This Week's Obsession: Hawaii Takeaways
[Eric Upchurch]
The question: Biggest takeaway from the Hawaii game?
-----------------------------
The responses:
BiSB:
Goooooo sports team!
-----------------------------
Brian: The thing that leaps out at me is *how diverse Don Brown's defense is*. I've just about thrown my hands up on accurately describing one formation versus another. The safeties seem to line up at any depth from 15 yards to 6(!), which Jabrill Peppers did once...
...on a play where his first steps were backwards and Delano Hill's were forward. Hill is lined up at 11 yards. There were ludicrous splits, plays where both LBs sat between DL in a three-man front, plain old nickel stuff, and a wide array of gray area defenders doing all kinds of stuff. I have no idea what I'm looking at. I gather that's the idea.
Meanwhile Peppers is another monkeywrench on top of everything. I'd say that for a good third to half of his snaps he was functioning as a safety. He was a corner for another chunk, and then there was some linebackery. Michigan's nickel package is the same as its 4-3, and Peppers can do damn near anything in the back seven from play to play. I'm fascinated to see how Michigan deploys their safety trio this year, but it's 50/50 if I'll ever be able to figure anything out.
-----------------------------
David: if he can fool you, 90% of B10 coaching has no chance, right?
Kirk Ferentz can guarantee himself nearly his full 10 year salary by winning 7 games a year each of the next five. https://t.co/taoAyyuq3y
— Stewart Mandel (@slmandel) September 6, 2016
Nevermind. They're boned.
[Hit THE JUMP for takes that will melt your cool heart with a fresh island song.]
-----------------------------
David: So, the thing that kept running through my mind in the second half was the sheer volume of true freshman that kept seeing the field. Going into this season, I think that most people speculated that there would/should be more rookies to see some playing -for various reasons- than in quite some time. Normally, I am a red-shirt promoter. However, watching the game on Saturday, my tune might be slightly changing.
Looking at this recruiting class (and what next year's is shaping up to be...not to mention even farther down the road), there are just a lot of dudes that can straight-up play, right now. Its probably one of the better ready-now classes that I can remember. I just got to thinking that in order to even get a lot of these guys into the class, playing time pretty much has to be on the table. In addition to that, we're starting to see more and more guys who just may not be here for 4-5 years, anyway. In those cases, a redshirt seems like a waste of a year. Then, assuming a somewhat similar class is following...the cycle repeats itself. What you're generally going to end up with are slightly younger fellows with higher potential playing instead of slightly older gentlemen with lower ceilings playing. And if those young dudes are headed to the NFL...sign me up.
Now, I'm not going as far as to say that I'm not in favor of redshirting at all, obviously. But...with the recruiting trending up and the player development the highest that I can remember...Michigan is in great position to keep putting its best talent on the field and not always worrying about what will happen in 3-4 years. Not to mention grad transfer rules, crazy Harbaugh washouts, etc This is a brand new era that we're starting to see unfold.
-----------------------------
Seth: That life is fleeting and can be taken away from you any moment even if you're washing the dishes or playing football against Pacific islanders. The game was already in hand, but the point of a tuneup game is to get your players tuned up, and somewhere between "it's 35-0" and "we're not at the halfway point yet" it was reasonable enough to still have the first team playing. Then they started dropping liek flies.
Watching Taco get rolled was a sobering moment, as was seeing Mone limp off earlier. Until then I was rooting for a negative yardage half and other superfluous carnage. After Taco, I was terrified every time a Warrior took a shot at Peppers, and retroactively furious for the one they gave him on the first punt. But I also appreciated Matt Godin way more. He had 26 snaps on Saturday at 3tech, one fewer than Wormley. With Hurst and Mone out, Godin is now nominally the top backup at tackle. They can also have Godin take some snaps at DE when Winovich and Gary need a rest (Gary can play either end position apparently). As long as Godin is available, Michigan doesn't have to rush anybody back the next two weeks. A week ago I thought it a minor tragedy that a guy like Godin would wind up buried by this historic depth chart; now more than ever we're going to be glad to have him
-----------------------------
Adam: My biggest takeaway is that the inside linebacker's athleticism is as advertised. Harbaugh talked up that particular aspect of their game over the past couple of weeks, and though he doesn't usually compliment without reason it's always worth watching what happens on field to see whether that's faint presser praise drawn out by a specific line of questioning or something that the coaches are seeing in practice. By about the second quarter it was clear that the praise was deserved. Mike McCray in particular looks a guy whose sliders were set to Don Brown's liking in create-a-player mode; thanks to Seth, I think we'll be muttering "stay healthy stay healthy oof contact alright yes no yes whew" under our collective breaths whenever he's on the field.
-----------------------------
Ace: That Chris Evans is a viable, perhaps game-changing running back is perhaps not the most shocking answer, nor one that takes a great deal of #analysis, but the fact that he was the third-string RB in the first place speaks a lot to Harbaugh’s flexibility—even when a player doesn’t fit a Harbaugh archetype, he’ll play so long as he can contribute. I assumed Harbaugh would be more rigid when I watched Evans play in high school last year:
Evans probably isn't the type of running back Jim Harbaugh wants—he's not a pile-mover between the tackles—but give him the ball in space and he'll make things happen. I'd like to see more of him catching the ball downfield, but from what I saw he looked good in that regard, and his ability to turn nothing into something should serve him well in the slot.
I deeply regret that now. Evans displayed the vision and instincts that will allow him to take advantage of his athletic talents even when the competition level takes a big step up. His ability to make defenders miss in tight spaces does a lot to make up for his lack of size. I’m particularly upset I didn’t see this coming considering Evans turned this…
…into a touchdown in the game I covered of his. He made a spectacular first impression, and I’d be very surprised if it turns out to be an anomaly.
-----------------------------
BiSB: Dammit, Ace beat me.
Ace: The Greatest Mid-February Weekend In The History Of Mid-February Weekends trained me well for such a scenario.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^
In addition to that, we're starting to see more and more guys who just may not be here for 4-5 years, anyway. In those cases, a redshirt seems like a waste of a year.
I recall Urban Meyer saying something along those lines either at Florida, or shortly after he came to Ohio State.
The key point being -- if they're good enough to leave after 2 or 3 years, they're likely good enough to play early. And if the roster is stocked with lots of those guys, then play 'em. If there's confidence in recruiting and keeping the cupboard full, why not?
September 7th, 2016 at 12:22 PM ^
The only real wrong answer here is if the redshirt policy, development time and recruiting approach are at odds, and that doesn't seem to be the case here. If you think it takes your players 3-4 years to develop and will be there that long, burning the redshirt wastes a year to play someone who isn't ready. If you think your players could be out in 3 years because they're that good, the redshirt is setting a year on fire. It looks like Harbaugh has realized he can RECRUIT.
FWIW, Harbaugh doesn't play you if you're not ready. It's extremely telling that he redshirted Shane Morris. It was conspicuous because he publicly said Morris was the #2 QB last year but trotted out Speight against Minnesota.
The Hoke years were kind of the worst of both worlds, because they couldn't develop players and often didn't have true freshmen playing meaningful snaps anyway. Some redshirts got legitimately burned out of need, but others were wasted on making special teams a glorified reserve unit.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:20 AM ^
I thought the FB play was great. I was expecting a drop off from last year with Poggi's IDing issues and Hill not playing the position before, but they both did well. Hill in particular impressed with a bunch of thumping blocks.
On the not so good side of things. I saw Butt and Bunting get absolutely blown up a lot. That's pretty alarming against the level of competition.
Not much to say on the defensive side, they looked every bit the part.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:35 AM ^
"On the not so good side of things. I saw Butt and Bunting get absolutely blown up a lot. That's pretty alarming against the level of competition. "
The three things that concerned me:
1) Butt and Bunting get absolutely blown up a lot.
2) Our LBs (including Peppers) look really poor in off coverage. As an offense, I'm going with 3-4 wides all the time, and running slants/quick outs/drags/digs with slot receivers going right at the linebackers. Peppers looks ok in press, but when he's playing off on a slot ninja - they seem to get easily open.
3) Speight arm strength. Look noticeably worse than Rudock. He's accurate and made smart decisions, but I'm afraid WR screens where the CB isn't 10 yards off will be dangerous... and out routes are even worse... and deep outs I'd pull right out of the playbook.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:41 AM ^
September 7th, 2016 at 1:55 PM ^
September 7th, 2016 at 2:07 PM ^
I agree. He also has a more compact motion than Rudock, probably because he doesn't need to use as much arm to get the ball there.
September 7th, 2016 at 3:08 PM ^
I think it was the blind biased Play by Play announcer ripping on Speight from the get go criticizing all of his completed passes that may have given some a bias of thinking his arm looked weak.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:42 AM ^
The quick slants were having their way for a bit, but Hill's pick-six was an answer. We'll have things figured out by Big Ten season.
I'm also not sold on Speight's arm strength, especially compared to the laser that O'Korn threw to McDoom.
September 7th, 2016 at 1:05 PM ^
play, but more for the catch by McDoom. That slant throw was a bullet and the catch pure NFL calibre. Seeing a freshman with hands like that in his first game is very exciting for the future.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:51 AM ^
I'm not too worried about the LBs in coverage. Peppers got shook on a great route/play design where the stacked WRs formation created the space and the WR ran a great route to take advantage of Peppers's momentum as he tried to close that initial space. McCray is never going to be a great matchup there, but that's the nature of the position and I think he's in the 90th percentile as far as athleticism at LB.
Teams are always going to be able to dink and dunk a bit. That's basically the only response you have against a DL like ours. The problem is it's really hard to make a living that way. You have to have perfect execution and string together a lot of good throws to get down the field. Sooner or later, you're going to screw up and get behind the sticks, or worse.
I don't think it's a coincidence Michigan had 2 pick 6s and another interception that was called back on quick throws. If you force QBs to predetermine where the ball is going based on pre-snap reads, then you can have some fun baiting bad throws, especially if pressure is in his face.
September 7th, 2016 at 2:09 PM ^
Great comment. Thanks.
September 7th, 2016 at 12:08 PM ^
Part of that could be first game nerves. By time O'Korn and Morris got in the game, they could play free and easy and let it all out. Let's see what happens in a couple weeks. But for now, his debut seemed to be way better than Rudock's and we know how well that turned out.
September 7th, 2016 at 12:22 PM ^
throwing motion just looks so much more seemless and natural. O'Korn must make some really bad decisions or have difficullty reading defenses because judging based on how they look throwing the ball I can't see Speight over O'Korn. I will be interested to see how that develops.
September 7th, 2016 at 12:51 PM ^
I'm convinced it is because O'Korn plays with more variance. Harbaugh probably realizes the defense he has and just wants consistency from the QB spot. Basically the philosophy is let the defense win you the football game and use the offense to protect the defense. If our defense wasn't so strong O'Korn would probably start because I think he probably gives you the best chance to win with the offense.
September 7th, 2016 at 1:27 PM ^
O'Korn's throwing motion and arm strength looked superior to Speight. I guess Speight is the safer choice as far as decision making goes.
September 7th, 2016 at 1:37 PM ^
but judging a QB by his throwing motion is just plain stupid. QB is a results-oriented job. How the QB LOOKS while throwing the ball is 100% irrelevant.
Harbaugh has said in the past that he could not care less about textbook throwing motions. All he cares about is the results of the pass.
September 7th, 2016 at 1:55 PM ^
Agreed, if we judged QBs on throwing motion then Phillip Rivers wouldn't be in the NFL
September 7th, 2016 at 2:35 PM ^
One real dart he threw was right on target for about a 20 yard gain. Seemed to have a bit more touch too. Overall, Shane looked improved as well even though it was in mop up time. All 3 QB's looked to have taken the competition seriously.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:43 AM ^
I also saw Bunting block dudes into the other half of the field, so it could be inconsistency rather than inability. Wheatley and Asiasi are both spheres of doom, too.
September 7th, 2016 at 1:17 PM ^
- I took a look back at that first drive, when Hawaii was stuffing our running plays, and it looked like for each stuffed play either Butt or Bunting had gotten beat. Something to be concerned about.
September 7th, 2016 at 1:39 PM ^
Yup, and on the first TFL, they both got whipped. Not great, Bob.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:21 AM ^
That looks like a case study in Ferentz hiring a sharp lawyer who is a good negotiator, and Iowa saving money by negotiating that in-house. While universities often engage outside counsel for high-profile matters, employment agreements tend to stay in-house since that's an area of general expertise.
In any event, it looks like Ferentz did very well in his negotiations. Convincing Iowa that there's a red-hot market for Ferentzes (even after last year's great results) and consequently they need to double down on Ferentz can't be that easy.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:25 AM ^
The most ridiculous part is that he could go 7-6 for the next 5 years and be gaurenteed a 100% buyout value until 2026. That's fucking crazy.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:37 AM ^
Michigan seems to promote meritocracy.
Iowa seems to promote mediocrity.
September 7th, 2016 at 1:53 PM ^
So, when it comes to mediocrity, there's that.
September 7th, 2016 at 2:22 PM ^
sabotaged our program on his way out. At least, according to Bacon.
September 7th, 2016 at 3:25 PM ^
But instead, we got the Rich Rod years. So there was that.
September 7th, 2016 at 12:39 PM ^
I think Ferentz's pitch is probably "Hey, you can generally expect 7 to 9 wins from me every year with high and low fliers here and there. Look what happened when Nebraska fired Bo Pelini. I'm the best you can get"
Which may or may not be true, but I wonder if Iowa isn't content with 7-9 wins per year instead of taking a shot with a new name and risking cratering the whole enterprise
September 7th, 2016 at 1:39 PM ^
Ferentz = Carr - 2
September 7th, 2016 at 1:56 PM ^
September 7th, 2016 at 11:23 AM ^
Maybe it was just me, but during Evan's recruitment when he was pegged as a slot or DB, I kept thinking 'why doesn't he get a shot a plain 'ol RB'. I think the size think is overrated, just like Brian thinks speed is overrated. He won't run over someone, but with his running instincts, burst, he can make up for that by following blocks and slipping through cracks a back like Deveon can't. Just like Hyde was awesome in Meyer's system, and McCaffery is awesome in Stanford's, any system can use any runner if the back and coaches are good enough to make it work.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:38 AM ^
Denard didn't truck many defenders and didn't weight a ton. He ran ok.
September 7th, 2016 at 3:30 PM ^
And I'm sure Evans can too. There were penty of times Denard moved some piles after contact. Evans does have similar run instincts to Denard though. Both were patient runners, who ran behind blockers before using their speed to accelerate through the hole.
He'd be the first Michigan back in a while that will force opposing players to take those crazy angles to try to catch him. He's going to be hard to keep off the field, which is great, because I really like Deveon Smith as our back.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:39 AM ^
September 7th, 2016 at 11:50 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 7th, 2016 at 12:11 PM ^
I don't think he was ever perfectly healthy against OSU.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:55 AM ^
That makes sense but are they really taking the same amount of abuse? To some degree a smaller guy who can juke and move may take more off angle or glancing blows where a guy like Smith who just tries to run through people seems to take a lot more heavy, direct hits. Injuries often seem to just be some odd hit or twist anyway. I wonder if their durability is really that different outside of the random bad event?
September 7th, 2016 at 11:56 AM ^
September 7th, 2016 at 12:11 PM ^
September 7th, 2016 at 1:44 PM ^
Or at least believe all kinds of stupid things that are "conventional wisdom", like punting on 4th and 2 from your opponents 38 yard line is a good idea.
Football coaches don't tend to be the most enlightened folks. Luckily we have Jim Harbaugh, who is not like most football coaches.
September 7th, 2016 at 12:47 PM ^
Certainly not comparing Evans to Barry Sanders, but Barry credited his mostly good health to never allowing tacklers to get good angles on him. Given that, Barry was thicker than Evans, too, but until he adds a little more muscle, his elusiveness will serve him well as goes his health.
September 7th, 2016 at 1:58 PM ^
September 7th, 2016 at 8:09 PM ^
Barry's thighs...try to picture them in your mind. Now open your eyes...do you really think Evans has anything to do with Barry. Barry was a MACHINE
September 7th, 2016 at 1:39 PM ^
Mike Hart was a small guy and he was very rarely hurt.
Vincent Smith was a really small guy and he was never hurt.
The whole "small guys get hurt more" theory is WAY WAY overblown.
September 7th, 2016 at 2:32 PM ^
September 7th, 2016 at 12:42 PM ^
After two consecutive coaching regimes of "system" guys who seemed completely inflexible -- I'm looking at you, Nick Sheridan, inverted veer specialist, and Denard Robinson, pocket passer -- it's refreshing to have a coach who fits Bum Phillips's line (4th paragraph): Harbaugh "can take his'n and beat your'n, or he can take your'n and beat his'n."
Harbaugh has succeeded with a variety of players running a number of different styles, by coaching to their strengths instead of to a system. I'm very glad he's here.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:38 AM ^
I need more content.
I'm useless at work today. So tired.
September 7th, 2016 at 11:53 AM ^
September 7th, 2016 at 11:50 AM ^
I'm a little bit curious to see the UFR on Peppers in coverage. I feel like they went after him with some success. And on a couple throws, he just got flat-out beat.
Do you think it's a change in focus? Am I just full of it?
Comments