2012 Sugar Bowl Preview

All 2012 Sugar Bowl coverage can be found on the Bowl Game page.

---

Allstate Sugar Bowl
#13 Michigan (10-2) vs. #11 Virginia Tech (11-2)

Mercedes-Benz Superdome, New Orleans, LA

Kickoff 8:30 pm EST

ESPN

---

Previous Game
#5 Virginia Tech 10 - #20 Clemson 38. The last time the Hokies took the field, things did not go as planned, as the team was blown out in the ACC title game against Clemson. Much hyped running back David Wilson was completely shut down, rushing for just 32 yards on 11 carries. And with the Hokies down by so much, QB Logan Thomas threw the ball 44 times and was not great: 22/44, 274 yards (6.2 YPA), 1 TD, 2 INTs.

Meanwhile, Clemson did just about anything they wanted. As a team, they rushed for 4.8 YPC on 45 carries, which is the best performance of any team against the Hokies this season. QB Tajh Boyd went 20/29 for 240 yards and 3 TDs. The vaunted Hokie defense was wholly shredded: 457 total yards, 8.0 YPA, 4.8 YPC, 0 turnovers forced.

Ohio 34 - #15 Michigan 40. Game column. I mean, you know what happened.

Offense vs. Virginia Tech
If the Hokies are known for anything, it's their defense. Virginia Tech boasts the #17 rushing defense, #13 pass efficiency defense, and #8 scoring defense, while coming in at 30th in turnover margin. They run an aggressive, blitzing defense that gets most of its production from its secondary and pair of sophomore defensive ends. As mentioned around here earlier, four of the Hokies top five tacklers are in the secondary. Those four secondary members account for 3.5 sacks, 8 INTs, and 21 tackles for loss. The Hokie secondary plays downhill, blitzes frequently and is often involved in the run game.

While that sounds intimidating, the Hokie linebackers are subpar at best. They overpursue to the ball, have trouble filling running lanes, and bite on play action frequently. That the Hokies have such a good run defense is due to the fact that they sell out against it with their secondary. On the defensive line, meanwhile, defensive ends JR Collins and James Gayle have some crazy numbers, combining for 20 tackles for loss and 13 sacks. The defensive tackles are unimpressive. Frankly, I'm not sure how this defense boasts such good numbers across the board.

Offensively, Michigan should make hay against the interior of the Hokie defense. Al Borges' playbook has the kind of counters that should eat the Virginia Tech linebackers alive, and the defensive line is either ineffective defensive tackles or pin-your-ears-back defensive ends. When you take chances and blitz a lot, you create turnovers and big negative plays, but Michigan has been good in preparation for defenses this year and has all of the pieces to victimize the Hokie defense.

With Denard coming off his best game of the year against Ohio (14/17 for 167 yards, 3 TDs, 26 carries for 170 yards, 2 TDs) and seemingly healthy, Michigan matches up well against this defense. Though Mark Huyge's matchup against the Hokie defensive ends looms large, the rest of the line should be able to contain the blitz-heavy front of Virginia Tech. In the secondary, the Hokies will show both man and zone coverage, and while MGoBlog has been kind of terrified of the Virginia Tech secondary, I'm more confident in Michigan's ability to find holes in the intermediate areas of the field where the linebackers were supposed to be*.

On the ground, Fitz Toussaint should have a big game. Given the struggles of the Virginia Tech linebackers and Toussaint's noted ability to cut back and burst upfield, if the offensive line can create any holes (and it seems like they should be able to), Toussaint should gash the Hokie defense frequently.

*Something I've been thinking about this year: Rich Rodriguez's QB Oh Noes were usually used to attack opposing safeties and get big plays. Borges' have been used to attack linebackers for 10-15 yard gains. I think this will be a huge factor in the game.

Defense vs. Virginia Tech
Though the Virginia Tech defense boasts some impressive numbers, the offense is not quite as intimidating, at least on paper: 29th in rushing offense, 66th in passing offense, and 52nd in scoring offense. The dangermen are running back David Wilson and QB Logan Thomas, but really, most of the work falls on Wilson's shoulders.

The Hokies run the ball about 60% of the time with Wilson averaging 6.1 YPC. Though it may qualify me as a crazy person, I don't think too much of Wilson. He has a tendency to bounce the ball outside even when he shouldn't, and despite having a devastating spin move, seems like a pretty regular running back. There are mitigating factors: the interior of the Hokie offensive line might be the worst that Michigan faces all year. The Hokies are more or less unable to run up the middle despite being fond of using pulling linemen and running power. Mike Martin and Ryan Van Bergen are set up for big games, and if Jake Ryan, Desmond Morgan, and Jordan Kovacs are disciplined and maintain the edge on rushing plays, I expect Wilson to have another poor game, closer to his performance against Clemson in the ACC title game than against some of the team's weaker opponents.

Oddly, it's Thomas who scares me more than anything else on Virginia Tech. Thomas is a slightly mobile rocket cannon (think Ben Roethlisberger, except not a despicable human being). With a clean pocket, Thomas can hit receivers in stride and rifle passes into any hole in the defense. Maybe it's just residual fear from 2010 or turning Braxton Miller into a capable thrower, but watching film on Thomas makes me fearful of this game.

Getting to Thomas is key. He has a tendency to throw some bad interceptions, but is far too accurate with a clean pocket for Michigan's secondary to adequately cover all game. Oddly, despite the Virginia Tech interior line being horrible in run blocking, they seem to handle pass blocking pretty well as long as the defense is only bringing four linemen. Greg Mattison blitzes and Martin's ability to shuck interior linemen on pass plays are what is going to decide this game for Michigan's defense.

They Hokies also have a bit of option running in their game. They have shown both the inverted veer as well as a triple option look in the games I've watched this season. Earlier in the year, Mattison mentioned that the contain defenders are always forcing the QB to hand the ball off on option plays, but I would expect them to break tendency against Virginia Tech. Thomas is a huge, rumbling, 6'6" pillar that gets yards because he's bigger than you are. Risking David Wilson in the open field is a worse option than letting Thomas try and rumble for more than five yards.

Prediction
Aside from Thomas' arm and the potential for Wilson to get hyphy on the edge of Michigan's defense, there's really not much about this matchup that worries me. I think Michigan is supremely suited to attack a Virginia Tech defense that is overly aggressive and weak in the front seven. On the other side of the ball, Martin and Van Bergen should show some inspired play against an interior line that gets thrown around by basically everyone. If Michigan can't get any pressure on Thomas, this game could quickly turn ugly, but Mattison and the defensive line will make sure that doesn't happen. Good Denard vs. Evil Denard given, but Michigan's offense gets it clicking early and often.

Michigan 34 - Virginia Tech 24

Preview: Ohio 2011

---

Ohio (6-5) vs. #15 Michigan (9-2)

The Big House

Kickoff 12:00 pm EST

ABC

Forecast: Low 50s, 50% chance of rain

---

Last week
#21 Penn State 20 - Ohio State 14. Last week, Ohio State continued their season of futility with a loss to Penn State. Rather than hilariously losing to Purdue in overtime after a late botched extra point, Ohio State lost after falling behind 10-0 in the first quarter and never climbing back into the game. The offense could muster only 289 yards and allowed Penn State's anemic offense to put up 327, though both teams were held scoreless in the second half.

Ohio State star senior receiver DeVier Posey played his first game and caught four passes for 66 yards, but that wasn't enough to bolster another awful passing day from Braxton Miller (7/17, 83 yards, 4.9 YPA, 1 TD). Miller had a decent day on the ground, rushing 18 times for 105 yards and Dan Herron averaged 4.2 YPC on 18 carries.

On the other side of the ball, Matt "Farvian Walk-On" McGloin wasn't much better (just watching this guy play this season makes me break out in hives; how did Michigan's defense make him actually look like Favre last year? Oh, nevermind). McGloin went 10/18 for 88 yards and 1 INT. Stephon Green did most of the damage on the ground, averaging 5.8 YPC on 16 carries while Silas Redd averaged 7.9 YPC on 8 carries. The thing that stuck out during the game was just how bad Ohio State's linebackers were against the run. It appears they attended the Obi Ezeh school of gap filling. PSU's running backs were finding holes at the line of scrimmage and no linebackers in sight. The hope is this continues because, well, dang.

#16 Nebraska 17 - #18 Michigan 45. Game column. Michigan followed up a dominating defensive performance against offensive-line-challenged Illinois with another great game against Nebraska, limiting one of the better running attacks in the country to 4.5 YPC on 31 carries. More impressively, the defense was barely on the field, whether it was from Nebraska special team turnovers or the 3/13 performance on third down. Infamous duck thrower Taylor Martinez was as advertised: ducky. He was 9/23 for 122 yards and 1 TD but looked awful getting there. He can't be totally blamed:

That's a run play, but Michigan's defensive line was getting that sort of penetration all game. Martinez was only sacked a handful of times but constantly had pressure in his face.

On offense, Denard scrambled, which was the unit's biggest revelation. When he wasn't dropping dimes to Martavious Odoms in the back of the endzone, Denard was scampering through a vacated middle of the field as Nebraska's secondary played exclusively man coverage. Unfortunately, he was indecisive on many of those runs, turning what should have been a big day into a mediocre 3.6 YPC day on 23 carries. Fitz Toussaint picked up the slack, though, averaging 4.8 YPC on 29 carries.

Offense vs. Ohio State
Though Ohio State has been universally awful this season, their one bright spot is defensively where they rank about where you'd expect an Ohio State team: 42nd in rushing defense, 35th in pass efficiency defense, 16th in total defense, and 14th in scoring defense. Aside from the rushing defense numbers, that sounds about right. Those numbers are largely because of defensive end John Simon. Short of Whitney Mercilus, Simon will be the best defensive end Michigan faces this year. The matchup between him and Mark Huyge in pass protection looms large, but any time I say something like that, Huyge comes through with a competent effort. To date Simon has 13.5 TFL and 6 sacks.

The other dangerman on Ohio State's defense is defensive tackle Johnathan Hankins whose numbers are similarly harrowing: 10 TFL, 3 sacks. He's not quite as terrifying, however, as the strength of Michigan's offensive line is David Molk on the interior.

The linebackers, as previously mentioned, are suspect. None of them have particularly great numbers (their starting linebackers combine for 6 sacks and 11.5 TFL). Ohio State is a prototypical cover-2 defense that doesn't blitz a ton, so those numbers aren't totally unexpected, but their ability to fill in run support was terrible against Penn State. Given that the team is 42nd in run defense, it's been that way for much of the year.

With the strength of Michigan's offensive line and the lack of discipline from the Buckeye linebackers, Fitz Toussaint and Denard should find plenty of room to run between the tackles in this game. Chances are the Buckeyes will load the box with their strong safety making it difficult to bounce runs to the outside, but Michigan should average solidly in the 4.5-5.5 YPC range.

Through the air, we'll see. It's expected to rain, which probably favors Ohio State (Miller can't throw anyway, so this makes Michigan's offense a bit more one dimensional), but if the weather holds up, the Buckeye secondary isn't all that harrowing. They're currently starting two juniors, a sophomore, and a redshirt freshman. They've accounted for 7 interceptions between them, which isn't spectacular. More interestingly, the safeties (Christian Bryant and CJ Barnett) are the #3 and #4 tacklers on the team, respectively, which lends credence to the linebacker-suck theory.

Per usual, this comes down to Good Denard vs. Evil Denard. Borges has shown a few new passing concepts in the last few weeks that have all had good results. Expect at least one or two new formations and route combination that pick up good yardage. If it's raining and both teams are having trouble throwing the ball, Evil Denard will likely rear his head a few times. Pressure off the edge from Simon or up the middle from Hankins will probably cause a few errant throws, but I don't expect Michigan's passing game to be significantly worse against the Buckeyes than it was against Illinois or Nebraska.

Defense vs. Ohio State: Where the LOLephants roam
Anyone who has watched the Buckeyes this year knows that the offense is barely functional. Watching Braxton Miller throw the ball is basically a redux of Terrelle Pryor during his freshman year: lots of armpunts, terribly inaccurate, and rarely effective. Given the current state of Michigan's secondary, chances are Ohio State will forgo passing the ball as much as possible. Floyd and Countess have been too good in coverage and Miller too bad passing for this to make a dramatic swing during this game.

Third and long will be interesting. In the last few weeks, Mattison has unleashed hell with Michigan's "okie" package, but Miller is a better athlete than Nathan Scheelhaase or Taylor Martinez and is better at escaping pressure than both. Fortunately, Michigan's zone blitzing is the kind of scheme that can confuse a young quarterback--especially one prone to scrambling--and force him into the strength of the defense. Expect at least a few moments when you say to yourself, "awesome blitz call" during this game. Simply put, Miller is not a threat through the air, even with the recent return of Posey, who Floyd will be Snuggie-ing all day.

The run game is where the Buckeyes will do the most damage. Miller's aforementioned athleticism will cause the team problems, but I'm not sure how many more than Scheelhaase and Martinez. Again, were this earlier in the season, I'd be worried about the edge discipline of Jake Ryan and Craig Roh, but in the last few weeks, Michigan has largely ironed those out. Per usual, Michigan will try to play contain on Miller and force a handoff to whatever running back is on the field.

That RB is likely to be senior Dan "Boom" Herron, he of TatGate fame. Herron has played in only five games to date but has accumulated 556 yards (5.2 YPC) and 2 TDs. He's a rumbling back (5'10", 205 lbs) that plays like a poor man's Beanie Wells. He's got some speed, but he makes most of his yards carrying the pile and running over defenders.

The Buckeye running game has really excelled because of their offensive line and fullback Zach Boren (yes, that Boren). The interior of the line is fierce, led by senior center Michael Brewster and the return of Mike Adams at tackle gives Ohio State possibly the best offensive line in the Big Ten. Were Michigan's defensive line not currently Swiss cheesing teams (see above), this would be a bigger worry. The real concern will be Michigan's linebackers filling the proper holes and reacting on time. I can already envision a few 20-yard runs after Desmond Morgan gets flattened by Boren, but if Demens and Co. can hold up against an aggressive, downhill running game, the Buckeye offense will be nonexistent.

Prediction
It's really hard to see Ohio State moving the ball at all. They haven't been able to all season and with Michigan's defense playing its best two games of the season in the previous two weeks, I can't see that trend changing. Miller is a dynamic athlete and he'll be a terror to defend against in the next few years, but he's not there this season. The Buckeye passing game is barely functional and Michigan's secondary is good enough to shut it down. With Ohio State forced to exclusively run the ball, Ryan, Roh, and Kovacs will be left to clean up the option runs. This will not be too much of a problem.

On the other side of the ball, Michigan's run game is going to be extremely variable. Runs will likely go for either zero yards or 10 yards. Given how poor the Buckeye linebackers are, if Toussaint and Denard can make it past the defensive line, they won't see anyone until they run into the safeties downfield. Depending on the weather, the passing game may be a non-factor. Regardless, expect a run/pass split like we've seen the last few games.

Ohio State 13 - Michigan 23

Missed blocks (Iowa edition)

After a poor 2009 season blocking for Tate Forcier, Mark Huyge proved himself a decent-to-good right tackle last year en route to Michigan's best offense in over a decade. Unfortunately, 2011 hasn't been quite as kind. Against MSU, Huyge opened SitB for suffering Spartan defensive ends. And against Iowa, he was responsible for the death of a play that was setup to go a long, long way.

The setup:

Michigan is down 6-7 with just over 13 minutes left in the second quarter and has the ball on their own 40 yard line. Michigan comes out in an I formation with stacked receivers to Denard's right. Initially, Kevin Koger is lined up as an H-back on the left side of the field...

He will motion across the formation and line up directly behind Mark Huyge:

This is a basic power play. On the snap, Michael Schofield begins to pull across the formation as the lead blocker. Huyge and David Molk down block. Patrick Omameh needs to get to the second level to seal Iowa's MLB. Koger is responsible to kick out the playside Iowa linebacker. They're creating a hole in the C gap (to the right of the right tackle, Huyge) for Schofield and Fitz Toussaint to run through.

Michigan State 2011: Where Little Brother finds your weakness

#11 Michigan 14 - #23 Michigan State 28

Jeff Sainlar | AnnArbor.com

The last time my older brother and I got in a serious altercation was on Thanksgiving Eve a few years ago. It was past midnight at our parents' house and we were both in town for the holiday. Neither of us felt like going out, so we opened a few beers and my poker set, and sat down at the dinner table to play a few games heads up until we got too bored, angry, or tired to keep going.

My brother is a better poker play than me. Aside from knowing the odds, he's also more disciplined; it's difficult to bluff if you haven't won any hands yet, but invariably, that becomes my strategy early in poker games. But I know my brother's greatest weakness and more importantly, I know how to exploit it: get in his head. If only I could win a few toss-up hands, I knew I could give him enough mental jabs to get him totally off his rocker. After about an hour of playing, he stormed off into his room as I sat at the table shrugging saying something to the effect of, "Whatever dude, just sit down and shut up and we'll play." This was a victory.

It's not just poker either. My brother is taller, stronger, and smarter than I am, and being of a religiously competitive breed, we spent most of our childhood figuring out Who Is Better, which meant I needed to figure out what his weaknesses are and how to exploit them. In basketball, I have a speed advantage that I use to get to the basket. Defensively, I know that when I don't contest his shot, he tends to shoot with less arc, causing more rim outs. These are petty, small, unsustainable strategies that have become my only defense against someone who is objectively better than me at a few key competitive events.

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

When Mike Hart now famously referred to Michigan State as Little Brother in 2008, the Spartans took it as the greatest sign of disrespect, but in reality, it's not that far off. When people think "football" and "Michigan", the first thing that comes to mind is the Wolverines; teachers called me by my brother's name an innumerable amount of times through gradeschool and high school. But less disrespectfully, Michigan State is a growing program, fighting for national relevance by slowly making itself a force to be reckoned with. Michigan, meanwhile, was the established entity.

Michigan's weaknesses are not the same as my brother's--he understands statistics, so he knows better than to punt from the opponent's 36 yard line on fourth and four. Michigan State plays like a little brother, though. For the last several years, more than any other opponent, they've identified and exploited Michigan's weaknesses en route to commanding victories.  Michigan's linebackers and defensive ends struggle with contain? They run almost exclusively outside of the tackles (even with two mediocre-to-bad offensive tackles). Denard Robinson struggles throwing under pressure? Bring heat constantly. Michigan runs well but struggles throwing the deep ball, even with man coverage and no safety help? Load the box.

You would think that Al Borges and Greg Mattison would change tendencies. How many times does an opponent have to blitz before Borges calls that throwback screen to Smith? How many times can Michigan State run outside the tackles before you bring a safety/cornerback blitz off the edge? In this game, unfortunately, either arrogance, ignorance, or just befuddlement caused Michigan's coordinators to spend most of the afternoon slamming their head against a brick wall and hoping that eventually, it would crumble. It didn't, of course, because the brick wall was made of brick and your head is made of squishy tissue that, if this were Rock-Head-Brick Wall, would lose to brick wall. (Head would also lose to rock for what it's worth. It doesn't seem like a very balanced game.)

So Michigan goes into its bye week 6-1. This was never supposed to be a BCS season, and 10-2 with a win over Ohio State would still be a better case scenario than most expected preseason. Michigan has its flaws and at this point, they're obvious to everyone, including the Michigan coaching staff. Finding ways to remedy those, or at the very least mask them, has become Borges' and Mattison's primary mission.

Bullets

• Borges comes in for some lashings after this game. The offense continued to run plays that were doomed from the start. All passing routes were vertical and downfield. Rushes were stuffed at the line as Michigan State loaded the box. There were no screens thrown against an aggressive blitzing defense. Borges was punked the whole game and seemed content to run the same plays through four quarters.
• Mattison, on the other hand, called a pretty good game. Were it not for the defensive ends and linebackers giving up the edge on rushes, the defense shut down the MSU offense. Kirk Cousins averaged only 5 yards per attempt. The Spartan offensive line was as advertised: soft. But by doubling Michigan's defensive ends with tight ends, Michigan State was able to get the edge and run all over Michigan's undisciplined defense.
• It was a good day for Mark Huyge's new charity Spartans in the Backfield (SitB). Huyge had a truly awful day and offered MSU's defenders a direct line to Denard on countless passing plays.
• Denard struggled, but there were reasons for it outside of his control. SitB was a huge problem all game. In addition, the Michigan State defense loaded the box making running nearly impossible.
• Despite playing against single coverage, Michigan's receivers were completely shut down. I'll have to watch again, but they seemed to get precisely zero separation against MSU's corners. Though Denard wasn't very accurate, he didn't have many open receivers to throw to.
• Michigan showed another counter to the heavy-I formation they debuted last week but it was blown dead on a delay of game penalty, which is a shame because Fitz Toussaint had a 20+-yard carry.

Next week
Michigan is on its bye this week. They can use this time to get healthy and implement more of the offensive and defensive schemes. The following week, Michigan takes on Purdue, a game that will be a good barometer for the rest of the season.

Around here, this week will feature the regular post-game analysis. The following week will be a mid-season breakdown of where I expected to be at this point and where they are now.

Counter draw play action

Denard had three unfortunate interceptions against Northwestern, but his first might have been the most regrettable because it wasted one of Al Borges' meticulously setup plays. Against Minnesota, Michigan unveiled the long-awaited counter draw to resounding effect. Though much of that was probably opponent dependent, the basic principles of the play are fundamentally sound. Given Borges' predilection for creating play trees (see: two-way Hopkins, 2011 version of QB Oh Noes, etc.), the conclusion seemed obvious:

In these images, the running back gets slightly more vertical than in the counter play above, but the principles are the same. In all of these, you can see the defensive line and linebackers flowing toward the play, often with sizable holes on the backside of the play. Lewan pulling across the play on the counter is a key to the linebackers, but I would be surprised if Borges doesn't tweak the play with that wrinkle involved to further confuse the defense.

Against Northwestern, Borges did almost exactly that (the pulling lineman was Huyge, not Lewan).

It's second and eight on the team's second drive of the game. Michigan comes out in a three-wide set with Koger lined up on the right side of the line of scrimmage. Vincent smith is in the backfield beside Denard.

On the snap, you can see Huyge step away from the line of scrimmage and begin pulling toward the backside of the play. Northwestern's WLB is blitzing and will be blocked by Huyge. Denard and Smith both take a step to the strongside of the field.

A moment later, Smith has planted his foot and begins running toward the weakside of the field like he would on the counter draw. Huyge is about to block the blitzing WLB.

After the play action, Denard now has a solid pocket with plenty of time to throw. Hemingway was lined up in the slot and will run a seam route. You can see him below running down the middle of the field. Northwestern is playing cover-3, so there's a deep safety that will be covering Hemingway.

QB power oh noes pt. 1

Yesterday I broke down a QB stretch against EMU that utilized gap blocking and power principles. Specifically, the playside tackle and center both individually pulled to the first gap playside of them. This... well, it didn't work. It took too long for the linemen to pull playside and EMU was able to stretch the play to the boundary where the pursuit defenders could tackle Denard. I concluded with NO MOAR GAP BLOCKING, which isn't entirely accurate. It should have read don't block like this anymore because it totally sucks. Early in the second half, Michigan ran some more basic power runs with Denard in the shotgun that were more effective and, more importantly, set up the blogosphere-coined QB Oh Noes. This is the setup; the Oh Noes will come later today (UPDATE: Part 2).

Michigan just received the ball to begin the 3rd quarter. This is their first play from scrimmage of the second half. Michigan comes out in a three-wide set with Toussaint in the backfield and a tight end on the line of scrimmage. Eastern Michigan is in a basic 4-3.

As the ball is snapped, Mark Huyge's first step is away from the line of scrimmage as he pulls across the formation to the weakside of the field. A pulling lineman is often a key to the opposing linebackers of what direction the play is headed.

Toussaint crosses Denard and fakes a handoff (this was never a zone read). Denard keeps the ball as Huyge pulls across the formation. Ricky Barnum seals the playside DT to the inside while Taylor Lewan punishes EMU's playside defensive end, kicking him out to the sideline and opening a huge hole for Denard to run through.

Huyge is now Denard's lead blocker and about to pancake an EMU linebacker.

EMU linebacker: nullified. Denard has turf and a free safety ahead of him and will pick up eight yards on the play.

All power schemes are not created equal. The one we saw yesterday nullified Denard's most dangerous weapon (his explosiveness) and allowed EMU to stretch the play to the outside. This is a more traditional power play, except that it's run from the shotgun. This is a deadly offense. A defense has to protect against a handoff, zone read, QB keeper (like here), and the threat of a pass, all with power blocking schemes. With the talent of Michigan's linemen, this kind of playcall should be a staple of the offense.

Later today (UPDATE: Part 2), we'll see Al Borges doing his best Rich Rodriguez impression with a QB Oh Noes that unfortunately falls incomplete, but at this stage, it's more important that we see Borges tinkering with his systems and looking for ways to exploit a defense. In any case, this is proof that power running schemes can be effective with Denard in the shotgun.

WMU stunt blitzes

While rewatching the game yesterday in an effort to track Will Campbell's game time and performance (which were limited and not very encouraging, respectively, and not nearly interesting enough for the full post I had intended on writing), I came across something far more interesting. After diagramming two blitzes that Michigan used on Saturday, both structured around a linebacker stunt and overloading one side of the offensive line, a few commenters wondered whether or not a more competent offensive line might be able to more effectively block the blitzes. Their arguments:

The mistake is buy [sic] the play side guard and center. The guard needs to slide out to take Kovacs and the center take Brinks. When the center sees Heinenger bail into zone, it's obviously a zone blitz and he needs to find the blitzing side and get the guard wide to pick up the safety. With and experienced line who has gelled and knows how to identify and pick up blitzes, this won't work nearly as well.

and

I recall: 1) later the D looking something very similar to this and Kovacs dropping back and getting a tip; and 2) the D turning into a near feeding frenzy as the WMU OLine seemed so confused play after play. Hopefully this is the Mattison effect and it continues into the season.

Fortunately, Western ran an almost identical blitz early in the second half.

Michigan is in a four-wide set with Vincent Smith in the backfield. You may recognize the defensive alignment from the blitzes diagrammed earlier. Western Michigan is crowding the line of scrimmage with linebackers in an effort to disguise coverage and where the blitz is coming from. Much like the plays Michigan ran, WMU is in a three-lineman set with a NT covering the center and three men outside of the offensive guards (in this instance, we'll be watching the weakside blitz [top of the screen]).

As the ball is snapped, Western blitzes all seven men on the line of scrimmage. The outermost linebackers for WMU begin to stunt inside.

As you can see, Taylor Lewan is blocking the edge rusher, Michael Schofield is blocking the WDE, and David Molk is blocking the NT, leaving a hole in the A gap for the stunting WMU linebacker to blitz through unblocked.

As the WMU blitzer shoots the A gap, blocker extraordinaire Vincent Smith recognizes the weakside blitz and steps in front of Denard to make the block.

Smith steps up and chops down the WMU defender, allowing Denard to get the pass off (it will fall incomplete to Roundtree, mostly because this was at the beginning of the torrential downpour).

I think we all would agree that Michigan's offensive line is more cohesive and talented than Western Michigan's, yet the Broncos were still able to get essentially a free blitzer into the backfield with the same stunt principle. Fortunately, Smith chops the blitzer before he can cause any real damage, but the schemes are what I'm concerned with. Notice also that WMU executed this stunt blitz on the strongside of the field as well. You can the WMU linebacker #29 about to shoot the strongside A gap between Molk and Omameh completely unblocked.

Obviously, there are some differences between this play and the ones Michigan ran. First of all, the WMU nose tackle rushed rather than dropping off into coverage. This changes the play in a number of subtle ways. Whereas Michigan blitzers Kovacs and Demens shot the B gap (between the guard and tackle), the WMU blitzers were attacking the A gap (between the guard and center). In my opinion, this probably made it easier for Smith to recognize and block the weakside blitz as he only needed to step up in the pocket rather than come across the face of his QB.

Secondly, with or without the NT dropping into coverage, it's the guard's responsibility to block the defensive end shaded to his outside shoulder. Given that there are three players outside of the guard, including a DE at the 3-tech spot, it's the guard's responsibility to block that DE while the tackle is responsible for the edge rusher, and the running back is responsible for the stunt blitz. In this play, we see Schofield block the weakside DE (Omameh blocks the SDE), Lewan blocks the edge rusher (as does Huyge on the strongside), and Smith steps up to take out the blitzer stunting to the middle. When Michigan used this concept, the NT dropped into coverage and the WMU center doubled the DE. This necessitated that Michigan blitz the B gap instead of the A gap as WMU does here.

The point is that Mattison's defensive principles are sound and will work independent of the opposition's skill level or coaching. The chances that Michigan can land the punishing sacks that they did against WMU against better opposition is unlikely as more skilled running backs will probably make the block that Smith does here, but I'm willing to risk sending Kovacs or Demens full bore against a running back in the backfield.

UPDATE
Per a commenter's request, here's video of the play in question (:41 mark)


For what it's worth, I'm still working on getting an open source video editor to do this myself.