When is the last time we had a truly dominating defense?

Submitted by Marley Nowell on
I don't count 2006 because O$U and USC combined for 942 YDS

jmblue

July 18th, 2009 at 2:58 PM ^

2006 should have been a dominating defense, considering all the future NFL talent on it. I just think we gameplanned really crappily for those last two games.

jmblue

July 18th, 2009 at 3:05 PM ^

I don't think that was it. The D actually played very well in the first half of the SC game (it was 3-3 at the half). But then SC made its adjustments (in particular, rolling the pocket to buy Booty more time) and we were helpless. Booty always rolled to the same side of the field, but it never seemed to occur to us to send more pressure from that side.

jg2112

July 18th, 2009 at 5:07 PM ^

That's a hell of an opinion to hold. They had their hearts in it enough to hold SC to 3-3 at halftime, but then they "didn't go the extra mile" in the second half and lost? I prefer the more rational and non-insulting answer: SC adjusted and Ron English didn't adjust to the roll-outs in the second half. I'm going to go with that instead of impugning the desire of Woodley, Burgess, Harris, Adams, Trent, Branch, et al to play hard, especially since you're insulting them over something you could never prove.

nucegin60

July 19th, 2009 at 2:43 AM ^

I agree that we lost that game because we couldnt make adjustments, but I felt the defense in the second half of the rose bowl was just bad because they were on the field too long and got tired, which happened because the offense couldnt make the adjustments, i.e. they couldnt run the ball because sc was stacking the box, and the passing game wasnt working because henne wasnt making the right calls on hot routes and such that you need to when a team stacks the box and brings the house. The roll outs thing might have been a factor, but i personally feel that the amount the defense was on the field was the bigger reason they stunk it up the second half.

Medic

July 19th, 2009 at 2:02 AM ^

I don't buy that at all. USC has been torching everyone who sets foot in the Rose Bowl since Carroll arrived. I've always felt the kids came to play and they looked damn good on D in the first half of that 2006 Rose Bowl game against USC (They gave up 3 points in the first half remember?). Halftime comes. Pete Carroll does what Carr and DeBord never do and made adjustments. BLAMMO they drop 29 second half points on us. All coaching imo.

MichiganMan_24_

July 18th, 2009 at 3:06 PM ^

I felt like in 2006 it was dominant ... but against osu we just had a crappy gameplan in the 1st half ... and the 2nd half we did much better ... and against USC our offense did not move the ball well which made it tough on the D because your not going to hold their offense all day and the D couldnt get a breather

ndhillon

July 18th, 2009 at 8:18 PM ^

The 2006 secondary was complete garbage...if we're talking in terms of 'best of the best ever'. USC's WR's torched the hell out of us in the 2nd half. tOSU spread that secondary out and all we could do was give 4-5 yard cushions and Smith just threw quick darts all day long. Shawn Crable was in that backfield like crazy...I would go as far as to say we had a better pass rush that game than Florida did in the NC game. Our secondary couldn't press to save their lives though.

ndhillon

July 18th, 2009 at 8:35 PM ^

how often could he trust his safety help? Leon Hall is great...the secondary as a whole (2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th CBs and all the safeties)...against the best of the best...didn't hold up. What makes it so tough is...imagine if we closed in on Rolle or King or any other of the half dozen DB's we were so close to getting the previous 2-3 years. But I know, let it go....

jmblue

July 19th, 2009 at 12:41 AM ^

Given that we basically never played press coverage that season (or really, any season after Woodson left), it's tough to tell whether or not the 2006 DBs were capable of it. What we do know is that the soft zone coverage didn't work out too well in that game. Smith continually found open receivers before our rush could get there.

AZBlue

July 18th, 2009 at 5:16 PM ^

My freshman year - those boys were awesome. If Bo had let Harbaugh throw the ball in that Iowa game (#1 vs #2 - we lost 9-7 iirc) - it would have been a NC year. This - by the way - was the year after our previous "worst year in recent memory" of 6-6...........I'm just saying....

Rico616

July 18th, 2009 at 3:28 PM ^

Have to agree w/ 1997...aleast for my somewhat young recent memory. The 97 defense was shutting everyone down led by the best cornerback in UofM history...Charles Woodson!

Tater

July 18th, 2009 at 3:44 PM ^

Not only do I agree with 1997, but I wonder if it is possible to even have a dominant defense anymore. The proliferation of the spread seems to have temporarily shifted the balance of power to the offensive side of the ball. I think defenses will adjust, but I also think the game has permanently evolved to a point where the definition of "dominant defense" is about to undergo a great change. It's sorta like the way defenses suffered when everyone started passing and "three yards and a cloud of dust" became obsolete; teams started scoring more points. The spread is having a similar effect on the game. Much like the days of 10-7 games are pretty much gone, the days of 17-14 games are fading into the distance, too.

jrt336

July 18th, 2009 at 4:27 PM ^

Football is always evolving. Otherwise, offenses could never score because the defense would know what they were doing. There was a time in football when they never even passed.

Blue boy johnson

July 18th, 2009 at 4:38 PM ^

After the 06 Ohio State game I thought Carr did a poor job preparing the team for the Rose Bowl and the 07 season for that matter. It really ticked me off that the 06 team after losing to OSU talked about winning the NC in 07. Damn, how about winning a Rose bowl, or a Big Ten Title, or beating OSU, before you make grandiose plans for a NC.

nmwolverine

July 18th, 2009 at 5:54 PM ^

1997- the year defense was fun to watch. good even in the Rose Bowl despite WSU's 5 receiver sets and a coach who knew that quick throws are needed to attack blitzes and speed. 2006 - the defensive line was superior to 1997, but the strength of the 1997 team was the secondary and the linebacker speed (Jones, Gold). Our 2006 secondary did not perform against OSU and USC. I invite others to explain that. 2006 Rose Bowl really pissed me off. The mistakes of the offense (inability to run, inability to avoid the pass rush by rollouts and short passing) were the same errors made in 2003 Rose Bowl against same team. This performance said Carr would not learn. This is when, for me, the plane crashed.

wlvrine

July 18th, 2009 at 8:40 PM ^

Yeah, it was a shame to see Pete Carrol dust off the same blitz packages he used in 2003 and use them to beat us again in 2006. I blame Michigans lack of adjustment on arrogance. It seemed like Carr was determined to impose his will on the USC defense. A three step drop would have helped to...oh forget it. Now I'm pissed all over again.

AMazinBlue

July 18th, 2009 at 10:30 PM ^

I just finished watching the 1997 tosu game and Glen Steele was an animal. At 290 he was all over the field, catching running backs from the opposite side of the field, making sacks and causing all sorts of mayhem in the middle. That team had Woodson (obviously), Steele, Hall, Dhani Jones, Ian Gold, I really miss the defenses we had that were so stingy and relentless. I can't wait for our next great defensive team.

pasadenablue

July 19th, 2009 at 4:37 AM ^

dont forget sam sword, marcus ray, rob renes, and josh williams. if im not mistaken, they were all nfl players or picks. actually, all but ray spent time with the colts. josh williams was a cool dude. i played football when he visited my middle school on a mentoring trip. he'd been drafted 2 days before (3rd round) and had his colts hat on.

UMFootballCrazy

July 19th, 2009 at 9:13 PM ^

1997 -- there was a stretch leading up to the tOSU game where no one scored more than a field goal on us in the second half of games. Over and over and over again that season I kept thinking to myself, "This is how you play defense!" We have had good defenses since, but nothing like '97

aarchambeau90

July 21st, 2009 at 11:27 AM ^

I'm surprised nobody mentioned the 2003 defense. It compares very favorably to the 2006 defense. Rushing Defense: 22 (#1 in 2006) Pass Efficiency Defense: 9 (#25 in 2006) Pass Defense: 15 (#89 in 2006) Total Defense: 11 (#10 in 2006) Scoring Defense: 11 (#15 in 2006)