GBMWolverine: Coach’s Corner — Michigan Football — Michigan at Michigan State — What Happened and What It Means

Posted at 6:00am — 10/18/2011

GBMWolverine: Coach’s Corner — Michigan Football — Michigan at Michigan State — What Happened and What It Means — Part I

This week there is plenty to look back and comment on and plenty to take into the future. The opinion here is the game was not exclusively gloom and doom.

First off, a look back at the preview of what may happen from last week. The prediction was a seven to ten point MSU victory. That was on target, as the late pick change the margin to 14 points.

It was levied that the physical part of football would be the deciding factor and that the team that could run and stop the other team from running was the probable winner. This came true and the clear difference right now between the two teams centers on line play and overall physical play. By the way, the above statement and prediction does not reek of genius, but instead of obvious self-evident truths.

Next, the running attack was discussed and the danger of Michigan giving up the edge. This happened, just to a degree that Michigan State could control a good part of what was happening on the field. Baker did a nice job of reading his blocker’s shoulder and dipping in, out, or cutting back. It is irksome to me that years ago the position was put forth that certain Michigan folks did not want Baker, he was simply not a fit for the spread. Baker is good enough to contribute in many offenses, the power game being the most obvious. But, the edge was obtained by Michigan State. The edge was also taken in the passing game as Cousins hit a few important outs. Frankly, I think Michigan gave this and prevented worse damage downfield.

The next item discussed was the difference a big strong-armed quarterback could make in this game by providing a balanced attack. This proved to be so as Michigan could not run effectively because Michigan could not pass effectively. The UM staff knew that MSU would bring the fort from everywhere and the remedy is to make a zone blitz team that sends the fort pay with passes that yield big yardage. Only once on the slant for the second touchdown did UM make the Spartans pay.

The Wolverines did a nice job on many of MSU’s pet patterns that yield big yardage. The view here is that the secondary played reasonably well and is making progress. Michigan State sent slots and tight ends to vacated spots when Mattison rolled the dice. MSU could pick the blitz up and make the play.

Even though UM knew that MSU would blitz, the Spartan’s job was made easier by the entire defense being able to time the snap on the silent count and take off beating UM blockers to the spot. UM will need to work on changing up the count, etc. or Nebraska and Ohio State will tee off in the same manner. I had an eye on Molk a good part of the day and the opinion here is he did a decent job. But a center cannot block three guys, and the other two guys running up the A gaps caused instant havoc.

The outside blitz was poorly read by Denard and not reacted to by the Michigan offense. Backs missed blocks, blitzers were unaccounted for, and blockers were beat. Again, this goes back to the defense timing up the snap and being correct in the gamble.

There was no real Michigan antidote for the blitz package. The preview mentioned Michigan trying to get to the edge. MSU controlled the edge and that did not work. Swings and quick screens were discussed, none occurred and frankly that is puzzling. The other option presented to attack the blitz was the quick slant and that worked once. The patterns were open many times but the ball has to be in the same zip code.

Please comment on our GBMWolverine Message Board about this article and read what others comment.

You can contact us at our e-mail address: GBMWolverine

Written by GBMWolverine Staff

Go Blue — Wear Maize!

Home/Michigan Football