Monday Presser 9-8-14: Doug Nussmeier Comment Count

Adam Schnepp

Nuss

Can you talk about some of the positives you took away after watching the film?

“Well, you know, I think when you look at the football game and you say, ‘Okay, what were the things that we can take out of this game?’ I thought we were prepare to play. I talked to our guys about [how] the preparation was right. We were prepared. You look at the first drive, we move the ball down the field the first two drives and unfortunately were unable to convert but the preparation was right. We’ve talked a lot about what we’re doing to prepare for games and right now we’ve just got to play smarter, we’ve got to play more disciplined and we’ve got to execute better.”

What does this offense need to do to regain the consistency and solidity it had against Appalachian State and what did Notre Dame do to break down what you built up in the season opener?

“Well, I wouldn’t say that anything got broke down. The same thing I talked about a week ago; we’re still in the infancy stages. We’re still learning to play consistently and I’ll continue to hit on that because, like I said before, we play well in stretches and it showed in that game. You could see where we’d get movement, we’d create things, we’d move the ball and then we’d lack that consistency and that’s going to be a growth process and it’s something that we work every day in practice on and we continue to talk about it’s about eleven guys on every play doing the right thing. You just can’t play, when you play a quality opponent like Notre Dame- if it’s ten guys doing the right thing and one guy doing the wrong thing you’re doomed so we’ve got to get eleven guys on every play doing the right thing.”

Can you talk about what you’ve seen out of Devin Funchess in the first couple of games, but beyond that the production you’re expecting from those other guys when Devin gets the attention that he inevitably will.

“Sure. Devin’s done an outstanding job. I talked about that before. We moved him around and his ability to process the information, to move into the slot, to move back out by himself, then to have the tight end with him, that’s a lot of information. People don’t realize how difficult that is and that should tell you a little bit about his mental makeup and the other side of Devin Funchess, not just the athletic side that you see. He’s done an outstanding job with that.

“That being said, you could see in the game that there are other guys on this team that can make plays. Dennis Norfleet did a nice job for us, made some plays for us. Amara Darboh, Jehu Chesson. We’re still looking at some young guys to stand up and develop. Freddy Canteen, we’re trying to get Freddy going a little bit so we’re trying to not only let Devin do what Devin does but also develop that corps around him.”

[After THE JUMP: generating explosive plays, evaluating the offense’s progress, and a bunch of Devin Gardner questions]

Doug, when you go back and look at game film with Devin Gardner what’s the message to him and what are the teaching points there? What did you say to Devin, especially when things were going wrong?

“Well, the biggest thing is when you get in a game like that, and obviously the flow of the game never got where we wanted it, we never got the consistency and the flow. We’d get some good things started but then we’d have something that would set us back to get us behind the sticks, and we spent a lot of time talking to the whole offense about that. When you play a quality opponent you can’t play from behind the sticks. You’ve got to stay on schedule and when we got hurt was when we got behind the sticks.

“Devin obviously did some things that neither of us really wanted but that happens. It’s all about the process of learning, going through reads, going through progressions, what did you see, where do your eyes and feet need to be and he’s growing. We’re growing together. It’s the second game I’ve been with him. There’s things I need to do better, for sure.”

Were you concerned that Devin became frustrated when you didn’t get any points out of the first two drives and then as the game went on seemed to become more and more frustrated?

“I wouldn’t say concerned. I think that’s always something with a quarterback playing in that type of game when things don’t go the way you like them to. Like I said, we had a hard time establishing the offensive tempo that we wanted to establish. We couldn’t do that and therefore, the quarterback- you get behind the sticks, you get put in third and long situations and obviously we didn’t play as well as we needed to play on third downs. You put pressure on a quarterback and allow teams to blitz you and do the things they’re going to do when you get behind the chains. That’s not advantageous.”

Some of the pass pro[tection] problems- were those assignment issues or part of the growth you’re talking about?

“Well, we saw a lot of different blitzes. They did a nice job. They had a nice blitz package and I thought our guys really, we talked about it after the game, from an assignment standpoint did a really, really nice job. What you see is what you think is maybe a guy turning a guy loose. Well, that may be a shift where it’s this dangerous one or that dangerous one and he picked one or the other. Now, maybe we’d like him to pick the closest guy to the quarterback but as far as mental errors and busts there were not that many. We had a couple that we’ve got to get cleaned up but for the most part, as far as assignment-wise, it was pretty darn good. We need to be more stout, the quarterback has to be more decisive and part of that is you get into third-and-long in a game like that it makes it difficult. You’re on the road, it’s loud, you’re seeing lots of blitzes so that’s something that we can control through the process of first and second down and what we’re doing there.”

Two part question: first, against Notre Dame being your Michigan debut against a major opponent if you could reverse your role how would you grade your performance looking through the eyes of Michigan fans?

“Not very good. Obviously when you don’t score and you’re the offensive coordinator it’s not good. It’s been a lot of reflection. What could we have done differently and what should we have done differently. Obviously, we take big ownership in this and when you don’t score points it falls on everybody and you start with the offensive coordinator.”

Second part: it looked like a swing kind of over Dennis Norfleet’s head. It looked like a big play. He’s a guy who when he touches the ball can potentially score a touchdown. Are you excited about what you’re going to be able to do? Do you plan on working him more into the offense?

“Well, like I talked about we feel like we’ve got multiple guys that can do things and when you look back at the game what’s one of the things we didn’t do well, that I didn’t do well? We didn’t create enough explosive plays, plays that are a twelve yard run or a sixteen yard pass. We only had five explosives so it averaged out to about one every thirteen plays, something like that. That’s not good enough for us. When you can’t generate big plays that makes it difficult. That means you have to sustain long drives and that’s one of the things that we have to look at and how do we develop ways to get our guys in situations where they can create explosive plays.”

MGoQuestion: How would you evaluate the offense’s pre-snap communication on Saturday?

“I thought it was excellent.”

MGoWellAtLeastWeHaveThatGoingForUs

You mentioned Devin still growing. I think a lot of people have trouble embracing that because he’s a fifth year senior. What about Devin is still growing and why isn’t he more of a finished product at this point?

“Well, he’s in a new system. Second game in a new system.”

Did you ever think about Shane {Morris] at all in that game?

“I thought Shane had a great week of practice. And Shane has done an outstanding job. Said it before, we feel very comfortable with Shane playing. The way the game unfolded and the way the game played out, felt like it was the best thing to leave Devin in the game.”

You mentioned earlier that your offense was in the infancy stage right now. When do you expect that to progress? What’s the timeline there?

“I don’t think there is a timeline. We’ll go as fast as we can. You look at the big picture of things and you’re early in the season, you’re in week two and you go on the road and play a quality opponent and you find out a lot about yourself and you can some of the procedural things that we’ve got to clean up. We had the false start penalties within drives, and that’s what I talk about getting behind the sticks and those kind of things. Those are things we have to clean up.

“One of the other things we did, we went back and we looked at plays from the game and plays that we ran that were either the same exact play that we ran in one stage of the game that was successful and when we came back why wasn’t it successful the second time or what did we do differently or maybe it didn’t work the first time but it worked the second time because we executed properly. A lot of it is we’re running plays that our players, this is their second live game doing it. And we played a quality opponent.”

You talked about your need for explosive plays and your tight end Jake Butt is working his way back in and he’s one of those kind of players. Talk about where his ceiling is and what he brings when he’s fully ready to go.

“Jake, obviously, he gives you a dimension in the pass game. When you can get a tight end that can vertically stretch the field it helps the passing game tremendously. He’s coming off the ACL so obviously as he continues to get healthier and healthier we’ll continue  to implement him in our system.”

Comments

maizenbluenc

September 9th, 2014 at 11:43 AM ^

than the defense, and this presser adds to that.

All those people asking why he didn't throw it deep: at least in the second half he didn't have time - the pressure didn't allow him to wait - or at least it appeared that way to me.

Yeah there were some egregious plays (like the pull down fumble), but it appeared the line was more cohesively functional than last year. So hopefully that will grow and improve.

There were a few long yardage plays where I was asking why call a run on that play, but in general we put yards on the ground, but then we got bogged down as we approached the red zone. Time will tell.

The defense is what concerns me. Hopefully Mattison got more than softballs - specifically about the disconnect from his unbridled optimism about how great this defense would be, versus the reality of the result on the field Saturday.

dragonchild

September 9th, 2014 at 11:55 AM ^

I know this game was a disaster but I saw the beginnings of a long-term plan.  A sound one, worth waiting for.  I understand Borges did his best to get the team wins but it just wasn't sustainable over a season, let alone long-term.  This one is more like a blue-chip stock -- it grows sloooowly, even regresses, while other stocks are jumping (up AND down) like grasshoppers so most people lose patience with it, but those who stick with it get better consistency and eventually better returns.

Borges asked for patience that I personally feel wasn't a reasonable request for what he was doing.  Patience doesn't really apply for a scheme-of-the-week approach.  Nuss really does need patience because eventually those 1-2 yard runs with the occasional negative will become 4-5 yard runs with the occasional big play, but it'll take several years to get there as the O-line develops technique to handle every sort of front, play, angle and move in existence.  The challenge is comparable to learning a foreign language.  The difference is, those techniques actually exist within IZ and its constraints.

If Michigan bails on this plan now it'll be the dumbest thing for the program in the last twenty years -- yes, even dumber than hanging on to Carr too long or firing RRod.  I've only seen two games but I can see what Nuss is doing here and for the first time in a decade it's sustainable.  Unfortunately it's just going to look awful for at least half a season; he may run out of time and there's nothing we can do about it.

bighouse22

September 9th, 2014 at 12:17 PM ^

This is where the leadership question by the Head Coach comes into question.  I too prefer the build something approach, that was the approach that RR had as well.  Rather than wait several years to implement his system, he implemented it immediately with the belief he would have time to see it develop.  We had an AD and fanbase that weren't willing to allow that to happen.

My problem now is why is Hoke just now taking a build something approach, when this should have happened 4 years ago.   Brady has lost the benefit of time at this point.  The other problem I have is if Nuss starts having success he will likely leave for a HC position.  Do we then have to go through the same reboot with a new OC or does this now become Hoke's system.  

This is where I struggle with the CEO head coach model.  He doesn't own the system for either side of the ball.  Also, why does a HC that was never a coordinator and had a sub .500 career coaching record get multiple reboots and the benefit of time without having a history to justify that trust, but a HC (RR) with a proven track record is broomed out the door.  The math doesn't work for me!

 

dragonchild

September 9th, 2014 at 12:32 PM ^

"why does a HC that was never a coordinator and had a sub .500 career coaching record get multiple reboots and the benefit of time without having a history to justify that trust, but a HC (RR) with a proven track record is broomed out the door."

BECAUSE PEOPLE LEARN FROM THEIR MISTAKES GODDAMMIT.

Seriously, enough with this already.  RichRod's time was mishandled but absolutely nothing can be done about this now.  By this logic we should fire every single HC after three years just to be fair to RichRod.

funkywolve

September 9th, 2014 at 12:49 PM ^

I understand what you're saying, but they (Hoke and Borges) were kind of in a weird spot.  They wanted to run a pro style type offense but their best weapon was Denard who really wasn't designed to be a pro style QB.  Heck, there was tons of complaining on this blog that the coaches weren't utilizing Denard properly cause at times they were trying to implement some features of a pro style offense.

UMForLife

September 9th, 2014 at 10:47 AM ^

I agree with that explanation. It seems that he is still evaluating and the playbook is not fully open yet. If I buy into some of his remarks, this is not over. If he can dig out of this hole, I will not be surprised if he is offered a big job soon. A good challenge for him and let us what he has got.

funkywolve

September 9th, 2014 at 11:07 AM ^

It's almost a catch 22.  If your offense isn't consistent, it's going to be pretty hard to string together drives of 8, 10, 12 plays.  At some point the inconsistency is going to pop up and quite possibly kill the dirve - especially against better teams.  Being able to pick up 20, 30+ yds in one play can be a huge boost.  I'm not saying either OC is right or wrong.  It's trying to walk that fine line of getting the offense consistent, but at the same time knowing they aren't there yet and still being able to move the ball 60, 70 or 80 yds for points.

Space Coyote

September 9th, 2014 at 10:52 AM ^

First off, Nuss isn't a huge 3-step drop guy regardless, from what I've seen. He runs his screens and he has some built in hots, but other than that it's mostly 5/7 step drops. 

Second, and this isn't something I can't confirm completely because I don't have All-22 of the game, but whenever I looked for it or whenever I could see it given the TV angles, ND was playing a 6-yard off man coverage with help over the top. They were jumping everything underneath. They played the box straight because they believed the box could stop the run alone. They were correct. That means they can jump screens (which is why Michigan went away from it) but the slip also doesn't necessarily work because there is safety help over the top, almost always likely rotated over Funchess.

Lastly, what Dragon said above me about Nuss trying to avoid negative plays (sacks) that Borges had his head lapped off for. Nuss isn't big on max protections (Borges wasn't nominally either actually, but Nuss even less so), and without that, it's fairly difficult to trust this OL at this stage not to break down before a 7-step route structure can be completed.

Again, I couldn't see All-22 on the TV, but Michigan likely had to run more 5/7-step drop routes to get open, whereas 3-step routes could be jumped underneath or with help over the top. Unfortunately, Michigan's OL likely still isn't to the point it needs to be to run a lot of longer routes to attack deep.

 

Reader71

September 9th, 2014 at 10:58 AM ^

Well, thats the dumb thing about last year's "execution" meme. Execution is the most important thing in football. It might be the only thing. Every coach is obsessed with execution. Coaching is, in the most practical terms, the ability to get your players to execute as you want them to.

People don't want to hear it. But if a guy starts and plays every snap for 4 years, he gets about 3500 in game snaps. He will have taken at least 4 times that many snaps in practice in an effort to execute well in those 3500 snaps.

bstaub32

September 9th, 2014 at 9:51 AM ^

I think part of the frustration with the responses from the coaches, are the open-ended softballs they get tossed. Tough to get any real substance or answers from questions like those.

aiglick

September 9th, 2014 at 10:40 AM ^

Let's say we go 8-4 or 9-3 this year which probably is the upside unless the team massively improves from Saturday. How well do you think they should do next year? Year 5 in the Hoke regime. He has not won a Big Ten conference championship and yes the Big Ten absolutely stinks. We haven't been particularly close to even winning our division.

Are you finally going to be realistic instead of constantly taking these coaches' side?

For the record, I agree that this was Game 2 for Nuss so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Borges got three years after all so Nuss should get at least two. Now the defense we were promised big things and that was not a great performance. This is Year 4 for Mattision and I'm starting to think that in 2011 the fact that the same players were a year older played a huge part in that unit's improvement.

Again, I want our team to be successful and to get out of football purgatory but unfortunately Michigan football over the last seven years has turned me into more of a realist than an optimist.

reshp1

September 9th, 2014 at 11:00 AM ^

I expected 8-4 or 9-3 before the season even started, and we're unfortunately right on track for that. I think next year we should be challenging for the B1G and be competitive in all games. I'm not always on the coaches' side, I just love Michigan Football and have a view that coaching changes are a lot more of a big deal than people think. Always having your own coach on the hotseat unless he meets some pre-determined win-loss metric is silly, IMO.

Take the Nuss thing, for example. Replacing Al Borges with Alabama's OC was the slam dunkiest of slam dunks. But even that isn't without problems and set backs. This team is once again learning a new system. It's not just the youth now, even the veterans start back at square one in terms of scheme, communication system, etc. We also lost a great recruit in the process and Al wasn't even really involved in recruiting. What do you think a HC change is going to do?

I said this in another comment, but even if we replace Hoke right now, the next guy is only going to have until the first bad loss before his honeymoon is over and that's when being not-Brady-Hoke isn't going to be good enough, just like how ND was when Nussmeier being not-Al-Borges wasn't good enough. There's so much pent up frustration in the fanbase right now that it's down right toxic. I just don't want to see us continue down this spiral of chasing the next great hope that began when Lloyd Carr retired.

(also, I should point out, at no point in the post you responded to did I mention the coaches. I'm going to the game to support the team).

Reader71

September 9th, 2014 at 12:15 PM ^

Reshp1 can correct me if im wrong, but I don't think this is about Hoke at all. Fire him today if you want.

Just know what challengest the new coach is going to have. Like I said last year, Borges can go, but the new guy will have to deal with a young line who has shown very little ability to run any one thing right. Lo and behold, Nuss is struggling with that today.

There is no quick fix in football. We thought we had one in 2011. How did that work out?

reshp1

September 9th, 2014 at 12:20 PM ^

As I said, it's not just about looking at when to make a change, you have to balance it with the disruption that the said change creates.

Well, at a minimum, we don't do it after 1 bad game, 2 games into the season after you already made a huge change in what everyone thought was the biggest problem last year (Borges). Beyond just the sake of fairness to Nussmeier, it's pretty silly not to at least let that part play out enough to get some real data.

Beyond that, provided that this year doesn't spiral out of control, I'd like to see what we look like next year when there aren't obvious personnel issues on the OL for the first time since 2011.

So I guess the answer is "Show progress this year, be competitive for the B1G next year." After that, he's had more than a fair shake.

aiglick

September 9th, 2014 at 12:51 PM ^

Well based on your last paragraph it looks like we're largely in agreement. However, this year I think we need at least eight wins for Hoke to feel totally safe. If we go 7-6 again this year then all bets are off. That's not fulfilling the show improvement condition you keep mentioning.

There's almost no way we can go 7-6 while showing improvement since, again, we don't have the strongest non-conference schedule and the Big Ten is really down this year even more so than the past six years.

reshp1

September 9th, 2014 at 1:18 PM ^

I still hate the idea of evaluating things on just a win-loss number, but yes, I realize that the ND game was a game changer and raised the bar this staff needs to clear considerably. I do still think how we win and lose matter though. 8-4 or even 7-5 is better than 9-3 and two more blow-outs at the hands of our rivals, and probably none of those situations clear the new bar unless we beat one of MSU or OSU.

uncleFred

September 10th, 2014 at 12:14 AM ^

but the ND game was not a "game changer". Not even close. We'll never know but I'd bet that if we played ND in game four instead of game two the results would be very different. I'm not saying that it would be a win, but I think the offense would have been more effective in maintaining their drives and points would have been scored. Further I suspect, and again no one can ever know, had we played Minnesota in game two instead of ND there is a very good chance that Michigan might well have lost that game. Perhaps they'd have scored or won but it would not have been pretty.

Borges as much as he's vilified here tried to scheme around the teams weaknesses. He had some success but obviously not enough. Nussmeier (and Hoke) have decided to bite the bullet and take their lumps while building an offense. This is the result. ND was an exceptionally ugly loss where our defense got consistently beaten on the margins when it mattered and our offense sputtered when it mattered. Was it painful? Hell yes! But it is not a "game changer".

People, generally not you specifically, complain about this being Hoke's 4th year. Well for the first two years he and his OC put off building the offense they wanted to create to take advantage of the players they had, including perhaps the best running QB in 3 (maybe more?) decades. After what happened to RichRod it was pretty clear that losing seasons weren't going to be tolerated during the transition, and as much as people are berating Hoke he's yet to have a losing season, something that RichRod had during his first two years here. I do not mean that as a cheap shot at our former head coach, I'm just stating a fact. Head coaches at Michigan don't get to have losing seasons. At least not many and not early in their careers here. 

So here we are in "year four" dealing with the 3rd new offense in four seasons. Hoke avoided losing seasons, but to do that his team has had revolving offenses. Sadly this team is almost exactly where we should expect. The shutout was because they caught a couple of bad breaks even had they those breaks gone in their favor,  ND was the better team last Saturday and would have won. 

Someone earlier said that our team has 'no hope" of beating MSU. So very very sad and completely untrue. The team that played last Saturday, barring divine intervention, had no hope of beating MSU, but the Michigan team that will meet MSU on October 25th may well have a solid "hope" of beating MSU. We won't know that for weeks.

As I understand it, Hoke's contract runs to 2016. Barring a LOSING season this year he'll be here in 2015. Nussmeier gets at least two years to prove his offense can turn things around and Hoke will be here for those two years. Barring the greatest football coach on the planet (you can decide who you think that is) applying for Hoke's job in January, absolutely nothing else will prevent Hoke being here another year. The ND game, in and of itself, doesn't change it.

Hoke may not be the guy to turn this around. We won't know for a while yet, but he is NOT in over his head. He is not "a deer caught in the headlights". He is not lost nor clueless. Mattison is not pass his prime or unable to deal with a "21st century game" and Nussmeier is not unable to make adjustments. Hoke has a vision that he wants to build here. He's assembled a staff of exceptional professionals who share that vision. Maybe they'll succeed. Maybe they'll fail. Time will tell, but none of us know that three days after this season's 2nd game. 

Everyone Murders

September 9th, 2014 at 10:48 AM ^

We have had two games, and one admittedly went poorly.  But we still have a talented group of players, coaches who are working to get them at their best, and the greatest traditions in college football.

Oh, and we're gonna pants Miami (NTM).  They are running into a buzzsaw on Saturday, and it will be good for you (and your kids) to see that sort of energy.

We have a slate of winnable games coming up, and (for once, it seems) an off-week before heading up to MSU.  There is a ton of excitement left in this season, and once the ND hangover wears off you'll be glad you came to the games.

Everyone Murders

September 9th, 2014 at 12:06 PM ^

First, I know that you were positing your original "question" in jest.  Some folks on the board are loaded for bear and lost their sense of humor sometime late Saturday night.  They'll find it - don't worry.

But I'm truly optimistic that it's not just a Dumb and Dumber chance.  Michigan has a real chance to have a great year.  Look at the tire fire year that we all thought MSU was headed for last year, but they figured out a way to not just salvage a rough start but do well.  Put Peppers on the field, give the OL some time to gel against a relatively easy schedule, give the offense in general some time to absorb Nussmeier's system, give the DBs some time to work on improving their press coverage (i.e., do a better job of disrupting WRs' timing and routes), and we could have a very successful season.

And if you're buying your Miami (NTM) tickets on StubHub after Saturday's performance and it's still costing you a week's pay?  Well, you might want to look for a better job!

swalburn

September 9th, 2014 at 9:54 AM ^

I know I'm going to get negged to oblivion, but I am still very optimistic about the season.  I remember how good we looked last year against Notre Dame and then the misery that followed for 3 months.  I remember watching MSU against Notre Dame last year thinking MSU was a giant turd and we would crush them.  Sometimes, you play a bad game early in the season.  It was our second game with a new offensive coordinator.  Granted, the game on Saturday made me physically ill but I think we turn it around.  I genuinely believe we will run the ball a lot better this year as we get a feel for the system.  Golson and ND are pretty damn good.  The Big Ten is pretty awful.  There is no reason we can't do a lot of damage in the conference this season.  What I want to see is us progress and get better as the year goes on instead of peaking the 2nd week in September and then showing no improvement like last season.  

True Blue Grit

September 9th, 2014 at 10:28 AM ^

the rest of the season is if Nussmeier can somehow straighten out Devin Gardner so he doesn't keep falling apart in big games (or even semi-big games for that matter).  The rest of our season depends on it.  The defense will come around I think.  The OL is definitely better than last year and protection wasn't completely awful.  But Devin G seems to do best if he can start out good and then fall into a rhythm of some sort.  He has done that in the past and we usually do well when he does.  Last year's ND and OSU games are good examples.  The reason we lost the latter was our defense couldn't stop Ohio's running game at all.  But Saturday's game is a good example of how he had a poor start, got very frustrated and flustered, and couldn't recover from it.  He then starts forcing things and making bad decisions.  That one play where he runs all over trying to find an open receiver, fails, then decides to run too late and fumbles the ball away was just ridiculous.  5th year seniors should NOT be making plays like that.  He either needs to run earlier when he had an open field, throw the ball away, or make a pass play (believe Chesson was open on that one). 

We'll see in the next few weeks if Coach Nuss can work some magic with Devin.  I really hope so.

CompleteLunacy

September 9th, 2014 at 10:53 AM ^

 

Even in a shutout, there were bright spots that indicate Nuss is trying to put DG in positions to succed. You said "Devin G seems to do best if he can start out good and then fall into a rhythm of some sort."

To my eye, that's exactly what Nuss was trying to do early on. And it was at least partially working...those first two drives should have ended in points (in hindsight, I wish they would have gone for it on that 4th and 2 on the first drive). It wasn't until the last drive before the half ended that Devin started unraveling, with the weird fumble play that I think had more to do with Devin awkwardly hanging onto the ball than Miller getting owned by a bullrush. After that, Devin was never the same, and the OL steadily got worse as they grew tired. But it at least seems like Nuss was trying to get his offense to be successful earlier. I think had those first two drives ended in at least 6 points total, the game might have ended up looking much different. It definitely felt weird watching live...like, it never felt like Michigan was out of the game in the frist half, competetively, and yet the scoreboard read 21-0 at halftime. 

 

Blue In NC

September 9th, 2014 at 1:17 PM ^

Sorry, not buying the "DG doesn't perform in big games" statement.  Look at OSU and ND last year which were his best games.  I think what you mean is DG is not performing at a consistently high level.  Or maybe not performing well in big road games.  I would agree with those but the sample size on the latter is not very large.

gwkrlghl

September 9th, 2014 at 12:20 PM ^

That blowout loss didn't feel like the blowout losses of the RR era. We felt generally ok on offense - it wasn't 19 yards in a half ala 2008 Wisconsin. We felt generally ok on D - held their RBs in and forced Golson into a lot of 3rd down passing situations....which he seemed to convert every single time.

It's strange but sometimes good teams will lay an egg early but settle in and recover. Michigan teams in recent years have done the opposite - start hot and do nothing down the stretch. I still look at the depth chart and schedule and see 9+ wins. I think the Utah game will tell if ND was a fluke or a harbinger of things to come

reshp1

September 9th, 2014 at 10:14 AM ^

Seriously, 2 games. The man has called 2 games and so many people have already turned on him. The same thing is going to happened if/when we fire Hoke. The new guy rides a wave of euphoria in because he's not Hoke, just like Nuss did because he's not Borges, but when they inevitably run into the same problems and struggle, people are going to turn on them in an instant.

bstaub32

September 9th, 2014 at 10:09 AM ^

The talk of getting rid of the coaching staff is ridiculous. Why? So the guy who comes in next year returns 18 starters (OSU and MSU at home) and goes 11-1 (with Brady's guys), sounds familiar right?

dragonchild

September 9th, 2014 at 10:27 AM ^

When Borges talked of execution, it rang hollow because they repped nothing with enough consistency for execution to be a valid excuse.  Execution is the one thing you DON'T get with a Cheesecake Factory offense.  If I ever hear Borges talk of "execution" again I'll stab my eardrums with a rusty screwdriver, but with a constraint-oriented offense, execution actually matters.

This is the opposite of a gimmick offense.  It's not dead in the water as soon as it's on tape, but it probably has very few trick plays as almost all the time is dedicated to repping the base.  Experience, and by extension execution, is the difference between laughable and unstoppable.  This is what we wanted, but IZ + inexperience means it's easy for an opposing DC to play it straight and force the offense to rely on consistency it just doesn't have.  I think Kelly got outlandishly lucky in how effective that was, but basically we said, "We're an IZ-based West Coast offense!" and ND countered with "show me".

This time, execution matters.  That doesn't exonerate the OC but don't confuse Borges' lip service with a fundamental requirement of playing inside zone.

Reader71

September 9th, 2014 at 11:14 AM ^

You keep insinuating that "execution" was an excuse for Borges. I suggest that this construction is just a product of your emotional response to Gorgeous. There is no difference at all in the way Borges and Nuss used execution, nor is there a difference between the way any coach uses it, unless he comes straight out and says, "I teach these guys perfectly, I call all the right plays, and the players are at fault because they don't execute." That will never happen.

The nature of football coaches is that they are obsessed with execution. The day to day operation of a football program is focused on nothing but execution. This is so obvious that I cannot understand where any possible misunderstanding can come from.

You have a great X and O coach. He needs his players to execute his scheme. You have a coach who runs IZ exclusively. He needs his players to be able to execute the play against any front in any situation. You have an army of S&C coaches, whose sole purpose is to get the guys strong and fast enough to execute their duties on the field. You have nutritionists who make sure the guys get optimal intake so as to be able to train to the fullest of their ability and thus be able to execute.

There are hundreds of reps in a single practice. Every one of them is broken down, player by player, step by step, punch by punch, refining technique, explaining the players immediate role and how it fits into the play at large, explaining why IZ is meant to look a certain way so that OZ screws with LB keys, etc etc etc.

This is all the players and coaches think about. Unfortunately for us, it all falls under the umbrella of execution. Execution is the most important thing in the world. It is the differnce between winning 31-0 and losing 31-0. We turned it over, they didn't. We were bad at executing on third down, they were good. We didn't defend well in the red zone, they tightened up a lot after midfield. 

Come on man. Try to empathize. Put yourself in the coaches shoes. The paragraphs above basically encompass their whole existence. Forgive them for focusing on execution. Don't disrespect them to the extent that you project your emotions onto their supposed motivations for answering a presser a certain way. Be a human being, not just an angry football fan. Be an angry football fan that tries to use reason and not just emotion.

No one on the board or in the Michigan fanbase or inside Schembechler Hall are happy. We get the advantage of raging and shit. The guys in the building have to look at everything objectively, get back to work, and execute.

AFWolverine

September 9th, 2014 at 10:11 AM ^

Is that picture of Nuss from the actual presser? If so (since it doesn't say "file" underneath), his face looks precisely like mine did when I turned the game off in the 3rd quarter. I just don't get why this team keep reverting to bad habits. There's only 1 reason, IMO, that would cause that, and it starts at the top. I sincerely hope Hoke spent the rest of his weekend taking a good hard look at what he's shoe-horning his coaches into. I just don't see any other source for the crapshows we keep seeing. It starts at the top, and Hoke needs to own up and have a change in mentality.