Jim Harbaugh, Come on down

Since Michigan's last demoralizing loss at the hands of Ohio State, I kept telling people, "I think Rich Rod will probably be around next year. But the team has to at least be competitive in the bowl game." This is no longer the case. For all intents and purposes, Rich Rodriguez is no longer the head coach at Michigan. Dave Brandon will avoid the media until Wednesday or Thursday when he can officially announce that Rodriguez has been canned and they're beginning the coaching search, which will be over in a day or two when Michigan and Jim Harbaugh come to terms on a contract.

This is disappointing because it means the end of the spread offense at Michigan and more importantly, Denard Robinson, who will land on his feet after a redshirt year at some spread offense powerhouse (see: Auburn, Oregon, etc.). Losing Denard will be the biggest disappointment of all because aside from being an incredible athlete and football talent, he's the kind of kid you want to be the face of your program. So Michigan will be tossed back into the throes of attrition and rebuilding as a new coaching staff looks to maintain the current roster and rebuild a new one. Whether or not they have a redshirt freshman Devin Gardner to take the reigns a la Pryor at Ohio State is yet to be seen, but regardless, Michigan is going to be seriously devoid of talent at key positions once again.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Saturday, Michigan was killed. It wasn't even competitive. Part of that was talent: the defense is still remarkably young, poorly coached, and lacking in physical skills. But worse was the playcalling, and this time, not just Greg Robinson's. Michigan didn't do anything on either side of the ball. Mississippi State was, as they showed all year, blitzing like mad men and yet Michigan kept handing the ball off to Vincent "Can't Break a Tackle" Smith who was slaughtered to the tune of 1.9 YPC. The Denard one-man play action wasn't shown once, a play that would've been effective against the Bulldogs defense. Michigan threw about a half dozen screens, a common method for slowing down a blitz. Mississippi State said, "We're going to sell out on the run" and Michigan kept running the ball. This was not an impressive performance from the offensive coaching staff.

On the defensive side of the ball, you have to feel for the linemen, who had to play 80+ defensive snaps and managed to hold the 16th best rushing attack in the country to 3.5 YPC. The secondary, on the other hand, was exactly what we've come to expect: nonexistent. Chris Relf, who is mediocre at best, went 18/23 (what?!?!) for 281 yards, 3 TDs, and 1 INT. This defense has gotten no better throughout the year and might be the worst in the country. This is an utter embarrassment and it'll be interesting to see what players get substantial playing time next year with the coaching overhaul.

Bullets

• Mississippi St. was 5/5 of fourth down. There was no need to punt the ball because Michigan was unable to stop the Bulldogs from getting 1-2 yards on any play. Reasonable coaches against any other defense in the same position would've kicked the ball 5/5 times. But since Michigan's defense is so terrible, punting was a ludicrous options.
• Denard was held mostly in check going 27/41 through the air for 254 yards. Michigan's coaches kept putting the offense behind the chains by running the same read-option on first down that Mississippi St. was selling out against. Denard did make two of his best throws as a Wolverine in this game (the touchdown passes), but he was put in such awful situations all game that his passing stats look unimpressive at best.
• Relf is bigger than most of Michigan's defenders and ran over all of them.
• Why Rodriguez thought it was a reasonable idea to attempt any field goals in this game is beyond me. Michigan's kickers can't kick.
• Martavious Odoms was a revelation on kick returns. It's a shame he's been out the whole season.
• Michigan's other receivers all looked good in this game, making difficult catches to bail out Denard and the offense in tough situations.
• Michigan's first drive was impressive, but it was clear right away that it wasn't replicable in the long term. The team was in too many third and long situations to expect them to be that successful all day. Michigan didn't make any adjustments all game and it showed.

Going forward, it'll probably be a lot of insider news that this blog isn't great (or concerned with) breaking. Big news will come in the form of coaching announcements, recruit commits/decommits, and other general whathaveyou. I doubt I'll do much posting about the Gator Bowl, making basketball more of a focus. I'll also try to do report cards for all players and coaches throughout the offseason. Time to hunker down and hope that this "coaching search"* goes as smoothly as planned.

*For the record, if Harbaugh ends up taking an NFL job, I'd bet that Rodriguez is around for another year with a new defensive coaching staff. But with the kind of money that Michigan is going to throw at Harbaugh, it's probably close to a done deal that he comes back.

Gator Bowl preview

For better or worse, tomorrow's Gator Bowl against Mississippi St. may very well determine the eventual end of Rich Rodriguez's rocky tenure at Michigan. And if Michigan already has an unspoken agreement with Jim Harbaugh to take the reigns next year, tomorrow's game marks the end of the spread option, and with it, Denard Robinson at Michigan. These are all things that disappoint me immensely as a pretty devout Rodriguez supporter, but are things that I can accept and totally understand. If you're still of the mind that the Gator Bowl actually means something for Rodriguez's resume as I am, then tomorrow's game will really be something to watch. Let's get on with it:

The Numbers

Mississippi St. Defense Offense Passing 89th nationally 236.42 YPG 83rd nationally 192.25 YPG Rushing 19th nationally 121.67 YPG 16th nationally 215.75 YPG Scoring 27td nationally 20.33 PPG 58th nationally 27.08 PPG

Michigan Defense Offense Passing 111th nationally 260.25 YPG 35th nationally 249.83 YPG Rushing 94th nationally 187.67 YPG 11th nationally 251.08 YPG Scoring 102nd nationally 33.83 PPG 22nd nationally 34.33 PPG

Nothing new here on Michigan's side: The defense is terrible, hovering around 100th in nearly every statistical category, and the offense is fearsome. Mississippi St., on the other hand, is an interesting creature. They run a blitz-heavy defense that's stout against the run and vulnerable against the pass. Their rankings make perfect sense of their playing styles: the blitzing stops teams from scoring touchdowns in the end zone when the field compresses but allows a decent amount of yardage elsewhere, hence the weak passing defense and high scoring defense ranking. Their offense, meanwhile, is painfully similar to Illinois': run-first triple option attack led by an athlete who has trouble passing the ball.

Michigan's offense vs. Mississippi St.'s defense
We'll begin with the positive. As I've outlined numerous times, Michigan should be able to move the ball against Mississippi St.'s defense. Despite the strong rushing statistics, the Bulldogs' defense has a lot of holes in it, the most glaring of which is a fundamental problem with the way that they defense screens. In short, Mississippi St., in order to bring adequate blitz pressure on most plays, doesn't have enough defenders on the strong side of the field to properly defend the screen game. This will be a huge point of yardage for Denard and company on Saturday.

The hope is that if Michigan is successful enough in the passing game, it'll open up holes for Denard and and the backs to run through. Either that or Michigan will be able to run away from blitzes creating lanes downfield and the potential for big plays. A healthy Denard should help with a bit of scurrying around in the backfield, and the health of his shoulder should allow him to make good throws to the flats.

Michigan has faced its fair share of good defenses this year and moved the ball effectively against of them. And for the most part, opposing defenses are usually more uniformly sound than Mississippi St.'s. The only way the Bulldogs are going to slow down Michigan's attack is getting negative plays, primarily in the red zone, where Michigan will invariably have to go for it on fourth down due to a total lack of a kicking game. But you knew that already.

Michigan's defense vs. Mississippi St.'s offense
This is somewhat less rosy. As I mentioned above, the Bulldogs' offense is remarkably similar to Illinois', which managed 45 points in regulation and 65 overall against Michigan. Quarterback Chris Relf is a Terrelle Pryor-sized Nathan Scheelhaase, with most of the ominous implications that that carries: difficult to tackle because of his size, makes good cuts, sees the field well, and is generally going to be a tough matchup for a young Michigan defense.

On the other hand, Relf throws about as well as the aforementioned Big Ten signal callers (if not a little worse). He's had one good day through the air this year (against a good Arkansas defense) but is generally inaccurate and unreliable. Saying Relf can hit open receivers doesn't even paint the right picture: he very often over or under throws receivers that have found themselves open because of linebackers and safeties overcompensating against the run. That's not to say he doesn't have the tools though. Relf has a rocket arm and can make all of the throws. He just can't make all of them accurately.

Stopping the Mississippi St. offense depends on the reaction time of Michigan's linebackers and safeties, and their ability to tackle Relf and company in space. Fortunately, the Mississippi St. supporting cast is uninspiring. Starting running back Vick Ballard is basically league average, and the offensive line is mediocre. Meanwhile, the Bulldogs will be without their best wide receiver Chad Bumphis.

Prediction
From every angle, this game looks like a toss up. Michigan has a great offense and terrible defense. Mississippi St. is a little more balanced but is average overall on both offense and defense. Per usual, winning the turnover battle will be key, especially with two teams that, on paper, appear to be evenly matched.

After watching a lot of Mississippi St. games, I feel relatively confident that Michigan can win this one, especially if Denard's rumored health sees him return to the unflappable Shoelace of earlier this season. This is probably a homer's prediction, but I don't like picking against Michigan when a game looks not only winnable but more or less like a coin flip. Michigan 42-38

Mississippi State: Last post about screens... probably

A series on Michigan's Gator Bowl opponent. You can find all preview content on the 2011 Gator Bowl page in the sidebar.

Anyone who's read this blog in the last two weeks knows that I've been harping about Mississippi State's screen pass defense. I finally had a chance to sit down and watch the MSU/Arkansas game over the weekend--I wanted to watch it primarily to see how Chris Relf finished the game 20/30 for 224 yards (the short story: tons of protection in the pocket, about which more probably tomorrow)--and saw yet another instance of Mississippi State's flimsy defensive numbers.

This is the last time I'll dedicate significant space to this, but at this point, I feel confident saying that these are not isolated incidents, rather a systemic issue with their defense. I've now watched three games of Mississippi State (two at the beginning of the season and this one at the end) that all show this same flaw. This is not something that they've cared to fix after acknowledging a problem. To the play (apologies for image quality, I wasn't able to find a high-def torrent):

Mississippi State was a little disorganized before the snap but was able to get into place just as Ryan Mallett pulled away from center. Arkansas is in a single-back set with trips to Mallett's left and a tight end on the weak side of the field. By this point, you can probably already see the problem with the Bulldogs' alignment: they have two defenders (almost three with the strongside linebacker who's standing at the 20 yard line) to cover three Arkansas receivers.

On the snap, you see the H-receiver head out to the flat for the screen pass. The two outside receivers start to head upfield to block. The strongside linebacker who was rolled up to the line of scrimmage sees the H-back headed out for the screen pass and starts to run with him. However, he's already a few yards behind the receiver horizontally.

Mallett has thrown the screen. The two outside receivers are still headed upfield to block the safety and cornerback that were covering them. The strongside linebacker may be able to make a tackle on this play if he takes the right angle, but it'll be difficult because the H-receiver already has momentum and a step on him.

The H-receiver now has the ball and is turning upfield. His blockers are about to engage the only defenders that were on the strongside of the field.

The playside linebacker gets close to making the play but dives and can't quite get there. The outside receivers are now laying blocks on the DBs down the field. The middle linebacker (#50) is crashing on the play as hard as he can but similarly won't make it in time.

The playside linebacker dove and missed. The middle linebacker is behind the play. And the outside receivers are running Mississippi State's DBs down the field. The only reason this doesn't go for a touchdown is because of a great foot grab by the MSU safety as he desperately tries to tackle the Arkansas receiver:

The H-receiver will end up falling just inside the five yard line.

What does it mean?
Like I mentioned above, this is not an isolated incident: Mississippi State's screen defense is structurally unsound, and that's because they play a heavy-blitzing style. Unless they switch up their defensive schemes significantly against Michigan, I anticipate RichRod checking to this play frequently at the line of scrimmage when he sees a favorable alignment. MSU will attempt to counter this by crashing their DBs into the backfield to intercept/swat balls, but that can be easily expoited with vertical routes by the outside receivers.

Michigan will go to these bubble screens often against Mississippi State, or at least until it slows down their blitzing schemes and opens running lanes for Denard and company. Roy Roundtree's ability to hold onto the ball will be crucial here, and I also expect to see Vincent Smith headed out to the flat to catch screen passes from time to time.

This should conclude my obsession with the Bulldogs' screen defense. Hopefully.

What to hope for: Gator Bowl edition

A series on Michigan's Gator Bowl opponent. You can find all preview content on the 2011 Gator Bowl page in the sidebar.

So as scouting time (and materials; if anyone knows where to find a good MSU/Arkansas torrent, let me know) begins to dwindle for the 2011 Gator Bowl and with the holidays rapidly approaching, it's probably a decent time to take a look at what to expect and what I hope to see against Mississippi State. This is going to be the more optimistic of the two: What to hope for.

Offense

• Health. Denard is rumored to be healthier than he's been all year, which makes sense with the layoff. But getting a healthy Mike Shaw and Vincent Smith could be huge for the offense. Also, just the general physical condition of the receivers and offensive line should be improved. If the team comes into this game completely healthy, we may see a return to the explosiveness that colored the early parts of the season.
• New plays. Toward the end of the season, it seemed like Michigan's offense started to stall, and I think part of that is because there were very few new formations and plays. We'd get a wrinkle here or there, like optioning off the playside defensive end, but even that went the way of the Dodo by year's end. Things I'd like to see: triple option, which we saw last year briefly; the traditional option pitch; optioning off the playside DE again; and more use and variation in the heavy set. Having new looks will keep MSU on their toes during the game and could produce a few big plays.
• Tate Forcier. I'm usually not one of the people calling to see Forcier put into the game, but given the disparity between Mississippi State's passing and rushing defensive production, Forcier may be the perfect change of pace QB to take advantage of a vulnerable defensive secondary. I don't want to see him get significant snaps, necessarily (like the back-and-forth against Purdue), but giving him an occasional drive might be beneficial.
• A cure for the dropsies. We all know that if Roy Roundtree drops a first down pass, the next play will be a Denard interception. Those are bad. But all of the drops have put Michigan behind the chains and in third and long situations. Keeping a rhythm will be crucial against a team whose primary defensive strategy is to stop said rhythm.
• Denard scrambles. Denard has been reticent to scramble this year for whatever reason, but did so a few times against Ohio State. The hope is that this trend continues and he starts to take off a little more frequently. The opportunities will be there: MSU blitzes their linebackers more often than not, so there should be plenty of room for him to run. Cam Newton did so to great effect in the Auburn/MSU game, so hopefully Michigan's coaches are teaching Denard to pull the ball and run when his receivers are all covered.
• No field goals. We're all in agreement? Good.

Defense

• Four-man defensive lines. As I've been chronicling the last two weeks, Mississippi State's offensive line is not great. They're repeatedly pushed into the backfield against four-man defensive fronts and have trouble in pass protection. Michigan's four-man line did a great job against Ohio State, at least for a little while, and OSU's offensive front is far superior to the Bulldogs'. The four-man line will also limit free-releasing offensive linemen. MSU's linemen are adept at getting downfield and facesmashing linebackers. If Michigan can hold the offensive line in check, this will leave Mouton, Demens, and the other linebackers free to make plays.
• Man coverage. I know, I know, I've been harping on this all year and it's had only mixed results. But, like Illinois, if ever there was a team to feel OK playing man coverage against, it's Mississippi State. Chris Relf is not the kind of quarterback who can make Hennebot throws to the outside or over the middle of the field. Challenging him to beat Michigan through the air is something they'll have to do if they want to stop the option running attack. Because eventually, Michigan is going to have to sneak safeties into the box to help out with the run.
• Zone blitzing and showing pre-snap looks. Michigan has gone to both of these occasionally throughout the year, and they usually work. It's not something you can do repeatedly with a young defense like Michigan's, but giving looks like this more often, especially in passing situations, could go a long way to stopping a fairly immature passer.
• Obi Ezeh at outside linebacker (a little). Ezeh has been pretty good moonlighting as an outside linebacker after Demens took over his starting gig. Ezeh has the strength to take on releasing guards and tight ends, as well as the athleticism to attack the backfield on option plays. I don't know if JB Fitzgerald is quite as well suited to stop a team like MSU.
• General improvement. Michigan has time to do nothing but practice and prepare. For a single game. At the end of the season. This means missed assignments should not happen. It also means that Michigan should be able to tackle. Hopefully this practice time gives players like Ray Vinopal and Courtney Avery, as well as the other freshman DBs, time to get their tackling and assignments in order. If the youngsters are competent in this game, Michigan might be able to field an only slightly below average defense.

This is all optimistic, I know, but it's also the first bowl game we've seen under Rich Rodriguez. He may have a whole host of offensive tricks up his sleeve that he unveils on an unsuspecting MSU defense. On the other side of the ball... Have you been saying your Rosaries?

Mississippi State: Inside pitch

A series on Michigan's Gator Bowl opponent. You can find all preview content on the 2011 Gator Bowl page in the sidebar.

I've spent the last week and a half breaking down Mississippi State game film and writing optimistically about why Michigan Might Win. Long story short: unsound defensive numbers, Michigan's ability to exploit blitzes, and a vulnerable looking Bulldogs offensive line. The occasional Mississippi State fan that stumbles over here invariably goes, "But Michigan sucks", I shrug and say, "Yes, I know, but maybe?" And despite all of the exploitable moments, Mississippi State still does one thing that will probably kill Michigan: they, urm, are pretty good at football.

Michigan's had trouble with option looks like the Bulldogs' all year. And given the amount of misdirection that MSU runs, Michigan is going to be in trouble unless they play incredibly disciplined and smart football. One play against Auburn in particular has given me nightmares.

MSU is in a 3x1 formation with a tight end on the weak side of the offensive line. Before the snap, the X receiver starts in motion and will run behind Chris Relf as the ball is snapped. Auburn is in a 4-3 alignment, possibly with their nickelback on the field shaded over the slot receiver.

On the snap, the X receiver is directly behind Relf. The tight end (#32 Marcus Green, red) begins to pull behind the formation. The trips receivers on the strong side of the field start upfield looking to block. The Mississippi State offensive line intentionally leaves the stronside defensive end unblocked.

This is a great shot of the triple option: you can clearly see the TE Green, Relf, and RB Vick Ballard swinging around to the strongside of the field. The Auburn defensive end has started upfield to attack Relf and Ballard, completely unaware that Green is pulling across the formation on the triple option. Auburn's playside linebacker also didn't see Green coming across the field, and MSU's right tackle is releasing to the second level to block the weakside linebacker.

The playside defensive end and linebacker effectively have the Relf/Ballard option wrapped up in the backfield but never recognized Green on the triple option. Down the field, the right tackle is blocking the weakside linebacker, the trips receivers are either engaged downfield or headed toward safeties, and the right guard is releasing to the second level to block someone downfield as well.

Green has caught the ball and has nothing but blockers and turf ahead of him. The playside linebacker has overpursued the play trying to thwart the option in the backfield. This won't go for a touchdown, but it goes for a fair amount of yards.

What does it mean?
Argh, terrible linebacker play, poor play recognition, safeties having to come downfield to make tackles. This play is basically a microcosm of everything that's bad about Michigan's defense this year. If Mississippi State pulls out a bunch of this type of misdirection plays, Michigan's defense is probably sunk. That is unless Mouton and Demens are perpetually in the film room from now until January 1. For Michigan, defending plays like this will very likely come down to film study/preparation and avoiding mental mistakes. It'll also be important for Kovacs, Cam Gordon, and Vinopal to come downhill and make plays.

If this was one play in the Mississippi State arsenal, I'd feel more confident (e.g., zone read plays in Ohio State's playbook). Unfortunately, this sort of play is the Bulldogs' offense, which means we're probably going to see a pretty high variance of defensive results: Demens and Mouton will probably make a lot of impressive plays, but there are also going to be a fair amount that get broken for significant yardage (like the one above) because of a single mental lapse. Being disciplined and knowing where your help defense is will be crucial, as will not overpursuing like the Auburn linebacker.

Also, you're welcome for the nightmare fuel.

Mississippi State: LSU game notes

A series on Michigan's Gator Bowl opponent. You can find all of this content on the 2011 Gator Bowl page in the sidebar. Previously: NCAA rankings, Defense vs. Auburn, Screen defense, Jumping the Screen, Offense vs. Auburn, Defending Mississippi State's option

I had a chance to watch the Mississippi State game against LSU. Here are the various things I learned:

Defensive formations
Mississippi State continued to show an unsound defense against 3x1 formations. Example 1:

This is the more egregious of the two examples I saw. Here, LSU lines up in a 2x1 formation with an H-back to the strong side of the field. Though Michigan has never shown a look in which the H-back bows out for the bubble screen, you can still see the problem with the Bulldogs' defensive formation here: there simply aren't enough defenders on the strong side of the field to cover LSU's receivers, let alone if the H-back heads outside for the screen pass. But even here, LSU could easily throw a bubble screen to the slot receiver and gain a significant amount of yards. The closest safety is 15 yards off the line of scrimmage and the playside linebacker is already behind the slot receiver.

Example 2:

Here's the second example I noticed of Mississippi State poorly defending a screen look. As you can see, the Bulldogs only have three defenders against LSU's three receivers. This play ended up being a screen and being broken up by Mississippi State. The middle receiver comes back toward the play on a screen pass, which is knocked down by the Mississippi State defensive end. [Ed. Were LSU to run this screen to the outside, it likely would've netted 7-10 yards. Instead, they came back toward the Bulldogs' defensive strength in the middle of the field.]

Through the two games I've watched--against LSU and Auburn--it's becoming obvious why there's such a disparity between the Bulldogs' rushing defense (20th) and passing efficiency defense (50th, 89th by yardage): they gamble against the pass in order to stop the run. Formations like this leave them vulnerable to various different passing attacks. However, their stats are in keeping with a high-blitzing team. They allow teams to complete just under 60% of their passes because of the pressure put on quarterbacks, but they allow a significant amount of yards when passes are completed. Michigan's screen and quick passing game have the potential to crush this defense.

Mississippi State offensive line
Despite much consternation in the comments section of an earlier post, the Mississippi State offensive line once again looked vulnerable against four-man rushes. It's difficult to quantify how bad/good the offensive line is because of the level of competition. LSU and Auburn both boast good-to-great defensive lines, so any criticism of the Bulldogs' front line should be taken with a grain of salt. Repeatedly, however, their offensive line was put on skates and pushed into the backfield. Their sack and TFL numbers seem to agree: 52nd in sacks allowed and 70th in TFLs allowed. It's safe to say that both of those numbers are probably a little inflated because of Chris Relf's size and scrambling ability. Their offensive line looks to be a liability.

Michigan went primarily to a four-man front against Ohio State and I expect them to return to it against Mississippi State. Though the final score against OSU disagrees, the defensive front was pretty effective especially in the first quarter when they completely shut down the Buckeyes attack. Coming into this season, Michigan's defensive line was predicted to be far and away its strongest unit. With Roh's move back to defensive end rather than linebacker, that prediction should come true. The season's final game against Mississippi State should be a chance to prove it.

Red zone blitzing
If Michigan's inability to kick field goals hasn't hurt them enough this year already, it'll come back to bite them in the bowl game. Repeatedly, LSU drove the ball into the red zone only to stall out because of negative plays or a compressed field. I don't know if it's because of more conservative playcalling on the Bulldogs' behalf that slowed the attack or just the opposite, but LSU kicked five field goals in this game because they were unable to move the ball beyond the 20 yard line. Whether or not that's LSU offensive incompetence (Michigan's offense is light years better than LSU's, especially this early in the season) or should be credited to a sound defensive gameplan is difficult to determine. But the end results were the same: field goal attempts. Michigan will miss at least one field goal in the Gator Bowl.

What does it mean?
Watching Mississippi State's defensive alignments in these two games leaves me more and more confident that Michigan's offense will be able to move the ball easily through the air. This should eventually slow down the Bulldogs' blitzing, leaving room for Denard to break a couple of runs. The point being, Michigan is going to be a pass-first team against MSU. Unfortunately, those blitzes will kill a number of Michigan's drives in the game, possibly through missed field goals or forcing punts. Michigan's ability to exploit a team's aggressiveness is going to pay dividends.

On the other side of the ball, Mississippi State is going to have to live and die by Chris Relf, specifically his passing ability. I've been pretty underwhelmed by the Bulldog offensive line, and a four-man front of Roh-Martin-Van Bergen-Banks should be able to make hay. Whether or not Michigan's linebackers can react to and attack the Bulldogs option running game will be the key, but if the improvements of Kenny Demens are for real and Jonas Mouton is healthy, I feel confident that Michigan should be able to slow the Mississippi State running game, forcing Relf to put the ball in the air.

Mississippi State: Offense vs. Auburn

A series on Michigan's Gator Bowl opponent. You can find all of this content on the 2011 Gator Bowl page in the sidebar. Previously: NCAA rankings, Defense vs. Auburn, Screen defense, Jumping the Screen

Much like Michigan will benefit from having Mississippi State game film against a team with a similar offense, Michigan also played against a team with a very similar offensive strategy to the Bulldogs. That's the good news. The bad news? Mississippi State runs basically the exact same offense as Illinois. The same Illinois team that put up 65 points on Michigan's defense. 

The offense
As MGoBlog pointed out yesterday, the Bulldogs run a rush-first option offense not unlike the Nathan Scheelhaase-led Illinois offense: lots of pre-snap motion, lots of triple option, and very little passing. Mississippi State spent a lot of time in the pistol, triple option... well I don't know what to call it:

Michigan saw this alignment a lot against Illinois. The player lined up next to Mississippi State QB Chris Relf is the B-back, who will run a dive play, while the A-back behind Relf  acts as a traditional option back should the QB pull the ball. They also run a fair amount of traditional shotgun formations, but almost all of the plays include some sort of pre-snap motion and reads.

Quaterbackin'
The Bulldogs have thrown the ball 265 times this year (32% of the time) and run the ball 561 times (68% of the time), and rightfully so. Starter Relf is completing only 56% of his passes. But you don't have much incentive to throw the ball when your quarterback is a 6'4", 240 lbs mantank that runs people over. Like MGoBlog noted, Relf is more Cam Newton powerful than Denard shifty. Expecting the Ray Vinopals of the world to make wrap-up tackles against Relf is a pipe dream. Watching him steamroll a good Auburn defense didn't bode well for Michigan's ragtag group.

Relf doesn't throw the ball much, though, averaging just 16 attempts a game, which is good news for Michigan's secondary. Like Illinois, however, Mississippi State runs a nominal two-quarterback system. "Backup" Tyler Russell was often deployed as the passing quarterback against Auburn, coming in on long yardage situations and given the occasional drive. He's not much better, completing only 58% of his passes, but he'll be a variation that Michigan will have to account for.

When Russell comes into the game, however, Mississippi State almost completely abandons the pre-snap motion and option game. Russell is a pretty standard drop-back quarterback with uninspiring wheels. He'll give Michigan another look to prepare for, but they'll need to worry primarily about Relf's running ability.

Random notes from the Auburn game

• Many of Relf's passes ended up being designed QB rollouts, and we've all seen how Michigan fares against those. Unless Michigan has improved in their defense of these, it could be trouble. Then again, Relf's passes are often off target.
• When Mississippi State gets behind the chains, their drives often stall. Their offense doesn't have a ton of big-play ability in the run game, and the passing game is atrocious in third and long situations. Aurburn's Nick Fairly repeatedly blew threw their offensive line in these situations and caused havoc in the backfield. In general, the Bulldogs' offensive line seemed to have trouble in pass protection.
• Against Auburn, which ran primarily a cover-2, Mississippi State went to the corner/fade route over and over again (a pass behind the corner but in front of the safety). It was their most consistent and effective passing play despite several drops and overthrows.

What does it mean?
Frankly, not great things. Mississippi State's offense looks remarkably similar to Illinois', which thoroughly torched Michigan's defense all game. They look to break contain and get to the outside--something Michigan frequently allows--but if you over pursue, they have counters to get the ball back up the middle. Relf is basically a 6'4" version of Scheelhaase except marginally slower, older, and possibly a better passer. If Michigan doesn't show any adjustments from their defensive formations against Illinois, this could be another ugly performance.