The only other serious option is Jesse Minter, but it's not clear he has the same HC disposition that Sherrone does. If we can keep the same defensive scheme with Zach Orr or someone like that, I think Moore will hit this out of the park. Plus, he already satisfies the #1 job requirement: owning real estate in Ryan Day's head and the rest of that awful fanbase. They're already calling Sherrone, "3rd base Moore." But, does anyone recall Sherrone claiming he hit a triple? Beating OSU without your head coach is only like a double, right? (Cackles with glee).
Put this in another thread already, but I think he always saw this as a 2-3 year gig tops! After the 2015 bowl win, he told the team, "Next year, we go for the big one (i.e. National Championship). Refs screwed him in Columbus in 2016, then 2017 happened. Couldn't leave at that point. The problem was it took him 3 more years to realize Don Brown's scheme couldn't cover Ryan Day's offense. After 2021, Jim said he felt the program was in "good shape" (as in, "I think it's time to leave"), but then the Vikings left him at the alter.
Just be thankful that one of the best NFL head coaches out there loved his alma mater enough to take an extended sabbatical away from his real job for a while. That's all this ever was. He's been "passing the torch" to his replacement all year.
I think he always saw this as a 2-3 year gig tops! After the 2015 bowl win, he told the team, "Next year, we go for the big one (i.e. National Championship). Refs screwed him in Columbus in 2016, then 2017 happened. Couldn't leave at that point. The problem was it took him 3 more years after that to realize Don Brown's scheme couldn't cover Ryan Day's offense. After 2021, Jim said he felt the program was in "good shape" (as in, "I think it's time to leave now"), but then the Vikings left him at the alter.
Just be thankful that one of the best NFL head coaches out there loved his alma mater enough to take an extended sabbatical away from his real job for a while. That's all this ever was. He's been "passing on the torch" to his replacement all year.
I hear you on the play calling concerns. I guess a question I have has to do with the extant to which JH still has influence on in-game play calls? I was never a huge fan of JH's play calling when he used to have the co-coordinators suggest plays to him before he signaled it in himself.
Nowadays, it does seem like Jim's handed the play-calling keys over to Moore for the most part, but I still wonder if he isn't interjecting with some regularity. I have liked the way Moore has implemented some interesting pass-game concepts like, for example, the WR motioning at full speed to a free release behind another WR right at the snap (a Miami Dolphins staple). I doubt that came from Harbaugh. Anyway, I wonder if Moore wouldn't be an even better play caller all on his own.
I think the concern has been that if we prioritize Moore over Minter, we'd lose Minter to wherever Jim goes. I'm saying that even if we lose Minter in the Moore scenario, we'd likely keep that quality of DC and that scheme simply because John (Ravens) and Jim (Chargers or Eagles or whoever) would keep us well supplied.
No, I expect that. That's why I said the Ravens-->Michigan DC pipeline would remain "open" with Sherrone. Harbaugh will take Minter, but do you think John and Jim will turn a deaf ear to Sherrone if he wants an NFL level DC? I think not.
Except that Moore already proved his chops by beating Ohio State and Third Base. Who else out there is 1-0 against OSU? And this comparing Sherrone Moore to Brady Hoke is about the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
Here's the thing, Sherrone would most likely be Harbaugh's first choice (JH has probably been grooming him for it all year). By keeping Sherrone, you keep the Harbaugh culture, AND the Baltimore Ravens-->Michigan DC pipeline. Say goodbye to that defensive scheme if you go trying to get anyone else. Same applies for keeping Herbert.
Can they be defined as non-staff "scouts" though? They were just tasked with making video. Do they even know what they're supposed to be looking at beyond "that side of the stadium"? Plus, the rule against sending scouts has no purchase on gaining an unfair on-field advantage; it has to do with budgetary concerns for smaller schools being able to afford the sending of scouts or not. Honestly, the Venmo trail is what is probably the most damning thing here.
This point can't be made enough! When we needed JJ to win it while playing from (way) behind--and sure he almost pulled it off--it'd be nice to give him a little more than, "okay, young gun, pull one out of your ass now."
We don't have dominant d-line play? We had 4 sacks last night and 7 TFLs. Did you look at their rushing stats? 2.4 yards per carry. The problem is that that is an advanced passing offense. They get the ball out quick! If you commit extra defenders in the middle of the field as Don Brown always did with his safeties (His 4-2-5 was really a 4-3-4 or 4-4-3 with undersized safeties as linebackers), you will get burned. Of course, making every possession go three and out is optimal, but the cost of trying to make that happen will... oh yeah, haha, thank you Jim Knowles!
Wrong! That's Don Brown think. That's where a modern offense will burn you. You stop them in the red zone when you can't get beat over the top. 4-pt plays. In Minter I trust!
That's modern defensive football, though. Situational not systematic. Don't get beat over the top in the middle of the field. Bring more pressure in the red zone when you can't get beat over the top. Get those 4-pt plays. Don Brown never understood that that is the only way to play advanced offenses. You can't expect to pitch shutouts with risky mid-field blitzes like... lol, thank you Jim Knowles!
Listen, we may not get OSU in the semi, but you can “bet” anything there will be a rematch one way or another. The Game had 17 million viewers. You think a rematch isn’t an absolute dream scenario for the NCAA? Book it! It’s happening, so everyone better start coming to terms with that. Bring ‘em on, I say!
Using the pass to open up the run... hmm... who'd a thunk it? Alright, Michael Scarn, I'm a man of my word. My Venmo is @Tyler-Hambley. Send me a request for that $30 for beer and I'll get it to you. Can't give you that $50, though, because we did attempt a pass beyond 10 yards on 2nd and short in this game (it was the Andrel Anthony deep attempt). There were also some nice deep shots on 1st down in this one. Anyway, here's to killing crashing safeties and busting some nuts!
An idea for the red zone... avoid it when you can. How? Use 2nd and short opportunities to throw a 15-30 yard (in air) pass (it's basically a free play since you're still on schedule for 3rd down if throw is incomplete). Harbaugh never does this, instead almost always going heavy run to convert the first down on 2nd and short. Great, but why pass up the opportunity to use down and distance to keep defense guessing? See Ted Ginn's 2nd quarter touchdown against us in 2006. That's a way to avoid the red zone!
Only if you define a 10-yard attempt as a downfield throw? That's all I've argued (never once for "bombs" as you keep strawmanning me). And, no I don't want us to throw "more," like willy nilly, with no attention to the specifics I argued.
Anyway, no attempts past 10 yards on 2nd and short this game again, but no need to with 2-high safety looks the majority of the game. Thanks Manny Diaz! (What was that you were saying about not needing to pay attention to what a defense gives you?). I wonder if OSU will do that? Also, we had four trips inside the red zone that resulted in field goals. It'd be nice to turn those into touchdowns in the Shoe. My entire argument has been in reference to OSU, what could get JJ easier looks, and what could assist the runs and underneath passing game by keeping safeties honest--all by leveraging the horizontal AND vertical options available to an offense in 2nd and short scenarios. Thankfully, none of it was needed against James Franklin.
But hey, I'm glad you keep coming back here to visit me. Tell you what: if Michigan beats OSU in the Shoe, come back here again and I'll GLADLY Venmo you $30 so you can buy you and a buddy some drinks on me. If we beat OSU and do so with no pass attempts past 10 yards (ball in the air past the line of scrimmage) on 2nd short, I'll make it $50.
Can't we just be friends Michael Scarn? Cheers! ;-P
Hey! I said 2nd and short! That's a great time to let McCarthy threaten vertically past 10 yards since you're still on schedule for 3rd down if incomplete. No attempts this game, but not needed. So yes, I will be shutting up for a bit. I do think we'll see it down the road.
I don't want Michigan to throw downfield "sexy" passes at a whim for the sake of downfield "sexy" passes. Nor do I want to risk "bombing it downfield" to give the opponent extra possessions. Exactly the opposite! My argument is counterintuitive, but more nuanced than you give it credit for: I DON'T want Michigan's drives to end! I want the well-schemed bubbles, crossing routes, and run concepts to explode! What I am saying--very specifically--is that on 1st and 10 and 2nd and <5 situations (especially the latter) an offense is both on schedule AND not pressed into doing any one thing out of necessity (like throw on 3rd and long, or run on 4th and short).
As I argued in a comment further below, if Michigan threatens vertically (I'm just asking for 10 yards or more, not a bomb) on, say, 40% of 2nd and short scenarios as opposed to just %16 currently, then, even if half of those throws go incomplete, you are still on schedule for 3rd down. More importantly, you force the other team, especially their safeties, to not cheat up in that situation allowing for the short bubbles, crosses, and runs you call the other 60% of the time in those situations (84% currently) to pop for big gains more regularly. My argument is not just about "big plays" but systemically what will allow the short stuff more breathing room. I get that my argument sounds petty since we're talking about stats vs Indiana and the rest of the trash barrel. All I'm trying to do is think about what a young offense will need to threaten in the Horseshoe against THAT talent, THAT defensive coordinator, THAT seething-mad Head Coach, and THOSE 100,000 truck drivers. Threaten a 15-yard skinny post (or play-action waggle, or RPO, or intermediate crossing route, or something) a little more often than you have for years tended to do! I've had this complaint against Harbaugh offenses for a long time. It's just that this year, we're so loaded that it doesn't seem like anything could stop it. I'm merely trying to point out tendencies that are currently forming and hoping that I don't see a heavy run set on 2nd and 3 in the horseshoe every dang time. Run the ball, sure, but do so with McCarthy on play-action waggle threatening a deep post to Schoonmaker. Unfortunately, I fear we'll see the heavy run set, eager eyes for the damn 1st down marker, and a few too many drives end with field goals. So when you watch this weekend, pay attention to 2nd and short! That's all. I'll be happy for Harbs to make me wrong.
I think you're misunderstanding. The design of the offense, individual plays, blocking schemes, misdirection, etc is great! The problem I'm attempting to surface, forgive me, is what type of plays are being called when and whether or not such tendencies will translate to success vs OSU? That's the only team we need to worry about. Don Brown used to talk quite a bit in interviews about his defense's numbers and national rankings in certain categories during the season, but none of it mattered against OSU because... obviously. Similarly, offensive efficiency numbers against our current slate of opponents tells us pretty much nothing about what will ultimately translate to OSU. Tendency analysis, however, could at least give us an idea of what Jeff Knowles will load up against. There are two down and distance scenarios (1st down, and 2nd and short) that I have objectively identified where an OSU defense does not have to account for ANY vertical threat (I'm talking just 10 yards!) 84% of the time!!!!!!! These are scenarios unlike, say, 3rd and long or 4th and short, or even 2nd and long or 3rd and short, where an offense can keep a defense guessing as to what they're going to try to accomplish.
Michigan is avoiding 3rd downs not by tendency balance but by opponent competence level (or lack thereof). An 84% tendency to run or throw shallow on 2nd and short is not balanced enough. I'm asking why it is Harbaugh is so attracted to the short play for 1st down in that situation, when there's no "stay-on-schedule" necessity for doing so? If you throw an incomplete 30-yard pass there, you're still "on schedule" for 3rd down. Why the need to pass up that opportunity 84% of the time? That's a play where going short to pick up the 1st down makes some sense, sure, but it's certainly not a must. You can, and should at least, threaten the field vertically--I dunno--40% of the time in that situation? In fact, that's exactly the place to open up down field passing opportunities because a defense can't completely guess what you're going to do. My argument has been that when Michigan gets into 2nd and short situations, Harbaugh almost always opts for heavy run packages in order to immediately pick up 1st down. This is not "staying on schedule" if it distracts the offense from continuing intermediate passing attempts. Has Harbs picked up the 1st down and avoided 3rd with that heavy run on 2nd so far? Sure. Has it boosted offensive efficiency metrics against the likes of Hawaii, UCONN, Maryland, Iowa, and Indiana? Yes. But, brother, I don't think I'm "grasping" when I say we're inhibiting what this offense could do. If instead, on 2nd and short opportunities, Michigan ran play-action waggle, for example, rolling McCarthy out for a downfield pass with the option to run for the 1st down, then the defensive backs have to pick their poison: if they break off to stop McCarthy, death comes from above; if they continue to cover the vertical threat, McCarthy gobbles up easy 5-yard runs to the 1st down marker out of bounds. Either way, a defense is screwed in a way it wouldn't be with that same play in other down/distance scenarios (i.e. 2nd and long, 3rd and long, etc).
That's great, but also beside the point. It's not like we're asking Corum on a 2nd and short run to gain 2 yards then take a knee in order to get us to 3rd down. If the 84% run or short pass on 1st down and 2nd and short opportunities goes well against Hawaii, UCONN, Maryland, and Indiana, etc, then hurray!!! The question is, will that 84% tendency continue to find that same degree of success against OSU in the Shoe when THEIR athletes are loaded up for it?
Yes, this exactly! If we go play-action or even RPO pass on 2nd and short opportunities you will make JJ's job way easier. They are free plays; you still have 3rd and short available. The thing is, we have the weapons capable of toppling OSU in the Shoe this year, and perhaps Harbaugh and co. are waiting to pull out tendency breakers for that game. It's just that in the past, that hope hasn't really materialized and I think OSU is going to force JJ to beat them. We can be ready for that (and still knock them around with Corum) by forcing them to guess more.
Here you go. Finally some data. Below are all of McCarthy's starts showing tendencies in the following scenarios. Of key interest is 2nd and short opportunities to threaten vertically past 10 yards instead of just keying in on picking up the 1st down. 1st and 2nd down have identical 84% tendency to run or pass short, invite crashing safeties. I'm just asking us to balance this out, and with Brian to stop running 100% of the time in Pistol, and with Klatt to stop tipping pass play when we don't motion. Cheers!
The argument here isn't with pace. Indiana gets to the line quick and starts the play with lots of time left on the play clock in order to get more plays in. This has some advantages, but also costs you in terms of conditioning. Obviously, on 3rd and short, you need to pay attention to picking up the 1st down. What I'm saying is that too much of the offense is directed toward getting to that 3rd and short or immediately converting a 2nd and short instead of just staying in rhythm and with a balanced running and vertical passing.
Actually @IU was 4.1 yards per carry not 6, and as Brian pointed out, take away Corum's miraculous 50-yard run, and that takes us to 3.0 ypc (on the other 39 carries!)... against INDIANA! Hey if you're cool taking that into the horseshoe when Ryan Day has had a whole year to prepare with a new defensive coordinator, great! And why do you think JJ has missed those 2 or 3 extra wide open shots? You think they'll suddenly manifest themselves into completions in the shoe if down field passing hasn't been entrusted to JJ more in the interim?
Okay, you win. Let's check my gut. Here's a chart of every McCarthy start this year. I'm tracking vertical threats, here defined as any pass intended (whether complete or not) that was ten yards down field or greater. You can see that on 1st down we are either running or passing (short TE hitch, flare screens, bubble screens, short outs) 84% of the time. Hello crashing safeties! My real interest, though, is on 2nd short scenarios (5 yards or less), which are key opportunities to continue rhythm passes down field (all I'm asking for is 10 yard shots or more), but we are instead either running or attempting short passes geared toward picking up the 1st down at a rate of 84%. I threw in 3rd and short just out of curiosity: 100% run or short pass. Although it makes more sense in that scenario not to threaten vertically. Anyway, got dang my gut is good! Throw in the pistol and motion tendencies that Brian and Klatt have identified, and, yeah, I'd say we're leaving meat on the bone. The tyranny of down and distance! If you don't like the dreaded critical voice, a way of casing the data in the positive is to admit our offense is pretty darn good even when we're blatantly telegraphing what we're trying to do. Awesome! Will it work in the horseshoe?
1. Opponent variable. See Hawaii, CSU, UConn. Take abstract efficiency into the toilet bowl in November and we'll see what happens.
2. That's post facto analysis. We're talking about in game play-calling. I'm claiming the down-and-distance ghost of Schembechler is very strong with this one (Harbaugh). I have certainly made an interpretive claim that is not (yet) backed with data. The claim may still be true.
3. Yeah, I think calling it the way they have for JJ is (kinda) wise at this point. I fear the same approach can be carried into every game from now until THE GAME with great success only for us to be fooled into thinking we can hit the gear we need to hit on the road in the Toilet bowl. At that point, it's too late. So between now and OSU, what do you think they'll do to get the offense humming at full strength? That's not a rhetorical question.
4. See McVay, Sean regarding numbers in the box. Harbaugh admitted himself after the Indiana game they were doing things to take away the run, especially on the edges. We will not beat OSU in the toilet bowl by running all over them like we did last year. We CAN run on them, if we're sufficiently balanced with vertical passing.
5. I disagree. It's a game. It's fun to offer takes (even critical ones) on this, that, or the other thing with sports. That's why there's sports radio, ESPN, etc. Love our team, love our coach, love the game (but, got dang, let the kid throw a 20-yard rope on 2nd and short).
Yes, little data. Granted! I confess to not wanting to spend time on it. I ask for pardon and penance. Maybe others have the time. Still, I bet if we did a little digging, we would quickly find that we are in fact throwing on 1st down more than in past years. My "hot take" was made in part to counter the numerous "hot takes" I see each week of people complaining that we run on 1st down too much. I don't think that is true, but rhythmically it "feels" that way because, contrary to what another commenter has said, points per drive (a post facto analysis) is not what is governing in game play-calling as much as the more immediate down and distance scenarios.
As for ball control being the right choice to win games, it does, and has, especially in the last two games. I don't know about you, though, but I am seeing quite a bit of grumbling over our offensive execution. I began by granting the premise, which perhaps you reject, that there is indeed meat being left on the bone offensively. An in-game comparison of the two halves against Indiana suggest that what came later could have come much earlier. I then proposed an interpretive framework for evaluating down-to-down play calling. I do grant that another post would be required to dive into the "data" using that a priori framework. But the added inflection I gave throughout was to case everything with an eye toward OSU. I'm saying that if we get into 2nd and short scenarios against them, and Harbaugh hits Corum up the middle twice in a row to get the first down, that, even if we get the 1st down, overall offensive rhythm and momentum will be negatively impacted vis a vis shootout requirements.
Our secondary looked real good, though. We're just not getting someone home with a 4-man rush. The problem with a team like Maryland (and Ohio State) is that they force you to cover the entire field. Beginning with MacDonald last year, we got smart and stopped trying to blitz so much in the middle of the field a la Don Brown. The name of the game is to keep everything in front of you between the 20s and tighten down in the red zone. Don Brown never understood that when it came to defending dynamic spread offenses. That's why he always got torched. This Maryland offense would have smoked Don Brown. Our defense will be fine, but we do need to find an edge rusher who can get home more consistently in 4-man rush situations. Someone's got to step up there.
Okay, time to confess: I wanted Jim gone last year. I honestly thought he didn't have it in him to make the adjustments he did. And by that I don't just mean coaching changes. I mean going for it on 4th and short near the 50. He didn't do that enough before. Hats off to the analytics kid who got in his ear. The little things. Harbaugh addressed them all! Well done!
I don't care how sick of them we get. I motion for immediate installation of the blue pants as our permanent pants (until we vote otherwise at a later date yet to be determined). All in favor say, "I."
Recent Comments
Yet another example of Sherrone owning real estate in their heads.
The only other serious option is Jesse Minter, but it's not clear he has the same HC disposition that Sherrone does. If we can keep the same defensive scheme with Zach Orr or someone like that, I think Moore will hit this out of the park. Plus, he already satisfies the #1 job requirement: owning real estate in Ryan Day's head and the rest of that awful fanbase. They're already calling Sherrone, "3rd base Moore." But, does anyone recall Sherrone claiming he hit a triple? Beating OSU without your head coach is only like a double, right? (Cackles with glee).
Like when Graham and Grant see that new center...
Put this in another thread already, but I think he always saw this as a 2-3 year gig tops! After the 2015 bowl win, he told the team, "Next year, we go for the big one (i.e. National Championship). Refs screwed him in Columbus in 2016, then 2017 happened. Couldn't leave at that point. The problem was it took him 3 more years to realize Don Brown's scheme couldn't cover Ryan Day's offense. After 2021, Jim said he felt the program was in "good shape" (as in, "I think it's time to leave"), but then the Vikings left him at the alter.
Just be thankful that one of the best NFL head coaches out there loved his alma mater enough to take an extended sabbatical away from his real job for a while. That's all this ever was. He's been "passing the torch" to his replacement all year.
I think he always saw this as a 2-3 year gig tops! After the 2015 bowl win, he told the team, "Next year, we go for the big one (i.e. National Championship). Refs screwed him in Columbus in 2016, then 2017 happened. Couldn't leave at that point. The problem was it took him 3 more years after that to realize Don Brown's scheme couldn't cover Ryan Day's offense. After 2021, Jim said he felt the program was in "good shape" (as in, "I think it's time to leave now"), but then the Vikings left him at the alter.
Just be thankful that one of the best NFL head coaches out there loved his alma mater enough to take an extended sabbatical away from his real job for a while. That's all this ever was. He's been "passing on the torch" to his replacement all year.
Yep, it was win Chris Spielman entered the building. That was the turning point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_DZcqVA6Q8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fx0KLcG5dMk&t=10s
I like this one A LOT! But, we most likely lose the DC pipeline in this scenario.
I hear you on the play calling concerns. I guess a question I have has to do with the extant to which JH still has influence on in-game play calls? I was never a huge fan of JH's play calling when he used to have the co-coordinators suggest plays to him before he signaled it in himself.
Nowadays, it does seem like Jim's handed the play-calling keys over to Moore for the most part, but I still wonder if he isn't interjecting with some regularity. I have liked the way Moore has implemented some interesting pass-game concepts like, for example, the WR motioning at full speed to a free release behind another WR right at the snap (a Miami Dolphins staple). I doubt that came from Harbaugh. Anyway, I wonder if Moore wouldn't be an even better play caller all on his own.
I think the concern has been that if we prioritize Moore over Minter, we'd lose Minter to wherever Jim goes. I'm saying that even if we lose Minter in the Moore scenario, we'd likely keep that quality of DC and that scheme simply because John (Ravens) and Jim (Chargers or Eagles or whoever) would keep us well supplied.
Actually, I do! Love wins!
I mean... if he had any National Championship rings, would you listen?
Absolutely, but an outside hire could mean we lose the NFL internship and I want to keep that.
Correct! Thanks!
So... you do understand my fragmented sentences.
Settled! I can go to sleep now.
No, I expect that. That's why I said the Ravens-->Michigan DC pipeline would remain "open" with Sherrone. Harbaugh will take Minter, but do you think John and Jim will turn a deaf ear to Sherrone if he wants an NFL level DC? I think not.
Except that Moore already proved his chops by beating Ohio State and Third Base. Who else out there is 1-0 against OSU? And this comparing Sherrone Moore to Brady Hoke is about the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
Here's the thing, Sherrone would most likely be Harbaugh's first choice (JH has probably been grooming him for it all year). By keeping Sherrone, you keep the Harbaugh culture, AND the Baltimore Ravens-->Michigan DC pipeline. Say goodbye to that defensive scheme if you go trying to get anyone else. Same applies for keeping Herbert.
Can they be defined as non-staff "scouts" though? They were just tasked with making video. Do they even know what they're supposed to be looking at beyond "that side of the stadium"? Plus, the rule against sending scouts has no purchase on gaining an unfair on-field advantage; it has to do with budgetary concerns for smaller schools being able to afford the sending of scouts or not. Honestly, the Venmo trail is what is probably the most damning thing here.
This was exactly the first thought that came into my mind. Can't possibly be genuine... can it?
Best comment I've seen in years, and that's saying something!
This point can't be made enough! When we needed JJ to win it while playing from (way) behind--and sure he almost pulled it off--it'd be nice to give him a little more than, "okay, young gun, pull one out of your ass now."
We don't have dominant d-line play? We had 4 sacks last night and 7 TFLs. Did you look at their rushing stats? 2.4 yards per carry. The problem is that that is an advanced passing offense. They get the ball out quick! If you commit extra defenders in the middle of the field as Don Brown always did with his safeties (His 4-2-5 was really a 4-3-4 or 4-4-3 with undersized safeties as linebackers), you will get burned. Of course, making every possession go three and out is optimal, but the cost of trying to make that happen will... oh yeah, haha, thank you Jim Knowles!
Wrong! That's Don Brown think. That's where a modern offense will burn you. You stop them in the red zone when you can't get beat over the top. 4-pt plays. In Minter I trust!
That's modern defensive football, though. Situational not systematic. Don't get beat over the top in the middle of the field. Bring more pressure in the red zone when you can't get beat over the top. Get those 4-pt plays. Don Brown never understood that that is the only way to play advanced offenses. You can't expect to pitch shutouts with risky mid-field blitzes like... lol, thank you Jim Knowles!
Georgia will have to play against the refs, too, tho. NCAA will do all it can to get OSU-Mich natty game.
Listen, we may not get OSU in the semi, but you can “bet” anything there will be a rematch one way or another. The Game had 17 million viewers. You think a rematch isn’t an absolute dream scenario for the NCAA? Book it! It’s happening, so everyone better start coming to terms with that. Bring ‘em on, I say!
Ooh... I like this!
Using the pass to open up the run... hmm... who'd a thunk it? Alright, Michael Scarn, I'm a man of my word. My Venmo is @Tyler-Hambley. Send me a request for that $30 for beer and I'll get it to you. Can't give you that $50, though, because we did attempt a pass beyond 10 yards on 2nd and short in this game (it was the Andrel Anthony deep attempt). There were also some nice deep shots on 1st down in this one. Anyway, here's to killing crashing safeties and busting some nuts!
An idea for the red zone... avoid it when you can. How? Use 2nd and short opportunities to throw a 15-30 yard (in air) pass (it's basically a free play since you're still on schedule for 3rd down if throw is incomplete). Harbaugh never does this, instead almost always going heavy run to convert the first down on 2nd and short. Great, but why pass up the opportunity to use down and distance to keep defense guessing? See Ted Ginn's 2nd quarter touchdown against us in 2006. That's a way to avoid the red zone!
Only if you define a 10-yard attempt as a downfield throw? That's all I've argued (never once for "bombs" as you keep strawmanning me). And, no I don't want us to throw "more," like willy nilly, with no attention to the specifics I argued.
Anyway, no attempts past 10 yards on 2nd and short this game again, but no need to with 2-high safety looks the majority of the game. Thanks Manny Diaz! (What was that you were saying about not needing to pay attention to what a defense gives you?). I wonder if OSU will do that? Also, we had four trips inside the red zone that resulted in field goals. It'd be nice to turn those into touchdowns in the Shoe. My entire argument has been in reference to OSU, what could get JJ easier looks, and what could assist the runs and underneath passing game by keeping safeties honest--all by leveraging the horizontal AND vertical options available to an offense in 2nd and short scenarios. Thankfully, none of it was needed against James Franklin.
But hey, I'm glad you keep coming back here to visit me. Tell you what: if Michigan beats OSU in the Shoe, come back here again and I'll GLADLY Venmo you $30 so you can buy you and a buddy some drinks on me. If we beat OSU and do so with no pass attempts past 10 yards (ball in the air past the line of scrimmage) on 2nd short, I'll make it $50.
Can't we just be friends Michael Scarn? Cheers! ;-P
Hey! I said 2nd and short! That's a great time to let McCarthy threaten vertically past 10 yards since you're still on schedule for 3rd down if incomplete. No attempts this game, but not needed. So yes, I will be shutting up for a bit. I do think we'll see it down the road.
I don't want Michigan to throw downfield "sexy" passes at a whim for the sake of downfield "sexy" passes. Nor do I want to risk "bombing it downfield" to give the opponent extra possessions. Exactly the opposite! My argument is counterintuitive, but more nuanced than you give it credit for: I DON'T want Michigan's drives to end! I want the well-schemed bubbles, crossing routes, and run concepts to explode! What I am saying--very specifically--is that on 1st and 10 and 2nd and <5 situations (especially the latter) an offense is both on schedule AND not pressed into doing any one thing out of necessity (like throw on 3rd and long, or run on 4th and short).
As I argued in a comment further below, if Michigan threatens vertically (I'm just asking for 10 yards or more, not a bomb) on, say, 40% of 2nd and short scenarios as opposed to just %16 currently, then, even if half of those throws go incomplete, you are still on schedule for 3rd down. More importantly, you force the other team, especially their safeties, to not cheat up in that situation allowing for the short bubbles, crosses, and runs you call the other 60% of the time in those situations (84% currently) to pop for big gains more regularly. My argument is not just about "big plays" but systemically what will allow the short stuff more breathing room. I get that my argument sounds petty since we're talking about stats vs Indiana and the rest of the trash barrel. All I'm trying to do is think about what a young offense will need to threaten in the Horseshoe against THAT talent, THAT defensive coordinator, THAT seething-mad Head Coach, and THOSE 100,000 truck drivers. Threaten a 15-yard skinny post (or play-action waggle, or RPO, or intermediate crossing route, or something) a little more often than you have for years tended to do! I've had this complaint against Harbaugh offenses for a long time. It's just that this year, we're so loaded that it doesn't seem like anything could stop it. I'm merely trying to point out tendencies that are currently forming and hoping that I don't see a heavy run set on 2nd and 3 in the horseshoe every dang time. Run the ball, sure, but do so with McCarthy on play-action waggle threatening a deep post to Schoonmaker. Unfortunately, I fear we'll see the heavy run set, eager eyes for the damn 1st down marker, and a few too many drives end with field goals. So when you watch this weekend, pay attention to 2nd and short! That's all. I'll be happy for Harbs to make me wrong.
I think you're misunderstanding. The design of the offense, individual plays, blocking schemes, misdirection, etc is great! The problem I'm attempting to surface, forgive me, is what type of plays are being called when and whether or not such tendencies will translate to success vs OSU? That's the only team we need to worry about. Don Brown used to talk quite a bit in interviews about his defense's numbers and national rankings in certain categories during the season, but none of it mattered against OSU because... obviously. Similarly, offensive efficiency numbers against our current slate of opponents tells us pretty much nothing about what will ultimately translate to OSU. Tendency analysis, however, could at least give us an idea of what Jeff Knowles will load up against. There are two down and distance scenarios (1st down, and 2nd and short) that I have objectively identified where an OSU defense does not have to account for ANY vertical threat (I'm talking just 10 yards!) 84% of the time!!!!!!! These are scenarios unlike, say, 3rd and long or 4th and short, or even 2nd and long or 3rd and short, where an offense can keep a defense guessing as to what they're going to try to accomplish.
Michigan is avoiding 3rd downs not by tendency balance but by opponent competence level (or lack thereof). An 84% tendency to run or throw shallow on 2nd and short is not balanced enough. I'm asking why it is Harbaugh is so attracted to the short play for 1st down in that situation, when there's no "stay-on-schedule" necessity for doing so? If you throw an incomplete 30-yard pass there, you're still "on schedule" for 3rd down. Why the need to pass up that opportunity 84% of the time? That's a play where going short to pick up the 1st down makes some sense, sure, but it's certainly not a must. You can, and should at least, threaten the field vertically--I dunno--40% of the time in that situation? In fact, that's exactly the place to open up down field passing opportunities because a defense can't completely guess what you're going to do. My argument has been that when Michigan gets into 2nd and short situations, Harbaugh almost always opts for heavy run packages in order to immediately pick up 1st down. This is not "staying on schedule" if it distracts the offense from continuing intermediate passing attempts. Has Harbs picked up the 1st down and avoided 3rd with that heavy run on 2nd so far? Sure. Has it boosted offensive efficiency metrics against the likes of Hawaii, UCONN, Maryland, Iowa, and Indiana? Yes. But, brother, I don't think I'm "grasping" when I say we're inhibiting what this offense could do. If instead, on 2nd and short opportunities, Michigan ran play-action waggle, for example, rolling McCarthy out for a downfield pass with the option to run for the 1st down, then the defensive backs have to pick their poison: if they break off to stop McCarthy, death comes from above; if they continue to cover the vertical threat, McCarthy gobbles up easy 5-yard runs to the 1st down marker out of bounds. Either way, a defense is screwed in a way it wouldn't be with that same play in other down/distance scenarios (i.e. 2nd and long, 3rd and long, etc).
That's great, but also beside the point. It's not like we're asking Corum on a 2nd and short run to gain 2 yards then take a knee in order to get us to 3rd down. If the 84% run or short pass on 1st down and 2nd and short opportunities goes well against Hawaii, UCONN, Maryland, and Indiana, etc, then hurray!!! The question is, will that 84% tendency continue to find that same degree of success against OSU in the Shoe when THEIR athletes are loaded up for it?
Yes, this exactly! If we go play-action or even RPO pass on 2nd and short opportunities you will make JJ's job way easier. They are free plays; you still have 3rd and short available. The thing is, we have the weapons capable of toppling OSU in the Shoe this year, and perhaps Harbaugh and co. are waiting to pull out tendency breakers for that game. It's just that in the past, that hope hasn't really materialized and I think OSU is going to force JJ to beat them. We can be ready for that (and still knock them around with Corum) by forcing them to guess more.
Here you go. Finally some data. Below are all of McCarthy's starts showing tendencies in the following scenarios. Of key interest is 2nd and short opportunities to threaten vertically past 10 yards instead of just keying in on picking up the 1st down. 1st and 2nd down have identical 84% tendency to run or pass short, invite crashing safeties. I'm just asking us to balance this out, and with Brian to stop running 100% of the time in Pistol, and with Klatt to stop tipping pass play when we don't motion. Cheers!
The argument here isn't with pace. Indiana gets to the line quick and starts the play with lots of time left on the play clock in order to get more plays in. This has some advantages, but also costs you in terms of conditioning. Obviously, on 3rd and short, you need to pay attention to picking up the 1st down. What I'm saying is that too much of the offense is directed toward getting to that 3rd and short or immediately converting a 2nd and short instead of just staying in rhythm and with a balanced running and vertical passing.
Actually @IU was 4.1 yards per carry not 6, and as Brian pointed out, take away Corum's miraculous 50-yard run, and that takes us to 3.0 ypc (on the other 39 carries!)... against INDIANA! Hey if you're cool taking that into the horseshoe when Ryan Day has had a whole year to prepare with a new defensive coordinator, great! And why do you think JJ has missed those 2 or 3 extra wide open shots? You think they'll suddenly manifest themselves into completions in the shoe if down field passing hasn't been entrusted to JJ more in the interim?
Okay, you win. Let's check my gut. Here's a chart of every McCarthy start this year. I'm tracking vertical threats, here defined as any pass intended (whether complete or not) that was ten yards down field or greater. You can see that on 1st down we are either running or passing (short TE hitch, flare screens, bubble screens, short outs) 84% of the time. Hello crashing safeties! My real interest, though, is on 2nd short scenarios (5 yards or less), which are key opportunities to continue rhythm passes down field (all I'm asking for is 10 yard shots or more), but we are instead either running or attempting short passes geared toward picking up the 1st down at a rate of 84%. I threw in 3rd and short just out of curiosity: 100% run or short pass. Although it makes more sense in that scenario not to threaten vertically. Anyway, got dang my gut is good! Throw in the pistol and motion tendencies that Brian and Klatt have identified, and, yeah, I'd say we're leaving meat on the bone. The tyranny of down and distance! If you don't like the dreaded critical voice, a way of casing the data in the positive is to admit our offense is pretty darn good even when we're blatantly telegraphing what we're trying to do. Awesome! Will it work in the horseshoe?
1. Opponent variable. See Hawaii, CSU, UConn. Take abstract efficiency into the toilet bowl in November and we'll see what happens.
2. That's post facto analysis. We're talking about in game play-calling. I'm claiming the down-and-distance ghost of Schembechler is very strong with this one (Harbaugh). I have certainly made an interpretive claim that is not (yet) backed with data. The claim may still be true.
3. Yeah, I think calling it the way they have for JJ is (kinda) wise at this point. I fear the same approach can be carried into every game from now until THE GAME with great success only for us to be fooled into thinking we can hit the gear we need to hit on the road in the Toilet bowl. At that point, it's too late. So between now and OSU, what do you think they'll do to get the offense humming at full strength? That's not a rhetorical question.
4. See McVay, Sean regarding numbers in the box. Harbaugh admitted himself after the Indiana game they were doing things to take away the run, especially on the edges. We will not beat OSU in the toilet bowl by running all over them like we did last year. We CAN run on them, if we're sufficiently balanced with vertical passing.
5. I disagree. It's a game. It's fun to offer takes (even critical ones) on this, that, or the other thing with sports. That's why there's sports radio, ESPN, etc. Love our team, love our coach, love the game (but, got dang, let the kid throw a 20-yard rope on 2nd and short).
Yes, little data. Granted! I confess to not wanting to spend time on it. I ask for pardon and penance. Maybe others have the time. Still, I bet if we did a little digging, we would quickly find that we are in fact throwing on 1st down more than in past years. My "hot take" was made in part to counter the numerous "hot takes" I see each week of people complaining that we run on 1st down too much. I don't think that is true, but rhythmically it "feels" that way because, contrary to what another commenter has said, points per drive (a post facto analysis) is not what is governing in game play-calling as much as the more immediate down and distance scenarios.
As for ball control being the right choice to win games, it does, and has, especially in the last two games. I don't know about you, though, but I am seeing quite a bit of grumbling over our offensive execution. I began by granting the premise, which perhaps you reject, that there is indeed meat being left on the bone offensively. An in-game comparison of the two halves against Indiana suggest that what came later could have come much earlier. I then proposed an interpretive framework for evaluating down-to-down play calling. I do grant that another post would be required to dive into the "data" using that a priori framework. But the added inflection I gave throughout was to case everything with an eye toward OSU. I'm saying that if we get into 2nd and short scenarios against them, and Harbaugh hits Corum up the middle twice in a row to get the first down, that, even if we get the 1st down, overall offensive rhythm and momentum will be negatively impacted vis a vis shootout requirements.
Our secondary looked real good, though. We're just not getting someone home with a 4-man rush. The problem with a team like Maryland (and Ohio State) is that they force you to cover the entire field. Beginning with MacDonald last year, we got smart and stopped trying to blitz so much in the middle of the field a la Don Brown. The name of the game is to keep everything in front of you between the 20s and tighten down in the red zone. Don Brown never understood that when it came to defending dynamic spread offenses. That's why he always got torched. This Maryland offense would have smoked Don Brown. Our defense will be fine, but we do need to find an edge rusher who can get home more consistently in 4-man rush situations. Someone's got to step up there.
I lived in Durham for ten years. Love that place! Grad school at Duke?
His comments on Harbaugh begin @ the 8:30 mark, btw.
In other words, the blue jerseys--the color needed for the pants--was just north of the belt line the whole time. It all turns on the pants, tho!
Got Damn! And to think this whole time the secret elixir was just north of the belt line. #BLUEPANTSFOREVER!!!
You're right! Okay, I'm here, first in line. Go Blue! Go Harbaugh!
Okay, time to confess: I wanted Jim gone last year. I honestly thought he didn't have it in him to make the adjustments he did. And by that I don't just mean coaching changes. I mean going for it on 4th and short near the 50. He didn't do that enough before. Hats off to the analytics kid who got in his ear. The little things. Harbaugh addressed them all! Well done!
2. Alabama
3…
1. Michigan
2. Alabama
3. Ohio (I know, I know, but you know...)
4. Georgia
Book it!
I don't care how sick of…
I don't care how sick of them we get. I motion for immediate installation of the blue pants as our permanent pants (until we vote otherwise at a later date yet to be determined). All in favor say, "I."