's done it, the guys on ESPN do it, etc. Pointing out one or two gaffes doesn't really suggest anything majorly wrong about Phil Steele.
and he has probably the best magazine i've seen when it comes to pre-season college football. predictions are meant to be fun, but as you mentioned, everyone makes mistakes on them. fact is, steele puts out a great magazine with more information than one would normally care to even digest.
...that it's JAMPACKED with information.
It really is a great magazine. I just like using that word.
You know Steele and everyone in the media has to be PERFECT just like Message Board Guy always is.
I like this:"Our offense often scored too fast"--uh, sure. Until they met a defense with a pulse.
defenses, then Michigan faced #22 Iowa, #25 Notre Dame, and #26 Illinois. They did fine against those teams, yet they struggled against slightly lesser defenses sometimes. So there goes that argument.
But he doesn't just peddle the obvious, he's knowledegable and draws conclusions. As an example, all of the MSM will say "M learning new Offense, Denard not under Center, Expect Worse". This is on the surface true, but Steele says they'll go right back to the shotgun/spread if it doesn't work. Not many others have voiced that yet.
He's right about ND too. Their D turnaround was remarkable, but there may be reasons for that. They looked so bad against Tulsa, it's difficult to describe. They'll be better, but it's very premature to assume they're "back".
MSU at #28 is also a smart move. Most of the MSM will say "Couzins! Martin! Caper!" and have MSU in the Top 15. Their skill position O is at that level, but they need to find some O-linemen. Their D is replacing a lot, and their luck won't continue this year (they earned the wins in '10, but got help).
Just a few examples of where I think Steele moves it to the next level
D has nowhere to go but up. I doubt that Wisc will run 28 straight times against a Mattison defense & avg 12 yds per carry (BTW - Most brutal UM game I've ever attended)...Just a hunch
If our D can just be average, we have a chance to surprise some people.
Wisconsin will do that to Mattison too. I'm guessing they get 0 carries against us this year.