Cam McGrone danced through Iowa's backfield all afternoon [Bryan Fuller]

Michigan 10, Iowa 3 Comment Count

Ace October 5th, 2019 at 4:26 PM

It's a win.

Let's start there. Savor it. Michigan beat a ranked team. They even covered the spread.

You'd like more details? Well, that's unfortunate.

This was ¡El Assico! 2: This Time in Blue. Neither team cracked 270 yards of total offense. Of the game's 26 real drives, there were:

  • 15 punts
  • four interceptions
  • a lost fumble
  • two made field goals
  • two missed field goals
  • a single, solitary touchdown
  • Iowa's eight-play, 12-yard drive to end the game.

The defense, obviously, emerged as the game's heroes. The Hawkeyes, a team that still utilizes a fullback, mustered only three yards per non-sack carry. That's an important distinction to make, as Don Brown's group hounded Nate Stanley for eight sacks that, by the NCAA's tally, took Iowa's rushing output from 66 yards down to one. Kwity Paye (2.5 sacks), Jordan Glasgow (2), and Cam McGrone (1.5) were frequent uninvited guests in Iowa's backfield, and Khaleke Hudson sealed the win with a blitz that forced a desperation left-handed throw from Stanley on fourth down—Daxton Hill chased down the receiver near the line of scrimmage.

The touchdown. [Fuller]

After a rocky start for both teams, Michigan briefly looked poised for a blowout. Aidan Hutchinson handed the offense a quick field goal drive with a forced fumble, and after another defensive stop, Josh Gattis opened things up a bit. Shea Patterson hit Nico Collins down the middle for 51 yards to open the drive and picked up another first down with a crisp throw to Mike Sainristil to set up a short Zach Charbonnet touchdown. At the end of the first quarter, the Wolverines held a 10-0 lead and 101-57 edge in total yardage.

Then the game got trapped in the proverbial muck. Both quarterbacks were erratic; Stanley tossed three interceptions after going 140 attempts without one, while Patterson averaged 3.8 yards per attempt outside of the Collins bomb. Neither team could establish a reliable running game. The wind was the game's most impactful player for large swaths of the second half.

You can choose your favorite moment of absurdity, from Iowa calling a timeout to set up a fade to Oliver Martin, to Gattis dialing up a direct snap to Charbonnet from a covered receiver formation, to Kirk Ferentz taking an intentional delay of game before a 28-yard punt fair caught at the 14, to Stanley throwing a perfect fly route to Lavert Hill, to Donovan Peoples-Jones eating a nine-yard loss on a botched trick play, to Michigan unintentionally taking a delay of game before a punt that netted 25 yards, to Iowa punting from their own 49 on a drive that had reached the Michigan 25, to Stanley's final yakety-sax throw that looked for a moment like it might inconceivably work out. That probably doesn't cover all of it but I can't take responsibility for the damage that game did to my brain.

Ultimately, Michigan's defensive aptitude prevailed, or Iowa's offensive ineptitude lost out, or however you'd like to interpret that game, which we're all glad is over.

[Hit THE JUMP for the box score, if you dare.]

Comments

Eng1980

October 5th, 2019 at 7:33 PM ^

What play in what game makes you think that Patterson is capable of doing anything other than single read and throw a rocket?  I saw one RPO against PSU that was well executed.  Are all the open receivers that Patterson didn't throw to the fault of Harbaugh, Gattis, or Shea?

I just hope they can work together and figure it out.  If they just get better each game . . .

Murder Wolv

October 5th, 2019 at 10:54 PM ^

In that case, I put the blame partly on Gattis. If Gattis knows that the QB cannot progress through multiple reads, then he has to design the plays differently. For example, can the QB do a single read + do a check down? Check downs aren't exciting, but they are better than an incomplete or a pick. If Gattis hasn't figured that out yet about the QB, then it's even more on Gattis.

Michigan's coaches are very bad at a) working around the weaknesses of their players and b) targeting the weaknesses of their opponents.

Hail to the Vi…

October 6th, 2019 at 12:11 AM ^

If Gattis knows that the QB cannot progress through multiple reads, then he needs to take that QB out of the game and put in someone else. That is, and should be the expectation to be a starting QB at a school like Michigan. It is everywhere else for teams that recruit at the same level. 

Maybe Shea figures it out at some point, but right now he isn't getting it done.

outsidethebox

October 6th, 2019 at 6:43 AM ^

Well, here is where I believe it gets rather complicated. I don't think who plays the QB position in the game is a call that Gattis gets to make. 

I have been a staunch supporter of Harbaugh and continue to appreciate many things he brings to Michigan football. However, he remains a constant in many of the on-field offensive issues that have persisted. He knows what he knows and believes what he believes...and at age 66 I rather/too fully understand his position-though it appears he may be more stubborn than I...that would be a shame :) Does he know what his limitations are???

Murder Wolv

October 6th, 2019 at 8:02 AM ^

Yes, Harbaugh is the constant (at least in this administration). And, I recall that Harbaugh's earlier offenses were so complicated that it was very difficult for quarterbacks to learn the system (for example, there were two play calls every time - one run and one pass that the QB had to decide on at the line). That has disappeared. He has been more open to change than I would have expected, but that doesn't mean that your point is invalid :-)

Murder Wolv

October 6th, 2019 at 8:00 AM ^

True, but there are two other things to consider:

1) perhaps none of the other quarterbacks are better (or have some other critical flaw) (and McCaffrey is injured)

2) Perhaps they can make reads, but the offense has some other complexity that they cannot grasp that impairs their ability to move through progressions.

Either way, simplification of the quarterbacks' job is essential, which is why I put the responsibility / blame at the coaches' feet.

gruden

October 5th, 2019 at 7:19 PM ^

Yeah, that assumption really needs to go away.

I get it, in non-conference play against cupcakes there's no reason to go beyond vanilla.  But when you're playing a ranked, in-conference opponent, they need to throw in the kitchen sink to win each game.  A shot at the conference title is literally on the line each game.  Saving something for OSU accomplishes nothing if your team loses a couple games before that because you limited the playbook.

I think people keep conflating holding back plays with wrinkles.  You might take a formation and do something different than you have before to surprise an opponent, but that's something the team practices and learns as the season progresses.  You want that on film to surprise opponents.  M pays good money for offensive coaches to come up with stuff like that, I'm not sure it's getting its money's worth at this point.

ahw1982

October 7th, 2019 at 11:43 AM ^

You are obviously completely oblivious to the legendary stratagems of Hayden Fox, the former Coach at Minnesota State, who once won the Pineapple Bowl by pretending his star quarterback was injured and in a wheelchair for 58 minutes of the game, only to unleash him in the final 2 minutes to win the game.

username

October 7th, 2019 at 10:18 AM ^

I genuinely wish this was true, but name the big game (MSU, PSU, OSU, bowl game) where we've come out with unique twists, counters to what we previously shown, new plays we haven't seen before.  It sounds awesome on paper, but history doesn't support this theory.

I think the offense is particularly frustrating this year because we heard all about the wide open play that was about to come and we thought it fit the capabilities of our key players.  However, what we have seen is an offense that doesn't seem to have any identity.  I have no idea if it's play calling, poor QB play, poor OL play, or some combination of all three.

At least in prior years, we knew Harbaugh was going to run fullback, 2/3 TEs, manball. Expectations have a lot to do with perception.

SHub'68

October 5th, 2019 at 11:12 PM ^

I watched late on DVR and I think it is way worse that way. You see, I can fast forward through the muck to get quickly from play to play. So what really happened is I went really quickly from one "WTF are they doing?" to another. With no time to process, it just becomes one giant "WTF ARE THEY DOING?!?"

mgob-rad

October 5th, 2019 at 4:36 PM ^

The offense showed huge problems in the Army game, none of them have been fixed. None of them probably will be fixed. Regressing from ~ top 30 in SP+ last year to not even being in the top 60 this year is absolutely mind boggling. 

Don Brown should receive credit for a great performance and mixing in a ton of zone today. But this offense can’t compete for a big ten title. 

 

UMmasotta

October 5th, 2019 at 5:05 PM ^

I think of Gattis like a first-year manager in a normal job - it's a totally different skillset that what was required in the previous role, and it takes time to develop. It's unfortunate the timing of that transition lines up with the wealth of talent on the Michigan roster right now. However, I'm willing to give him the chance to learn and develop. We can blame Harbaugh for not having a better solution, but I also think he's earned a chance to help develop Gattis over the season and offseason. Gattis may still develop into a capable OC (even if not this season).

Glennsta

October 5th, 2019 at 6:29 PM ^

I'm sorry but there's no way on God's Green Earth that Gattis should be "learning and developing" at play-calling at this level, at a program that has been recruiting pretty much top ten talent.  When do you foresee that he will be done learning and developing sufficiently that we can contend for a Big Ten title?  2 years from now when we get OSU at home again?

I don't want to wait.  With this level of talent, we should be winning now. I'm tired of watching this program wasting talent. 

JFW

October 5th, 2019 at 6:41 PM ^

You’re out of touch with this fan base. It loves to set up borderline, or sometimes totally unreasonable expectations given past history and then lose it’s crap when things don’t pan out. 

People were vociferously complaining about a much better offense last year. And when Gattis came in the expectations were sky high and the doubts minimized because finally we had gotten a “modern” offense. And those never fail!

unfortunately the transition costs were higher than we wanted and Gattis may not be the play caller we hoped. 

We might get more consistency if Harbaugh did start taking more of a role. Gattis might develop. He might not. 

At this point though I want to just do the best we can and build with this offense. If Gattis doesn’t work out let’s find someone with as close a philosophy as possible so we can keep building with some consistency. 

 

gruden

October 5th, 2019 at 7:29 PM ^

I was hoping Gattis would do the exact same thing he saw Moorehead do at PSU, which was to routinely have McSorely throw arm-punts to receivers.  It may be a 50-50 proposition, but that 50% would put us way further ahead of where we're at now. 

jabberwock

October 5th, 2019 at 6:50 PM ^

You know, Head Coaches change, entire coaching staffs change at times.

Including the style of offense or defense they are most familiar with.

There isn't always a "transition cost".  

The good teams with good coaches improve quickly, the bad ones use excuses like transition cost.

gruden

October 5th, 2019 at 7:39 PM ^

Tressel -> Meyer, totally different offensive philosophy, and OSU steamrolled everyone his first year.  Transition costs are not mandatory payments. 

This offense is supposedly tailored for the talents of Patterson, yet he looks lost every game.  We have an OL coach who has coached in this type of scheme before with OL that are talented and experienced, yet it doesn't show very much. 

Meanwhile, on the other side of the ball, you see a bunch of guys replacing players who left for the NFL, and you can actually see progress.  They are getting better and the coaches are using some creativity to get results.  That's real transition costs, replacing talented players with new ones and getting them up to speed.  That not the case with the offense, that's something else.  Maybe Harbaugh should give Meyer a call and ask him how he did it.

 

JFW

October 5th, 2019 at 8:52 PM ^

They don’t do wholesale scheme changes without transition costs. That’s not an excuse. Saying it is is like a Manager changing a key software package and yelling at his employees because they aren’t learning it fast enough. The excuses mantra is just sloppy thinking of the kind that had teams on coaching carousels because the “next great coach who just wins” is right around the corner. 

Sometimes you get lucky, and get a Tressel. Most times you get got.

We need consistency and to build on this offense. The spread isn’t my cup of tea. But it can work and we should stick with it. But Gattis may not be our guy, and the players need time to adjust because they clearly aren’t getting it in many ways.