Michigan Football, Team 139, 2018 Season

[hack]

From Chengelis story today. I choose to read into that that with a few consistent weeks in practice one of Hudson or Mayfield will force their way on the field.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Reasonable ....... I've read a few good posts about Chengelis' take.

Mayfield, despite his apparently prodigious skill set as an OT, is not mentally or physically prepared to take on guys like Nick Bosa. One poster I read said, he still has that wide-eyed look of a youngster who first sets his foot on the big stage of live Big ten football in front of 100,000+ fans in the Big House. When challenged, "how can you see his eyes through his helmet, he looked pretty good to me? The response from another post in defense was that so and so who made the wide eyed comment has played OT at the college level and is a HS coach. He has a feel for what he's talking about.

I don't know if the wide-eyed comment is accurate or not but it makes sense. Hudson, OTH, will probably get more reps in practice and if he grows into those I can see him getting more play at RT. As a starter, dunno. Right now, I think JH is satisfied with scheming around Jon Runyan's liabilities and for all we know, he's playing a lot better than he is given credit for by us armchair coaches. He has played. A lot. I think most football coaches will say live game action, reps in the heat of battle and not in practice, are worth a ton.

[WM Wolverine]

Only reason Runyan is still playing is his backup isn't a better option. M is scheming around his weaknesses and he had a few drive killing mistakes vs ND. ??????i thought he deserved pulled during the ND game and the UFR only confirmed what I saw live.

[hack]

Maybe it's just hope on my end, but I'm reading into this that Hudson is ready but has to practice hard if he wants a shot at it.

[Jeff Buchanan]

There's another post today regarding a Q&A at some athletic club on Monday where he was asked about the OT play in the context of the current starters. He switched right to Mayfield and Hudson giving them hi praise. Maybe he misunderstood the question, didn't hear it correctly that the asker wan't him to talk about Jon Runyan and JBBor purposefully switched off to Hudson and mayfield becasue he didn't want to talk about either of the starters.

it's also possible that the poster who reported this read too much into it. But there is no escaping the ND UFR Offense with regard to the protections grade. It makes Patterson quite a star that he has been able to stay upright, rack up a decent completion percentage and make some really good throws.

There's no telling who is going to show up v. SMU. I would think Warriner would want to keep the 1s in tact and see if some of them are at their ceiling and not getting any better or are advancing, improving. Some of the stuff an OT has to do is opponent independent so, coaches are still getting data.

[WM Wolverine]

Mayfield just arrived on campus in June, Hudson moved to offensive tackle from defense just before his freshman season. Steuber has missed fall camp due to injury, unsure when he's expected back.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Angliques, DetNews article on Patterson:

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/wolverines/2018/09/12/um-qb-patterson-suggests-fans-relax-little-bit/1276896002/

[Hannibal]

Whether Notre Dame is very good is up for debate. Ball State gave them a one score game too.

[iam416]

That really is the question.

[WM Wolverine]

Ball State must be really good then?

[Jeff Buchanan]

To that end, has anyone seen any PFF grades for ND after 2 weeks? Somebody put up some of M's grades at mgo. Shea scored in the 90s and Hornibrook was a point above him in the Big QBs scores. I think Bush and Gary were in there two but scoring only in the hi 70s, meaning good enough but not great. Higdon wasn't scored becasue he didn't have 20 plays - that's the minimum to get scored by PFF a pay-walled site.

[Hannibal]

I don't know but they had about 350 yards and 24 first downs against ND. Normally a MAC team doesn't put up those kinds of numbers against an steel-walled fortress.

[iam416]

Ball State played almost the identical game against ND that M did, except they were probably slightly more effective on offense and less effective on defense.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I know some people don't like Seth's Neck Sharpies posts. I do so, you're gonna get a link so youse football neanderthals posting here can at least try to get an understanding of football to carry on meaningful discussions.

So, this article is about one play run a couple of different ways by Harbaugh. It explicitly demonstrates, according to the author, why Harbaughffense's run game is sophisticated beyond what most think it is or, the notion that the power run game in Harbaughffense is antiquated. It's not and here's why. Mike DeBord did nothing like this when he was running Debordian power where every defense knew exactly what was coming.

When I first saw the play, and before Seth's useful article, I thought it was a standard pin and pull play that worked. So what. In it Evans got loose on the play side for a big gain. But it's not a pin and pull and there is the clever deception. It's a play that pulled on the frontside like power but blocked zone on the backside. The purpose is to give the opponent blocks that he wasn't expecting after the snap so as to create gaps not otherwise anticipated by the D. In one play it works perfectly. Evans is through the gap and gone. On the 2nd play with the same intent on the opposite side of the offensive line but against a defense that had adjusted to it the 1st time it was run, it doesn't work for two reasons: it wasn't executed as well and WMU defended it better.

Now I'm new to some of this detail and someone better than I at football may say, shit, this is the chess match that goes on all the time. Nothing to see here unique or unexpected at all. Fine. You're lying.

https://mgoblog.com/content/neck-sha...power-all-zone

[hack]

I personally don't understand the link to DeBord. If anything what Harbaugh does is the opposite -- too complex. That's what Dantonio was talking about in the post-game last year. 40 different sets, or whatever. A lot of that certainly is complexity to mask simplicity -- we have our bread and butter but we move around before the snap and run it out of different formations to confuse you. But the point of this post is to say that calling him a DeBord is clearly off the mark and I don't know who is saying that.