Monday Morning Football
Jim Comparoni • SpartanMag.com
@JimComparoni
EAST LANSING - Michigan State’s surprisingly strong first three quarters of the season won’t do the program much good if the Spartans don’t capitalize with two more wins and a shiny 9-3 regular season record.
Moving on from a 48-3 loss in Saturday's a de facto Big Ten semifinal game at Ohio State is the first and last order of business at the Skandalaris Center today, with a game against Maryland (4-6) looming in the final home game of the year.
“We’ve got to get ourselves ready to play our next game and get win No. 8,” Mark Dantonio said during Sunday’s weekly teleconference.
In the weekly teleconference, which usually lasts about 15 minutes, Dantonio rarely talks about the upcoming game, and saves those comments for the weekly Tuesday press conference.
But he briefly broke from his usual protocol in mentioning in his opening statement about the need to point all focus toward getting the team’s eighth win this weekend.
“That’s the thing we can control,” he said. “Focus on the things we control and get ready to go.”
FILM DOESN’T LIE
Dantonio found nothing in the game film that he didn’t already know the last time he spoke with us, on Saturday evening.
“We obviously did not play well enough in any area to win and that is supported by the film,” Dantonio said. “I think also momentum sort of took over. Momentum swung in their favor and it was like a wave. So (we’ve) got to be able to respond better and the other thing we have to be able to do is move forward.”
VALUE IN FILM
Some might believe that the coaches would want to smash the game tape, move on and pretend it never happened - like Tom Izzo has famously done in past seasons.
But Izzo usually has 30 other game tapes to learn from during his teaching process.
Football coaches have fewer games to view, and more players to evaluate. Every snap of Saturday’s blowout loss can be used as teaching material, and Dantonio is deep into that process right now.
“There are things to learn from, especially schematically whether you were outflanked or you were out of position,” Dantonio said. “So I think it needs to be corrected more from a standpoint of what plays or defense was run. You need to just look at it and say, ‘Here’s all these formations, how did you adjust?’ Look at those things and draw from it and try and make it a learning experience.”
But he admitted there will be a time to dispose of it.
“This is one you want to burn and you don’t want it to be indicative of how you play all the time,” he said.
THE TEMPO QUESTION
I was surprised by the problems Michigan State had with Ohio State’s tempo. Dantonio and Joe Bachie commented after the game about the difficulty the defense had in getting the calls in on time, and getting set for pre-snap against Ohio State’s tempo.
Bachie said they worked on it in practice and thought they were ready for it, but it turned out that they were not.
Without getting a chance to clock it myself on film, I theorized that Ohio State perhaps had played faster than the Buckeyes had shown on film, and caught Michigan State a bit off-guard. I asked Dantonio on Sunday night if this had been the case, if OSU’s tempo was different from what they had shown up to that point in the season, and whether they snapped the ball even faster than the :12-second clip that Indiana used at times against Michigan State, three weeks ago.
“No, I think it was about the same,” Dantonio said. “I don’t think it was any faster. And they looked to the sideline and would change the play on us.
“I think they did a very good job of formationing us, formations that were a lot like what we’ve seen before, but (with) little a little bit of tweaks, whether it was an alignment here or an alignment there.”
Defenses expect to get new wrinkles each week, and prepare for the possibility of drastic changes. But Ohio State apparently disrupted Michigan State with some of the slight changes in formations that they showed, which caused some pause.
“They changed up some things there,” Dantonio said. “The (Michigan State defensive) calls were coming in, but for whatever reason, it just didn’t feel like we were lined up and ready to play. Now, on the film, it would appear you’re lined up, but I know in the game, I felt like it was a scramble.”
**
COMP’S TAKE: The margin of victory in this game, and the quick TKO, surprised everybody, from Dantonio, to fans, to myself, and most media. Vegas had Ohio State as a 17-point favorite, and that line seemed astronomical. But even Vegas sold it short by a couple of touchdowns.
Michigan State had played so soundly a week before, against Penn State. And Ohio State had looked awful a week earlier against Iowa.
Michigan State had matched up well against Ohio State over the years, with Dantonio having more success against Meyer than any coach in the Big Ten. Yet Michigan State was blown out of this game inside of 12 minutes.
In processing this surprising 45-point margin of victory, I wonder if part of MSU’s poor performance was due to the stunned surprise the Spartans may have felt, on both sides of the ball, when realizing early-on that Ohio State was just plain more talented than any team the Spartans had faced this year. Not only were the Buckeyes more talented, but they were more mature, and they had a leg-up in some schematic areas, AND they were just as motivated as the Spartans, if not more. These had to be stark discoveries for the young Spartans.
When Dantonio mentioned that the game in some respects “seemed like a scramble,” I think this gets back to the point of Michigan State realizing that Ohio State was a different animal than the one that showed up on the game tape from Iowa City. This was the first time many youthful players in the Spartan playing group had dealt with taking that type of a blow.
“I think sometimes when things are going against you, everything seems like a scramble,” Dantonio said. “Everything. And that’s the nature of this one. Everything – whether it was tackling or playing the ball in the deep part of the field or pressuring the quarterback or getting lined up, everything seemed to be a scramble. And we’ve got to negate that.”
D-TACKLES FAIL FOR A CHANGE
Ohio State’s 335 yards on the ground was the biggest surprise of the game. Firm play from defensive tackles Raequan Williams and Mike Panasiuk, along with reserve Naquan Jones, has been a team strength the Spartans all season. But OSU defeated MSU's strength in this game.
Williams and Panasiuk have been strong against double-teams on interior run plays since last November. They’ve been strong all year against the run, inside, against Michigan, Penn State, and even Notre Dame’s prodigious ground attack. When ND gained yards on the ground, they didn’t send the ball through MSU’s defensive tackles.
Last year, when Michigan State battled Ohio State to a tight 17-16 loss, Williams and Panasiuk were firm against OSU’s inside zone runs, and that set the foundation for the near-upset.
Now, Panasiuk and Williams are a year better, and have better back-ups. That’s why it was such a surprise that MSU’s defensive tackles struggled in this game.
“I don’t think we quit, I just think we didn’t play effectively,” Dantonio said. “Inside, our defensive tackles were getting reached.
“Out of our gaps, gap integrity, leverage issues on defense, tackling issues,” he added. “On offense, (we had) protection issues. They were getting pressure. They were doing the things they needed to do to beat you. Things that you can control to some degree. But, hey, Ohio State has got good players. They played well, and they were prepared to play.
“It’s very difficult when things are going in this direction to continue to play hard. And I thought we did play hard, we just didn’t play well enough.”
**
My Follow-Up: In writing about the on Saturday night, I analyzed Mike Weber’s TD runs of 47 and 82 yards. On neither occasion did I see MSU’s defensive tackles bashed vertically downfield. I saw defensive players influenced out of the area. And I saw Williams fail to secure his gap on the 47-yarder, due to a slant and a unique zone counter step by OSU’s offensive line. I thought it was a good finesse move by OSU, but not necessarily a display of physical dominance.
I still haven’t had a chance to go over the rest of the film, so I was intrigued by Dantonio’s statement about defensive tackle play early on in this teleconference.
When Dantonio said the defensive tackles “were getting reached,” that means offensive linemen were crossing the faces of the Michigan State d-tackles and controlling their far shoulder, and scooping them out of gaps. That can be done with quickness, or combinations sometimes referred to as “pyramid” techniques, or the counter zone step that I mentioned earlier.
I would consider those moves to be quick, technical, almost finesse moves, not necessarily power moves. That’s why I asked Dantonio if he could elaborate about the process of being reached, and if OSU was having success with more of a horizontal approach to beating the d-tackles, rather than vertically bashing them downfield.
He said it was more than just horizontal schematics.
“They moved the line of scrimmage,” Dantonio said. “They got movement on the three technique and on the nose by doubling them and then coming off the double and getting up to the ‘backers.”
That’s something that Panasiuk and Williams haven’t allowed anyone to do to them on a consistent basis in their young careers at Michigan State.
(So why didn’t I recognize this while it was taking place? Well, when watching the game live, I focus on the defensive back seven, and especially the secondary, trying to identify the coverages, and coaching calls on the back end. I watch d-line play when I go back over the TV replay, which I haven't yet done. So I was reduced to asking Dantonio about d-line play rather blindy.)
“At times where they scooped us — in other words zone blocked us — we’re supposed to be in this gap and we end up in a different gap,” Dantonio said. “Combination of both.”
Meaning, a combination of being scheme-scooped, and also moved off the line by brute strength double-teams.
“We played the zone play much more effectively in the past,” Dantonio said. “A lot of it depends on if they’re able to move our defensive tackles. They were able to move them. So that creates different gaps and issues that go along with that.
“But they got movement and they changed the line of scrimmage,” Dantonio said. “Both sides of the ball.”
On offense, Michigan State tries several times a game to get movement with double-team blocking. This game was no different. But, as has been the case in many games recently, the Spartans haven’t gotten much movement up front - despite a great start on Saturday with a 20-yard run by LJ Scott.
“They won up front,” Dantonio said. “(They) changed the line of scrimmage. Usually what we’ve always said here is you’ve got to win up front first. It makes the quarterback’s job easier. It makes the linebackers’ job easier, and you can play around that. We just didn’t win up front.
“Now, we’re young. We’re young up front on both sides of the ball. But you still have to win. You have to win your share.
“We’re a better football team than that, but it’s in the books. We’ve got to be able to also take responsibly for coaching, take responsibly for how we played. But we also have to just focus on the future of this next week, and that’s what we’ll do.”
HOW THE TEAM IS TAKING IT
Dantonio said his team’s initial response to this loss has been what he would expect and want.
“It was tough,” he said of their response after returning home to East Lansing. “It was tough because we’ve been very competitive with Ohio State.
“It was tough, very quiet, very somber. And usually when you have that, people are reflecting on it themselves, I think, which is a good thing.
“We’ve always responded. We’ve always looked at things: How do you play after a tough game? How do you play after a great game in a big environment, a game that had this kind of magnitud? So we look for reaction.
“We’ll take the next step, but we’ll look for reaction, see how we play this week. But I anticipate our guys will come to play.”
MIXED BAG IN THE SECONDARY
I asked Dantonio about the play of the Spartan defensive backs. Justin Layne gave up a deep ball for a touchdown, was flagged for a pass interference, but bounced back with good pass defense on a deep ball and a one-armed interception in the end zone.
For Dantonio, defensive back play went beyond pass defense. He wanted DBs to rally in run support better than they did.
“Ball got out on us,” Dantonio said. “We have to be able to track it down. Leverage issues. A lot of it stems from a couple of different formations that sort of put us in difficult situations. But over and above everything, we’ve got to be able to tackle more effectively on the perimeter.
“Can’t give up a deep ball - not when you’re supposed to be bailing. Justin is supposed to be bailing (on the deep TD), can’t give it up. But we’ll continue to compete back there. We’ll be fine.
“I thought that we need to play better technique on the edges,” Dantonio said. “By edges, we need to tackle more effectively in the back end. David Dowell had a big interception. Justin Layne has a great interception in the end zone. But (we need) consistency, consistency in performance.”
THE SACK PROBLEMS
Michigan State had ranked in the top three in the Big Ten in sack prevention. But Ohio State rang up six sacks against the Spartans, although half of those sacks came on the last four snaps of the game.
Still, Michigan State had problems in pass protection against some of the same players who didn’t bother the Spartan backfield much at all, last year.
“Obviously we gave up too much pressure,” Dantonio said. “Ohio State did a nice job. (Nick) Bosa and some of the other guys, (Jalyn) Holmes and other guys are very good in pass rushing. They got us in long-yardage situations. We talked about that; the inability to run the football puts you in long-yardage situations at times, and then they can tee off on you. And then if you over-set or if you don’t do it exactly right, then there’s a power issue, you’re not in a position of power to protect the quarterback. And then everything else just starts to fall downhill - pressure on the quarterback, makes you nervous, try to get the quarterback out on the edge, not as accurate as he has been, can’t separate downfield with the receivers. So there was a little bit of everything. We’ve talked about the storms that we’ve been in or played through. This one was a storm as well and we couldn’t play through it.”
ANYTHING POSITIVE?
True freshman Antjuan Simmons ranked third on the team in tackles on Saturday, with seven stops (three solos, four assists).
He saw extended playing time in place of junior starter Andrew Dowell at ‘slot’ linebacker.
Simmons (6-0, 217, Ann Arbor) has seen spot duty at other times this year. But this marked the most snaps he has seen in a game.
“Antjuan played 26 snaps,” Dantonio said. “I thought that for a freshman in that environment, he played very well. He was under control. He tackled well, he hustled. He made some plays down the field, tackling relative to pursuit. Couple of mistakes in terms of his assignments, but I thought he played -- for a freshman, I thought he played OK. You can see there is a bright future there.
“You could say that about a lot of our guys, but collectively as a group, we got to get them off the field defensively.”
