The micro personnel stuff will follow in a few minutes:
THE PRE-SNAP READ:
Michigan State vs Michigan
By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.com
ANN ARBOR - This might be Mark Dantonio’s last stand.
Not because there’s pressure or heat from the university administration, the athletic administration or donors. They’re all fine with him, as they should be. The grouchy discontent from fans and media is a different issue.
He doesn’t care what media thinks. But he does care what fans think. And this might be his last stand, meaning he might not be able to stand dealing with the backlash that he and his family are starting to experience, borne out of the expectations created by his success.
Barring a huge collapse in the last three games, he can return next year as head coach - if he wishes, if he can stand it, if he doesn’t mind subjecting his legendary standing to the whims of a portion of the fanbase that thinks it’s Texas. He’s confident he can turn it around, but it’ll be harder without support from all areas. And recruits will notice.
If Dantonio pitches a gem and pulls one of the biggest upsets of the Big Ten season at noon at Michigan Stadium, and improves to 9-4 against the Wolverines, it will whet his appetite to continue on the multi-year path forward that he set out to navigate, as outlined last summer in meetings with athletic officials and donors.
If Michigan State loses, and does so in miserable fashion, Dantonio will be more inclined to rethink his future.
But Dantonio isn’t thinking about that right now. He and his players can look at Michigan’s film from two weeks ago against Maryland, pick bits and pieces from that game, mesh it with short swaths of Michigan State success against Ohio State and even last weekend, and arrive at a level of belief that they can pull this upset.
Michigan State can give Michigan a game if …
* Michigan slumbers like it did against Maryland (despite what the scoreboard said).
* Michigan returns to its turnover ways of September.
* Michigan State suddenly finds the pixie dust ability to play four quarters of football without assignment errors on defense, an end to dropped and inaccurate passes, and an end to the special teams gaffes of the Penn State game and the missed field goals of September.
From there, the blueprint is a familiar one: Get a great performance from the defensive line, contain the Michigan ground game, put Michigan into passing situations and hope QB Shea Patterson has one of his shakier days, especially from the pocket on third down.
And then hope Michigan’s big, talented receivers come down with a case of the dropsies. They’ve had them from time to time. And hope Michigan doesn’t try to throw deep as often as it should.
From there, MSU’s offense needs to get first downs. Don’t punt from your 20-yard line. Move it near midfield and then punt if you must. Get the punt off. Cover. Tackle. Make Michigan go 80 yards.
Do that a few times, and you might survive the first quarter and begin to shrink the game.
From there, hope that Michigan doesn’t get a game-changing play on special teams, such as the kickoff return for a TD that they had in their last game against Maryland, or a fake punt for 14 yards in the 2Q which stood as Michigan’s longest running play of the day up to that point.
In order for all or most of those things to come to fruition, Michigan State has to hope that Michigan already thinks it has this game won. That’s often part of the equation when Michigan State has been able to pull off monumental upsets in this series. It’s up to Jim Harbaugh and Michigan’s leaders to make sure the Wolverines aren’t looking ahead to Ohio State in two weeks. Harbaugh and the Michigan leaders have done well since mid-season, rescuing the situation when many Wolverine watchers thought the season was headed off the cliff toward another 8-5 type of season.
But Michigan found its ground game and emerged as the better team in Happy Valley on Oct. 19, despite losing on the scoreboard, 28-21. The Wolverines have smashed Notre Dame (45-14) and Maryland (38-7) since then.
Michigan was playing its best football of the season - 10 straight quality quarters of it - when the second bye week of the season hit. Is it good timing to have a bye week when you’re playing your best? The Wolverines surely had some dings and bruises that they wanted to heal up. But they will need to make better use of this bye week than they did prior to the trip to Wisconsin in mid-September.
Clearly, this is Michigan’s game to lose. Michigan has better talent at nearly every position. Michigan State has better defensive tackles. One of MSU’s defensive ends might be a better all-around player than one of Michigan’s defensive ends. When healthy, MSU’s Josiah Scott is a better college cornerback than Michigan’s best. That’s about it.
Michigan played error-prone football on offense early in the season, but fixed the problem. Michigan State hasn’t fixed its problems on either side of the ball.
MSU’s defensive secondary is still committing its twice-weekly (at least) busts. A revolving door of wide receivers and offensive linemen has yielded some promising newcomers to the playing group, but nothing that has been proven against Top 15 opposition. Meanwhile, quarterback Brian Lewerke has been mired in inconsistency.
In order to beat Michigan, the Spartans would need an NFL-type performance from its quarterback and skill players - similar to Jim Miller in 1993, Tony Banks in 1995, or Plaxico Burress in 1999, or Jeff Smoker and TJ Duckett in 2001. Those were the grandiose ingredients necessary for an upset in this series prior to Dantonio’s arrival. Michigan State sometimes needed players to play like we didn’t know they could. It’s become that way again this year.
Lewerke seemed to have the goods when he helped lead Michigan State to a 14-10 victory at Michigan in 2017. But he received major assistance from the ground game and ground defense that day. Michigan State out-gained No. 7-ranked Michigan 158-102 on the ground in 2017. That was a surprise. It would be a shock if Michigan State could duplicate something like that again.
Beating Michigan looked do-able, if not probable, on Sept. 21, the day Michigan State beat Northwestern 31-10 and Michigan lost to Wisconsin, 35-14. But we didn’t know how bad Northwestern was. We didn’t anticipate the struggles Michigan State would face, or how much Michigan’s run game would improve as its offensive line regained health, gained traction and found consistency in their running backs.
Now, Michigan needs to keep it going. Michigan State needs to find some momentum. Where can Michigan State find it?
BRIEF REASONS FOR HOPE
(I’m not saying Michigan State will win due to the following reasons. I’m pointing out things that Michigan State saw on film and will try to replicate):
* Through the first 35 minutes of Michigan’s most recent game, a 38-7 victory over Maryland, the Wolverines were being out-gained and losing badly in time of possession. But Michigan didn’t give up any explosive plays. Meanwhile, Maryland threw an interception in the red zone, missed a field goal, gave up a kickoff return for a TD. Michigan hit a 51-yard pass to Nico Collins on a post. And boom, that’s how a 21-0 lead is authored.
Michigan State could play its brains out against Michigan and fall prey to a similar scenario - and that’s if Michigan State plays something close to its A-game. Michigan State needs Michigan to help the cause with a dose of turnovers, dropped passes and maybe a safety assignment bust, like the one against Penn State. Maryland didn’t get that kind of help. But Michigan State is better than Maryland. I think.
Can Michigan State duplicate or emulate any of the things Maryland did well? Did Michigan simply not put forth much effort against the Terps, something that surely won’t be an issue against Michigan State? Possible and probable.
MSU’s hopes must begin with containing the run. That’ll be a tall task. Michigan beat Michigan State on the ground last year, 183-15.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME: MICHIGAN’S BALL
The Wolverines were outstanding against Notre Dame. In a rainstorm, they ran for 303 yards and stuffed the Irish ground game. Checkmate.
I was amazed by the variations of Michigan’s run game against Notre Dame. Of Michigan’s first 14 run plays, which covered most of the first half, I charted 10 different type of runs.
Inside zone; outside zone; Packers sweep left (both guards pulling); center pull and fold to the B-gap on an outside zone; counter weak with a left guard pull; pin and pull with the center and right guard; inside zone out of two-back with a lead blocker; outside zone with center, right guard and right tackle all pulling; inside trap.
It was a dizzying display. They weren’t this varied against Penn State or Wisconsin. They changed. It looked more like the Harbaugh Stanford teams, although Michigan is doing it from spread formations and the shot gun.
The speed and space promises of the off-season have been put aside.
I don’t know the last time I’ve seen a team with so many different variation of run plays - other than the service academies.
Not many teams even try to be this varied in the run game. The more “volume” you have in your playbook, the more likely you are to make mistakes and yield a diluted product. But Michigan ran inside, outside, left, right, weak, strong and did it with few if any penalties.
They aren’t completely mirrored (balanced) in their tendencies. They are more likely to trap with the left guard pull (Bredeson).
And if the right guard (Onwenu) pulls, it’s likely to be to the right. He’s not as effective pulling across formation to the left. He’s quick in a short area, but not on a long pull across formation.
Other than that, what you see one way is likely to be coming at you the other way, too.
WHY IT MATTERS:
With so many variations of run plays, it muddies the eyes of the opposing linebackers. It makes them a half-step slower to diagnose a play or a tendency.
That half-step, when mixed with the quickness of Michigan center Cesar Ruiz, can cause a linebacker to get cut off from his gap. Then the RB has daylight and probably a chunk play.
Michigan State is playing without Joe Bachie, who is ineligible due to failing a Big Ten drug test. (Michigan State officials are clear in telling us he is ineligible, not suspended).
Bachie is the film junkie of the defense. Antjuan Simmons is quick and hard-hitting as the new MLB. He performed well last week against Illinois. But he will have so many tendencies and tells and reads to try to learn and memorize this week. He can do it. And he does many things better than Bachie. But they’ll miss Bachie’s frame of reference.
HOWEVER …
However, Michigan wasn’t nearly as varied or impressive on the ground against Maryland. Michigan was sky high for a rivalry game against Notre Dame. It was a prove-your-manhood game, a must-win in order to keep Harbaugh hope alive. And they did, and he did.
But they came down a little bit in the Maryland game.
Michigan’s first 10 run plays against Maryland netted just 6, 2, 4, 5, -1, 2 (TD), 4, -5, 2 and 1 yards.
Then they faked a punt, gained 14, went deep for a 51-yarder, and a shaky 14-0 lead became 21-0 late in the 1H.
But Michigan had only 22 yards rushing through the first 26 minutes of the game.
Maryland out-rushed Michigan 51-47 in the first half, and had an 18-11 time of possession advantage.
Maryland began to lose heart in the second half and Michigan eventually rushed for 155 (4.6 per carry). Not a bad day, but after the ND game you might have expected another 300-yarder.
Can Michigan State contain Michigan in similar fashion?
Maybe not to that degree, but it wouldn’t be a complete shocker if Michigan State’s ground defense rises to the occasion, for at least awhile - like they did against Ohio State. But they’ll need to do it longer.
How did Maryland do it?
Maryland played a two-gapping, 30 front. Notre Dame played an aggressive, one-gapping front. Michigan used Notre Dame’s aggressiveness against it. Notre Dame tried to go to two-gapping midway through the game, but that’s not their bag.
Maryland has a rotund nose guard. Rather than trying to avoid blockers and shoot gaps and make plays in the backfield, a two-gapping defensive line engages blockers, tries to jam them backward, make reads and then disengage.
If you have a dominant nose guard who commands a double-team, then that’s one less blocker who is getting out to your linebacker level.
Notre Dame had no such interior linemen who commanded that type of blocking attention. Michigan o-linemen were getting out to the LB level with ease against the Irish.
Maryland doesn’t have the best two-gapping defensive line, but they log-jammed Michigan’s blockers and run game enough to yield the results mentioned above.
Michigan State is primarily a one-gapping, attacking, gap-shooting defensive front. However, Michigan State can play the two-gapping game. They do it for a handful of snaps each game. They did more of it last year. I wouldn’t be surprised if Michigan State does more two-gapping in this game than in previous games, and creates some resistance similar to Maryland.
Raequen Williams and Mike Panasiuk are excellent defensive tackles. Panasiuk has had a good, not great, year. He was slowed last week by a sickness. I suspect he will be wired up for his best effort. He isn’t necessarily a backfield ransacker, but he is a logjammer. He can keep Ruiz occupied and away from Simmons far more often than Notre Dame was able to.
Michigan State will mix in plenty of one-gapping, attack-mode defense. They’ll need to have the right feel for when to turn it lose. I don’t think they can play that way every down, without Michigan using that aggressiveness against them.
Of course, this is only half of the equation. The other half - Michigan’s pass game vs MSU’s pass defense - we’ll get into later.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME: MSU’S BALL
Notre Dame didn’t do crap against Michigan. It couldn’t run the ball. Throwing the ball, when trailing, wasn’t doable in the wind and rain.
Penn State had some explosive success, but little of that is applicable to MSU’s offensive skill set.
Maryland drove inside the Michigan 15-yard line on two of its first three possessions. And they did it with a style of play similar to MSU’s.
Maryland didn’t have blasting success on the ground. For the game, Maryland averaged only 2.8 yards per carry (ND averaged 1.5). But Maryland mixed in enough positive plays with some chain-movers on third down and had chances in the red zone.
Michigan’s defense is good. Michigan ranks No. 3 in the Big Ten in yards allowed per play (my favorite defensive stat). Michigan State is No. 6.
Michigan’s best attribute on defense is their run defense in the back seven. Corners and safeties defeat blocks, are on the same page with fast-flow linebackers, and are quick to read and converge. After all that, they arrive with tenacity, team leverage and good tackling ability.
This makes it hard to run wide on them. But a quality running attack can run inside on them. Wisconsin did it with ease, but that’s a specimen not applicable to this game. Plus Michigan’s defensive front seven is different now. Jeter is longer part of the playing group at DT. He was not good against Wisconsin. And McGrone has replaced Josh Ross at MLB.
Michigan isn’t great at defensive tackle. They aren’t nearly at the level of the College Football Playoff caliber defenses that Michigan State has faced, and been a part of, in recent years.
If you’re merely good at defensive tackle, and not outstanding, you will get undressed when you play quality teams. Michigan State isn’t good enough to do that to Michigan but Michigan State might be able to hash out some ground gains inside, like Maryland did.
Defensive tackle Carlo Kemp is mediocre against double-team blocking. And he’s their best guy. Michigan has been unable to come up with a good Robin to his Batman.
Defensive tackle Michael Dwumfour didn’t play against Wisconsin. They missed him. His replacements were substandard.
He came back from an early-season injury and provided a lift against Rutgers, and then made a big difference against Iowa. But his effectiveness has waned in recent games, as has his playing time.
Michigan gets away with being mediocre at defensive tackle by outnumbering you in the run defense game, and doing it with quickness, same-pageness and four-star athletes.
They can play good pass defense with only one deep safety, while deploying the other safety into the box to play 7 box defenders against six blockers against most teams. Michigan State will be one of those teams because MSU’s pass game is not good enough to make Michigan play honest with two deep safeties.
Michigan WILL play with two deep safeties occasionally, especially on third and long. Michigan surprised Notre Dame with zone coverages on third-and-medium.
The Wolverines don’t play “plus one in the box” all the time, but they can - especially on first down, or run-tendency downs, or against run-tendency personnel and formations.
On third downs, Michigan is playing more two-deep zone than in the past, which has cut down on the plays they have given up to shallow crossing route man beaters in recent years.
Michigan’s pass rush isn’t as fierce as it’s been in the past. Their number of TFLs are down.
Michigan d-coordinator Don Brown says all three of his starters on the d-line are having career years. That’s good for them, in comparison to what Dwumfour, Kemp and Kwity Paye have been in the past. But they aren’t having Chase Winovich/Maurice Hurst type of years.
I’m not saying you can easily blow holes in Michigan’s defense. But their weakness is right up the gut, if you can lay a double-team on No. 2, or No. 50, and get movement. But the daylight might not last long, due to their their plus-one run defenders and the quickness of their back seven.
That’s where you need a KJ Hamler and a Freiermuth. Michigan State doesn’t have one.
But Maryland enjoyed a little flurry in the first half:
+ Gain of 6 on a power.
+ Gain of 8 on a split zone read handoff. (Kemp and Aiden Hutchinson tried to two-gap as part of a 30 front but were knocked backward. They aren’t two-gap type blasters.).
+ On third-and-one with the run established, Maryland gained 21 on a play fake waggle pass.
+ Gain of 4 on a power, with Kemp knocked back 2 yards by a RG/RG double team.
+ Gain of 4 on a split zone read vs a two-gapping 30.
+ Gain of 3 on a split zone.
+ Gain of 6 on a QB keeper off a zone read.
+ Gain of 5 on a counter, run right at d-end Hutchinson. Dwumfour knocked back and off balance.
These were plays in succession. I’m not just picking out the highlights.
These were well-blocked. Michigan was losing inside, but notice that the gains didn’t get out very far. That’s where Michigan’s back seven is so good and minimizing the mess.
**
Michigan is multiple on defense. They run a one-gapping, four-down front. And they run a two-gapping, 30 front. They want to do both. But they don’t have the horses to do the latter effectively against good, balanced teams with physicality.
Brown was pushing buttons and pulling levers to find the right approach to shut Maryland down, but it didn’t come easy.
* Penn State had success early against Michigan, but lost momentum. Penn State rushed 29 times for 101 yards (3.5 per carry), with nearly half of that net coming on one play - a 44-yarder run by RB Slade in the 1H.
PSU tailbacks had only 13 carries in the game (88 yards.)
I’m not sure Michigan shut down the running attack, or if Penn State shut itself down.
Either way, Michigan began flying the ball and certainly shut down the outside run game.
Penn State RB Slade had a 44-yard run on an inside zone. Michigan didn’t get a plus-one to the box at the proper angle for that play; the threat of Hamler in the slot kept OLB Glasgow a step further outside of the box than will be the case against Michigan State, and safety Mettelus was influenced outside by the QB keep threat and the TE threat (Freiermuth).
These weren’t errors by Glasgow and Mettelus, they are examples of what happens when the opponent has diversified threats.
Michigan’s mediocre defensive tackle situation showed itself on this 44-yarder. Michigan played a four-down front and two-gapped on this play, which is as rotund as Michigan can possibly be against zone blocking. But Kemp was double-teamed and moved a yard off the ball, and the October version of Dwumfour, which is better than the recent version of Dwumfour, was controlled by the LG without a problem. The RB split the inside LBs and was chased down by DBs 44 yards downfield. Penn State scored on that drive.
But Penn State wasn’t able to repeat that success in the 2H.
THE TAKEAWAY: A solid ground attack CAN carve out some humble gainers on inside run plays against Michigan. From there, some possession-route play action passing can help move the chains as well.
But one offensive penalty when playing against this defense, and Michigan State might as well punt on second down.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME: Michigan State Pass Game
Michigan’s pass rush is good, but not great. No. 6 Uche is good off the edge, when he is playing on the edge. He spends some snaps as an inside LB when Michigan takes Dwumfour out and goes with a 30 front.
Uche leads Michigan in sacks with 7.5.
Michigan State has allowed only 12 sacks this year. That’s No. 1 in the Big Ten. (Michigan is No. 3 in the Big Ten with 14 sacks allowed).
Michigan’s pass rush is not as good as last year, not nearly as good this year as Ohio State, Penn State, and Wisconsin.
Sack Totals This Year:
OSU 41
Wisconsin 33
Penn State 31
Michigan 29
Michigan State 25
Michigan is not as blitz-happy as they’ve been in the past. In the samples I’ve watched, they will come with the occasional five-man rush, but they don’t send wholesale blitzes all that much.
Lewerke had no time throw against Ohio State in the fourth quarter and THOUGHT he had no time throw against Wisconsin, which is probably worse.
He admitted to saying that he felt more pass rush pressure against Illinois than was actually there. I love the kid, but that’s not so good. The lack of receivers, the dropped passes, the poor pass protection in the first half of the year, all of that stinkage infiltrated Lewerke’s armor.
Now … he gets to return to Michigan Stadium.
Here’s the bad news for Lewerke: Michigan kind of resembles Wisconsin’s defense in some regards, with the way they threaten to blitz, make you figure out who’s coming and who’s dropping.
They aren’t as electric with their individual pass rush as some of the Wisconsin guys, like Zack Baun and Chris Orr. But Michigan can muddy things up for you.
Like Wisconsin, on third-and-medium, Michigan will show six pass rushers, but might only come with four.
Michigan MLB McGrone (No. 44) spied against ND when Michigan blitzed or pressured, and he’ll spy against Lewerke.
Lewerke is quick enough to elude and outrun most inside LBs, but not 44.
From there, the old Michigan would have always been in man-to-man, which makes for easier reads, and the chance to bust a play out, albeit agaist small windows and handsy DBs.
But new Michigan might show a six-man blitz, bring only four and drop into a disguised zone. By the time you read zone, your pass protection time is up.
Lewerke was extremely unsettled against this type of pace and puzzle against Wisconsin, and that’s likely to be the case on third downs in this game.
WHO’S OPEN?
Michigan State’s receivers have not had a good year. Junior Cody White has played his two best game of the season in the last two weeks. They needed that. He has come through. They needed that from him in September.
The rest of it is auditions. Julian Barnett shows some flashes, but failed to high point a 20-yard pass down the left sideline last week.
Tre Mosley was excellent in spurts against Penn State, but his dropped pass in the end zone at the end of the first half last week (resulting in an interception) was one of the turning points and expensive missed opportunities of the game.
Michigan cornerback Lavert Hill and Ambry Thomas are Detroiters who flirted with coming to Michigan State. They will be sky high for this game. Michigan defensive backs are known for being extremely handsy in man-to-man. They’ll be grabbing, tugging, water skiiing behind receivers, if necessary.
But they might not need to do that against MSU’s receivers. There are no Hamlers out here.
White, Barnett and Mosley know Hill and Thomas well. It will be a backyard scrap when they go against one another.
The Michigan players have an edge in experience, and they are NFL caliber talents.
The windows won’t be open long for Lewerke.
Throwing to the tight ends and backs could help move the chains. They’ll need a healthy dose of that, maybe from a play or two that we haven’t yet seen.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME: Michigan Throwing
When Patterson is on, this team is very good. His receivers are big and they get open. They dropped too many passes in the first half of the season, including Ronnie Bell’s potential game-tying opportunity at Penn State.
Michigan State cornerback Josiah Scott is an excellent all-around player. He left the game last week in the third quarter, went to the locker room, came back to the bench in pads, and didn’t reenter the game. He limped off the field after the game. Dantonio said on Tuesday they expect him to play. But we have to wonder at what capacity.
If Scott is less than 90 percent, Michigan State’s scant chances of hanging in this game grow weaker. Josh Butler and Shakur Brown have been mediocre at cornerback this year. We haven’t seen Kalon Gervin in the last couple of games.
If Scott can’t play, Michigan State will be in survival mode in pass defense from the beginning.
Michigan critics feel the Wolverines don’t throw deep enough. That might change in this game. Michigan State will be on thin ice each time Michigan tries.
Patterson was very unsettled in the pocket against Wisconsin, but the Michigan offense has changed a lot since then. It seems the run game, and not the RPO pass game, is now the base element for Michigan. It works better for Michigan that way. Patterson was good against Michigan State last year, but he’s not a great one.
QB 2 SHEA PATTERSON (6-2, 202, Sr., Shreveport, La/Bradenton, Fla. IMG)
* 5-star recruit, No. 3 in the nation.
* Transferred from Ole Miss.
* Ranks No. 8 in the Big Ten in yards passing per game (197.0).
* Completing 57 percent of his passes, which is No. 9 among Big Ten QBs averaging at least 184 yards passing per game (Brian Lewerke is No. 10 at 55 percent).
* 12 TDs, 4 INTs.
* 7 TOs in the first five games. In the last four: 1 turnover.
* His lack of height hurts him when trying to throw over the middle, over drop linebackers to digs, over routes and square-ins vs zone - as shown last game when missing high over the middle to a seemingly open tight end Eubanks on a short over route. The TE was open if you’re a tall 12-6 thrower rather than a 6-2 (that’s stretching it) three-quarters arm angle.
Recently:
13-22 for 151 yards with 1 TD, 0 INTs vs Maryland.
6-12 for 100 yards with 2 TDs, 0 INTs in rainstorm vs Notre Dame.
24-41 for 276 yards with 0 TDs, 1 INT vs Penn State.
* Good ability to elongate a play, get outside the pocket and throw on the run, like he did on a rare throwing situation against ND, on a third-and-seven in the 2Q. Good quickness, good scramble, good throw to freshman WR Mike Sainristil.
* Against ND, he fumbled a snap and had a Hail Mary attempt slip out of his hands at the end of the 1H as he got into his trigger. Rain surely had something to do with both. Cold weather isn’t his natural Louisiana habitat, either. So maybe he’ll dribble a couple on Saturday.
- Had an INT dropped in the 3Q against ND on a third-and-14, wet ball seemed to slip out and sail high.
* He’s a factor in the zone read game, makes good reads on keepers and has quick enough feet to get good yardage. He was good with the zone read keepers in the 1H against ND. But ND adjusted with better continuity on the scrape-replace and stopped the zone read keepers in the 3Q.
SPECIAL TEAMS
+ They are aggressive with the punt block. It’s a good mix when a good defense isn’t afraid to rough the punter.
+ Slippery little 5-foot-9 freshman Giles Jackson, 97-yard kickoff return for TD last week against Maryland on the opening kickoff.
* Peoples-Jones punt returner. Quality.
* Daxton Hill fast in punt coverage as a gunner.
* UM faked a punt, snapping it to the short man for a gain of 14 in the 2Q. Michigan’s offense was sputtering at the time. Michigan hadn’t had a run gain for more than six yards prior to that play, through the first 28 minutes of the first half.
* Place kicker missed a 37-yarder at the end of the half, last game.
ADD IT ALL UP
Michigan State needs Patterson to go back to his September fumbling ways. A middle screen interception like the one he threw against Penn State would be welcomed too. But Lewerke is the guy more likely to turn it over right now.
Michigan State needs to play far more poised, disciplined and solvent in the defensive backfield than at any time all year just to begin to stay in it. That’s not impossible.
From there, Michigan State needs to prove it can hang tough against Michigan’s varied run game. Michigan State has a good run defense, but it might take a very, very good run defense to hold Michigan under 130 yards rushing, WHEN Michigan is right (motivated and everything else).
Against ND, Michigan ran inside, outside, and countered and trapped with impressive, stylistic dominance. It’s hard to believe that they couldn’t get the ground game humming against Maryland. Did Michigan sleepwalk through the game? Can Michigan flip the switch and go for 200-plus with no problem against Michigan State? Or is there a level of consistency, and poise, that Michigan still needs to achieve and demonstrate? Can they handle success? Michigan State will test that question.
Can Michigan State get a little something going with inside runs, and then some play-action and RPO stuff? There are openings in the Michigan defense that a quality offense can probe, but even if Michigan State is able to get into a rhythm and move the chains, how much confidence do you have in Michigan State finishing in the red zone? How confident are you that Michigan State can drive for 10 plays without a penalty?
Michigan State isn’t likely to break off the type of explosive plays that will be needed to spring this upset. Even if Michigan State plays above its head, puts forth a terrific, respectable performance, Michigan has the play makers on special teams and at wide receiver to erase 30 minutes of great work in a two or three plays.
Michigan isn’t great. But neither was Illinois.
Is Michigan State ready to play its most physical, mistake-free brand of football on Saturday? The Spartans need to. We haven’t seen them do it yet. It’s November, and the chances of ever seeing it this season have become unlikely.
THE PRE-SNAP READ:
Michigan State vs Michigan
By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.com
ANN ARBOR - This might be Mark Dantonio’s last stand.
Not because there’s pressure or heat from the university administration, the athletic administration or donors. They’re all fine with him, as they should be. The grouchy discontent from fans and media is a different issue.
He doesn’t care what media thinks. But he does care what fans think. And this might be his last stand, meaning he might not be able to stand dealing with the backlash that he and his family are starting to experience, borne out of the expectations created by his success.
Barring a huge collapse in the last three games, he can return next year as head coach - if he wishes, if he can stand it, if he doesn’t mind subjecting his legendary standing to the whims of a portion of the fanbase that thinks it’s Texas. He’s confident he can turn it around, but it’ll be harder without support from all areas. And recruits will notice.
If Dantonio pitches a gem and pulls one of the biggest upsets of the Big Ten season at noon at Michigan Stadium, and improves to 9-4 against the Wolverines, it will whet his appetite to continue on the multi-year path forward that he set out to navigate, as outlined last summer in meetings with athletic officials and donors.
If Michigan State loses, and does so in miserable fashion, Dantonio will be more inclined to rethink his future.
But Dantonio isn’t thinking about that right now. He and his players can look at Michigan’s film from two weeks ago against Maryland, pick bits and pieces from that game, mesh it with short swaths of Michigan State success against Ohio State and even last weekend, and arrive at a level of belief that they can pull this upset.
Michigan State can give Michigan a game if …
* Michigan slumbers like it did against Maryland (despite what the scoreboard said).
* Michigan returns to its turnover ways of September.
* Michigan State suddenly finds the pixie dust ability to play four quarters of football without assignment errors on defense, an end to dropped and inaccurate passes, and an end to the special teams gaffes of the Penn State game and the missed field goals of September.
From there, the blueprint is a familiar one: Get a great performance from the defensive line, contain the Michigan ground game, put Michigan into passing situations and hope QB Shea Patterson has one of his shakier days, especially from the pocket on third down.
And then hope Michigan’s big, talented receivers come down with a case of the dropsies. They’ve had them from time to time. And hope Michigan doesn’t try to throw deep as often as it should.
From there, MSU’s offense needs to get first downs. Don’t punt from your 20-yard line. Move it near midfield and then punt if you must. Get the punt off. Cover. Tackle. Make Michigan go 80 yards.
Do that a few times, and you might survive the first quarter and begin to shrink the game.
From there, hope that Michigan doesn’t get a game-changing play on special teams, such as the kickoff return for a TD that they had in their last game against Maryland, or a fake punt for 14 yards in the 2Q which stood as Michigan’s longest running play of the day up to that point.
In order for all or most of those things to come to fruition, Michigan State has to hope that Michigan already thinks it has this game won. That’s often part of the equation when Michigan State has been able to pull off monumental upsets in this series. It’s up to Jim Harbaugh and Michigan’s leaders to make sure the Wolverines aren’t looking ahead to Ohio State in two weeks. Harbaugh and the Michigan leaders have done well since mid-season, rescuing the situation when many Wolverine watchers thought the season was headed off the cliff toward another 8-5 type of season.
But Michigan found its ground game and emerged as the better team in Happy Valley on Oct. 19, despite losing on the scoreboard, 28-21. The Wolverines have smashed Notre Dame (45-14) and Maryland (38-7) since then.
Michigan was playing its best football of the season - 10 straight quality quarters of it - when the second bye week of the season hit. Is it good timing to have a bye week when you’re playing your best? The Wolverines surely had some dings and bruises that they wanted to heal up. But they will need to make better use of this bye week than they did prior to the trip to Wisconsin in mid-September.
Clearly, this is Michigan’s game to lose. Michigan has better talent at nearly every position. Michigan State has better defensive tackles. One of MSU’s defensive ends might be a better all-around player than one of Michigan’s defensive ends. When healthy, MSU’s Josiah Scott is a better college cornerback than Michigan’s best. That’s about it.
Michigan played error-prone football on offense early in the season, but fixed the problem. Michigan State hasn’t fixed its problems on either side of the ball.
MSU’s defensive secondary is still committing its twice-weekly (at least) busts. A revolving door of wide receivers and offensive linemen has yielded some promising newcomers to the playing group, but nothing that has been proven against Top 15 opposition. Meanwhile, quarterback Brian Lewerke has been mired in inconsistency.
In order to beat Michigan, the Spartans would need an NFL-type performance from its quarterback and skill players - similar to Jim Miller in 1993, Tony Banks in 1995, or Plaxico Burress in 1999, or Jeff Smoker and TJ Duckett in 2001. Those were the grandiose ingredients necessary for an upset in this series prior to Dantonio’s arrival. Michigan State sometimes needed players to play like we didn’t know they could. It’s become that way again this year.
Lewerke seemed to have the goods when he helped lead Michigan State to a 14-10 victory at Michigan in 2017. But he received major assistance from the ground game and ground defense that day. Michigan State out-gained No. 7-ranked Michigan 158-102 on the ground in 2017. That was a surprise. It would be a shock if Michigan State could duplicate something like that again.
Beating Michigan looked do-able, if not probable, on Sept. 21, the day Michigan State beat Northwestern 31-10 and Michigan lost to Wisconsin, 35-14. But we didn’t know how bad Northwestern was. We didn’t anticipate the struggles Michigan State would face, or how much Michigan’s run game would improve as its offensive line regained health, gained traction and found consistency in their running backs.
Now, Michigan needs to keep it going. Michigan State needs to find some momentum. Where can Michigan State find it?
BRIEF REASONS FOR HOPE
(I’m not saying Michigan State will win due to the following reasons. I’m pointing out things that Michigan State saw on film and will try to replicate):
* Through the first 35 minutes of Michigan’s most recent game, a 38-7 victory over Maryland, the Wolverines were being out-gained and losing badly in time of possession. But Michigan didn’t give up any explosive plays. Meanwhile, Maryland threw an interception in the red zone, missed a field goal, gave up a kickoff return for a TD. Michigan hit a 51-yard pass to Nico Collins on a post. And boom, that’s how a 21-0 lead is authored.
Michigan State could play its brains out against Michigan and fall prey to a similar scenario - and that’s if Michigan State plays something close to its A-game. Michigan State needs Michigan to help the cause with a dose of turnovers, dropped passes and maybe a safety assignment bust, like the one against Penn State. Maryland didn’t get that kind of help. But Michigan State is better than Maryland. I think.
Can Michigan State duplicate or emulate any of the things Maryland did well? Did Michigan simply not put forth much effort against the Terps, something that surely won’t be an issue against Michigan State? Possible and probable.
MSU’s hopes must begin with containing the run. That’ll be a tall task. Michigan beat Michigan State on the ground last year, 183-15.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME: MICHIGAN’S BALL
The Wolverines were outstanding against Notre Dame. In a rainstorm, they ran for 303 yards and stuffed the Irish ground game. Checkmate.
I was amazed by the variations of Michigan’s run game against Notre Dame. Of Michigan’s first 14 run plays, which covered most of the first half, I charted 10 different type of runs.
Inside zone; outside zone; Packers sweep left (both guards pulling); center pull and fold to the B-gap on an outside zone; counter weak with a left guard pull; pin and pull with the center and right guard; inside zone out of two-back with a lead blocker; outside zone with center, right guard and right tackle all pulling; inside trap.
It was a dizzying display. They weren’t this varied against Penn State or Wisconsin. They changed. It looked more like the Harbaugh Stanford teams, although Michigan is doing it from spread formations and the shot gun.
The speed and space promises of the off-season have been put aside.
I don’t know the last time I’ve seen a team with so many different variation of run plays - other than the service academies.
Not many teams even try to be this varied in the run game. The more “volume” you have in your playbook, the more likely you are to make mistakes and yield a diluted product. But Michigan ran inside, outside, left, right, weak, strong and did it with few if any penalties.
They aren’t completely mirrored (balanced) in their tendencies. They are more likely to trap with the left guard pull (Bredeson).
And if the right guard (Onwenu) pulls, it’s likely to be to the right. He’s not as effective pulling across formation to the left. He’s quick in a short area, but not on a long pull across formation.
Other than that, what you see one way is likely to be coming at you the other way, too.
WHY IT MATTERS:
With so many variations of run plays, it muddies the eyes of the opposing linebackers. It makes them a half-step slower to diagnose a play or a tendency.
That half-step, when mixed with the quickness of Michigan center Cesar Ruiz, can cause a linebacker to get cut off from his gap. Then the RB has daylight and probably a chunk play.
Michigan State is playing without Joe Bachie, who is ineligible due to failing a Big Ten drug test. (Michigan State officials are clear in telling us he is ineligible, not suspended).
Bachie is the film junkie of the defense. Antjuan Simmons is quick and hard-hitting as the new MLB. He performed well last week against Illinois. But he will have so many tendencies and tells and reads to try to learn and memorize this week. He can do it. And he does many things better than Bachie. But they’ll miss Bachie’s frame of reference.
HOWEVER …
However, Michigan wasn’t nearly as varied or impressive on the ground against Maryland. Michigan was sky high for a rivalry game against Notre Dame. It was a prove-your-manhood game, a must-win in order to keep Harbaugh hope alive. And they did, and he did.
But they came down a little bit in the Maryland game.
Michigan’s first 10 run plays against Maryland netted just 6, 2, 4, 5, -1, 2 (TD), 4, -5, 2 and 1 yards.
Then they faked a punt, gained 14, went deep for a 51-yarder, and a shaky 14-0 lead became 21-0 late in the 1H.
But Michigan had only 22 yards rushing through the first 26 minutes of the game.
Maryland out-rushed Michigan 51-47 in the first half, and had an 18-11 time of possession advantage.
Maryland began to lose heart in the second half and Michigan eventually rushed for 155 (4.6 per carry). Not a bad day, but after the ND game you might have expected another 300-yarder.
Can Michigan State contain Michigan in similar fashion?
Maybe not to that degree, but it wouldn’t be a complete shocker if Michigan State’s ground defense rises to the occasion, for at least awhile - like they did against Ohio State. But they’ll need to do it longer.
How did Maryland do it?
Maryland played a two-gapping, 30 front. Notre Dame played an aggressive, one-gapping front. Michigan used Notre Dame’s aggressiveness against it. Notre Dame tried to go to two-gapping midway through the game, but that’s not their bag.
Maryland has a rotund nose guard. Rather than trying to avoid blockers and shoot gaps and make plays in the backfield, a two-gapping defensive line engages blockers, tries to jam them backward, make reads and then disengage.
If you have a dominant nose guard who commands a double-team, then that’s one less blocker who is getting out to your linebacker level.
Notre Dame had no such interior linemen who commanded that type of blocking attention. Michigan o-linemen were getting out to the LB level with ease against the Irish.
Maryland doesn’t have the best two-gapping defensive line, but they log-jammed Michigan’s blockers and run game enough to yield the results mentioned above.
Michigan State is primarily a one-gapping, attacking, gap-shooting defensive front. However, Michigan State can play the two-gapping game. They do it for a handful of snaps each game. They did more of it last year. I wouldn’t be surprised if Michigan State does more two-gapping in this game than in previous games, and creates some resistance similar to Maryland.
Raequen Williams and Mike Panasiuk are excellent defensive tackles. Panasiuk has had a good, not great, year. He was slowed last week by a sickness. I suspect he will be wired up for his best effort. He isn’t necessarily a backfield ransacker, but he is a logjammer. He can keep Ruiz occupied and away from Simmons far more often than Notre Dame was able to.
Michigan State will mix in plenty of one-gapping, attack-mode defense. They’ll need to have the right feel for when to turn it lose. I don’t think they can play that way every down, without Michigan using that aggressiveness against them.
Of course, this is only half of the equation. The other half - Michigan’s pass game vs MSU’s pass defense - we’ll get into later.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME: MSU’S BALL
Notre Dame didn’t do crap against Michigan. It couldn’t run the ball. Throwing the ball, when trailing, wasn’t doable in the wind and rain.
Penn State had some explosive success, but little of that is applicable to MSU’s offensive skill set.
Maryland drove inside the Michigan 15-yard line on two of its first three possessions. And they did it with a style of play similar to MSU’s.
Maryland didn’t have blasting success on the ground. For the game, Maryland averaged only 2.8 yards per carry (ND averaged 1.5). But Maryland mixed in enough positive plays with some chain-movers on third down and had chances in the red zone.
Michigan’s defense is good. Michigan ranks No. 3 in the Big Ten in yards allowed per play (my favorite defensive stat). Michigan State is No. 6.
Michigan’s best attribute on defense is their run defense in the back seven. Corners and safeties defeat blocks, are on the same page with fast-flow linebackers, and are quick to read and converge. After all that, they arrive with tenacity, team leverage and good tackling ability.
This makes it hard to run wide on them. But a quality running attack can run inside on them. Wisconsin did it with ease, but that’s a specimen not applicable to this game. Plus Michigan’s defensive front seven is different now. Jeter is longer part of the playing group at DT. He was not good against Wisconsin. And McGrone has replaced Josh Ross at MLB.
Michigan isn’t great at defensive tackle. They aren’t nearly at the level of the College Football Playoff caliber defenses that Michigan State has faced, and been a part of, in recent years.
If you’re merely good at defensive tackle, and not outstanding, you will get undressed when you play quality teams. Michigan State isn’t good enough to do that to Michigan but Michigan State might be able to hash out some ground gains inside, like Maryland did.
Defensive tackle Carlo Kemp is mediocre against double-team blocking. And he’s their best guy. Michigan has been unable to come up with a good Robin to his Batman.
Defensive tackle Michael Dwumfour didn’t play against Wisconsin. They missed him. His replacements were substandard.
He came back from an early-season injury and provided a lift against Rutgers, and then made a big difference against Iowa. But his effectiveness has waned in recent games, as has his playing time.
Michigan gets away with being mediocre at defensive tackle by outnumbering you in the run defense game, and doing it with quickness, same-pageness and four-star athletes.
They can play good pass defense with only one deep safety, while deploying the other safety into the box to play 7 box defenders against six blockers against most teams. Michigan State will be one of those teams because MSU’s pass game is not good enough to make Michigan play honest with two deep safeties.
Michigan WILL play with two deep safeties occasionally, especially on third and long. Michigan surprised Notre Dame with zone coverages on third-and-medium.
The Wolverines don’t play “plus one in the box” all the time, but they can - especially on first down, or run-tendency downs, or against run-tendency personnel and formations.
On third downs, Michigan is playing more two-deep zone than in the past, which has cut down on the plays they have given up to shallow crossing route man beaters in recent years.
Michigan’s pass rush isn’t as fierce as it’s been in the past. Their number of TFLs are down.
Michigan d-coordinator Don Brown says all three of his starters on the d-line are having career years. That’s good for them, in comparison to what Dwumfour, Kemp and Kwity Paye have been in the past. But they aren’t having Chase Winovich/Maurice Hurst type of years.
I’m not saying you can easily blow holes in Michigan’s defense. But their weakness is right up the gut, if you can lay a double-team on No. 2, or No. 50, and get movement. But the daylight might not last long, due to their their plus-one run defenders and the quickness of their back seven.
That’s where you need a KJ Hamler and a Freiermuth. Michigan State doesn’t have one.
But Maryland enjoyed a little flurry in the first half:
+ Gain of 6 on a power.
+ Gain of 8 on a split zone read handoff. (Kemp and Aiden Hutchinson tried to two-gap as part of a 30 front but were knocked backward. They aren’t two-gap type blasters.).
+ On third-and-one with the run established, Maryland gained 21 on a play fake waggle pass.
+ Gain of 4 on a power, with Kemp knocked back 2 yards by a RG/RG double team.
+ Gain of 4 on a split zone read vs a two-gapping 30.
+ Gain of 3 on a split zone.
+ Gain of 6 on a QB keeper off a zone read.
+ Gain of 5 on a counter, run right at d-end Hutchinson. Dwumfour knocked back and off balance.
These were plays in succession. I’m not just picking out the highlights.
These were well-blocked. Michigan was losing inside, but notice that the gains didn’t get out very far. That’s where Michigan’s back seven is so good and minimizing the mess.
**
Michigan is multiple on defense. They run a one-gapping, four-down front. And they run a two-gapping, 30 front. They want to do both. But they don’t have the horses to do the latter effectively against good, balanced teams with physicality.
Brown was pushing buttons and pulling levers to find the right approach to shut Maryland down, but it didn’t come easy.
* Penn State had success early against Michigan, but lost momentum. Penn State rushed 29 times for 101 yards (3.5 per carry), with nearly half of that net coming on one play - a 44-yarder run by RB Slade in the 1H.
PSU tailbacks had only 13 carries in the game (88 yards.)
I’m not sure Michigan shut down the running attack, or if Penn State shut itself down.
Either way, Michigan began flying the ball and certainly shut down the outside run game.
Penn State RB Slade had a 44-yard run on an inside zone. Michigan didn’t get a plus-one to the box at the proper angle for that play; the threat of Hamler in the slot kept OLB Glasgow a step further outside of the box than will be the case against Michigan State, and safety Mettelus was influenced outside by the QB keep threat and the TE threat (Freiermuth).
These weren’t errors by Glasgow and Mettelus, they are examples of what happens when the opponent has diversified threats.
Michigan’s mediocre defensive tackle situation showed itself on this 44-yarder. Michigan played a four-down front and two-gapped on this play, which is as rotund as Michigan can possibly be against zone blocking. But Kemp was double-teamed and moved a yard off the ball, and the October version of Dwumfour, which is better than the recent version of Dwumfour, was controlled by the LG without a problem. The RB split the inside LBs and was chased down by DBs 44 yards downfield. Penn State scored on that drive.
But Penn State wasn’t able to repeat that success in the 2H.
THE TAKEAWAY: A solid ground attack CAN carve out some humble gainers on inside run plays against Michigan. From there, some possession-route play action passing can help move the chains as well.
But one offensive penalty when playing against this defense, and Michigan State might as well punt on second down.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME: Michigan State Pass Game
Michigan’s pass rush is good, but not great. No. 6 Uche is good off the edge, when he is playing on the edge. He spends some snaps as an inside LB when Michigan takes Dwumfour out and goes with a 30 front.
Uche leads Michigan in sacks with 7.5.
Michigan State has allowed only 12 sacks this year. That’s No. 1 in the Big Ten. (Michigan is No. 3 in the Big Ten with 14 sacks allowed).
Michigan’s pass rush is not as good as last year, not nearly as good this year as Ohio State, Penn State, and Wisconsin.
Sack Totals This Year:
OSU 41
Wisconsin 33
Penn State 31
Michigan 29
Michigan State 25
Michigan is not as blitz-happy as they’ve been in the past. In the samples I’ve watched, they will come with the occasional five-man rush, but they don’t send wholesale blitzes all that much.
Lewerke had no time throw against Ohio State in the fourth quarter and THOUGHT he had no time throw against Wisconsin, which is probably worse.
He admitted to saying that he felt more pass rush pressure against Illinois than was actually there. I love the kid, but that’s not so good. The lack of receivers, the dropped passes, the poor pass protection in the first half of the year, all of that stinkage infiltrated Lewerke’s armor.
Now … he gets to return to Michigan Stadium.
Here’s the bad news for Lewerke: Michigan kind of resembles Wisconsin’s defense in some regards, with the way they threaten to blitz, make you figure out who’s coming and who’s dropping.
They aren’t as electric with their individual pass rush as some of the Wisconsin guys, like Zack Baun and Chris Orr. But Michigan can muddy things up for you.
Like Wisconsin, on third-and-medium, Michigan will show six pass rushers, but might only come with four.
Michigan MLB McGrone (No. 44) spied against ND when Michigan blitzed or pressured, and he’ll spy against Lewerke.
Lewerke is quick enough to elude and outrun most inside LBs, but not 44.
From there, the old Michigan would have always been in man-to-man, which makes for easier reads, and the chance to bust a play out, albeit agaist small windows and handsy DBs.
But new Michigan might show a six-man blitz, bring only four and drop into a disguised zone. By the time you read zone, your pass protection time is up.
Lewerke was extremely unsettled against this type of pace and puzzle against Wisconsin, and that’s likely to be the case on third downs in this game.
WHO’S OPEN?
Michigan State’s receivers have not had a good year. Junior Cody White has played his two best game of the season in the last two weeks. They needed that. He has come through. They needed that from him in September.
The rest of it is auditions. Julian Barnett shows some flashes, but failed to high point a 20-yard pass down the left sideline last week.
Tre Mosley was excellent in spurts against Penn State, but his dropped pass in the end zone at the end of the first half last week (resulting in an interception) was one of the turning points and expensive missed opportunities of the game.
Michigan cornerback Lavert Hill and Ambry Thomas are Detroiters who flirted with coming to Michigan State. They will be sky high for this game. Michigan defensive backs are known for being extremely handsy in man-to-man. They’ll be grabbing, tugging, water skiiing behind receivers, if necessary.
But they might not need to do that against MSU’s receivers. There are no Hamlers out here.
White, Barnett and Mosley know Hill and Thomas well. It will be a backyard scrap when they go against one another.
The Michigan players have an edge in experience, and they are NFL caliber talents.
The windows won’t be open long for Lewerke.
Throwing to the tight ends and backs could help move the chains. They’ll need a healthy dose of that, maybe from a play or two that we haven’t yet seen.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME: Michigan Throwing
When Patterson is on, this team is very good. His receivers are big and they get open. They dropped too many passes in the first half of the season, including Ronnie Bell’s potential game-tying opportunity at Penn State.
Michigan State cornerback Josiah Scott is an excellent all-around player. He left the game last week in the third quarter, went to the locker room, came back to the bench in pads, and didn’t reenter the game. He limped off the field after the game. Dantonio said on Tuesday they expect him to play. But we have to wonder at what capacity.
If Scott is less than 90 percent, Michigan State’s scant chances of hanging in this game grow weaker. Josh Butler and Shakur Brown have been mediocre at cornerback this year. We haven’t seen Kalon Gervin in the last couple of games.
If Scott can’t play, Michigan State will be in survival mode in pass defense from the beginning.
Michigan critics feel the Wolverines don’t throw deep enough. That might change in this game. Michigan State will be on thin ice each time Michigan tries.
Patterson was very unsettled in the pocket against Wisconsin, but the Michigan offense has changed a lot since then. It seems the run game, and not the RPO pass game, is now the base element for Michigan. It works better for Michigan that way. Patterson was good against Michigan State last year, but he’s not a great one.
QB 2 SHEA PATTERSON (6-2, 202, Sr., Shreveport, La/Bradenton, Fla. IMG)
* 5-star recruit, No. 3 in the nation.
* Transferred from Ole Miss.
* Ranks No. 8 in the Big Ten in yards passing per game (197.0).
* Completing 57 percent of his passes, which is No. 9 among Big Ten QBs averaging at least 184 yards passing per game (Brian Lewerke is No. 10 at 55 percent).
* 12 TDs, 4 INTs.
* 7 TOs in the first five games. In the last four: 1 turnover.
* His lack of height hurts him when trying to throw over the middle, over drop linebackers to digs, over routes and square-ins vs zone - as shown last game when missing high over the middle to a seemingly open tight end Eubanks on a short over route. The TE was open if you’re a tall 12-6 thrower rather than a 6-2 (that’s stretching it) three-quarters arm angle.
Recently:
13-22 for 151 yards with 1 TD, 0 INTs vs Maryland.
6-12 for 100 yards with 2 TDs, 0 INTs in rainstorm vs Notre Dame.
24-41 for 276 yards with 0 TDs, 1 INT vs Penn State.
* Good ability to elongate a play, get outside the pocket and throw on the run, like he did on a rare throwing situation against ND, on a third-and-seven in the 2Q. Good quickness, good scramble, good throw to freshman WR Mike Sainristil.
* Against ND, he fumbled a snap and had a Hail Mary attempt slip out of his hands at the end of the 1H as he got into his trigger. Rain surely had something to do with both. Cold weather isn’t his natural Louisiana habitat, either. So maybe he’ll dribble a couple on Saturday.
- Had an INT dropped in the 3Q against ND on a third-and-14, wet ball seemed to slip out and sail high.
* He’s a factor in the zone read game, makes good reads on keepers and has quick enough feet to get good yardage. He was good with the zone read keepers in the 1H against ND. But ND adjusted with better continuity on the scrape-replace and stopped the zone read keepers in the 3Q.
SPECIAL TEAMS
+ They are aggressive with the punt block. It’s a good mix when a good defense isn’t afraid to rough the punter.
+ Slippery little 5-foot-9 freshman Giles Jackson, 97-yard kickoff return for TD last week against Maryland on the opening kickoff.
* Peoples-Jones punt returner. Quality.
* Daxton Hill fast in punt coverage as a gunner.
* UM faked a punt, snapping it to the short man for a gain of 14 in the 2Q. Michigan’s offense was sputtering at the time. Michigan hadn’t had a run gain for more than six yards prior to that play, through the first 28 minutes of the first half.
* Place kicker missed a 37-yarder at the end of the half, last game.
ADD IT ALL UP
Michigan State needs Patterson to go back to his September fumbling ways. A middle screen interception like the one he threw against Penn State would be welcomed too. But Lewerke is the guy more likely to turn it over right now.
Michigan State needs to play far more poised, disciplined and solvent in the defensive backfield than at any time all year just to begin to stay in it. That’s not impossible.
From there, Michigan State needs to prove it can hang tough against Michigan’s varied run game. Michigan State has a good run defense, but it might take a very, very good run defense to hold Michigan under 130 yards rushing, WHEN Michigan is right (motivated and everything else).
Against ND, Michigan ran inside, outside, and countered and trapped with impressive, stylistic dominance. It’s hard to believe that they couldn’t get the ground game humming against Maryland. Did Michigan sleepwalk through the game? Can Michigan flip the switch and go for 200-plus with no problem against Michigan State? Or is there a level of consistency, and poise, that Michigan still needs to achieve and demonstrate? Can they handle success? Michigan State will test that question.
Can Michigan State get a little something going with inside runs, and then some play-action and RPO stuff? There are openings in the Michigan defense that a quality offense can probe, but even if Michigan State is able to get into a rhythm and move the chains, how much confidence do you have in Michigan State finishing in the red zone? How confident are you that Michigan State can drive for 10 plays without a penalty?
Michigan State isn’t likely to break off the type of explosive plays that will be needed to spring this upset. Even if Michigan State plays above its head, puts forth a terrific, respectable performance, Michigan has the play makers on special teams and at wide receiver to erase 30 minutes of great work in a two or three plays.
Michigan isn’t great. But neither was Illinois.
Is Michigan State ready to play its most physical, mistake-free brand of football on Saturday? The Spartans need to. We haven’t seen them do it yet. It’s November, and the chances of ever seeing it this season have become unlikely.
