Coaching Points: Oregon vs MSU, 2015

Raj Mehta USA TODAY Sports

Offense: Lots of personnel groups, but mostly between 11 personnel, 12 personnel, and 21 personnel. More zone blocking than against WMU which worked really well.
Defense: Same old same. More MEG in this game compared to the MOD to the field they did against WMU.



Disclaimer
Shorter and later this week. Sorry, been really busy lately. Feel free to ask questions though if you have them in the comments below.

Previous Games
MSU vs WMU

Overview

• Cook is Cook at this point, more good than bad, but everything from amazing to WTF.
• RBs look good, most of success came off of zone schemes in this one
• Really like Burbridge's routes.
• Heath struggled on first drive, not again after that. Rest of DL changed outcome of the game in biggest way, IMO.
• Bullough got off blocks and snuffed out a lot of key plays.
• CBs and Harris need to take on blocks better to hold down short, outside routes and screens.

Quarterback
I really don't know what to say about Cook that hasn't already been said. He durfs a short drag route because he doesn't reset his feet and comes back and throws a perfect strike on the right sideline. He overthrows the ball on an INT after almost throwing an INT on the play before, then throws a dart a little while later. He is patient as a DE zone drops underneath a slant and waits for Burbridge to come open on a TD; the next time he moves off that read and onto the comeback on the other side; the third time he throws it right at the defender zone dropping for a near pick 6.

He's an enigma. He's all over the place. He has a high ceiling and a low floor, but trends toward his ceiling. I thought overall his play was good, but it's crazy how he botches easy throws every once in a while. I get trying to force the ball, that's in his nature, and it's what allows him to make some of the truly impressive throws he does, but the easy throws that he misses are really weird.

I still think he's better throwing left than right, particularly to the sideline. He looks more comfortable throwing in that direction as well. Still would like to see MSU attack the center of the field more and involve the TEs more, we'll see if that develops as the season progresses. But at this point in his college career, I think he just is who he is. He's going to make passes that make your jaw drop, he'll do it multiple times a game, sometimes it'll be because it is so, so bad and inexplicable, more times it'll be because it was amazing.

Running Backs
Both looked good again. I thought there were a few times where guys missed some lanes, particularly on the gap/man schemes like Power. But the blocking was such that, at least once, where London didn't read his pulling block correctly (you want to run off the OG's butt, and the OG had sealed the defender inside; London still went inside) and still picked up 6 yards. That's how dominant the OL was most of the night.

Scott looks good. A lot of the same comments as last game. Has great balance and just doesn't want to go down. He knows how to take contact and keep going. I don't think we saw a lot new from these two, just confirmation of what we saw against WMU.

Wide Receiver
I'm ready to say Burbridge is picking up where Lippett left off. In fact, the resemblance is uncanny. Neither necessarily had great speed to consistently take the top off the defense, but both can at times because of their route running. A few years ago, people were calling for Samuel's head; now he has once again proven that, given the time, he can coach his guys up. The most impressive route was a simple stop route that Burbridge had for a first down where the CB just blew right past him by almost 5 yards. It was so smooth and effortless, and there was such little in the route that gave it away that he wasn't running the seam. And because of that, he was able to turn, present himself to Cook, and it was an easy first down conversion.

Kings has also shown an ability to run really good routes and display solid hands. I still think he loses focus too often though. There are just some things he doesn't do that are smart. He ran a few routes intended to go beyond the sticks short of them, he adjusted incorrectly a couple times as well (I don't believe the INT was one of those times, however). He has a ton of talent, I'd just like him to clean up some of the mistakes he makes.

Tight Ends
Won't add a whole lot. Price looked really good, as he runs really clean routes to allow himself separation. Lyles saw a little action but nothing really his way again. All the TEs seemed to block well for the most part.

Offensive Line
Struggled a little more with some of the gap/man schemes, as I think Oregon was keying that. But where they dominated was some zone runs, particularly to the left side of the LOS. The announcers pointed out a couple times when MSU got to the 2nd level without anyone to block, both of those were on zone runs where it appears Oregon was keying the down blocks it seemed and got caught peaking when MSU successfully executed their combo blocks. This resulted in a number of the Spartan's longer runs, which was nice play calling and execution by the OL.

It's no surprise that MSU was a bit better (or consistent) running left than right, but they were able to go both ways. When Kieler went out, I thought MSU looked a bit better when McGowan slid into play RG and Clark slid out to RT. I really liked what I saw from Clark at RT in the spring, and I really don't think MSU will miss all too much if that's the starting lineup going forward.

Defensive Line
Go rewatch the first Oregon drive of the game, when they marched down the field and scored a TD. Watch Heath get destroyed multiple times on that drive. After the first drive, I thought Oregon had a crack in MSU's front that they could exploit to successfully attack inside and out. But then watch the rest of the game. McDowell is getting a ton of buzz for his performance (rightfully so), but Heath turned his whole game around. He went from being dominated to dominating.

McDowell, as I said, is getting a lot of buzz. The combination of size and speed was always a good sign for him, but the technique has come along nicely as well. What's impressive is that even when his technique breaks down in one area (such as getting too high, which is difficult for him because he's so tall), his technique and ability in other areas help mitigate that. The 4th and goal stop that people are showing off, where he got serious push in the backfield, he was stood up on. That's insane. He was stood up, but was able to get his hands inside the blockers hands and just absolutely control him, on the goal line. Truly impressive.

I think the backup DTs still have some work to do. Evans had a rough few plays later in the game. But the starters are stout. The DEs are also good. Calhoun was able to get pressure consistently, and with the focus on McDowell and Cahoun, the other DEs were able to get in the mix as well. MSU consistently ran 3 and 4 man pressures, and Oregon's QB was clearly feeling the pressure. I thought that was the biggest impact on the game. The Spartans could impact Adams eyes and feet based on 3 and 4 man pass rushes. His mechanics would break down, he would fall off of receivers (sometimes breaking open), but he couldn't find any of them. That's a credit to the DL, 100%.

Linebackers
Bullough did Bullough-like things. His goal line stop, where it looked like Oregon had a walk in TD, was truly impressive. He's getting dispatched, driven by an OL, and he just sinks, gets underneath the blocker, discards him, and makes a tackle that ends up saving 7 points. He was around the ball all night, got off blocks well, and made plays. This is more of what I expected of him after the spring.

I think the other LBs still have to play in space a bit better. Yes, there was some holding, but what makes calling holding difficult is when a defender is getting pushed off the ball. This happened both to Harris and to the CBs on a lot of the screens. If you are getting pushed backwards, it's very difficult from the field for refs to see holding. You have to hold your position better. That comes from your technique and mental understanding of taking on blocks and getting through them. MSU needs to do better at that in space. Pop blockers, discard them, use your hands, get low, shed, and make plays. That was a major reason Oregon was able to gain so many yards underneath.

Cornerbacks
It seemed like MSU played more MEG again in this game, and the CBs coped well. Copeland I thought actually played a better game against the pass in this one, though struggled a little more against the run/screen. Both CBs, more Copeland than Cox, got shoved around a bit by blocks. Have to be stronger taking those on. But Copeland looked better in his MEG coverage than last week, though MSU still isn't jamming as much, the press technique is looking better.

There are still small things for Copeland to clean up; he turned the wrong direction on a fade in one instance where he was able to recover because it was an underthrown ball, but it's the small things now, rather than major breakdowns. Will be interested in seeing if teams try to attack with digs and slants more often though to test the fact that MSU isn't jamming as much.

The backup CBs are a worry though. The last Oregon drive, the CB got beat then fell, not the other way around. They got picked on when they came in the game. So there are still some depth concerns.

Safety
Nicholson's INT was a key example of why you never give up on a play. Nicholson was beat, plain and simple. The slot got clean separation and Nicholson was fighting to get back into trail technique. But he didn't panic. He played his trail technique and showed off his athletic ability and did exactly what he's taught to do as far as reacting to the receiver with the ball in the air. And when the pass was something other than perfect, he had put himself in a position to make a play on the ball and come away with the turnover. It was a truly impressive play.

I still need to see him take better angles to the football, particularly on the short passes. He got picked on when Oregon went PA to suck up the LB and then to the flat quickly, and he took some bad angles then compounded matters by not wrapping up. Needs to do better there.

Williamson had a good game too. His INT was a terrible decision by the QB because Williamson was playing his position exactly like he was taught. He was sitting on that throw and then made a play on the ball.

Etc.
Special teams... yeah. We may need to focus on that a bit more another time.

PODCAST: Breakdown Nebraska/BYU on 1620 the Zone

I got a chance to join Unsportsmanlike Conduct over at 1620 The Zone. Segment 14 on the day, take a listen if you get a chance.

LINK

B5Q - Wisconsin football: Evaluating the Badgers' defense vs. Alabama

Matthew Emmons-USA TODAY Sports

I participated in a Q & A over at Bucky's 5th Quarter recently about what went wrong, and a bit about what went right against Alabama.

Wisconsin's defense has been a top-five squad in terms of total defense since the arrival of defensive coordinator Dave Aranda, but the Badgers ran into a very talented Alabama offense on Saturday led by junior running back Derrick Henry in a 35-17 loss at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas.

Following the loss of redshirt senior safety Michael Caputo, a captain and pronounced leader of the Badgers' defense, Wisconsin gave up 502 yards -- including 274 on the ground.

The Badgers mostly applied a base 3-4 scheme, along with 2-4-5 "peso" nickel package of two defensive linemen as pseudo-defensive tackles, four linebackers and five defensive backs in certain situations to counter Alabama's 11 personnel and other looks the Tide used to throw off Wisconsin.

To help us break down the effort and what went right/wrong for the Badgers, I asked the help of B5Q friend and colleague, SpaceCoyoteBDS -- as he is far smarter than I. You can also read his breakdown of the game seen here.

Follow the link to read more...

Coaching Points: BYU vs Nebraska, 2015

FRANCIS GARDLER/Lincoln Journal Star

Offense: Mostly 11 personnel, mostly gun, but mixed in a bit more under center stuff than last year
Defense: Started heavy with Cover 4 (looked like MOD), switched to more single-high in 2nd half



Overview

• Armstrong looked confident early, lost confidence as protection broke down
• Newby was solid, especially in stretch, but didn't always trust his blocking
• They miss Piersen-El
• TEs are strong in run game, want to see more of them in pass attack
• OL struggled mightily with IZ and in pass protection
• DL still very strong, especially at DT
• DBs and LBs struggled in coverage a lot, but improved when Nebraska went to more Cover 1 and single high coverage.
• I'm not going to talk about the last play

Quarterback
Tommy Armstrong started out the game on fire. He was comfortable in the pocket, comfortable with his reads, and he got to show off his arm strength on some throws to the sideline. The timing looked good and he looked confident. Were these plays scripted? Because it went a bit down hill from there.

The biggest issue for Armstrong, in my opinion, was his protection (more about in a bit). Once he started getting pressured, his feet went kittywampus and his eyes started to drift. You could sense the confidence going out of him. From that point on, he started missing on some of the throws he had just made, started making poorer decisions, and started becoming late with his throws.

Armstrong clearly has the arm strength (I guess pun intended?), but he doesn't look like he has confidence in the offense yet. I don't think these deep passes are the same deep passes he was asked to make in Beck's offense, they are more controlled and precise: a corner route is pretty much a corner route, a post is pretty much a post, take away a lot of the deep seam throws, etc. Armstrong has the capability of making these throws, but you need confidence in where you are making the throw, and the throws need to be on time, or you simply run out of real estate as a receiver and defenders close the gap.

It also seemed like, until the final drive of the 1st half, that Armstrong was hesitant to run with the ball. There were two times early in the game where he could have easily picked up first down yardage once he broke contain, but failed to do so as he waited for someone to come open but never did (both resulted in incomplete passes). Even times when he was breaking the pocket he got tripped up from behind, and it almost seemed like he wasn't sure of himself taking off. An athlete like Armstrong needs to opportunity to make plays with his feet. We'll see if they open him up a bit more.

Running Back
Newby I thought looked pretty good out there, though a little too happy to cut back across the grain (which resulted in some blocks in the back or hold). There were a couple times where the play was open as designed that he tried to improvise or cut back and it ended up worse for the offense. I think there is still a comfort level there for him with some of the schemes, but he even did it on stretch zone, which isn't great.

Wilbon I thought looked like a nice third down back or screen back. He clearly has some ability to catch, though it still looks like he's trying to figure out how to release into the flat and where. He made some nice cuts and made yards that weren't available at times, but I think needs to get a bit better in some of the smaller aspects of his game (pass pro for instance) to be fully utilized and not tip the offense's hand a bit. He also looked like he was trying to do too much in the run game, which resulted in him getting bottled up more than anything.

Wide Receiver
Westerkamp looked very solid as predicted. He went up and got the ball, ran some good routes, and made some plays. There were a few instances where I thought he had a chance to make bigger plays, but that's not really his game. I thought he did well in his role. Rielly provided another good possession option, and had some nice YAC on a catch, but doesn't provide more.

With Pierson-El out, I think Nebraska is really missing that playmaker this offense needs. Moore, Turner, and Morgan filled in admirably, but they aren't in the same league as Pierson-El. That takes a bit away from the WR screen game, jet sweep attack, and some of the drag routes that I thought Nebraska should have thrown more of. It's a solid group right now, but even with Westerkamp's production, I don't think there is anyone the defense always needs to account for for fear of a big play happening if they don't.

Tight End
I still really like what I see out of the TEs in the run game. Outside Foster's TD catch on a wonderfully designed delayed release off of flare action, they didn't provide much in the pass game. That's fine for now, I think Rielly isn't gungho about throwing the ball over the middle of the field too much, and I don't necessarily blame him. But I would like to see them, guys like Sutton, involved on some corner routes and things of that nature, I think they have some potential.

But where they stood out was blocking. I highlighted him in spring and will again here, but Cotton is a guy that just blocks. Asked to seal block, he seal blocks. Asked to kick block, he kicks. He is a huge asset in the run game, and is a reason that I think Nebraska has to set up it's offense with outside zone again.

Offensive Line
The offensive line really did not have a strong game, particularly on the interior. Inside zone is still a bit of a mystery for this group, they are struggling to get vertical displacement with their initial combo blocks and struggling to get off those combo blocks and handle the 2nd level. I know Rielly wants Inside Zone to be his base running play, but these guys simply aren't built or technical enough to do it right now.

Power wasn't a whole lot better. For how well these guys move, the pulls weren't consistent, mostly for targeting issues (attacking the wrong shoulder, getting too deep, things of that nature). It's a work in progress attacking the inside.

Where they looked great was in the zone stretch game, which was the base of Beck's offense. Even when they didn't pick up yards, you see the opportunity to do so, only for it to get nerfed by a filling safety. But they were great at getting seal blocks or at least getting horizontal movement along the front. There is no question to me that they need to start games with more outside zone and establish that before going elsewhere. Once they established it a bit in the 3rd quarter, they were then able to come back with some inside runs and get some chunks. The major threat for this team is off the edge, often behind the TEs, and that should set up everything else. The issue with this is that it does sometimes lead to Armstrong getting happy feet on play action. He looks much better on PA from inside zone or on straight drops where he is clean.

Which brings me to my next thing: pass protection. Yikes. This was a serious issue with repeated breakdowns. Nebraska struggled picking up twist stunt after twist stunt after twist stunt. BYU twisted a LB over a DL again and again and Nebraska's OL got torched on both the left and right side, typically with what looked like to be mistakes by the OGs. RG Kondolo had a poor game overall in most facets. He missed on a pull in the run game, was too high on a few other blocks, but really, really struggled pass protection. His biggest issue is his feet and his bend. When he goes to set himself, he stops moving his feet, and when he stops moving his feet he leans to try to block. He doesn't get a squaty, athletic base to maintain leverage on his target, and because of that he not only gets beat, but whiffs too often. This was the major downfall of the game against BYU, but I'm not sure it has an easy fix (could be just a poor game, could be a sign of a bigger issue that will plague the Cornhuskers this year).

Defensive Line
We all know how high I am on Collins. He was disruptive again in this game, throwing blockers at times, splitting doubles at other times, and in general just whooping people. My one complaint with him continues to be his gap discipline. Sometimes he appears to take the easy approach, and that leaves him outside his gap responsibility. That got exploited a bit by Hill to step up and run with it, but several other times it allowed BYU's QB to extend plays behind the LOS because he could step up in the pocket and then escape from there.

Valentine had the same issue when he failed to complete a stunt which lead to one of Hill's longest runs of the day. But overall, I thought both DTs were very good in this one. It says something when an opponents leading ball carrier at the RB position finishes with 4 carries, it says they don't know how to deal with the opponents DL in the run game.

The DEs looked alright as well. McMullen had some nice pass rushes and the opposite DE didn't seem to stick out, which is probably a good sign there.

Linebacker
This is where position inconsistency started really hurting Nebraska on defense. Banderas looked like the best of the bunch, but even he wasn't great and didn't make nearly enough plays. Young, simply put, looked young out there. He flashed some things, but was a bit all over the place. Where made a couple nice plays in coverage, but mostly got picked on. That was the story of Nebraska's day on defense, discomfort in coverage, particularly zone coverage.

Defensive Back
Which brings us here. Nebraska started the game in what looked to me like Cover 4 MOD (it was some Cover 4 variation) and they seemed to really struggle with it. The biggest issue was failing to cover a man in a zone, as there was way too much separation between defender and receiver. They also blew leverage several times, as if not really sure where help was coming from in the pass game. And they pretty much all got picked on, Kalu, Davie, A. Williams, all had issues in coverage and left too much space between themselves and receivers. Overall, while they each seemed to make some plays, they mostly struggled. With bigger receivers like BYU has, you can't allow them to have that much separation and utilize their body to make catches. You have to get into their bodies and disrupt what they want to do, or else you're going to give up chunks, and that's mostly what happened.

Besides Hill going down, it was Nebraska's shift to a single-high defense primarily (lots of Cover 1, some Cover 3, Cover 1 seemingly more effective) that helped them out. It seemed like the players weren't forced to think as much, worry about where help is coming from and how to leverage the defender and those sorts of things. It still was far from perfect, but using Cover 4 as a change up (which lead to an INT in the slot and nearly another one a few plays before it) seemed to help the defense settle down and be a bit stronger on the backend.

Coaching Points: Wisconsin vs Alabama, 2015

 (VASHA HUNT)

Offense: Inside Zone base with Power O mixed in. Lots of 21 and 12 personnel, mix of under center and gun
Defense: One-gap 3-4, mostly Cover 1



Overview

• Offense sections are short; WR separation a huge issue that snowballed on the offense and you can't pass much more judgement than that.
• Did like what I saw out of the TE unit.
• DL had an awful game overall. Didn't maintain gaps, weren't very disruptive, and didn't maintain hardly a single double team.
• Still like the OLBs, they held the edge well for the most part and applied some strong pressure. Still some concerns in space.
• ILBs had hard task due to DL play; but didn't do enough when blitzing and caught too many blocks when trying to read the play.
• CBs were better in man but zone coverage still an issue.

Quarterback
I actually thought Stave looked pretty good. He was making some very difficult throws into tight windows that had nice tight spirals and were getting into pin-point locations they needed to be. A few times I thought he may have held onto the ball a bit long, but again, there was really tight coverage behind the play. I really think the problems stem from elsewhere.

What impressed me most was his ability to adjust his trajectory and pace on some longer throws. The first down throw to Erickson was a beautiful example, where he put the ball over the 2nd level and underneath the 3rd level. He also threw some bullets into tightly covered underneath players that were great throws. The issues for Wisconsin are elsewhere.

Running Back
I can't pass judgement on the RBs from this game. The holes weren't open up front and there just isn't much more you can say. I'm still a believer in Clement.

I will add that I was very impressed with Ogunbowale as a receiver. Stave threw him the ball quite a bit, but didn't always make it easy on him (sometimes throwing behind him or with an odd pace for how close he was) and Ogunbowale was very smooth with his hands and then trying to make something happen.

FBs need to improve as blockers, they got beat up quite a bit.

Wide Receiver
Where does this team get separation? I really like Erickson against soft zone coverage, he knows how to work into space and he has really good hands, runs good routes, and all that. But no one was able to pull away from Alabama defenders. What that means is that Bama was able to play either man coverage or match up coverage and focus on stopping the run. No one could get open downfield, thus forcing Stave to hold onto the ball and then try to find someone underneath.

I do think Wisconsin is good enough on offense to be good this season, including at WR. Not many teams can do what the Tide did in this game. But this was not a recipe for success.

Tight End
I thought Tight End was actually a bright spot on offense in this game. Yes, the gameplan required them to get a lot of underneath catches, but they made the most of it and it wasn't all easy.

Offensive Line
TBD - Bama has one of the best front 7s in football, and were allowed to bring an 8th in the box besides. I'm going to wait to even talk about how they'll perform this year.

Defensive Line
Anyone want to show up? Goldberg handled his blocks, he was strong at the point of attack, and made some plays because of it. He was also primarily responsible for the 2nd Henry TD run when he got blasted out of his gap by about 3 yards. A few of the DEs did a thing or two sporadically. But for the most part, this was a reversion to last year for the DL, which is not a good thing. Sheehy I don't think maintained a double team all night, as Alabama's already great OL was able to combo the NT straight to the ILBs on nearly every play. Sheehy had an awful game and was primarily responsible for Henry's first TD run, missing an arm tackle in his gap because he didn't get off a block well enough. Obasih is athletic but has the same issues as he's always had, getting washed out at times, standing up, and not consistently using his hands. Alec James flashed a play or two, but otherwise was very meh.

Worse yet, not only were they not holding up to doubles, but they weren't getting off blocks. These guys stayed glued to blocks outside of Goldberg. If you aren't going to keep your LBs clean, at least make some plays yourself, but if you do neither, you're going to have a bad night on defense.

It's unlikely Wisconsin will have to face a better OL this year, but this is a primary reason that got toasted by OSU last season as well. The DL play needs to improve, and I thought it looked improved in Spring, but looked a huge step down in this one.

OLBs
Schobert had a mostly good game. He showed off a great combination of speed and size on a couple pass rushes and was mostly solid in the run game. You'll note (just like last year against OSU) that almost the entire run success was between the tackles. Maybe they could have squeezed down on a few gaps here or there, but that's asking a lot, as I think there was also a play where Schobert did squeeze down too far and though his outside arm was free, he wasn't able to make the tackle on the bounce. It really starts on the interior of the DL. I still think Wisconsin has a great set of OLBs.

I will say that they can still be attacked when forced to play in space a bit. There were several times when the dropping OLB looked uncomfortable.

ILBs
Not the best night for a unit that I thought was going to be solid coming into the season. A lot of the issues stem from the issues up front, but the ILBs aren't without fault.

First, I'll say that Aranda was forced to blitz the ILBs (particularly Edwards) a lot to try to make up for the poor play at the NT position. He was trying to slice through the OL on the inside gaps to cause some havoc, and it simply didn't work. Often times, this took Edwards out of position a bit, but he also didn't consistently make the most out of these blitzes. You'd like to see him get lower, time his blitzes better, and really give a good pop on the OL to prevent them from getting push. Form a wall at the LOS by stopping their momentum. I think they'll be able to do that against some lesser teams, but not Alabama.

Bama's focus seemed to be to get a double out onto Jacobs, which isn't Jacob's strength. Jacob's looked great taking on blocks in the Spring, but that was against a questionable offensive line that was rotating guys and against an offense he was comfortable with. Here, he didn't do as well. He was hesitant a bit with his reads, and he's a bit undersized to boot. Combine that with the fact that Bama's OL was getting out to him almost immediately, it means he had no momentum or strength to counter Alabama's blocks. This means he was catching blocks. Undersized guys catching blocks get put on skates, and they have trouble getting off of said blocks because they don't have the length to get inside the blocker and shed. Jacobs needs to be an attacking player because that's his only way to get inside blockers and pop them with his shoulder pads and then make plays. He needs to do a bit better himself, but the DL needs to do a lot better to help him. He'll look better in future games though, trust me, the Bama OL doesn't roll through every game.

DBs
I thought Shelton looked much better in man coverage, making a couple really nice plays and flashing some recovery ability when he was beat. I really liked how he played for the most part in man coverage. Hillary didn't have his best game however. And this is still a team that struggles a bit in zone, they are too soft back there, too often covering space rather than a man in a zone. With the issues up front, it limited what they were able to do on the backend (and they were forced to commit more guys forward, one of whom wasn't Caputo due to injury), and that really hurt them.

Coaching Points: Michigan State vs Western Michigan, 2015

All photos from: Mike Mulholland | MLive.com

Offense: Mostly man/gap schemes with zone sprinkled in. Still lots of 2-man pass concepts. Multiple personnel/formations.
Defense: Still Cover 4 base, a ton more MOD coverage, particularly to the field. Lots of 5 zone behind 6 man pressure.



Overview

• Cook looked mostly accurate, but seemed too relaxed and was a beat slow going through his progressions and tried to overcompensate with arm (resulting in high throws early)
• London looks like the most improved player since spring
• Run blocking very strong still, Kieler may get attacked in pass pro
• DL very good as expected
• LBs good in the box and on blitz, some struggles finishing in space
• CBs were up and down, struggling in zone coverage and scheme designed to help them
• Zone coverage was too soft on the back end.

Quarterback
Cook was a bit inconsistent on this day, almost as if going through the motions. His pocket was, for the most part, really clean, which allowed him to be patient and prevented some (not all) of the happy feet tendencies when he gets pressured. However, it almost seemed like he felt so comfortable that he started relaxing. I noted around the 2nd quarter that Cook's accuracy was mostly on when he threw on time, particularly over the middle of the field (which was nice to see him attack more consistently early, with nice throws on a dig to Kings and a couple to Price, who needs more targets); and he made some very accurate throws toward the sideline (a nice quick fade when a CB peeked into the backfield and a few corner routes come to mind); but unless it was his first read, he seemed to get his timing off, and once his timing was off he tried to force throws which often resulted in overthrowing the target. It was a half beat or a beat slow for each receiver in his progression; this was most evident on slants and digs, but also a bit on the corner routes. The accuracy allowed for the receivers to still make some catches in some instances, but even then they had to fight for the ball or come back to the ball and in many cases the YAC was limited.

Step into your throw...

We'll see if the urgency is picked up against Oregon. Last year against Oregon, Cook had some moments he was confused, particularly with Oregon's multiple coverages. He needs to avoid getting happy feet under pressure, but he needs to have some urgency and pace to his footwork as he goes through his progressions when the first guy isn't there.

Of note in the passing game: WMU played a lot of tight Cover 1 and ran some Bear front and a spy, they were designing their defense to take away the middle of the field. Because of this, MSU ran verticals, switch verticals, and smash concepts almost all day.

Running Back
London doesn't even look like the same back as the one we saw in the Spring Game. In the spring, I made the point that it seemed like he didn't always run with purpose, his shoulders kind of went where ever, his feet stopped moving on contact as his ducked his shoulders when tacklers came. He had some burst, but it didn't necessarily look like breakaway speed. Against WMU, he looked significantly improved. His shoulders got squared as he attacked the LOS. He lowered his shoulder but continued to churn his feet with purpose, allowing him to fight through contact. There are still some vision issues where he isn't completely comfortable with what is going on in front of him, but one of the advantages of having this group of OL blocking in front of you is that you can get into the 2nd level often as the play intends; he doesn't have to improvise much.

Holmes, on the other hand, looked almost exactly like the same player. That's not necessarily a bad thing, I was impressed with him out of spring, but he continues to be a guy that seems to be getting more comfortable with the position in some of the smaller details. But I like his footwork and I love how he fights through tackles. His feet have purpose when he runs.

LJ Scott had a nice debut. Still some obvious cases of being a freshman, trying to do some things that apparently don't work when everyone is bigger and faster than what you faced in high school. But Scott is a really big body with great balance for his size. The things that stuck out to me was how he took contact. When he was recruited, I stated he reminded me of former Michigan RB Chris Perry, and I still think that's fairly accurate. He doesn't have great lean, but his balance is simply terrific. He stays on his feet and just watches guys kind of bounce off of him. Now WMU is a smaller (and fairly fast) defense, we'll see what happens against some of the bigger defenses MSU still has to face, but he passed the first test.

I also want to shout out Pendleton, who had a couple great blocks on the first couple series. Some nice cut blocks, some nice arc blocks, really a bit of everything.

Wide Receiver
For not a ton of production last season (though some production), this group of receivers seems very well known and understood. Each of Burbridge, Kings, and Price (we'll get to him in a bit) are essentially who we thought they were. Burbridge had some nice catches, one with a long YAC and another one where he played the fade well (he gave cushion between himself and the sideline and used his hands in a non-obvious manner to help gain some last second separation). He was under control, and he was smooth. I'm not quite sure he's MSU's Lippett from last year, but it's a strong start.

Kings had a good start to the game and then dropped some passes later. Kings is a guy that flashes some really nice plays, and then seems to lose focus and have some inexcusable drops. He's a solid receiver though and a solid part of the group, but he needs to be more reliable

Troup still looks like all his injuries are limiting him a bit. He's a big body that has pretty good hands, but he just can't get separation right now. I expect Arnett to continue to take snaps from him.

I liked what Arnett did late, want to see more of him though.

Tight End
Price continues to show why he's one of the better TEs in the league. Good hands and a good blocker, can really do it all. Had some nice routes running the corner route, and even got targeted a couple times over the middle of the field. He needs to be targeted more in coming games though.

Was disappointed not to see more Lyles in this game. Keeping him under wraps for Oregon? I don't know. He's a guy that can create some mismatches as long as he's reliable. He had a really nice down block on a counter play that sprung London's first TD, but then also struggled a bit when asked to reach block. Still more of an H-back in my opinion.

Offensive Line
The top group is very strong. What's best about this group is how well each person pulls. Not just the guards - though both B. Allen and Clark are good blockers - but even the center J. Allen and both Tackles, Conklin and Kieler, had good pulls. On one TD, B. Allen got out of his stance extremely quick and sealed off the sideline about 7 yards downfield, allowing another puller behind him to lead all the way to the end zone. It's a group that just moves really well in space and identifies blockers in the run game very quickly. And MSU did what every they wanted on Counter F and Counter OG off of jet motion in this game.

I wouldn't be surprised if Oregon ran some Bear fronts. For whatever reason, Cook failed to check out of some runs against that, and that forced MSU to go to more straight zone blocking schemes. In those cases, MSU did struggle a bit more to generate movement when their interior OL had to try to get push with single-man blocks. When MSU didn't break free in the run game, that was often (probably more times than not) the reason.

There were some minor concerns in pass protection though. At times, they lost a bit of leverage, and I think Kieler is going to get targeted with some line games in coming games, as he struggled to position himself a bit and where to take his eyes at times, and resulted in Cook feeling some pressure (including the strip sack).

I also think there is a bigger drop off in the depth compared to last year. MSU likes to rotate about 7 guys on the OL, but McGowen seemed to have some struggles, and I guess I didn't notice much from the backup OTs. It just doesn't seem to be where it was last year, where MSU hardly missed a beat.

Defensive Line
One of the best groups in the nation, they did nothing to dispel that in this game.

I thought the most impressive player in this game was McDowell, which seemed to pick up at his peak from last year. At one point, he tossed a LG who was trying to double team him in pass pro and pressure the QB. He showed quickness on a few other snaps to get into the backfield as well. He's going to be difficult to handle for a lot of teams.

Other DTs played well too. I thought there were a few times when Heath and Knox, particularly the latter, got a little overzealous with trying to get into the backfield and got a bit too deep on plays away from them. I'd expect Oregon to come back with traps/whams next week to try to attack that a bit. Evans was exactly as advertised in the run game.

At DE, Calhoun is who he is. He didn't make a huge impact until late, but didn't need to. Other guys were getting home and it was clear there was a focus on him by the WMU OL. LT did some nice things opposite him, and MSU had a lot of success with TEX/EX stunts, where the tackle and end cross. I liked what Cooper did on one rush to really get skinny to split a couple blockers and make himself difficult to block.

One thing I do expect MSU to work on over the week is allowing pressure to escape out the back. There were more than a few times that WMU's QB was able to retreat around pressure and break contain, which puts a lot of pressure on the defense, particularly the coverage. Oregon was able to do that a bit last year as well, and I anticipate Barton (MSU's DL coach) to make that a focus this week.

Linebackers
This group I thought was the least consistent, but flashed both ways. Part of this is more responsibility that seemed to be given to them in the pass game, putting them in a little tougher position. Between the tackles, they mostly looked great. Bullough missed some tackles, but he got to the ball the way he did in the spring. He was very comfortable pressuring the QB, and seemed to be very comfortable picking through the wash to get to the QB. MSU had a ton of success with their 6 man pressure in this game up front (the back end was a little less stellar).

The Money LB spot didn't really standout, which is neither good nor necessarily bad given the circumstances. Both missed a couple tackles, but no more than anyone else. I'd take it considering both Reschne and Frey haven't played on the field much. I thought Reschne looked more instinctual as a LB at this point, and therefore performed a bit better.

Harris at STAR looked very good coming up in run support and very good taking on blocks on screens and things. But he really had some issues playing in space (Bullough as well had some issues with angles and tackling when he was forced to make a play in pursuit from inside-out). His zone drops seemed uncomfortable, and he got picked on again. But again, this is going to get back to the coverage, as he's now tasked with covering a lot more ground.

Cornerbacks
Copeland flashed a little bit, making some nice tackles on the edge and coming away with the INT at end, but I thought he struggled in coverage, particularly zone coverage. WMU was able to pick on both him and Cox quite a bit in this game, though the production didn't always show. It was interesting seeing MSU play their field corner nearly 10 yards off his man quite often, in the past when they played off man to the field it was only about 5 yards off. I think this is for a few reasons: 1) they appeared to be playing more MOD to the field (and at times to both field and boundary) much more often, but also because I think they actually wanted to give him time to turn and run with receivers. WMU ran a lot of fades, and Davis is one of the better WRs MSU will face this year, so from that point it's easy to understand, but Cox got beat cleanly deep a couple times, and Copeland seemed a bit uncomfortable controlling the receiver away from the end zone. He allowed separation and allowed the receiver to maintain spacing with the sideline and to peal off on the back shoulder throws, he needs to get stronger and reroute those throws more into the sideline and use his body a bit better and still needs to get better at defending a man in zone coverage rather than space.

I will say though that Copeland looked much better than he did in the spring. He's making progress, no doubt, as in spring he looked far away from being ready. I think he's mostly ready now, but still needs to refine things. My guess is he's still about a year away from breaking out.

Another interesting note is that MSU jammed much less often than in the past. There was still a lot of press, but they were much more focused on simply turning and running, particularly with Cox (who has struggled with his jam technique previously; Copeland did in spring).

Cox, as I said, also struggled a bit. He looked a bit slow (again, Davis is a really good WR), and seemed to really worry about inside breaking routes, particularly after getting beat on an in once where he failed to wall off the receiver (similar to what happened on a quick slant against OSU). Again, zone was a weakness for him as well. That 5 coverage (3 deep, 2 underneath) needs to get tightened up, because there were some large gaps in coverage back there when the pressure didn't get home immediately.

I thought Copeland looked better than he did in spring, but MSU is really focused on protecting their DBs more this year. MOD coverage and jam MEG (but not press) are a result of getting beat due to poor technique and getting more bodies behind the ball. This is putting more pressure underneath on the LBs, so they'll have to tackle better in space.

I think those to are the clear favorites at playing time going forward though (Hicks still didn't look like he was ready to play physical football, which Dantonio won't allow).

Safeties
Nicholson still looks good, and I still like Williamson. Zones, again, were not a strength, particularly the underneath zones that the safeties are responsible for in the 5 coverage. But they looked good in their nominal coverage for the most part (hard to break on the underneath stuff and not risk getting beat over the top). Think the TD to the TE was on the backside safety, and some of the angles in run pursuit weren't as strong as you'd like them to be, but the safeties are solid. Communication will be essential against Oregon, where we'll really see what the safeties are made of.

Etc.
Oye, kick return. Guys getting out of lanes and guys not making tackles. Nicholson is clearly the clean gunner in their scheme that they want to fly at the return man, so he has a little more freedom (I call him the Sting player, he's supposed to get in front of the ball and blow anything up in front of him as he approaches, allowing the lane filling players to finish the job), so while he looks like he's getting out of his lane at times, I don't think it's on him. But other guys weren't getting off blocks early and were losing their assignments.

Still interested in seeing if MSU mixes some things up in the Oregon game. I think seeing more MOD to field is a direct result of some of the struggles against spread teams last year. I thought they showed a little Cover 1 in the Spring Game, but didn't notice it against WMU. We'll see next week.

Coaching Points: Michigan vs Utah, 2015

Melanie Maxwell | The Ann Arbor News

Offense: Almost even split gun and under center. Man blocking mostly. Lots of personnel groupings.
Defense: Single high defense, mostly Cover 1. Ran mostly nickel grouping with over front and 3 down DL.


Overview

• Rudock overthrew all but one of his deep passes, but typically made right decisions, which is why Harbaugh left him in the game (pick 6 was wrong decision, FWIW)
• Most of the run game issues were on the OL not identifying their targets
• Starting receiver group looked really improved
• Pass protection was very solid
• DL was the strength of the team
• LBs were hit or miss
• DBs struggled early but rebounded, Hill was my standout performer.

Quarterback
Rudock did not play the way most Michigan fans were hoping, that is quite obvious. I'm going to start with a few caveats in defense of Rudock: it was his first game, at game speed, in a new offense; it was his first time working with these receivers at game speed; it was the first game of the season; it was an away game; there was a little bit of wind. To a certain degree, some mistakes were understandable.

Melanie Maxwell | The Ann Arbor News

But Rudock didn't play well enough even despite those reasons. For the most part, he made the correct decisions (outside the Pick 6 and the throw back screen and another poor decision to throw late over the middle), which is good to see in a new offense - and yes, this is a new offense, just because both Michigan and Iowa are "pro-style" doesn't mean they are the same. But I think he had 8 or so downfield pass attempts and overthrew all but one (the poor decision that resulted in a TD pass to a triple covered Butt). He overthrew the corner route to Perry in which Perry adjusted correctly, he overthrew Chesson twice or three times as he broke wide open deep, he overthrew Darboh in the same manner, he over threw Williams on what would have otherwise been a PI if he puts it anywhere near accurate on the seam throw (I don't mind throwing the Williams in the seam, defenses are going to squat on his routes because he doesn't have a lot of speed, you need to take advantage of that when you can or else they'll play him as they did on the Y-stick later in the game, but Williams also isn't very good at using his big body to help shield defenders). You have to give your receivers a chance. Let them go up and get it, let them battle for a PI, let them make plays, which they were actually doing in this game.

I touched on the 2nd INT. The first INT was on Perry, who didn't adjust his route correctly (as noted by the analysts in-game. The third INT - the pick 6 - was a poor decision. Rudock stared down his receiver on an out route and never really identified the coverage. He assumed a soft coverage and didn't get it, you can't assume as a QB, particularly on a quick out, because when you're wrong it's a TD the other way.

Other than that, he was inconsistent. He made some nice plays on the ground, made some nice throws, and also made a bunch of throws that could have been better. The first that comes to mind is a jump throw he made to Williams that was wildly off target, forcing Williams to stop his momentum. Those are small things, but in Harbaugh's offense, those small things that result in 2-4 yards are huge. You pump and go around or change your arm slot or lead Williams, and it's 3rd and 2 instead of 3rd and 5. I think they still got the first down, but those are the things that need to be cleaned up, and that's just an example of something that happened several times in this game.

Running Back
People are down on Smith today, I'm assuming there is a lot of talk about his lack of vision, but I really don't think that was even close to the primary issue. In one instance, on a 2nd and 2, it looked like Smith had a huge gap to the left if he bounced it and ran it up the back of his OL. I don't think people realize on that play that the defender had his outside shoulder free in that outside gap and was squeezing down. Smith had an opportunity in the open field, without about 15 yards open space and one safety, to make a guy miss, and he went right at the defender; he doesn't make guys miss, he makes contact. The point being, that he isn't going to bounce laterally into an occupied hole and get to the edge before he gets swarmed, he made the correct decision for himself in that instance.

Melanie Maxwell | The Ann Arbor News

Smith ran really hard, rarely going down on first contact and always fighting for extra yards. The problems are two-fold: Smith isn't a creative back that works well on instinct; and the offensive line did not perform well at all in this game (more on this later).  On the potential "bounce" play, Smith could have helped himself by threatening the outside gap in an effort to induce flow from the defender and give his offensive lineman some momentum to wash him outside and open up a hole inside. Those are instincts; those are things beyond the play; those are things Smith doesn't do. But when your OL isn't blocking well enough for you, you need more than that. I'm not sure Michigan has that on the roster right now.

What gets forgotten is Isaac on the play right before this, on 1st and 5. He catches a swing pass and jogs out of bounds toward the sideline as a defender flows from inside to out... hit someone! Attack a defender, make contact, make him tackle you, pick up two or three more yards. Isaac should have gotten the first down before that play, but in this game he didn't look too interested in contact. Isaac also missed a huge pass pro pick up, when he started leaking before actually identifying if his defender was dropping or blitzing. Have to clean that up; ensure the protection and the dump off will still be there if the QB gets to it in the progression.

Wide Receiver
I was actually pretty impressed with Chesson and Darboh in this game. Darboh looked a lot more explosive this year than he did last year. He looked like he could threaten DBs in and out of cuts and was a really strong and smart runner after the catch in this game. He read the defense well on his smoke screens and read his blocks from Perry really well.

Chesson showed improved route running, getting behind the defense a few times. Still not a great natural catcher, but if he can keep threatening over the top and if Rudock can finally hit him, then he has provided a need for this offense simply with the threat of going deep.

Perry, as I said, didn't seem quite ready. It's a huge change from High School to college in terms of what you have to see as a receiver. All the route adjustments, complex defenses, faster moving parts, it's a lot to take in. I don't really fault him for having to be in that position at this point in his career. He did make a nice catch late and some nice blocks, I'm interested to see his development over the course of the season.

Everyone else is still a complete unknown, which doesn't say much for depth.

Tight End
Jake Butt is for real. He runs good routes, has great hands, and does the things you need out of the position. He's going to have a good year, and I think the WRs helped him out enough to prevent him from being smothered by bracket coverage. I didn't notice (didn't look too much) how well he blocked in the run game. I know the young guys, like Poggi, struggled a bit in that regard. The biggest issue is their feet: they anticipate where the defender is going and stop moving their feet. Once you lunge, if you guess incorrectly, you're toast. That needs to get cleaned up.

Melanie Maxwell | The Ann Arbor News

Offensive Line
This was a mess. Let me start with the good: pass protection was for the most part very good. Cole struggled a little bit on the edge, sometimes catching the bull rush a bit too deep and so that a nice clean pocket didn't form, or getting beat a bit by the speed rush. Cole didn't have his best game overall. Braden still struggles in pass pro and got whipped on one really badly. But for the most part, the pass protection held up really well. That is easily the biggest improvement for the OL, and an important one. If they can get the run game going at all, that really opens up the field to threaten the defense. Hopefully the protection can lead to some downfield completions that loosen up the defense underneath.

But after incrementally improving over the course of last season, Michigan's OL took a fairly significant step back with the switch to mostly man blocking schemes. Some of it is expected, it's still a new scheme, and they are going up against a defense with some moving parts that frankly, is a very good defensive front 7. But they rarely got good first level movement and failed to identify second level blockers consistently. I'm going to show that with a "Film Review" post as soon as I get video to do so, because the second level blocking was awful. Cole missed and obvious kick block early on a Lead T that forced Isaac to cut inside and turned a 8 yard gain into 4. Braden jumped up through the wrong hole and never even got through to the 2nd level a couple times. Kalis didn't get his eyes to the right spot on several pulls, meaning he never blocked the ILB when he was pulling. Etc. And it was consistent. Too often, defenders were flowing freely because the OL wasn't on the same page, and because of that, and Utah's attacking style, they were essentially able to form a wall at the LOS. That was, by far, the biggest reason for the lack of run game success. And it's damn frustrating to watch.

Also, Braden got submarined on a QB sneak. How the hell, as a LG, do you get pushed 3 yards into the backfield, into your QB, when the only thing you have to do is fire off the ball low and hard and you get a first down. That's just lazy, and that's a serious issue. And it was consistent (getting blown up and shoved into the backfield on run plays). He just really struggles to get low, and I don't think he's the answer at LG (not sure there is one, unfortunately, Dawson didn't look ready in spring either).

Defensive Line
For the most part, the DL was really good. Wormley had a lot of early success spiking inside (slanting a gap inside on the snap). He showed he could fire off low and hard and have the strength to hold off the block and get into the backfield. Along the DL, Glasgow, Henry, Hurst all showed they could get penetration and used their hands extremely effectively. And through all of that, Godin may have been the most consistent. A few chunk plays, and a few key missed tackles, but I thought they performed as the best unit easily.

The Buck position was not so good. RJS had a really rough game, not only getting driven back several times, but also missing tackles. Mario didn't perform consistently, which is against his nature. Most frustrating was the missed tackles behind the LOS. There were opportunities left on the field for quite a few TFL from this position that were missed. Have to finish plays.

Linebackers
Very hit or miss showing from the LBs. Bolden was either a heat seeking missile blowing up blocks or being left grasping at air. He also left his assignment a couple times to try to make a play elsewhere, which ended up costing the defense yards. He needs to stay within what he can do, and when he breaks down in a hole he needs to keep his feet moving.

Morgan had a great PBU at the LOS and was set up on his twist stunt well by the DL that occupied the RG to allow him to come clean. He's still a good player between the tackles, but he gets caught up a bit too often. Durkin's defensive design is for fast players everywhere. It's very multiple, with guys lining up in a variety of places to give the offense a lot of different looks. Unfortunately, for a guy like Morgan, sometimes that leaves them a bit behind the 8-ball. You're trading offensive recognition for not being in an optimal position at the snap, and Morgan struggles to make up for that.

Melanie Maxwell | The Ann Arbor News

Ross showed a few nice plays but didn't see much time with Michigan mostly in the nickel. Gedeon had some time, I expect to see more of him as the season progresses but he still has some work to do.

Coverage out of the backfield is something else they need to clean up. They missed assignments or didn't have the correct communication a couple times (not switching with DBs) that really need to be cleaned up, as Utah was able to run flare routes from the backfield way too easily too often.

Defensive Backs
A lot of people talking about Peppers today, rivals about his struggles in the first half, Michigan fans about his great play in the 2nd half. I want to talk about Michigan's best safety for a bit too. Delano Hill had himself a great game. Hill still has some struggles in zone coverage, but as a guy that comes up and sets the edge, fights through blocks, plays within the scheme and creates defense for others and himself, Hill had a spectacular game from what I saw.

As for Peppers, he struggled a bit early with some two-way releases in the slot. He needs to improve his technique as a CB type player still, that's just the fact of the matter still. He's used to being able to make up for it with his athleticism, but when you get some crafty slots that are good with their feet and good in and out of breaks, your technique (or lack there of) can set you up to fail, and that's where Peppers mostly struggled in the first half. It was corrected a bit in the 2nd half with a little friendlier alignment for him, which was nice to see, and he reacted with some really nice plays, submarining the WR blocks and making TFL on screens. And I'm not a fan of his PI call. I get it, because he didn't look back at the ball, which simply put you just need to do, but I thought he had very good position on the TE, was walling him off and leaning him into the sideline, and both players were kind of hand fighting and grabbing. But you need to look back for the ball.

Wilson struggled a bit in this one, particularly when they slid Hill back to FS and moved Wilson down over a receiver in man coverage. Michigan has to find ways to get him out of those positions, and that was exploited quite a bit. On a quick glance, it seemed that Thomas actually performed a bit better in this game, mostly because he's athletic enough. It's nice to see some things start clicking for Thomas, though he still made a few mistakes.

Stribling had and awful first series, failing to set the edge twice on two huge gains. He promptly got pulled for Clark. He came back in later, supposedly with the problem now corrected, which allowed for Peppers to submarine the WR blocks and make some really nice plays on the WR screens. It's good to see that adjustment and improvement happening in game, though there are still some concerns there overall (he wasn't great in coverage, but not awful, but Wilson - Utah's QB - also wasn't extremely accurate in this game and still put up strong numbers).

They mostly threw away from Lewis, and rightly so. He had very nice PBUs the three times (I believe) he was thrown at. Very good first showing for him.

Etc.
One of the things that stood out to me was the multiplicity of the defense. I need to watch again to really get a feel for all that was going on there. Lots of moving parts, lots of subbing (and not platooning), lots of looks. Defense should improve as they get more comfortable with it, Michigan's defense certainly isn't as easy to diagnose as they were in the past, but that sometimes also leads to mistakes as they are now asked to do more.

Defense did have some chances at turnovers, a few tipped balls and one on the ground. They need to get some of those and help the offense out a bit more.

Overall, I think the better team won, but Michigan had their chances (plenty) to steal this game, which at least is some reason for optimism. This Michigan team is a lot like last year's team as far as strengths and weaknesses, but the nice thing here is it seems like the mistakes are much more correctable this year. The run game should improve, though as of right now it's hard to see it being above average even with improvement. But switching to a mostly man based scheme takes time, it's hard to execute it at a really high level (zone blocking is easier to pick up more quickly because the rules are more simple, man blocking takes more time, but in my opinion, becomes a stronger run style once it gets executed well). The overthrows, some of the mistakes on the offense, even some of the mistakes on the defense, seem to be correctable, which is reason for some optimism. But there are still some holes in this team, both offensively and defensively that the better teams can take advantage of. It's going to take time for Michigan to get back to where they want to be, but there does seem to be a path forward.

Inside the Playbook: Breaking Down Michigan's DL Scheme and Personnel

Recently on MGoBlog, Brian wrote a piece previewing the defense as far as his expectations. In the past couple days, he's also discussed the Defensive Line and looked at the recently released Michigan depth chart. A question keeps arising, unknowingly getting answered, and then asked again. It's a common confusion, and an understandable one when looking at nomenclature of football.

AP Photo

In this post, I'm going to look at Michigan's DL and why Henry is playing 5-Tech (nominally, from now on called End) and Wormley is playing 3-Tech (nominally, from now on called Tackle).


What is Michigan Running?
I agree with Brian that this is a 4-3 Under. Michigan isn't going out there with a LOLB and a ROLB, and they aren't going out there and doing a lot of two gapping (though a 4-3 under will often two-gap somewhere). It's a 4-3 Under with a standup end sometimes. Furthermore, the defense will not consistently keep two guys in two-point stances and shift the DL every which way, like Wisconsin's one-gap 3-4.

This is a 4-3 Under all the way. Let's remind everyone of the gap assignments:

And let's take a look at what a nominal 4-3 Under looks like, the one most of you are familiar with from the early Mattison years.

Here, we're going to call the Weakside DE (WDE, 7-Tech) the Buck (it's Buck because "B" stands for Backer, like how MIKE is for Middle in middle LB), to keep with Durkin's terminology. He is, in fact, more DE than LB, but he will occasionally drop (see image below). The strongside DE (SDE, 5-Tech) we will simply call the End. The 3-Tech we are going to call a DT (or tackle). The 1-Tech we will call a NT (Nose).

MGOBLOG

This is close to what Michigan is running, but not quite. Actually, the image above is closer to what Michigan will now run than what Michigan nominally ran with Mattison as the DC. Notice how Beyer (the SAM LB at the top of the screen) is in a loose position. For Michigan fans, this is similar to how Greg Robinson deployed Stevie Brown in his 4-3 Under, when Stevie Brown managed to have a very good Senior year. This is what we call a "Loose" alignment, meaning he's 5-and-5 (5 yards off the LOS, 5 yards outside the offensive EMOL). Ross, the WILL in the picture above, is also playing a Loose technique (in this case, it is to allow the dropping DE to play an inside zone or spy and to allow the WILL to play the outside Flat Zone, where there is more likely to be an immediate threat in the pass game).

With Ross, an undersized SAM LB, Michigan will continue playing more of a 4-3 Under Loose.

Many 4-3 Under teams traditionally move the FS down into the box as the 8th man and rotate the SS to the center of the field. They do this because the Buck and DT generally protect the FS from having to face any wash, something the ILBs (WILL and MIKE) are more accustomed to. It'll look like this:

But Michigan won't be doing that as much this year. Instead, the SS (who always aligns to pass strength) will be the 8th man in the box. He can be inserted like this:

But more often he will align closer to this.

This essentially makes the SAM another ILB. He's protected a bit by the End, and the defense won't get out flanked because the SS holds the edge and the SAM can work over the top to provide additional support.

Wormley and Henry Primer
As a primer, Wormley is a guy that came in as a projected SDE. He was expected to be between 270 and 300 lbs. He has good straight line speed for his size and displays excellent burst when he's comfortable with what is in front of him. Unfortunately for him (and fortunately in some ways), he's also very long and tall. With hesitation sometimes coming when he has to take blocks from different angles, he often stands up. This leads to him struggling to handle doubles.

Henry on the other hand, was always a DT. He was projected as a slashing, penetrating 3-Tech that could also slide down and play the Nose if needed. He's more of a squaty player, but has the first step to beat OL to the spot he wants. This first step quickness gives him potential to be a two-gap player, and his squaty build also gives him the stout base to prevent him from getting clobbered when he's forced to choose one of two gaps. He also stands up too high at times, but has the strength to fight back against it.

Brian previewed these guys well in the DL articles linked above, and there is video there to demonstrate these traits in these players.

So Why The Position Switch

The Double Team
As I said, it's been explained, but never really answered. But the answer is quite obvious once it's pointed out. Wormley struggles more against doubles, and the 3-tech will almost never get doubled. The 5-tech will get doubled, possibly on about half the plays, especially with the way Michigan will align.

Notice the 3-tech isn't doubled on the run his direction.

This means that the 5-tech has to hold up to double teams quite often, it also means the 3-tech can simply be let loose to be a penetrating force on the interior. If you can get that out of your 3-tech, you cut off half the field and give the Buck a lot more options as a pass rusher, because he doesn't have to be as preoccupied with the rush.

Whether the SAM is in a Loose alignment or inside, initially, the 5-tech will often get doubled against zone based rushing attacks.

Here, the 3-tech is doubled, so he has to be able to handle that a bit, but the double likely doesn't last as long as the OL tries to get out to the WILL, and it is on the backside of the play.

Against man blocking schemes, he'll get doubled on essentially every strongside run (Power O and Counter F, for example)

He has to hold up at that position for the rush defense to have success. If he doesn't hold up, he gets washed into the ILB, and large creases in the defense form, particularly when the SAM is playing in a Loose alignmnet.

Two-Gap Player
But there is one more thing that 4-3 Under teams tend to do. From Pete Carroll to Will Muschamp (and I'd assume Durkin), these 4-3 Under coaches love to two-gap with the 5-tech, meaning they'll line him up over the top of the OT (4-tech).

It is from this End position that Seattle deploys all-everything Michael Bennett, and why they drafted Frank Clark to be his backup. It's a guy that can slide inside or play outside. It is a guy you can play games with while keeping the base of your defense the same. Keep things simple for the 3-Tech and let him attack, but get a 5-Tech that can do a little bit of everything.

This scheme has been described well in several places (here, here, here, here). That is what Henry is going to be asked to do on normal downs and distances. It is likely that Henry slides back inside on passing downs in some instances, as Wormley is the more natural outside rusher. Both may play inside and another Buck come into the fold. But this is why Michigan's depth chart looks the way it does today.

In this way, the DE can get more involved on a run away from him

He can also confuse the blocking on runs his direction, a set up the MIKE to beat his blocker to the spot he wants to get to in his run fit.

The ability to two-gap allows the End to blow up blocking assignments at the point of attack (think of an opposite side blocker trying to trap him, he can easily see it coming) or squeeze inside a block and make a play in the backfield (think of the OG to his side pulling away and the End blowing up the run from the backside). Either way, he is able to be more instinctual and be more involved, and the MIKE can correct him. This also helps him be more fluid and instinctual in his pass rush. Of course, this does take a player that can handle doubles, read plays, and still be athletic enough to make plays. Michigan is looking for Henry to be that guy.