Upon Further Review 2015: Offense vs MSU

Upon Further Review still has a sponsor. I'm late today so I'm just going to tell you that Matt's a good guy and did my loan and Seth's loan and everything was easy and professional. We are associating our name with his and that is something we are very comfortable with.

Matt's got a ticket offer going for a Michigan football or basketball game. If you're buying a home or refinancing, he's the right guy to call. (No pants required.)

FORMATION NOTES: The director was one of those guys who fancies himself Stanley Kubrick so we never got a proper shot of what M was doing presnap on the Peppers sweep:

You'll note that M only has four OL; Cole is lined up outside of DeVeon Smith. This was "shotgun empty tight" but that's insufficient to describe it, really.

This with 3TEs and a WR in a wing spot was "Ace tight":

And M pulled out another goofy split line setup. Cole is one of the WRs to the top; Williams is the "right tackle". "Emory 3-wide," I said, and took another antacid:

PERSONNEL NOTES: The usual at most of the spots except Michigan whittled down the number of guys who played at the skill positions. Johnson and Green are on the participation list but didn't get carries; I don't remember them playing at all. Higdon and Isaac did get carries, but sparingly.

At WR it was almost all Darboh and Chesson and then they added in Harris or Perry in 3 or 4 wide sets. TE was about the usual.

[After THE JUMP: opportunities untaken]

Coulda woulda shoulda.

Yes, that is the tl;dr of this post. Michigan did win the game until they didn't and they had opportunities to win it without the "until they didn't" part. The offense struggled, failing to gain 300 yards and relying on short fields set up by special teams to score many of their points. This was partly MSU's defensive line being pretty good.

It was more Michigan shooting themselves in the foot, whether it was mental mistakes or Jake Rudock's inability to make as much out of the swiss cheese purporting to be the MSU secondary as he should.

Rudock's

probably pretty dismal CHART

pretty dismal chart reflects his overall performance, which checks in at Sheridan-like 5.8 YPA once you get rid of the Jabrill Peppers end-around that gets counted as a pass because the NCAA is very persnickety about the letter of the pass/run law.

Jake Rudock 2014

Jake Rudock 2015

I won't be telling anyone anything they don't know when I say Rudock was maybe not quite as good as Connor Cook in this game. That DSR is ugly and it doesn't include a couple of unsuccessful screens. While Rudock did face down a lot of pressure in this game, he gets a pass for those since "PR" snaps aren't considered.

When Michigan tested MSU deep the Spartans were found wanting almost literally every single time. Rudock took some advantage of this, like this hilariously open back shoulder fade:

But when Michigan took their deep shots Rudock was off, again. They managed a 32-yard completion here but this ball was incredibly underthrown:

Michigan ended up with a field goal on that drive when many, many throws are 64-yard TDs. Chesson would break wide open to the middle of the field on Michigan's penultimate drive only to be overthrown yet again:

A couple people have wondered whether Chesson's break to the post was an unplanned improvisation that caused the throw to go long. I suppose that's possible, but given what we've seen from Rudock I think the much more likely explanation is that he just missed. Throws in the middle of the field are much easier than those to the sideline; once Chesson breaks into the clear he's making his QB's job easier.

That's bad, and then Rudock was inconsistent short. Michigan had to settle for a field goal after this failed third down conversion on which Butt flashes open; Rudock is super late with the throw:

On the next drive Rudock fired a panicked checkdown to Higdon way early on a flood route that was very likely to see either a one on one matchup deep or Butt easily open past the sticks:

Rudock also just about turfed a first down throw to Butt that was about 9 yards downfield; Butt dug the ball out for a completion but the replay official yet got another call wrong—he should not have been called into action.

It was good enough to win. Rudock didn't turn it over or come close to doing so. You can say that: he was just good enough to win this game.

Michigan couldn't run against these guys yet again.

At least this year I could see opportunities spurned. Against MSU the last, oh, seven years there has been very little in the way of opportunity as Michigan gets snowed under physically time and again. That was gone, replaced by a series of frustrating one-man brainfarts that felt more like first-year Harbauffense teething issues than oh, I don't know, a total systemic failure ranging from S&C to tactics to technique.

While the results were very similar, this running matchup felt a lot different than the inverse. Michigan State's ground game was getting whipped on blocks up and down the line, leaving their backs with nowhere to go except second and long. MSU just missed an opportunity to break a long one before halftime; other than that there were literally no runs that felt like they might break for more than a first down.

Michigan had their opportunities as Harbaugh and the OL won enough for Michigan to hit big plays. Penetration was rare; when it happened it was often Michigan trapping. But MSU was good enough to give Michigan a narrow margin for error; they erred.

The results in the blocking are decidedly mixed, but mixed is great given the recent history of this series. Michigan had only slightly more than 20 carries on which the OL was much involved in the grading (I didn't offer much positive or negative for some RPS plays and short yardage items), so raw amplitude is way down this week. It was a weird game where M had far fewer plays than the opposition.

Yes: a tie-ish RPS. This was much better after years and years of derp. MSU did occasionally obliterate a play they'd prepared for. The one pitch sweep Michigan ran was unceremoniously buried in the backfield on a play I didn't bother handing out any player minuses for since it was so doomed. Michigan also occasionally tried to waggle and got their QB killed for a TFL; This third and short conversion attempt was bad. Look at how MSU is lined up:

M tried to run into the gut of that defense and did not go at the bubble to top of the screen, which looks wide open for a QB sneak. That time M's FB tendencies bit them. Michigan ended up punting on about fourth and an inch.

Hopefully next time that happens they'll have a check or something. They should be able to invert that call, hand it to Smith, and get it. But they offset all this with

• a total lack of getting owned because MSU knew the snap count
• several big opportunities in the passing game
• The Peppers run
• various other small tweaks that coulda shoulda worked

More about that in a bit.

As far as execution goes, Michigan's edge blockers got beat up and the ball carriers were bad. Smith fought to even, but RB is a make plays position where even means you're just getting the yards they block for you—Smith did that and only that; others didn't even get there.

I feel like this is going to lead into another running back diatribe.

Are they really diatribes?

YES

Fine. I know I harp on this, but Michigan's tailbacks are so inconsistent with their cuts. A week after an excellent game against Northwestern, Smith and company reverted back to frequent WTF runs. Here an early split zone* play finds a semblance of a backside crease…

…that Smith does not take.

Yeah, the backside end is not completely down, but he is off balance and you are De'Veon Smith: if you make that cut you're getting more than zero yards. There is blame to spread around there since Butt could do a better job; it is frustrating to see Smith run into a big wad of nothing instead of giving himself a chance.

I don't even care if Smith gets yards, really; I want him to see the thing with a chance of getting yards. Especially on a play that very very frequently gives you this cutback lane.

*[I think. M is cutting the backside end like they would on split zone. Usually you see a guy come across the formation to do this; on this one M just lines up Butt there.]

A bit later Isaac would get a shot and blow an opportunity. This one is grim and would be agonizing if M didn't score on this drive.

There is a huge crease there all the way to a safety flat-footed and not even looking at the play. All Isaac has to do is put the last LB on one side of a block and go to the other side of it; instead he picks where he's going first and the linebacker you see diving at his feet makes a tackle for three yards.

This is a quintessential lack of patience. Isaac needs to slow up for a beat, allowing the block to develop, and then he's into the secondary. Or he could put a foot in the ground with the intention of cutting back. Instead he just runs as fast as possible in a straight line.

Later Smith's lack of vision for cutback lanes would turn this into a two yard gain:

That should have been a touchdown or close to it and the ensuing play saw Braden pick up the weak holding call that put M back on the 18.

Meanwhile, Michigan had shots at nice chunk plays that saw Kerridge and then Higdon simply fall over. Smith had opportunities to grind out some yards on plays where he instead just ran straight forward into guys. Late he started ignoring the play design entirely. Michigan got four yards on the first play of their last drive as he cut all the way back but they'd actually blocked power very well:

Playside end is on the ground and Michigan has a hat for a hat in the gap. If Smith runs the play there he gets more than four and the punt might not ever happen.

One of the questions going into this year was whether Ty Wheatley would be a meaningful upgrade over Fred Jackson, or if Michigan had just chosen a selection of backs without much vision and were stuck with them.

I think there is some progress. Smith did have a mean-ass stiffarm to rescue a first and goal play on Michigan's first touchdown drive and pop outside the tackles a couple times to gain yards on plays that were otherwise jammed up. But progress is faltering at best.

What about the blocking?

It wasn't great. It was okay, and a number of the problems were mental. I prefer that, because those are easier to fix.

Targeting issues linger. M debuted a play I called "iso counter" on which Houma steps to the line as if he's running a conventional iso before aborting to the back side of the line. This was close to busting a big play, but Poggi incorrectly decided a linebacker he was targeting had run himself out of the play and zoomed to the safety:

Houma had to spend himself on that guy. If Poggi goes and blocks him like he clearly is considering, Houma can go finish the guy Williams has lost somewhat and Higdon should be in the secondary. (If Higdon had gone to the right side of that block, anyway.)

Michigan had a shot at a big play here; Kalis pulls around to the hole and then starts blocking… uh… Cole's back.

The linebacker Kalis should be finding as he goes to look for work makes a tackle there on a play that otherwise was set to be one of those fun "let's see if this village of defensive backs can tackle Smithzilla" plays.

There were other incidents that were less clear cut but probable targeting failures. Michigan is in year one of a complicated and ever-shifting rushing offense, so I'm not surprised.

I noticed a distinct lack of linebackers screaming through the line of scrimmage as Michigan looked on, befuddled.

Yes. Michigan picked up a couple early double A blitzes. MSU didn't get gashed on these plays, but neither did they pile up tackles for loss like they had previously.

MSU backed off of these after the first few. If you keep running blitzes that get picked up sooner or later you're going to get a big chunk play on your face; MSU played it straight way more often than they had in the past.

Stanfordizations of the week?

I mentioned the counter iso above. Michigan couldn't get it to work but man was it sucking in linebackers.

Immediately after the game I was a bit frustrated that Michigan didn't hit anything like MSU did with their fancy-dancy fullback wheel play, but after reviewing things Michigan had plenty of wrinkles that just didn't quite come off because of execution or bad luck. This lovely little one-blocker screen that got batted down is the canonical example:

alllll the space

That's either a touchdown or close to one from the 18, but alas and alack. That's a brilliant design on which the receivers clear out most of the defense, the initial flat move from the RB gets rid of one LB, and then Glasgow should get the other. A hand makes all the difference.

Michigan did hit a fancy play of slightly less import when they got Peppers loose for on an end-around:

Michigan flanked Cole, their best blocker in space, outside of Smith there and got the crease they were looking for in large part because Poggi had a huge presnap advantage against the relevant linebacker. Point M.

Earlier they tried what I think was supposed to be a version of the double screen thing that got Hill so open against BYU. Watch Butt fall down on purpose:

MSU didn't bite immediately and Michigan borked their protection, so when Rudock turned around he was in huge trouble. I think the hope there was that Peppers and the screen fake would move the safeties and leave Butt wide open; the pressure was in too fast to let the play develop.

Michigan deployed a number of traps. MSU was able to stuff a few of them, but mostly by cheating linebackers; others saw Smith hit the second level and then but for a block here or there, etc. etc. etc.

Is it just me or has Chesson become a lot more prominent than Darboh recently?

If you're wondering who Michigan's #1 WR is, I think Michigan thinks it's Chesson. Multiple times in this game they moved him into sneaky places where he could get one on one coverage against guys unprepared for his speed. Once he was an inline tight end…

…and once he lined up at tailback and was about to streak for a TD when a linebacker wisely tackled him.

Unfortunately, Chesson did have a critical drop in the fourth quarter on a 20-yard ball that was right in his hands, and Rudock will never ever hit him deep. But it certainly appears like Chesson is the top target this season.

Receivers in general?

[0 = uncatchable, 1 = circus catch, 2 = moderate difficulty, 3 = routine]

Higdon caught a 3, as did Peppers.

Notable events were the Chesson drop mentioned above and Butt digging a 1 out; yes I am giving him it since he did catch it.

Heroes?

Glasgow and Cole stood up to a very difficult DL. I thought Houma was terrific as a blocker.

Maybe not so heroic?

Rudock struggled again; ballcarriers were mediocre; Butt struggled as a blocker.

What does it mean for Minnesota and beyond?

Game management only. Rudock's probably going to hit a deep pass as soon as I give up on it ever happening, so let me state very clearly that I have no expectation Rudock will ever throw an accurate pass longer than 20 yards.

But no turnovers, I guess?

The line is just a B, B+ unit. Cole and Glasgow are good, maybe very good. The rest of the guys are middling.

More Peppers please. Give it to me. I want it.

Houma has at least battled his way to a co-starter spot. Kerridge wasn't used very often in this game. I don't think that's the injury. At this point I think he's impressing as a blocker.

The tailbacks are shruggie dot emoji. Drake Johnson was still hurt for this game; I wonder how he'll fare against Minnesota. Smith is a pounder but he's not dynamic, and the other guys are well behind him from appearances.

Michigan got out of a Michigan State game without getting its ass kicked tactically. It wasn't a blowout in their favor—I don't know if you'd even call it a win. But it was a tie at worst, and praise all available deities for that.