GBMW: Grade Card — Eastern Michigan versus Michigan
The Grade Card – UM Versus Eastern Michigan University
Remember, this is not a perfect art but doing this is fun. Last week, one reader mentioned that the grade for the offensive line might have been a little rough. That is a real possibility. But the big uglies deserve the most love on the team, good, bad, or ugly.
Grading scale:
A Outstanding accomplishment in this area, a factor that decided the outcome or controlled the destiny of the game.
B A solid effort marked by strong contribution, clearly on the positive side.
C A wash, the unit broke even with the opponent.
D The opponent clearly held an advantage that impacted the game.
F- The unit essentially made it possible for the opponent to win, in the entirety of the game, not just a selected play. A clear mismatch that was repeatedly exploited by the opposition.
Offensive Line- B+
Great holes for Carlos and the others, but Coach English’s blitz package caused some grief. This group is starting to be consistent and is an asset. The real question remaining is how will this group hold up against the elites? Hopefully, Moose gets back and Molk is not too bad off. Molk is smart and is the glue to what the line accomplishes. Ferrara impressed.
Quarterbacks- B
There were both obvious positives and negatives, but when the positives result in touchdowns, that balances the scale to the good side. Denard is going to be so “entertaining” and so will Tate. I was informed by several fans of another Big 11 team that Denard only scored on his takeoffs because he is running against slow MAC talent and that there are 15-20 faster players in the conference. Those boys are off, Denard will make some defensive coordinators neural junctions lock up before all is said and done.
Wideouts-B
Odoms had a pretty good game and it is hard to give a grade with so little coming the way of the receivers. It is a shame Mo bobbled the one ball as DRob seemed to be off and running on the series. I still do not think UM has shown all the cards on the tight end package. Coach Rod mentioned an improvement in the wideout blocking.
Backs-A
The backs are only as good as the line, so the old expression goes, but every single one of them ran very hard. Michael Shaw was so close to breaking several tackles for even bigger gains. But in doing so the ball position was a little vulnerable. This is an age-old question coaches deal with: protect the ball or turn the guy loose and hit the home run. Vinnie Smith could step in and get a few if needed as well. Let us hope Minor is really healthy by the Iowa game. UM is going to need physical tough yardage in back-to-back weeks against Iowa and MSU.
D-line-B
No one got gashed but the performance was far from dominating.
Linebackers-C-
Some will say this is a kind grade. This group missed Mouton. Leach played hard but as mentioned in the wrap up article, both he an Obi were attacked hard. They came through the breach but not unscathed. Things in the second half went better, but why so is the obvious question. Perhaps adjustments, perhaps conditioning, perhaps UM gained a sizable lead and the Eastern staff had to bring the ball a little more. Priest is a good back, but every Big Ten team should have a back the equal or superior.
D-backs- B
When you are on an island the microscope gains magnification and resolution. Something like this will be stated very often this year. The corners certainly did not receive the testing that ND mustered, but Eastern was not afraid to take well-selected shots down the sidelines. I thought Woolfolk played pretty well, but again any injury to the back seven puts the defense in dire straits.
Special Teams- B
The kickoff and kickoff return squads did ok, but UM now needs better than ok. Stonum needed one good block to break the big one and he misread a couple of holes. The kickoff return team was a shred away from giving up a couple of long bustoffs. One player made enough contact to prevent the big play, but this group will likely hear fight through the block and converge as a wolfpack, not the lone hunter.
Coaches-A-
UM was not flat. The game plan was very sound. Again in the second half- the defense plugged the hole in the dam. There were few decisions to make of any consequence in the game and that sometimes is a sign of good coaching. Penalties were at a minimum and again UM played well in the second half. Last year the team needed a GPS to find the field in the second half, except for Wisky and Utah of course.
Three and 0 and this team should be heading to 4 and 0. But nothing is certain and a very rugged midterm exam arrives soon in back to back weeks on the road with Iowa and Michigan State.
Thanks for stopping by Go Blue Michigan Wolverine
If you have any questions please E-Mail
Written by Doc4Blu
