 |
| Devin Funchess had 4 catches for 41 yards and 1 touchdown |
Let's see less of this guy on offense . . . Power Al Borges. It's crazy how Michigan's offense started to get going a little bit once Borges realized that Michigan can't overpower teams with a bunch of baby-faced offensive linemen and a 195 lb. tailback. He went from a power team with a finesse running back to a finesse team with power running backs, and now things seem to be clicking a little bit.
Let's see more of this guy on defense . . . Ben Gedeon. Actually, I want James Ross to return to his WILL position as soon as possible, but Gedeon's someone I'm looking forward to watching develop over the next couple years. The coaching staff has done a good job of identifying talent at the inside linebacker positions, and Gedeon (6 tackles, 1 tackle for loss, 1 sack) has looked solid for a true freshman who got thrown into the fire due to injuries.
Let's see less of this guy on defense . . . Josh Furman. Furman (3 tackles, 1 pass breakup) gets lost out there. He was beaten for a 53-yard touchdown early, was slow to react in the running game, and took some bad angles. Hopefully Jarrod Wilson can return from his injury in time for the bowl game.
Play of the game . . . Devin Funchess's bubble screen. In a play reminiscent of the Indiana game, Funchess took a bubble screen to the right, leaped over cornerback Doran Grant, and sprinted up the right sideline for 22 yards before getting pushed out of bounds. This isn't anything new, but for a 6'5", 235 lb. guy to make these kinds of plays is pretty amazing.
Player of the game . . . Devin Gardner. Gardner had his second-best game ever with a 32/45 effort that resulted in 451 yards and 4 touchdowns, along with 9 carries for 10 yards and 1 touchdown. A chunk of that came with a bum ankle. That's the most passing yards and touchdowns in the history of The Game. He looked beaten up for the past few games, but he looked rejuvenated in this one. Honorable mention goes to Jake Butt (5 catches, 85 yards, 1 touchdown) and Jeremy Gallon (9 catches, 175 yards, 1 touchdown).
Dileo's injuries this season aside, here's a Monday conspiracy theory:
ReplyDeleteJeremy Jackson has been on the field so often because he *resembles* the kind of wide receiver Brady Hoke wants on the field. Blocking and size are valued above all else. Catching 8-yard passes on 3rd-and-7 is important. Speed to be a downfield threat? Great -- need a few of those.
Never mind that Jackson doesn't necessarily *do* all those things. Dileo just doesn't look right to Hoke, so that's why he hasn't been playing as much.
I'm of the opinion (crazy as it may be) that the illogical offensive calls from earlier games (where Michigan repeatedly and predictably ran into defenses stacked for the run) were indirectly from Hoke. I have the feeling that Borges may sometimes have had different ideas.
It's unlikely that Hoke is dictating substitution patterns and formations related to WR's and TE's on offense. Those decisions are too integral to Borges' specific play design, and Hoke does not meddle with Borges a lot during games. I could see Hoke getting involved with picking starters on the OL, giving the back-up RB's a chance, or maybe emphasizing run vs. pass in pre-game planning, but not much beyond that.
DeleteBut I agree that Jackson and even moreso A.J. Williams received excessive playing time based on Borges' fantasy offense. They are bigger guys who look like blockers, but can't actually block all that well. The same is true of Funchess to an extent.
It really is a big shame that Dileo got hurt this year. UM fans obviously appreciate him, but it was interesting that Todd Blackledge made a big deal about him during the game.
Thankfully, this problem should go away because UM is developing depth and talent at TE/H-back/WR. There will soon have more options of two-dimensional players who can both block and provide a receiving threat. So the one-dimensional (or zero-dimensional!) guys will get phased out.
Feeeelings....nothing more than feeeeeeelings.
DeleteI don't know what people are hearing to make these sort of judgements. Borges and Hoke seem to be on the same page to me, but clearly the playcalling is coming from Borges. And it seems like the personnel is based on the playcalling, so Borges has the guys in that he wants, I would guess.
If it was just about blocking from the WR position, I would think Reynolds would be the guy. Jackson's strengths relative to others seem to be that, while he isn't good at anything per se, he is reliable-handed, doesn't mess up the plays, and is a competent blocker. I think he's a guy they can rely on to not screw up his assignment, the other guys they don't trust.
I'd rather Dileo played as much as the next guy, and I do think Hoke is biased by size but...Jackson isn't actually very big.
Agree with PS that if the bigger issue in regard to the stuff raised here is the TE position. That's been a personnel weakness every year yet still we say tons of playing time at the expense of using the Rodriguez-era receivers.
Going forward, building depth and getting some TEs to red-shirt will be invaluable to this offense. Williams should be a backup RS Freshman.
FYI, I have always found Jackson to be a sub-par blocker. Maybe he does well in practice drills, but not in games. Earlier in the year when he was playing a lot, CB's were feasting on him in the run game.
DeleteFurman and Jackson ... on the one hand you have a kid with just a world of athletic ability and raw speed wasting it frozen with indecision, making bad decisions or just flat out taking bad angles. And on the other hand you have a kid who seems to see the field, knows what he's supposed to be doing and is trying to get there, but just doesn't have the physical tools to make it happen.
ReplyDeleteMaddening!!!!!
Asking this question out of complete ignorance but given Furman's speed would WR have been a better position for him? Maybe someone with a low fottball IQ is better when he is told specifically what to do rather than having to reactand think.
ReplyDeleteHe was a very productive RB in high school, but almost all programs recruiting him wanted him on D. There is no indication he has WR skills.
DeleteI think Furman's been playing out of position his entire career. He should have bulked up to become a SAM linebacker, in my opinion. Running back would have been my second choice. Then safety. Then wide receiver.
DeletePardon my ignorance as well, but what is extent of Jarrod Wilson's injury?
ReplyDeleteCast on his arm, so he must have broken a bone.
DeleteI want to be very clear that I am not being critical of Josh Furman as a person. I'm sure he is a nice kid and a good person. That being said, Josh Furman the football player...
ReplyDeleteMagnus, I have been saying the same thing over and over as well. He just seems to have little defensive football instincts. He's usually late, usually taking poor angles, and usually allowing himself to get blocked way downfield.
Regarding moving him to WR, he was actually a pretty successful RB in high school, even running for 500-some yards in a playoff game, IIRC. Not saying that he should be moved there but that he has played quite a bit of tailback, though not in college. However at this point moving him is probably out of the question due to a lack of upperclassman depth at safety.
I mean it's all too late now. Furman is a RS Junior I believe. I hope he just takes the degree and go away to open up another spot. He most likely won't get PT anyway. Coaches should probably think of a different way to actually use him or not renew the 5th year.
DeleteI think it's pretty clear that Furman WILL get some playing time next year. He and Wilson are the only potential returnees with starting experience, since Gordon and Avery are graduating. Even if Furman gets beaten out by Thomas, Clark, etc., he started a couple games this year and will probably be a frequently used backup next season.
DeleteAh God. More Furman, eh? My fingers will be crossed every time I see him out there.
DeleteThis game is why the offense has been so maddening and Borges has been the goat of the season...the talent is very clearly there. If the O-line is even mediocre next year, we should put up sick numbers if the coaches have their heads extracted from their asses.
ReplyDeleteThe OL needs to be mediocre to put up not-horrible numbers. Losing Gallon and Fitz will be a huge hit to the big play potential of the offense.
DeleteIs Fitz really a big-play guy? I don't know about that. Smith had a 38-yard run Saturday, and I'm hard-pressed to remember a longer run that Fitz had all year, despite way more carries.
DeleteGallon's obviously going to be a big loss, but Funchess can be a big-play threat as well. I think Chesson and Darboh will step up, too.
Toussaint hasn't looked the same this year as he did in 2011 and 2012 (or 2010, for that matter), but that might be partially because of the weak offensive line. It's hard to break big plays or get many opportunities to break big plays when you're getting submarined in the backfield half the time. He's had runs of 65, 61, 59, 50, 46, 43, 41, 38, 35, 35, 31, and 31 in his career.
DeleteDeVeon Smith has one carry over 20 yards (the 38-yarder), and Derrick Green has two (30 and 23 yards). Granted, that's only one year, and neither was a full-time starter. But Toussaint is/was more of a big play threat than those guys. His 65-yarder came as an infrequently used backup as a redshirt freshman in 2010.
First, I will say what a game by the offense. They came out inspired and even controlled the line of scrimmage during parts of the game, especially the first couple drives.
ReplyDeleteSo can we move Norfleet back to RB? There have been a few screens this year, especially in the past few games where there were blockers in front and Fitz somehow ends up making nothing out of something. You can say that the OL downfield are missing blocks, but even one-on-one in the open field you should be getting a couple extra yards. The way he carries no momentum, it's like the laws of physics don't apply to Fitz sometimes. Justice Hayes has made a couple rather important catches in late game situations this year, but hasn't proven his effectiveness. We need a Sproles/ Vereen type of back and I think Norfleet has that potential.
I agree with this. Norfleet has seemed to go down pretty easy, but there is clearly a need for a more elusive/shifty/play-making back to go along with the thumpers.
DeleteI've been calling for more Norfleet for a while. I don't care whether he plays slot receiver or running back, but he needs to get the ball more.
Delete