left: Monumental's* iPad app. right: Swag Mattison. *yes the wallpaper guy.
Brian forwarded a mailbag question I hoped to answer with the UFR database:
I recently re-watched the 2011 vs. Nebraska game, which was quite a defensive performance on Michigan's part. Several times Mattison employed the always-entertaining Okie Package, often times with very good results (sack, QB hurry, etc.). Anecdotally it seemed like we used that a lot less in 2012, in spite of the fact that we still had no natural four-man pass rush. Any ideas as to why we went away from this? It seemed like easy money to generate a pass rush and potential for turnovers. If anything I would have thought we would have been more prepared to use exotic blitz packages as our guys were 1 year more advanced in Mattison's system. The only explanations I can think of are either we expected teams to be used to seeing it and adjust, or we did use it a lot last year and for some reason I didn't notice.
Was it Used Less?
For our purposes I also categorized "Nickel eff it" from the Notre Dame 2011 UFR (picture-paged) as an Okie, since it was clearly the forerunner to Mattison's particular way of using the package.
By volume it doesn't look like we saw it any less often.
Yeah, Shafer's defense is in there; GERG ran an Okie just once in '09-'10. Unfortunately I don't have data from Ohio State and the bowl game for 2012 because when Michigan loses those somebody (not saying who) can't bring himself to UFR them. Anyway I don't see a difference in Okie deployment last year. The tables agree:
Def Formation | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | Mattison Avg |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4-3 odd | - | 59.2% | - | 35.4% | 30.5% | 32.9% |
Nickel | 14.1% | 2.9% | 4.0% | 42.2% | 21.8% | 32.0% |
4-3 even | 45.1% | 7.1% | 12.7% | 5.7% | 22.8% | 14.3% |
4-4, 5-3, Bear, etc. | 2.1% | 18.4% | 9.8% | 6.4% | 13.0% | 9.7% |
Okie | 7.8% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 7.8% | 7.1% | 7.5% |
3-3-5 | 29.4% | 6.3% | 59.6% | 1.9% | 3.2% | 2.5% |
3-4 | - | 6.2% | 9.4% | 0.4% | 1.2% | 0.8% |
Dime | 1.6% | 0.0% | 4.4% | 0.3% | 0.4% | 0.4% |
Big shifts: Mattison deployed the nickel less often last year and built even fronts into the defense. I thought the former was a result of fewer spread teams charted in 2012 but my data say Michigan faced MORE receivers in the formation (2.87 per play, 2.78 on 1st downs in 2012, versus 2.74 per play and 2.65 on 1st downs in 2011). The latter is an interesting wrinkle. Anyhoo the Okie he didn't seem to touch.
Since it's a situational package, we can see if it's being used less in those situations. By down:
The big difference seems to be 4th down but that's small sample: I charted 12 attempts on 4th down against Michigan in 2011, and 14 in 2012, so there were just two 4th down deployments: one against SDSU and one versus Ohio State. It's meant to be a surprise. What about by distance?
| Total attempts | | % Okie Deployed | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Down | Distance | 2011 | 2012 | 2011 | 2012 |
1st | 0-5 yards | 6 | 4 | 0.0% | 0.0% |
6-10 yards | 288 | 270 | 0.7% | 1.8% | |
11+ yards | 13 | 13 | 7.1% | 7.1% | |
2nd | 0-5 yards | 66 | 61 | 2.9% | 0.0% |
6-10 yards | 114 | 115 | 7.3% | 8.7% | |
11+ yards | 26 | 41 | 10.3% | 4.7% | |
3rd | 0-5 yards | 57 | 58 | 8.1% | 13.4% |
6-10 yards | 37 | 44 | 39.3% | 29.0% | |
11+ yards | 19 | 22 | 24.0% | 12.0% | |
Total | 636 | 643 | 7.8% | 7.1% |
So a little less often on 3rd and long.
Success Rate
Maybe it wasn't as effective last year minus Martin/RVB? Well I tracked its deployment on long situations (6 or more yards), and called it a "success" if it prevented the 1st down on 3rd or 4th down, or prevented 1/2 of the yards necessary to move the chains on 1st or 2nd down. Success?
Down | 2011 | 2012 |
---|---|---|
1st | 100% (3/3) | 83.3% (5/6) |
2nd | 83.3% (10/12) | 100% (13/13) |
3rd | 96.7% (29/30) | 100% (21/21) |
4th | 100% (1/1) | - |
All downs | 93.5% (43/46) | 97.5% (39/40) |
Success! Even with a tiny window for improvement, they found it.
ALL THE SWAG MATTISONS
Why Not Use it More?
The Okie package became a favored topic of discussion after it did mean things in the Illinois game:
the classic
Here's that play as drawn up on MonuMental's app, which is my new favorite toy:
Red=LB, green=DB, black=DL
Brian would come to call this "Okie one" for the number of safeties back in the formation. Michigan showed seven guys on the line of scrimmage but rushed just four. The right tackle and right guard were basically left alone while the rushers stunted around the guys on the left side and Illinois ended up blocking almost nobody.
Here a variation from 2012 used on 2nd and 12 on Minnesota's first drive:
Mattison senses this is an opportunity to kill the Gophers' opening drive. Here it's the 6th play of the drive and Michigan has already begun rotating the DL: the 5-tech is Heitzman, having come in for Roh on the 4th play of the drive, and Pipkins has just come in for Black. Michigan comes out in an Okie two, rushes five and drops to a Cover 2.
It turned out to be a run; Ryan managed to change course and hinder the RB in time for the Will (Desmond Morgan) to shut it down for a short gain, setting up a 3rd and 9. On the ensuing play Mattison dialed up another Okie:
Not 100% on the coverage. I think it's Cover 4 but the corners may be in man; Floyd is definitely giving his guy a tough release but Taylor is playing a Cov4. Crowd?
That's Avery (at nickel) playing back at the 1st down marker, and Thomas Gordon is also deep and went with that tight end when he motioned to the left side. Roh's back in for Heitzman and Black has come in for Washington (ALL THE pass rush!). In the diabolical world of Mattison's Okie package this is a Balrog with wings. Michigan lines up all over the tackles, and this time comes from the (offense's) left side. The two LBs on the weakside drop into short zones, as does the "nose" Black. Roh shoots past both the LG and LT to get into the center, and Morgan and Kovacs attack outside. The result:
Black seems to be in the wrong zone (he winds up all up in Demens's stuff), and that means the TE in the flat will be wide open on the sideline as soon as Taylor carries the X receiver's deep route:
That never happens; the QB has just enough time to see the slot's in-route has been disemboweled by Jake Ryan before the left side of his line not blocking anybody becomes his primary concern. The running back gets a delaying chip on Morgan and Kovacs gets a free shot and a forced fumble (which Minnesota recovered). You see there's weakness: Mattison's asking his nominal nose tackle to cover a deep zone when the receiver started 8 yards outside of him. But because the offensive line couldn't figure out who to block that never has time to develop. That's why the Okie is a changeup: the more Michigan uses it the more opposing coaches are going to prepare for it and the less valuable it can be as a situational ace in the hole.
One more from 2012. This is on 3rd and 8 from Michigan's 34 early in the 4th quarter and the Wolverines are down 9-16. Nebraska's kicker is Brett Maher, so every yard is a big deal for preventing the Huskers from going up by two scores.
Again, excuse me if I screwed up the coverage; here I'm guessing Gordon and Taylor were playing a read: they're both watching the inside receiver and break when he does. Nebraska's linemen mostly did their jobs here, though the guard (All-B1G Spencer Long) let himself get pushed really far backwards and that made room for Ryan to get into the center. Morgan took a few steps into a pass rush before backing into his zone but the RG and RT are not confused by this and do fine fending Heitzman off. The nickel blitz is unexpected but the left tackle did a good job adjusting and riding Avery behind the pocket. But for reasons passing understanding the tight end let Roh (playing WDE) past him and right into the RB. Ameer Abdullah can be little more than a piece of flotsam in the pile of mass about to descend on Martinez. It is beautiful.
You get a glimpse of Demens's coverage too as he got from the line to his zone in time to have pretty decent coverage on that slot receiver, not an easy thing. Anyway you can see how the Okie uses confusion to create a lot of places where things can go wrong for the offense, and if just one does you're out of FG range and punting in a one-score game. Of course the offense was Denardless that day and couldn't capitalize.
Still, as fun as these things are to watch you see each time Mattison was attacking from different angles and by the end of last year there were only one or two blocks the offense didn't pick up. If that diminishes to zero blocks, you give up six. Conclusion: the Okie was used just as often and incrementally more effectively last year as it was in 2011. However it's meant to be a changeup package; if opponents are sitting on it you'll get knocked out of the park. As something to pull out 7 percent of plays you're forcing opposing coaches to prepare for eight different attacks of which they're likely to see one or two, or giving yourself a situational out pitch when you're in a jam.