That's an ugly score. I didn't mind writing about a 27-24 victory when it came to the USC game, but I do have a problem with it after playing the Minnesota Gophers. In the game preview, I predicted a 38-13 victory. I had heard that Colston Loveland was likely to play, but I also assumed Will Johnson would play and I had no idea that Josaiah Stewart would miss the game. Regardless, Michigan has had some injury issues in past years against lesser Big Ten programs, and it didn't have a huge effect. Michigan had to hang on in a nail-biter here, and that doesn't bode well for the rest of the season.
Hit the jump for more.
Michigan coaches probably laughed at my game plan. First, let me be clear . . . I'm under no illusion that the coaching staff is reading my site for the game plan. And I also don't post my preview until the day before the game, so it would be nearly useless anyway. That being said, I mentioned on Friday morning that Michigan should put Stewart over Minnesota right tackle Quinn Carroll and let Will Johnson followed around Minnesota wide receiver Daniel Jackson. That would have been a great plan for success. But . . . neither Johnson or Stewart played. Sure enough, Jackson scored a touchdown (7 catches, 58 yards, 1 TD) and Carroll posted the second-worst pass blocking grade of the day (44.0), just barely ahead of left guard Tyler Cooper (43.6), who got roasted by Mason Graham repeatedly. In my opinion, that final score would have been significantly different with Stewart getting a couple sacks Johnson blanketing Johnson. Perhaps this should make Michigan fans feel slightly better, because it indicates that a full-strength Michigan would be much better. But you can never count on being full-strength down the stretch of the season. Injuries happen, and you need to have people ready to step up.
I hate Michigan's offense. I understand why Michigan started the season with Davis Warren as quarterback. I think that was probably a worthwhile experiment. I also understand why Warren had to be benched; throwing 6 interceptions in three games is just not acceptable. That being said, this offense isn't being adapted to the athletic skill set of Alex Orji. Where are the designed runs adding him to the run game to even out the numbers? I'm talking about QB iso, QB power, etc. Where is the triple option pitch man? Where are the easy throws created by the threat of Orji as a runner? The frustrating thing is that I do like Kirk Campbell, but he's not meant to be coaching an offensive player like Orji. They're two square pegs being forced into round holes. Campbell does not have a history of being able to use a player like Orji. I'm not someone who calls for coaches' heads, but I'll put it this way: I don't think Orji will be Michigan's QB in 2025, but if he is, it will be because Michigan found a new offensive coordinator with established success using a run-oriented quarterback.
Michigan is hurting at WR. I'm sorry, but this is going to be my new gripe to be heard every week until something changes. Michigan is not going to return to relevance as a national championship contender until they stop running out receivers who have no business starting at a place like Michigan. Kendrick Bell is a redshirt freshman at 6'2", 191 pounds, who is not big . . . or fast . . . or strong . . . or elusive . . . or crafty. Amorion Walker has barely been seen on the field despite his speed, but it's because he's 6'3" and just over 180 pounds. Peyton O'Leary should be an occasional sub, not someone averaging 20 snaps per game. Even with a good quarterback, Tyler Morris and Semaj Morgan are complementary pieces, not #1 guys. Morgan is probably the most dynamic, but he missed the Minnesota game due to injury. The pieces here just don't match.
No, Minnesota wasn't offsides. That first onside kick by Minnesota was unfairly ruled offsides. Minnesota wasn't offsides. They recovered and had a chance to score a game-tying field goal or a game-winning touchdown, but the officials screwed them over. Except . . . Minnesota illegally touched the ball before it went 10 yards. And they were also blocking a Michigan player before the ball went 10 yards, another illegal act. It should have been a re-kick, and Kalel Mullings recovered the ball cleanly on the second one. Game over.
Keepings things in perspective. Michigan is 4-1 at this point, which is where most people expected the Wolverines to be. None of the games have been as pretty as we wanted - even the Texas loss was expected to be more competitive - but there was supposed to be a drop-off, and we've seen it. If Michigan continues to stack ugly wins, it will be frustrating but okay. Next week the Wolverines will take on a struggling Washington team that just lost to Rutgers, but it will be a good test, since Washington has a solid defense. They're only giving up 12 points per game and they're tied for #7 in yards allowed per play (4.07).
So many questions ...
ReplyDeleteQ1 -- I can't believe Moore/Campbell aren't aware of the offensive ideas cited here and elsewhere. There's a reason they're not pursuing them. It could be explained by simple stubbornness. Or it could be something else. What is it?
Q2 -- If they install offensive schemes designed for a running QB, and they rep those schemes, and Orji goes down to injury, where does that leave the offense then?
Q3 -- I would imagine other teams have wide receivers of quality similar to -- or lesser than -- what Michigan possesses. What do they do to accommodate the lack of skill at the position?
Q4 -- Finally, after five games under the belt, what's your assessment of Grant Newsome as OL coach? Earlier you wondered how much of the OL issues fall on him. As the selected line plays more snaps together, do you see signs of promise? Some PFF numbers seem to suggest so.
1. Perhaps the idea of option ball seems "soft" to the coaches. Maybe they don't want to revert to the Rich Rod years? I don't think option has to be "soft" but perhaps that's an explanation. And then, of course, there's the concern that maybe Orji doesn't know how to read, doesn't know how to pitch the ball, etc. Which, like...if you can't pass and you can't read and you can't pitch the ball, what can you do? And I'm NOT suggesting he can't do those things. I'm guess he can and that's just not an avenue the coaches want to pursue.
Delete2. I think that's the problem with not recruiting QBs who fit your system. And I don't mean not recruiting guys like Orji, but not recruiting guys like McCarthy. If the system was built for guys like McNamara, McCarthy, etc. (pro-style, accurate quarterbacks), then you should continue to recruit guys like that. If they have plus athleticism, good! But the guys they recruited in 2022 and didn't land in 2023 are hurting the system.
3. Michigan needs bigger receivers - not all, but some - to block, to be red zone targets, and to have a bigger catch radius than guys like Fredrick Moore. Their "big guys" - and I've heard Kendrick Bell referred to that way - are 191 pounds or less. They get pushed around. All except O'Leary, who's a walk-on and athletically limited. Right now there's nothing Michigan can do because they can't recruit someone mid-season, so again, I think you lean into the option-style offense and try to mitigate the passing issues.
4. I do see some improvement with the offensive line, but it's too slow. Also, there are still some major gaffes like on Saturday when Mullings got the ball on 3rd-and-short and got stuffed for like -3 yards in the backfield because Priebe/Giudice didn't block the playside DT (Logan-Redding, I think). Honestly, even if they're first-time starters, most of these guys are old enough (aside from Link) to understand these blocking schemes against these fronts.
@Thunder
Delete1) I think it's the read. Look at Orji's feet in the pocket (happy feet). Next, look at his pass attempts: we thought Davis was bad at post snap reads, but Orji just doesn't get past his first look
2) we talked about this last year, but we undervalued QB recruiting for two cycles. Orji & Denegal were always projects and not starting material; I was called out for this, but Bell was never going to play QB
3) this has been debated here as well. Sure, a 5star or high 4star WR can be just fine. Low 4stars & 3stars can suffice if in the right system and supplemented with size around them. But we're back to only short, skinny or short & skinny, none of which are blue chip or with the intangibles of Jeremy Gallon. Playmakers was a bad call
4) 1oo%, and why Mullings is RB1. There's some bad missed blocks, and only he can turn it into something not disastrous. RB matters!
on 3, I'm referring to size ... we do need some more size at WR
Deleteje93 @ 10:24 -- the more I process the totality of events of the last three years or so, I'm becoming convinced Harbaugh was planning to leave after 2023 regardless. 2023 was his very best chance to win the National Championship, and he went all-in for that year. He didn't prepare for anything afterwards. Even if Michigan had lost to Alabama or Washington, he would have gone to the NFL. Whether the Chargers or someone else, he was gone.
DeleteIf I'm correct, then what Harbaugh did was poor executive transition planning. Regardless of his plans, he should have prepared better for 2024 after he was gone. I know there's an argument that "Jim Harbaugh should be about Jim Harbaugh" ... but no, not really. Responsible people plan responsibly.
@anon 1o43, if the cost of a national championship is a 7 or 8 win follow-up, then I take it. Absolute time of my life, and an experience I'll never forget
DeleteOther than that, no I don't think that's what Harbaugh was doing. We had two generational talents at QB right in our backyard, plus Carr's grandson. It would have been criminal to not go all in on them, which was costly
@Anon
DeleteHarbaugh won a national title while adding 9 guys from the portal. With the exception of Tuttle (who was probably QB2 when healthy), the other 8 all played meaningful roles. Barner, Wallace, Stewart, Henderson, Hinton, Nugent, Hausmann, and Turner.
For 2024, Harbaugh had already added Barham and Priebe before leaving. Had he stayed, there's a very real chance he would have addressed some of the holes at QB, WR, TE, OT, DT, and DE. Moore addressed kicker and the spring problems that popped up, post-Harbaugh, at DB. But Moore's focus from his hire date through the end of spring practice was on high school recruiting, not the 2024 team. Decent chance that Harbaugh would have been more dialed in if he had committed to Michigan and focused on the 2024 team.
@ThunderSeptember 30, 2024 at 10:13 AM
DeleteSomebody should ask Bo Schembechler if option football is soft.
Michigan did recruit guys for their system -- McCarthy, Denegal, and Davis are pro-style QBs recruited in the last few classes. McCarthy left early. Denegal is a dud. Davis isn't ready. For those that think Warren (PWO) is a hidden talent -- a narrative we absolutely DID hear this offseason -- that's 4, with Tuttle making it 5.
The issue is that JJ is the only good one in 2024 and he's in the NFL. So this is EXACTLY the situation that calls for the Portal but the coaching staff saw Orji as a different type of QB but an option they seemingly liked enough to run the offense.
The record so far is probably not any different than the record they would have with JJ McCarthy at QB.
"3. Michigan needs bigger receivers - not all, but some - to block, to be red zone targets, and to have a bigger catch radius than guys like Fredrick Moore."
DeleteSTRONGLY disagree. Red Zone has not been an issue for this team. Mullings and Orji are getting it done in the RZ. Loveland and Klein have a better catch radius than guys like Fred Moore and it hasn't helped them win any downfield balls. If Cornelius Johnson was on this team are we catching a lot more balls or 1 in 5 games more?
Michigan could most use Roman Wilson back to threaten downfield with speed. But if there isn't time or ability to throw downfield to him, the threat is moot.
The talent level at WR is low but size is not the problem and if it was Amarion Walker would be out there. He's their 6th best WR, at best.
"For those that think Warren (PWO) is a hidden talent -- a narrative we absolutely DID hear this offseason -- that's 4, with Tuttle making it 5."
DeleteFirst, Warren is more talented certainly than you believed. Yes, he was benched but it's because of the INTs, not what I would call a lack of talent. And that's presumably why the coaches named him the starter. Now I agree we would have been better off with a portal QB, but Warren without the INTs and some better protection might have been okay. At least the coaches initially trusted him to pass the ball.
@BNC
DeleteNo -- Warren is not more talented than I believed. His results can be excused to some degree given the context but he was asked to execute a lot of easy throws and it was telling that he wasn't particularly effective even at that.
I said the idea that Warren was something more than a walk-on caliber player was a fantasy. And it was. He looks like a walk-on caliber player.
Even when he isn't throwing INTs he looks like a walk-on caliber player. 6 YPA is bad. Passer rating of 111 is bad. The offensive ineptitude with him as starter was bad, even when he wasn't throwing INTs.
The lack of talent contributes to the INTs. Just like it did with John O'Korn or Russell Bellomy. Except Warren is older than those guys were when they were asked to play and is in his 4th year in this system.
When you don't have it you don't have it. The fact that Orji didn't beat him out is the worst thing I can say about Orji and his prospects as a starter. It's an exceptionally low bar to beat out a walk-on and Orji didn't pass it. That it's CLOSE is a failure in the QB room and an indictment of Orji.
Orji is a 20 year old 3-star QB. He looks like it. His QBR is 45.
Warren is a 22 year old walk on. He looks like it. His QBR is 35.
Orji is worse than I hoped he was going to be. Warren is exactly what I thought he was going to be.
The Warren offense against Texas produced 6 points, 156 yards, and 3 turnovers on 8 drives in the first 3 quarters before garbage time.
DeleteI don't think an Orji-led offense will fall to those depths, even against similar defenses at Oregon and OSU. I don't think Orji is world's better than Warren right now, but I think he's better enough to not repeat the Texas debacle.
Warren has a better passing efficiency (110) than Orji (108). When Orji passes the ball, it's 3.7 yards per attempt. Gross.
DeleteThe Warren offense played Texas, which has the #2 defense in the country, according to PFF.
Orji has played against the #42 and #43 defenses in the country in Minnesota and USC.
@Lank 5:14, I wish we had CoJo! He made far more plays than the guys we have now, even in the 2o2o season, the last time our QB & pass blocking were garbage
Delete*Walker doesn't run routes or block well ... he's sixth because he's not good, even in this poor WR room. The point was, we need more than small & mid. We need talent & actual playmakers, a couple with size would be a (big) bonus
@Thunder 9:o5, Lank is starting another debate on which pile of sh:t smells worse
@Thunder
DeleteWell if this was a passing competition I think you might be onto something. Namely...Warren is a better passer than Orji.
Orji is not going to win a comparison of passing stats against Warren. 110 vs 108 is....well, it's just very bad, for both.
How'd the offense do?
Let's pretend the absolute ineptitude displayed against Texas never happened.
The Orji offense produced 47 points in 2 games against USC and Minn.
The Warren offense produced 51 points in 2 games against Ark State and Fresno State*.
The Orji offense produced 2 turnovers in 2 games against USC and Minn.
The Warren offense produced 3 turnovers in 2 games against Ark State and Fresno State.
I dunno what numbers you're using - but how does Ark State and Fresno State rank in them?
Even if you take the large pile left by BEVO out of the equation. I think it's clear which pile smells worse.
(*Counting 2 TDs from Orji in the Warren offense.)
I know it wasn't pretty, but as stated on Game Day the 2nd Half was more like a practice session than a game. We saw a lot of 21 personnel, and Orji stuff was experimented & repped
ReplyDeleteNo loss "should" be surprising this year, but I expect them to go to Washington with a full roster and game plan that wins for 4 quarters
I like your take; may it be so!
DeleteI don't think the final score is very reflective of the game.
ReplyDeleteMichigan's D dominated the majority of the game. I think they are living up to expectations for a top 10, maybe top 5 unit, that was going to be a step back from the best D in country in 2023. Giving up three consecutive TDs wasn't pretty but one was off a turnover and sustained by a dubious personal foul, the second was a short-field following a 3 and out, then the third was trying to protect a 2-score lead with the clock ticking away. This was, to me, mostly, a series of unfortunate events and another example of the defense not getting help from offense (and special teams). All in all, without 2 of the best 4 players on the field, this was still a strong performance by the defense - especially considering the 3 turnovers forced.
As for the offense. Well it's not great but at this point -- what did you expect. I said this to Thunder before but the 38 point prediction for MIchigan was pretty outlandish. The Vegas over/under (total for both teams) was less than that. The consensus expectation was something like 24-10 or 21-13. I don't know where the confidence in this team to put up 38 points came from, for anyone who has been paying close attention to this team since January.
So the offense, I gotta say, kind of exceeded my expectations. Not in the results mind you, it was a pretty unexceptional effort on the ground with 4.8 YPC against a respectable but not great Minny D. But it exceed my expectations in the scheme changes I saw. Better balance between run/pass and Orji looking fairly competent as a passer. Another missed shot downfield and our first big turnover, but some glimpses were there. The series of plays with Edwards and Mullings both on the field....highly highly encouraging.
Michigan continues to mostly avoid turnovers and convert in the red zone. These are good signs. Two games into the Orji era and I am seeing progress relative to what I hope is the nadir of the season -- the complete annihilation of the offense during the Texas game. (qualify that to "through 3 quarters", if you like).
Thunder's questions about the offense are legit. BUT -- they are probably a fantasy. Sam Webb talked about it in Fall Camp. Sam Webb talked about it in the Spring. This coaching staff was never changing their offense for Alex Orji. The mix of plays called? Yes. The offense? Calvin Magee (RIP) isn't walking through that door. Hanging on to that fantasy is just a recipe for misery. Might as well be mad at your significant other they don't look like Jennifer Love Hewit (to borrow the 90s reference from the other thread).
BUT but but -- I do think there are some signs of progress from last week. This game wasn't ALL just RBs running and taking advantage of the mostly theoretical threat of Orji running. Orji did some stuff this game! Edwards ran some routes! Bredeson is being deployed more often. They are adapting. Slowly, yes, but adapting. I don't think it's going to be great with Campbell this year, but it can be "adequate" if they keep figuring stuff out and finding some comfort between Campbell's playbook and Orji's skillset.
progress? didnt they struggle to gain 200 total yards vs minnesota?
Deletenot sure id use the word "adequate" in any context with this O.
the staff allowed themselves to enter the season with this roster/plan so its ultimately on them but theres not much "comfort" to find when your QB cant pass & OL cant protect & your 175 lb WR platoon cant really win anyway.
were not talking about your average high school O facing these issues but the defending national champs. not a promising situation. im pulling for moore & crew
I said they CAN BE adequate. I think there were signs of progress and a few reasons to be optimistic. It hasn't been great, but last 2 games are better than what we saw in the first 3 games, IMO.
DeleteWhen I say optimistic I mean like -- good enough to win ugly. Talking some of the offensive struggles in the worst games of 2021 like Washington, Rutgers, or Wisconsin. That's probably your best case scenario. That's if they figure stuff out.
Not great. Far from great.
Michigan's yards per pass attempt with Orji were the #3 and #5 games (out of 5) this year.
DeleteYards per rush were #4 and #5.
Yards per play were #2 and #5.
This game did not show much progress offensively.
Don't forget that we got a new RB1 during the Texas game ... Coaches put the offense on his back, and Mullings delivered!
DeleteTEXAS:
- Orji: less than 1ooyds total offense, 2.7ypa; 0 TDs; 8oQBR
- Mullings: 159yds (9.4ypc), 2 TDs, Player of the Game (3x this year)
MINNESOTA
- Orji: less than 1ooyds total offense, 4.8ypa, 1.3ypc, 1TD
- Mullings: 111yds, 4.6ypc, 2TDs, B1G Offensive Player of the Week
QB is an obvious weakness this year. They don't get the credit for RB1 Herculean efforts
Scoreboard.
DeleteIn order of difficulty for offense:
6 points against Texas before garbage time (12 total)
20 points against USC
27 against Minny
23 against Fresno
28 against Arkansas State
Again, you can ignore the Texas game if you want to and start slicing and dicing things. Here is the bottomline.
Michigan held onto the ball and put up points, better than they did against the cupcakes.
YPP were #2 and #5, but based on opponent difficulty should have been #3 and #4. Fewer turnovers, keeping D out of precarious positions.
So......progress.
Scoreboard? You haven't even pointed to Orji being the difference ... he isn't, it's all about Mullings. While Loveland is a 1st Round Draft pick, there's no doubt who our mid season OMVP is
Delete*this is not me advocating for Warren, or even a two QB system. I think they both stink, and they're both bringing the offense & team down with them ... but if I have to choose, Orji is more entertaining. That's it; the gimmick - while severely limited - is more fun than other severely limited option
I'll have to check the archives but I believe Mullings played in the first 3 games.
DeleteYou bring up an excellent point jeLLLy93 -- Orji hasn't even played with Loveland in half his starts. WR1 and WR2 also each missed a game during the "Orji era". And then Hinton went out too against Minny. Orji has been challenged in ways that Warren was not against Fresno and Ark State.
So yeah we're getting similar or better results in less favorable circumstances with Orji at QB.
----------------------------------------------------------
I'll give you a very specific example. Mullings made an outstanding individual play to win the USC game but against Minnesota his big run (27 yard TD) saw two linebackers going to the left towards Orji, as well as the deep safety taking a step or two down in Orji's direction. The wrong direction, for him. With the OL blocking effectively on this play, Mullings only had to run in a straight line to the endzone. He was untouched.
If Donovan Edwards you'd be dismissing this as boom/bust or only getting what the offense gives you.
https://www.foxsports.com/watch/fmc-zecs0n1by9aa7nif
I'll put it plainly - the threat of Orji running made that touchdown.
The defense messed up, but they messed up because Orji was someone they were worried about on the ground. It's like play-action, but without the delay. And it happened multiple times against USC as well.
Call that a gimmick if you want - it works. Just like the flea flicker worked in most games in 2023 and WR runs (end arounds and reverses) work in most games. If you haven't played football since 1993 and can't process the world, you might not have noticed these things, but the game has evolved, and things that were considered gimmicks (run and shoot, 4 verts, no huddle, zone read, RPO) are now a standard part of most every offense in the NFL and college.
Yes meltdown man this is what I've been telling you when you attribute everything the run game does to the RB.
DeleteThe QB now is creating opportunities for RBs that were not evident against Fresno State or Arkansas State (or the other school that can't be compared because they aren't identical LOL). The big plays are there now, that weren't there before. Team game. 11 on 11. Not 1 on 11.
It's ain't 1993. Sorry for your loss.
I mean losses. Hold em up.
Lol "meltdown" is projecting (again) ...
DeleteYou're lying again ... when have I ever "attributed everything the run game does to the RB"? ... You won't answer because you're n0t bUilt for tHiS
How many big runs does Mullings have? Edwards? How many 1st Down runs for each? Touchdowns runs? Before Orji? Since? What's the PFF for ea RB? MGo UFR score?
These answers come against the same defenss, behind the same OL, and the SAME quarterbacks ...
YES, it's a team game. But RB matters, and only one has been reliable through five games, reflected in more than the data but coaches pick for player of the game (3x) and conference player of the week
*Minnesota has played five games. Against MICHIGAN, the longest run they gave up against Edwards was 1oyds ... only Rhode Island had a RB perform more unimpressive. He's not doing very well this season (again). Loads of potential, but not unlike last year we're left waiting ... maybe tomorrow night? I hope so, and will be screaming my brains out. But through five games? "Eh"
*you still owe $1
#peopledontforget
wordsalad. Don was the better back yesterday. Mullings is boom/bust by your definition.
DeleteGo back under the bridge.
You owe me $1000. #fantasy
You are saying Mullings is the reason offense took a step up against Minny and USC right?
DeleteWhat happened Saturday with that?
How's the boom/bust logic going?
#notbuiltforthis
YES, I am. As do the coaches, Big Ten, PFF & UFR
DeleteGuess what? Washington is NOT Minnesota or USC ... shocker, huh?
I forgot that USC isn't Washington but NC State is Texas.
DeleteJELLYLAND FUNTIME!
You owe me a $1000!
Changing subjects to another topic you failed on ... still waiting on your response by the way
DeleteWhite flag accepted
Whatever rando request you are making, I'll gladly provide. Right after I get a definition of boom/bust. Or a quote from the menu I offered you.
Delete#noquote
#justexcuses
#caseclosed
#scoreboard
You have the definition
DeleteYou have litmus testS
It's been weeks, but you still haven't quantified the financial difference for the University at MDen, hotels, etc from one traveling fanbase to another
Pretending you don't know is a part of your dodge ... ZERO integrity
Are you talking about the definition that makes Haskins, Corum, and Mullings boom/bust backs? You took the L there.
DeleteI gave you a second chance. You dodge.
The definition I gave you did not apply to any other MICHIGAN RB
DeleteI also gave you multiple litmus test to gauge against said definition ... you cherrypicked YPC - after years of arguing against - and ignored the rest ... even after I provided that information for Mullings
Your lies are noteworthy in attempt, but a failure as a strategy
#n0tbUiLtf0rtHiS
Yes jelly that's the point. Your definition for boom/bust only applies to the guy you want to call boom/bust.
DeleteNot even you believe you.
I said give me a measure that defines boom/bust and you did. When you got EXPOSED, now you say it does not apply to others. LOLOLOL
I asked you about the multiple tests and what to do when they contradict each other. You ducked and dodged.
You got asked to define boom/bust. You said it was simple.
You lied.
You failed.
You lost.
I gave you a second chance and I'll give you more to be honest because I already KNOW you can't do it. You aren't built for it.
The world is your oyster buddy. Choose whatever measure you want.
DeleteYou can't! Might as well just say it's just about your feelings and you can't define it, like Thunder.
What's Harball? You can't define that either.
What's a gimmick? You don't know - just stuff you don't like and don't understand.
Simple indeed.
I think it's funny that there's like a months-long argument about somebody demanding a definition of boom/bust, as if there's any technical, dictionary definition to share.
DeleteOther than the fact that the player in question didn't do jack squat for an entire season except three big runs against PSU and Washington.
Sometimes you just gotta let things go, Lank.
You're right Thunder. This is #caseclosed
DeleteNo one can define boom/bust. The goalposts move the minute anyone tries to explain it. Definition for 2022 is one thing. Definition for 2023 is another. Definition for a non-Edwards RB? No, it's only for him. Still boom/bust in 2024? You betcha -- just can't explain why.
Lank: you can't define Boom-Bust
Deleteme: here you go, and some litmus testS too
Lank: you can't define it ... and your (singular) test applies to Mullings, Corum & Haskins
me: but I did define it ... and I gave several litmus testS. Here's what Edwards carries gave us (one Boom, mostly busts). And here's Mullings (two Booms, multiple clutch 1st Downs, two TDs, game on his back)
Lank: you can't define it
me: but I have
Lank: yeah, but your definition only applies to Edwards, so me no likey
me: so then, I DID PROVIDE A DEFINITION AND TESTS (several)
Yet another concession from LyinLank. Yet another Dub for je93
#tooeasy
#outsmarted
#n0tbUiltf0rtHiS
#caseclosed
Mullings and Corum and Haskins ar boom/bust backs per your definition.
DeleteHold it up.
Lmao ... what's that I smell? FEELINGS!!!
Deleteno links
no quotes
no data
n0tbUiLtf0rtHiS
You clowned yourself.
DeleteYou claimed it was simple to define.
Then you got taken to the woodshed and cried NUANCE!
You tried. You failed. you lost.
Again.
#fact
"Your definition for boom/bust only applies to the guy you want to call boom/bust"
DeleteSo it was defined, and you admitted it right here on Oct 1o at 524PM. Glad you conceded AGAIN ... and yeah, simple
It's nuanced, in that there are many ways to consider the data (broken tackles, down & distances, first downs, touchdowns, etc). Your confusing nuance with difficult because you don't know the game
Lmao, w0oDsHeD ... https://tinyurl.com/4e7bap89
You claimed it was simple to define.
DeleteYour simple definition results in Haskins, Corum, and Mullings being boom/bust.
Now there are "many way to consider the data".
You tried. You failed. You lost.
It was simple to define. Now that you've conceded, you're dodging the fact you lied about me not defining it. Exposing LyinLank is also easy
DeleteThe definition did not apply to Mullings (as I demonstrated) or Corum/Haskins (as you claim but dodge when challenged)
#outsmarted
#n0tbUiLtf0rtHiS
It's simple to define yet it required three different definitions, which can all contradict, and others that can't be measured, requiring you to cry "nuance" uncle. You tried and you failed and now you're onto more fantasies.
DeleteI demonstrated how with Mullings.
You can't handle the truth!
Pay up!
ONE definition, that you lied about
Delete*You stuck to YPC - which you have argued against for years - while I demonstrated with Mullings ... TDs & 1st Downs ... versus Don leaving us behind the sticks. More lies on a month old post
#rentfree
What is the one simple definition? You don't know. You can't say. Because you failed.
DeleteHold it up.
Deleteje93September 28, 2024 at 11:14 AM
DeleteBoom-Bust: a guy who can hit the homerun, but otherwise won't get you what is needed for a given play, drive, game AND season ... unless used more creatively
http://touchthebanner.blogspot.com/2024/09/michigans-10-longest-plays-vs-arkansas.html
Case closed? Nah, LyinLank will move the target or pretend this isn't happening
Great you settled on the one that can't be measured. More fantasy land. What is a homerun in football? what is "more creatively". Let's focus on the part that can be measured:
DeleteSuccess rate is a measure for "getting you what is needed for a given play". Edwards success rate in 2022 was 47%. You said he was boom/bust that year, but that success rate says he got what he needed real often.
Blake Corum's success rate in 2023 was 47% also. So was Blake Corum a boom/bust back in 2023?
#outsmarted
Is success rate a measure of your boom/bust definition?
DeleteYou guys are STILL talking about the definition of boom/bust?!?!
DeleteYES, I settled it WITH QUOTES & LINKS ... yet, here you are
DeleteI did measure:
- you asked, and I gave stats & results for ohio 2o22. Rather than accept that I answered your question, you cried "what about Corum"
- you asked this year, and I gave stats & results for SC, and - anticipating your bullsh:t - gave stats & results for Mullings, IN THE SAME GAME
You ask, you get. Then you change your argument. Now it's Success Rate for a season rather than the games he started (the point of this exchange), purposefully misleading, since we all know Don wasn't given many tough runs until this year, and was promptly benched. DEFEATED. You want more? Bet me boy!
@Thunder: no, I proved LyinLank wrong two months ago ... he's been reeling since
RE 2025QB and the fit between Campbell and his QB room -- this seems like a thing for Campbell to resolve.
ReplyDeleteI think we can give him a pass for the short offseason but by 2025 he needs to either a)figure out how to fit with Orji better, b) get Davis or Carter ready to step in or c)hit the portal for someone who fits better.
Unless there's significant improvement from Orji - which I'm not expecting - Michigan simply can't go into 2025 with him as the projected starter. Ohio State parted ways with Kyle McCord, and McCord was a much better QB.
DeleteOSU has had more skill position talent for decades so I'm not sure that's the most pertinent comparison, but I agree. The talent level at QB is subpar when we are talking about a competition between a 3-star, a walk-on, and a guy who couldn't keep the starting job at Indiana.
DeleteThere was a hope (*** but not an expectation ***) that Orji could surge forward in 2024. When Warren was announced as starter, that dream was dead.
ReplyDeleteRE: WR - a known issue so what did we expect? We've got guys who can make plays (Morgan/Morris) but have not yet seen reliable targets emerge. And as much as we can try to excuse this with Orji throwing so infrequently to WRs -- it seems pretty clear they are not getting open enough to be worth targeting a lot more. We have some pretty massive busts in recruiting (Clemons, Walker, English) in the last few classes so we've got a hole at the position that already isn't a strength due to being run-heavy, even in the best of times. The problem is -- why are the remaining guys playing so much?
The answer is that Campbell is running a Campbell offense, not maximizing his personnel. For better or worse. I personally can't fault him for this. I think Orji is a bit of a stop-gap between McCarthy and the next guy.
We shouldn't really be surprised that the receivers on the roster are playing.
DeleteWhat I'm surprised by (and disappointed in) is the inability of the QB/OC to get the ball to the playmakers. In the off-season, we were told Tyler Morris was the second coming of Ronnie Bell. We were told Semaj Morgan was perhaps the best player on offense. Those guys aren't getting the ball consistently, and when they are, they either don't have a chance to do anything with it or they aren't getting it done (like Morgan's tunnel screen vs. Arkansas State).
I don't think these narratives are true Thunder. Maybe somebody said it one time (?) but Morgan was not considered the best player on offense by 99.999% of people. I think a lot of folks hoped that Bell could be Morris but not many people asserted that it was already the case and done deal.
DeleteBut yes -- these playmakers are not getting the ball as much as most of us hoped.
I think you make a fair point that we should expect WRs to play. BUT -- It's surprising that Michigan is
a) using WRs more than last year (about 6 snaps more per game by my math)
b) dipping further into their depth chart (WR5 had 108 snaps over 15 games last year and WR5 has 104 snaps in 5 games this year)
A is perhaps explained by context (Michigan spent a lot of time protecting leads in 2023 and not much time playing from behind). B is explained by not having proven players like Wilson and Johnson soaking up most of the snaps. But still -- Morgan and Morris are not playing anything LIKE those levels of snaps. They've each missed 1 game so maybe injuries are a factor, but regardless, the rotation is a lot larger this year.
The guys at 247 have said that Morgan was rumored to be the best offensive player in fall camp.
DeleteSomebody said there was a rumor? Stop the presses.
DeleteI'm going to give you a hot take here - but NOBODY of any relevance thought Semaj Morgan was the best offensive player on this team. Semaj's mom might have.
Given the way this coaching staff hyped people up this offseason, I don't think they can be trusted. Don't trust the coaches on that -- just like you don't trust the Harbaugh staff on their approach to health.
@ Lank 2:53 p.m.
DeleteI'm not saying we should believe that Semaj Morgan was/is the best offensive player on the team. I'm saying that was the word coming out of camp. So even with a grain of salt, I think it's fair to have an expectation that he would averaging more than . . . say . . . 6 yards per reception. And that the coaches would be finding ways to get him the ball.
Aside from Mullings and perhaps Edwards, Morgan is probably the most dynamic player with the ball in his hands. That's why he's been returning punts. That's why the coaches got him the ball in 2023.
I think it's fair to say Semaj has not met consensus expectations for 2024 so far, but the bigger issue is the passing game as a whole which I think was the larger point you made.
DeleteSemaj at least has had 12 passes caught. Morris has just six. That's 4th on the team and pretty bad for your expected WR1.
But hey at least he hasn't chosen to transfer like the guy Indiana expected to be WR1.
ReplyDelete"If Michigan continues to stack ugly wins, it will be frustrating but okay."
I am not going to be frustrated by ugly wins. Period. This team is not going to win any other way than ugly. We're 5 games into the season, we more or less know who we are. Unreasonable expectations at this point are more about the source of the expectations than this football team, IMO.
--------------------------------
Washington still ranks out as a top 25 team to computer models. They lost to Rutgers because their kicker is hot garbage (3 missed FGs and 2 possessions ended on downs in Rutgers territory) but they're better than Rutgers and outgained them 500 yards to 300 yards. Most games are not that kicker dependant - Rutgers lucked out.
With the first road game of the year for Michigan, against perhaps a top 25ish caliber team, an ugly win over Washington would be an excellent accomplishment for the 2024 Wolverines. It would keep this team ahead of schedule on the season's expectations, which they are thanks to that big win over USC.
THIS TEAM WINS UGLY!
DeleteLet's embrace it.
That's my more optimistic take. Win the game. Doesn't have to be pretty.
I have no issues with winning ugly. Winning is winning. But winning ugly because of bad planning/execution/coaching is not. Minnesota is a team that lost by a lot to Iowa. Iowa got rid of Brian Ferentz and immediately got better on offense, using similar personnel from last year. Coaches matter and our coaches are simply not cutting it this year.
ReplyDeleteI understand that why some coaches do not want to change the offense to fit the personnel. But if that was the case, why the heck did they not go after a QB in the offseason. UNLV got 2 transfer QB. Indiana got 4-5 transfer WR. And all we manage to get is Tuttle? Texas has 2 bona fide QB. You are telling me you can't recruit a QB because JJ might come back? I think the coaches are simply not doing a good job of evaluating their rosters.
With regards to Orji vs Warren, it really depends on the offense you want to run. You want to run the Harbaugh NFL style offese, go with Warren. You want to run a Rich Rod spread offense or Army style triple offense, go with Orji. Michigan managed to gain 280 yards against Texas (albeit with 2INT). I think that is a better showing that what we did against USC and Minnesota. I am not a coach but I think it is easier to teach the QB to throw away the football or take a sack rather than teach a guy how to put a soft touch on you passes. I also read somewhere that Warren has been somewhat unlucky in his INTs. Instead of 6 INTs, he should have thrown only 3 INTs.
@FT
DeleteI don't like the answer, but I think it's that the available pool of QBs in February was not better than Orji/Warren/Tuttle. Moore chose to focus on high school recruiting after getting hired, immediately hitting the road (to consensus praise). It wasn't till after spring when Michigan addressed the unanticipated emergencies at DB and K.
Bottomline -- they prioritized other things.
@FT
DeleteNobody is running a Rich Rod offense. Nobody wants Mullings and Edwards to have fewer carries than Orji. Orji is opening up the strength of the offense (RBs running).
Texas game was awful. 280 yards? 128 of those came on the last 2 drives with Texas playing soft. Through 3 quarters they had 156 yards on 7 drives, 6 points, and 3 TOs. USC and Minny were MUCH better games by the offense. The only excuse is that Texas D is better. Don't try and put lipstick on the longhorn pig.
"Instead of 6 INTs, he should have thrown only 3 INTs."
He should have thrown no INTs. He'd still be the starter if that was the case. And if Orji throws 6 INTs in 3 games, Warren will be starter again. It's inexcusable, especially while playing 2 cupcakes.
Comments from S.Webb.
Delete"This is why the talk of abandoning the Orji plan because of the ineffectiveness of the passing game is so misguided. You don't take away resources from a higher ceiling capability in favor of a lower ceiling one. Sure, Mullings will break tackles no matter who's at quarterback, but he will without question have fewer running lanes with a non-running threat at quarterback. That of course wouldn't be an issue if Michigan had a dominant offensive line or established perimeter threats, but the Wolverines have neither)."
Not a coach, just a talking head, but also one some folks respect more than others...
@Lank Given the state of our OL and QB, I do not think yards are going to be easy to come by no matter who the QB is. Regarding Orji vs Davis, I think Davis throw a better long ball than Orji but a poorer runner. But from what I have watched in the past 2 games (and I am not a football coach), I would simply run a cover 0 defense against Michigan on most downs. Unless you plan on running triple option (not happening I know), you need some vertical threats and I think Davis is the guy, flanked by Mullings and Edwards. We never did try to run an "Iowa offense" with Davis (lots of runs sprinkled with a few throws here and there). They were still using the JJ playbook. Give Warren a slimmed down playbook and I think his INT will come down. If you have Mullings and Edwards on the field at the same time, I think the running lanes will open up just the same.
Delete@FT
DeleteAfter watching 3 games of Davis "Warren Davis" Warren -- what vertical threats in the offense did you see?
Against Fresno the long pass of the game was a 20 yarder to Loveland. Against Ark State it was a 33 yarder to Marlon Kelin. Against Texas it was a 24 yarder to Loveland* That's better than Orji, but not much! See Sam Webb's comment above.
I agree that offense is not going to be great with either Orji or Warren (or Tuttle or Davis). I would argue it wouldn't even be that good with a solid/decent Michigan-caliber starter at the helm, like Speight or Rudock.
Teams can try to run Cover 0 on us regardless of Orji or Warren. Warren wasn't threatening downfield anymore than Orji is, even though Warren IS a better passer.
What we have seen is less at the second level and more near the LOS -- you've got LBs and Safeties who are running towards Orji to keep him from producing yards on the ground. This is happening even though Orji isn't even himself producing many yards on the ground, and no explosive runs to date by our QB. Edwards and Mullings can't reproduce what Orji does because that's 2 guys not 3. Warren can be ignored by the defense on any run play -- Orji cannot.
So yeah, if there was a vertical threat pasing QB sitting on the bench who was going to change the story for the offense - go ahead and start that guy. Instead we have a guy who completed 1 pass over 25 yards in 3 starts to 6 INTs. Where's the threat?
The defense can run cover 0 against either Warren or Orji and they can't leave guys uncovered against Orji or Warren. The risk of getting burned by this approach is higher with Warren than Orji, but only incrementally.
Even if you get Warren to throw fewer INTs (perhaps possible) you are not going to turn Warren into an NFL prospect. He is walk on, who looks like a walk on, plays like a walk on, and produced like a walk on.
Orji is a bigger threat. Frankly I think Orji might be a bigger threat vertically as well. The issue with Orji is if he can consistently convert third downs and be accurate enough to avoid huge mistake INTs. Orji can do it with his legs, but if forced to throw on 3rd and 10 I would trust Warren over Orji. But the INTs from Warren are disqualifying and we can't just wish those away.
Finally, I don't agree they were asking Warren to do the same things as JJ. Orji and Warren are both getting asked to do less complicated things, because they aren't up to the task. They lack the talent and they lack the experience. Meanwhile, the level of difficulty is much higher because instead of being surround by 10 NFL players and veterans in 2023, there's now 3 or 4 NFL guys, tops, and most of the players around them are inexperienced as well.
A QB change isn't going to resolve the challenges the offense faces. Period. We've seen them use 2 guys! We know this! There is no magic bullet by changing QB.
* Technically it was the last offensive play a 31 yarder to Semaj with under 2 minutes to go in a 31-6 blowout. Game was over and Texas was playing soft, so I excluded it.