Michigan 10, Iowa 3
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.]
October 5th, 2019 at 5:22 PM ^
Sometimes I wander into these postgame threads to see just how hyperbolic they can get, and I'll be honest "this is 2013 all over again" is pretty high up there. I challenge you to go back to those games and really give that team a look. That team barely held on against bad Akron and UConn teams but was also was skunked at home by Nebraska.
This isn't a playoff team. It's not even a conference championship contender. But it has potential, and beating a top 15 team is impressive no matter what people want to feel about it.
I also do think Iowa deserves credit for some of UM's offensive struggles. Iowa hasn't given up 100 yards all year and UM was able to clear 130. The passing game is going to struggle all year, but I thought Patterson made some good throws that just were hauled in. And I think UM not going deep was a mistake but also let them avoid negative plays, which kept them out of trouble.
We'll see how they look next weekend. But it's a damn win against a ranked team, and I'm a little sick of people pushing the goalposts back more and more because they want to complain.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:43 PM ^
The expectations for this season were sky high. I’m not looking for a playoff run (at this point I could not care less for the ND game) but I would like the OSU game to mean something other than bragging rights. I think this is a good win and I’m hoping the offense can continue to build. The defense is going to have a game (maybe multiple) where they give up 30+ points. I’m hoping the offense which is loaded with potential gets into gear by then.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:49 PM ^
Absolutely. But I do think the game against OSU will have stakes regardless. And as always, I'd rather by 5-1 than 3-3.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:18 PM ^
PSU will score points on Michigan. I’m going to bet that Gattis calls a much different game in a couple weeks. Will Michigan win? Not sure, but this had every indication of being a “let’s just score enough to win because I don’t think Iowa will score on us”.
Also, we left 6 points on the board with two missed field goals (granted one was 58 yards) and some missed offensive opportunities. The trick play might have been huge, but All tripped, its part of the game.
October 6th, 2019 at 10:14 AM ^
The plan is never to let the game come down to the last possession with your D on the field. So that would make me nervous if it's the case. I'm afraid the D is not as strong as the stats suggest either, what with giving up about 10 conversions on 3rd and long. You're right about PSU dropping points on us
October 5th, 2019 at 5:24 PM ^
I'd like to start by saying I'm happy to get this win. Fuck Iowa. They've been a bitch for years.
The offense...I'll wait until tomorrow to voice my concerns. I'd like to be happy at least for a little bit.
This game felt kind of like the 2002 Utah game (the one time we actually beat them). We came out on fire and jumped out to a 10-0 lead in the first quarter. Then, despite weapons like Edwards, Bellamy, Perry, Jopru and Navarre, we just couldn't get anything going offensively the rest of the day and had to hold on to win 10-7.
I have...concerns. But again, I'll save those for tomorrow. For now, go blue! Fuck Iowa.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:02 PM ^
We have a 9- or 10-win defense, but a 5- or 6-win offense. If we get to 8-4 it'll be an achievement.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:25 PM ^
The greatest thing about a game like this is we won. Iowa is a good team but not the 14th best in the Country.
The defense saved our ass....(still looking at you Don Brown for playing your Cb on the line of scrimmage in man on 3rd and forever from the 3 wtf fuck fuck is that?)
Mistakes cost us a 20 point win.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:27 PM ^
The offense is what it is at this point. It’s bad and won’t improve until the offseason.
I think Gattis either needs to go or JH hires an analyst who can help him create and run an offense.
Also no more transfer QBs.
October 6th, 2019 at 8:09 AM ^
Why no more transfer QBs? 2015 would have been far less fun without Rudock, and I wish OSU had that attitude going into this season.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:31 PM ^
SEMI OT- If a #19 SEC team beat a #14 SEC team 10-3 the Media would be doing cartwheels over yet another 'great SEC dominate defense win."
October 5th, 2019 at 5:38 PM ^
100%. I think I've seen some of those LSU-Florida games that have ended like that
October 5th, 2019 at 5:41 PM ^
FOX Halftime was about more critical of Mich than Iowa,yet Mich was up 7..The World is chock full oh Mich and JH Haters.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:37 PM ^
I'm not usually a guy clammoring for a backup QB, but at this point, what do you have to lose? This team with Shea at the helm is a team that loses 49-3 to OSU in the fall. Shea is a big time liability and at this point there's little reason to expect him to get any better.
Is DCaf worse? Probably? Maybe? But is his ceiling much higher than Shea's? Almost certainly. If you start DCaf now, he may be a better QB than Shea by the game. At this point, that's not that big of a hurdle anyway...
October 5th, 2019 at 5:40 PM ^
I don't know why but I keep thinking the offense will do a turnaround. It may be wishful thinking but, hey, that's a kind of thinking, right?
October 5th, 2019 at 5:42 PM ^
Good summary Ace. Nice to see DB come up with a solid scheme and for our D to execute. We were still being beat on the slants and crossing routes every time. Overall, the D played an A game. O looked abysmal almost the entire game and we continue to beat ourselves on O. Shea still telegraphs, makes poor reads and doesn’t throw well. The couple times he took the RO, he ran for solid yards. Overall, the play calling was erratic. Special teams was unimpressive too. The crowd was into the game this week unlike any other game this season and a win is a win. On to Ill and we need to figure out an O scheme ASAP.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:42 PM ^
Good summary Ace. Nice to see DB come up with a solid scheme and for our D to execute. We were still being beat on the slants and crossing routes every time. Overall, the D played an A game. O looked abysmal almost the entire game and we continue to beat ourselves on O. Shea still telegraphs, makes poor reads and doesn’t throw well. The couple times he took the RO, he ran for solid yards. Overall, the play calling was erratic. Special teams was unimpressive too. The crowd was into the game this week unlike any other game this season and a win is a win. On to Ill and we need to figure out an O scheme ASAP.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:43 PM ^
Woof....that was rough.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:44 PM ^
We owe Pep a huge apology.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:58 PM ^
Still would not want him back.
October 5th, 2019 at 7:09 PM ^
Yeah. I don't owe Pep an apology anymore than I owe Borges an apology. They both stunk. The problem might've been starting over again with an unproven guy.
October 6th, 2019 at 9:10 AM ^
Starting to think going with ex-Alabama offensive assistants might not be best.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:55 PM ^
Michigan has the market cornered in how to make wins feel like losses.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:28 PM ^
The offense was horrific, but it still feels like a win to me.
October 5th, 2019 at 5:58 PM ^
Speed in Space is the most hilariously oversold product I've seen in many years.
It's the New Coke of college football offenses.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:05 PM ^
It's as if New Coke and Crystal Pepsi had an ugly baby.
October 5th, 2019 at 8:04 PM ^
Damn, a Crystal Pepsi reference
October 5th, 2019 at 9:36 PM ^
I never tried new coke however I feel comparing this offense to new coke is an insult to new coke.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:00 PM ^
Limited play calling experience just isn’t a good excuse. Its not damn rocket science! Throwing a fade to bell instead of any other of our WRs? Getting Eubanks “in space” on a 3rd and 17? Taking out Tru when he’s running really well and kicking ass in pass protection? These things don’t require any sort of learning curve. Gattis will not get much better, if at all.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:54 PM ^
I regret that I have but one upvote to give you, sir.
October 5th, 2019 at 8:00 PM ^
Absolutely, if I may take liberty to summarize, real problems with personnel and play management, not to mention clock management.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:04 PM ^
Shea Patterson should be told if the pass isn't there by 2.5-3 seconds after the snap, it ain't going to be there ever. Throw it away or run while protecting the ball from fumble.
And that he needs to run the ball at least twice a game as long as he isn't fumbling.
October 5th, 2019 at 7:12 PM ^
Twice a game?
I'd say an average of twice a quarter.
Iowa did not respect him as a runner today.
October 6th, 2019 at 12:33 AM ^
I wonder if it would help if Michigan's offense practiced with a loud alarm that blares after 3 seconds during a passing or RPO play. If the alarm goes and the QB still hasn't decided what to do with the ball then the play stops and he gets coached on what went wrong. Seems like a simple yet effective method. Spend the whole week of practice doing that shit.
October 6th, 2019 at 9:58 AM ^
That’s a drill to do in pop warner or jv. Shouldn’t have to be working on fundamentals at the D1, B10 level.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:12 PM ^
I will reserve judgement of the offense until later in the week so Al Borges and Sam Webb can help me undertsand the nuances of this advanced offensive scheme.
As for the defense which of these statements are true and which are not true:
If not for the Josh Ross injury Cam McGrone would not see the field.
Michigan football is a meritocracy.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:13 PM ^
The best thing about this game IMO is that after hearing all week about how Iowa’s Oline (especially the tackles) were likely to stonewall and pave the defensive front seven, that emphatically did not happen.
October 5th, 2019 at 7:17 PM ^
They did better than i thought they would, but did you notice how long Stanley usually had in the pocket? A fair bit.
Those sacks and pressures were great, and much needed, but I'd say 1/2 of them were coverage sacks. Thats not a bad thing, but the D-line were not world-beaters on their own.
October 6th, 2019 at 10:21 AM ^
Thought the same thing- that despite the 8 sacks, Stanley had a lot of time, especially in the first half. If we are complaining about Shea not getting rid of the ball, I would think Iowa fans would have been going nuts with Stanley.
October 5th, 2019 at 8:27 PM ^
Actually, I was wondering why Iowa didn't run between the tackles more. We haven't been able to consistently stop ISO, Power, Belly, etc all year. If Iowa plays manball on offense, I think they win.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:26 PM ^
We need a new index on this blog: "For Fuck Sake." It would measure the absurd futility of the offense on a scale of 1 to 10. M00N would rank a 10; this game, probably 8.5 (only saved from 9+ territory by that one pass to Nico).
October 5th, 2019 at 6:28 PM ^
I don't know why the offensive line still can't produce a push needed to salt away a game.
I'd like to see the run game handed over to Warriner.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:33 PM ^
Rule question: There was a play today (3rd and 6?) where the Iowa receiver caught the ball in the air while above the first-down line, but was pushed back and his feet landed when he was about a yard short. But the officials spotted the ball right where he had initially caught it, even though his feet weren't down at the time. I assumed it was spotted wrongly, but they reviewed it and claimed replay confirmed the spot.
Was that really correct? You don't have to get a foot down to establish forward progress? You need a foot down to establish possession, so I don't get how you could have progress established before that.
October 5th, 2019 at 6:47 PM ^
I thought you had to have your foot down.
October 6th, 2019 at 12:36 AM ^
The receivers' own momentum was moving him backwards to catch the ball and I thought the spot in that case is dependent on where his foot comes down. In that case he was at least 1.5 yards short of the marker. Is this wrong?
October 5th, 2019 at 6:49 PM ^
No, you don’t have to have a foot down, although I thought that spot was bad.
if your logic was correct the defense could in theory stop a receiver in the air, carry him back to the end zone, and drop him there for a safety.
Im assuming you know that can’t happen.
October 5th, 2019 at 7:15 PM ^
Some team must try this sometime.
October 7th, 2019 at 2:33 AM ^
But if you push our carry a WR out of bounds before establishing possession in bounds it's incomplete, right?
October 5th, 2019 at 6:45 PM ^
I'll probably enjoy the defensive UFR. I will probably not enjoy the offensive UFR.
October 5th, 2019 at 8:25 PM ^
I feel the opposite. I love having knowledgeable people diagnose the problems. I’m always a little bummed when Brian skips the UFRs after embarrassing losses.
Comments