Positional Group Grade Card – UMass Versus UM — Offense
Posted at 8:00am — 9/20/2010
Positional Group Grade Card – UMass Versus UM — Offense
This grade card is a tale of two teams, and that is not good. It is the best in the class and the worst in the class; again this is not good. And so this weekly feature starts with the very good, namely the offense, and concludes with the bad (the defense) and the ugly (the special teams).
The Michigan Offense-
The combined grade for the unit is A-. The overall yardage for this group was 520 yards in total offense, 42 points, and, importantly, much more explosive diversity that was somewhat missing in the first two games. Only the interception turnover and a very sluggish 1st quarter prevented the overall grade from being an A. The yardage would have topped 600 if the offense had been given the normal amount of time on the field. The performance was pretty impressive in the second half, especially considering the amount of time the offense spent as spectators on the sideline.
Quarterback- Grade A-Although originally the thought was that this grade would be based on two or three players, only one, Denard Robinson played. Coach Rod had no choice with the score being what it was. Denard had another big day and, even in the midst of this bizarre game, he still appears to be improving, notwithstanding the pick down the middle. Denard had 120 yards rushing, one TD rushing, and was 10-14 passing with two TD’s. This was with the UMass defense concentrating almost solely on him. During Saturday’s game Denard made a couple of Houdini escapes that only a superior athlete could execute. Only the Interception and some sloppy ball handling (looking downfield and peeking early) stopped this from being an A.
RB’s- B+ This was a much better effort, 170 yards, 3 TD’s, and over 6 yards per carry. It was very good to see Mike Shaw step up. The offense will only get better if the line and backs supply a viable option to running Denard over 25 times per game.
O Line- B+ The unit gave up only one sack, but UMass did get some pressure. UM fans have to give UMass some credit, the Minutemen did a decent job of contain regarding the run. Only an average 1st quarter stopped this group from achieving a higher grade. In the second half UMass was gashed at will when the offense had a chance to get on the field. Michigan, late in the game, went to an I formation and could not convert on two short yardage plays in the power game. This is not a good sign. The knock on the zone read blocking scheme is that short yardage situations are troublesome and the line is not as physical as need be when converting back to base blocking. That happened when Michigan could not connect on a third and one against a defense that had been gashed, as a defender sprinted right past a lead-blocker fullback to sack the Michigan running back in the backfield. But in the zone scheme backside linemen were spotted downfield blocking and moving well.
Slots and SE’s- A- This was one of the best SE/slot performances demonstrated recently by the offense. The group was very explosive and generated big plays. Stonum continues to work hard and contribute. There also was a Hemingway sighting. Stonum’s big play, a screen, was a good call since the inside of the UMass defense sold out up the middle expecting a Denard run. Stonum slipped the defender and that was all that was needed. We thought the overall blocking from this group could have been a little better.
Written by GBMWolverine Staff
Go Blue — Wear Maize!