Season pivot points, After T-Wolf, what was the biggest difference maker?

Submitted by ImSoBlue on

I think that a record of 7-5 generally met expectation for the team this year.  Yet there were games out there that I think would have turned in our favor with a few breaks.

The pivit point I have in mind is when Martin got chopped and injured at the end of the MSU game (curse you Foreman!).  After that, the D could no longer hold the middle of the field and we really struggled.   

I think PSU and Iowa would have been much better games for us.

Mgoscottie

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:27 PM ^

clearly you haven't had a conversation with someone recently about Michigan football, it's extremely frustrating.  Or if you've made the mistake of listening to 97.1 during commercials on your radio on the way home.... 

save_me_forcier

December 23rd, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^

Wow... It's about TEAM progress.

 

This year's team went 7-5 while last years went 5-7... the difference? Purdue was fielding almost all 2nd and 3rd stringers, which gave us one extra win. Illinois didn't have Juice WIlliams, who showed last year vs us that he clearly would have been the difference in a 3OT game.

In other games, we got beaten far worse by Mich St, far worse by Iowa, far worse by OSU, and we got beat about equally bad by a PSU team that was nowhere near the level of last yr's PSU team. 

For the love of God can we stop acting like this team performed oodles better than the 2009 team because they won 2 more games? Look at the actual body of work and how the games actually transpired. And stop pretending it is irrational to think that RR should be fired. Every single person who follows college football closely (aside from maybe some of the ppl on this blog) would laugh in your face if they heard you talk as if firing Rich Rod isn't a decent option. It makes you sound like an idiot.

MyUncle played-4-UM

December 24th, 2010 at 12:07 AM ^

out of turn but I see why you have negative points. Your comment is just stupid and it will not lend it's hand to the masses. The people in here probably feel the same way about your thought processs and how you choose to use it to come up with your analysis. Just saying . Yeah , I know I am low but damn I thought the object was to be positive not negative. You sir are a example of what I choose not to become in this blog, a whiner. So get over it every team has their up's and down's and you are naive to believe that Michigan would not go through a transition period, but like most when the good times roll you will be on the bandwagon. MGoBlog will have first class tickets. Let the good times roll. P.S. I waffle when it looks bad , but I am not a kid anymore who believes that my team will always win, and also understands that their will be better days.Losing builds character.

jmblue

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:19 PM ^

I saw Avery make more plays on the ball in his four starts than Floyd did in his eight.  Maybe at the start of the season Floyd was better, but I don't think that was true by November.  Avery not only is a better athlete, he seems to have better instincts for the position (though he needed some practice playing zone).  Ultimately, I don't think the Floyd injury affected us much at all.  IIRC. Avery was only beaten deep once in the last four games, and it took an absolutely perfect throw from Scheelhaase to do it.

KevbosLastingLessons

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:36 PM ^

You don't need to "get beat deep" to play poorly. I'm not saying that Avery played that poorly, But I saw a dropoff from Floyd's injury, not only in actual play (remember, agree to disagree), but also in the fact that it boosted Talbott to first corner off the bench. It required more play from Cullen and Talbott, who weren't ready. Avery wasn't really ready either, but he certainly showed signs of being a future honorable mention All Big Ten his senior year.

jmblue

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:32 PM ^

Safety play was worse this year.  In fact, over the last month of the season, with Rogers and Avery starting, I thought our CB play was decent.  (For all the grief the guy took on this board, Rogers commanded a lot of respect from opposing QBs - they rarely challenged him downfield.) 

Really, our defensive failures this year went across the board, from the DL to the secondary.  If the front seven had stepped up like we were hoping, our problems in the secondary could have been mitigated.  IMO, the "distinction" of biggest defensive disappointment is a tie between Van Bergen and Roh.  Both came in with a lot of hype and turned out to be non-factors this season.

bighouseinmate

December 23rd, 2010 at 3:09 PM ^

........if Warren and TWolf were our starting corners, the secondary doesn't have to play zone nearly as much. This frees up LB's and even the safeties for blitzes that we couldn't do at all this year. Also, with them, our safeties have less area of responsibility for coverages, meaning they can be freed up to make the plays on the ball instead of having to make sure they are there for the tackles of the opposing WR's.

Having two very good corners frees up the rest of the defense. These kinds of things are all reliant and dependant of one another.

umich1

December 23rd, 2010 at 1:53 PM ^

Here is my flawed rationale:

  1. I enter with the assumption that Michigan was going to lose to Wisconsin and Ohio State this year, regardless of if we had Woolfolk and Martin's ankles.
  2. This reduces the question (for me) to:  What would have the greatest impact on the MSU, Iowa, and PSU games?

I will make a tremendous leap of faith and say if Denard doesn't throw the first interception, Michigan beats Sparty.  If Michigan beats Sparty, they start with a little more fire against Iowa to defend their 6-0 record.  If Michigan has a better start against Iowa, they pull it out in the end.  If Michigan is 7-0 going into PSU, they sure as hell don't lose that one.

This argument is so poor and full of flaws, I don't even know why I'm about to post it.  Fry away.

coastal blue

December 23rd, 2010 at 8:58 PM ^

I remember, either in 1999 or 2000, the Red Wings were playing the Avalanche in the semi-finals. They held a 2-0 series lead and were up 2-0 in game three. Sometime in the second period, with all the momenteum, Yzerman hit the post and Colorado scored on the ensuing rush. They ended up winning that game something like 5-2 and won the next three in the series to finish 4-2. To this day, I maintain that had Yzerman's shot went in, the Red Wings would have swept the series without much fanfare and moved on to the next round. But that one break let the Avalanche of the hook.

I feel like Denard's interception had that same snowball effect on Michigan's offense and in turn, the season. Up until that point, the offense had pretty much moved the ball at will and scored whenever points were needed. All week we had to hear about how this was the first real defense we had faced and that things would be different for Denard and Co. If we had just marched down the field and stuck 7 on them on the first drive, that idea would have been shattered from the beginning. It's definitely an interesting thought.

Then again, maybe Denard throws a touchdown, we go up 7-0 and then lose 52-7 as well as every game the rest of the season. Who really knows.

jg2112

December 23rd, 2010 at 1:53 PM ^

Here's a couple on the negative side:

(1) Denard's first INT v. Michigan State.

(2) The coaching staff's decision to make position switches during the open week, instead of keeping guys in their current places and drilling fundamentals. Cam Gordon would have been fine v. PSU and their lack of a deep threat.

(3) Jeremy Gallon running out of bounds at the 2 on a kickoff return v. PSU. 3 and out, PSU scores before half.

(4) The garbage personal foul call on Fitzgerald in the fourth quarter, on the KO return v. PSU.

(5) Will Hagerup's suspension v. Ohio State (gee, couldn't he have been suspended for the 2011 opener instead?) led to a 18-yard punt and the first TD v. OSU, and then a terrible KO led to a KR-TD.

jmblue

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:47 PM ^

But that wasn't really a bad break - we just weren't good on kickoff coverage.  Anyway, given the way we defended all year, I don't know that Iowa would have been that much worse off if they'd simply had to go an extra 10-20 yards each possession. 

Bodogblog

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:07 PM ^

It gave Cam a head start on his move to a position that probably will be a better fit, but for me it was a real WTF moment. I about shit when I noticed Christian at FS during that game. They barely knew their assignments at the positions they were at, why give them new ones. Bye week was a chance to catch a breath and learn from mistakes

michgoblue

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:19 PM ^

(1) agree - Denard deflated a bit at that point, and by the time he recovered, the game was out of hand.  We score on that drive, the whole game is different.  Our O has confidence and momentum and MSU's D is defeated and left wondering whether they will be able to stop or even contain Denard.  Instead, the opposite happened and they played with swagger.

(2) agree, but this only affected the PSU game.  And, we won the next two.  And, we got slaughterated in the final two, which was going to happen regardless.

(3) agree, but this only affects the PSU game.  Same reason as above.

(4)  agree, but see above.

(5) disagree.  This only impacted the OSU game, so not a "pivot point" for the season.  And, we got killed in that game.  Maybe it would have been a bit closer - maybe - but I don't think that we win that game even with Zolton at punter.

jg2112

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:49 PM ^

The Penn State and Ohio State games are the reason why RR's job security is an issue right now. So, anything that happened during those games are significant "pivot points."

I don't think he'd be dealing with issues right now had he kept the defense the same v. PSU, and won that game. So it is VERY important.

And don't act like things were solved by the follow up victories. Illinois scored 65 points, the defense was largely a sieve and the special teams were an abomination. Come on.

jmblue

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:02 PM ^

Yet there were games out there that I think would have turned in our favor with a few breaks.

We went 4-0 in games decided by single-digits, so I think it was more that we won the tossups and lost the games where we simply weren't as good as the other team. 

I'd say that the biggest break of the season was the tipped ball that Hemingway caught for the game-tying TD in the second OT against Illinois.  That ball was nearly picked off, and even if it had simply fallen incomplete, we'd have been facing 4th and goal from the 8 or so with the game on the line.  A loss there, and all this CC stuff would probably be academic.

BlueDragon

December 23rd, 2010 at 2:11 PM ^

Getting smoked as badly as we did by a goddamn walk-on QB brought flashbacks to Minnesota '08 and I think killed a lot of momentum we had building up for the season.  Probably the best individual performance was Dernard turning into a human flamethrower and breathing new life into the team.  Honorable mention is Tate for sticking it out and being ready to step in for injury or exhaustion.