Nick Saban on Lane Kiffin

The defensive personnel will be based on the offense's personnel, not formation (because they don't know the formation until after the offense lines up). They were trying to keep Utah in their base defense and then spread them out and force LBs to play in space. Most of the time what you'll see is Kerridge or Hayes split out as the widest person in the offense, that's in an attempt to force a CB to cover them within the scheme of the offense, putting LBs on WRs inside. You're trying to waste the defense's best two cover guys on RBs and force the rest of the defense to account for WRs.

On the other hand, when Michigan uses Norfleet or Chesson as an H-back, they are doing the opposite. They are trying to get the defense into a Nickel package and then force DBs to have to play inside the box. I believe it was Joe Gibbs who talked about running OZ at CBs because "our CBs suck at tackling and your CBs probably do too". Note: this was the exact philosophy Wisconsin had againt OSU last year, when they kept trying to have Roby leverage the boundary; it also happens to be why Borges ran TEs to the boundary, to force Dennard to be the force defender, obviously with less success; the difference there was that was an attempt to do it with scheme, while Nuss is attempting to do it with personnel. You force a defense to leverage a play with CBs or have DBs trying to pick through the wash and get off blocks, that's typically a win for the offense.

Part of the issue is that Gardner has failed to identify his hots this year when presented with the opportunity. This 5 wide system requires quick underneath reads (not a strength), accurate throws (not a strength).

Likewise, fewer box defenders makes it a bit easier to identify the pressure or where the pressure is coming from (at least internally, not on the edges necessarily), but it doesn't make it easier to pick up the pressure. You have fewer blockers, the defense has more free space and less wash, therefore, the defense can play quicker as well. From what I've seen this year, Michigan's biggest issues have been on blocking the edge, not the interior. It's hard to say if they are identification issues or technique issues, but most of them are coming from twists picking on Glasgow and Braden. One thing it would allow would be more simplified blocking schemes, like slide protections. But Michigan has busted those this year (and last year) as well, so I dunno.

Waitaminnit.... ARE you all for "protecting the kids" or are you not? The entirity of your post after the introductory sentence made it seem as if you're not that concerned with it.

Just to clarify, I'm going to make a random generalization here and say far fewer than 10% of the players who've represented the University of Michigan on the gridiron over the past 10, 25 or even 50 seasons ever played in the NFL.

Therefore they are most certainly playing for our enjoyment; it's that enjoyment that built the stadium, that paid to add the suites, that pays for the athletic scholarships (and that's not to mention those who PAY to play on the team - Order of Kovacs members).

I normally wouldn't take the time to refute your obviously angry points about student-athlete benefits, but you had to go and begin it with a false statement of your intent, and you had to go and demean the players' motives in suiting up in the Maize & Blue and donning the Winged Helmet.

So...there!

I suspected coaches track these things.  We live in a spreadsheet world.

I almost wish Hoke would come out in a press conference and talk a little bit about the metrics being tracked and the progress being seen. 

That assumes there is progress in the metrics being tracked.  If not ... then ... umm ...