This is the unedited Part I.
I will get into the micro personnel and the "add it all up" in a few minutes:
The Pre-Snap Read: Michigan State vs. Michigan
By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.co
East Lansing, Mich. - It’s rare to see a team enter a game in crisis management mode from the opening seconds, but that will be the case for Michigan State in this game at Michigan on Saturday.
And there’s a path by which the Spartans can properly manage the crisis and keep this game competitive. I would say there’s less than 35 percent chance of this game remaining competitive, but that might be more of a chance than you might read or hear elsewhere. By competitive, I mean keeping the score within 14 points heading into the fourth quarter.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST:
* The Spartans have no shot of remaining competitive if their offensive line is as atrocious as it was last week. Might it be better this week? It would be hard to be worse. Meanwhile the defensive front is more talented this week, especially at defensive end.
* If the offensive line gets dominated and Michigan State has no run game, and problems with pass protection in passing situation after passing situation, don’t expect Rocky Lombardi to pull a David Copperfield. Magicians don’t play football.
Lombardi was quite good last week, better than I anticipated. You can win Big Ten games with him, especially if you can get a run game going and avoid last week’s count of turnovers. But he’s not going to rescue you to victory. But he’s better than I expected, which changes the face of the season and the future a bit, in my mind, for now. He can become the man, as a game-managing gamer.
But this game will be very difficult to manage if he doesn’t get help from teammates. Now, Michigan State needs to see OTHER Spartans play like we don’t know they can - which is something I say about this Michigan State-Michigan series all too often.
* Another thing I say all too often about this series is that Michigan State first of all merely needs to get first downs. Move the ball to midfield. Then punt. Then make Michigan go 80 yards. And try to prevent Michigan from popping off 70-yard plays in the run game like they did last week for a pair of TD drives (one early and one late).
Sounds simple. But first downs are the first step toward staying competitive. But it will be difficult if the offensive line doesn’t at least improve to a MAC level after the FCS-level problems we saw last week in the run game.
* The o-line’s pass protection was pretty good last week. Now, the pass rush personnel it will face on Saturday will be among the best in the nation.
MSU’s RB and TE “help” in pass protection was non-existent last week. Mel Tucker says communication will be a big factor in this game. Read: It was terrible last week, and needs to find a better frequency this week. But that’s the type of thing that is correctable from a bad first week to the second week.
* The benefit of playing this game early in the season, if there is one for Michigan State, is that the Spartans still believe. They’re still bushy-tailed.
"This might be the most intense week of Michigan prep I've had since I've been here,” senior defensive end Drew Beesley said last night on the Mel Tucker radio show. “And I've had some pretty intense Michigan Weeks over my 5 years here. Make what you want with that."
That means they’re still bushy-tailed. That’s nice, for now. They’re buying in, they have energy, they aren’t banged-up (although WR Tre Mosley’s condition is unknown after leaving last week’s game with a lower body injury).
They still believe. They’re in it to win it. That’ll count for something during the initial collisions. They won’t be as easily demoralized as might be the case if these teams meet in December.
* As for the short notes: Michigan’s offensive line was a big, surprising plus last week. They will match up against a fair-to-middling Michigan State defensive front.
MSU’s run defense was good last year, and held Michigan to 83 yards rushing.
MSU’s run defense seems pretty good this year, but lives more dangerously than in past years, with more use of single-safety deep coverages, and more eyeball attention given to slot receivers than the tackle box.
That was fine last week against Rutgers, holding the Scarlet Knights to 50 net yards and 1.3 per carry. But the eyeball test shows us that new defensive tackles Naquan Jones and Jacob Slade were just “guys.” They weren’t easily displaced but they weren’t playmakers. Michigan State will need Jones’ fuse to be better-lit.
Inside linebacker Antjuan Simmons is quality.
Middle linebacker Noah Harvey was functional last year at the end of the season. But there were two TD runs by Rutgers inside the 5-yard line last week when Harvey seemed to flat-out not know what to do, in terms of reading keys and fitting. That was a surprise. He’s a fourth-year junior who had 14 tackles in the Pinstripe Bowl. He can play football. But he was fogged out last week. It was clear that some players are still adapting to the schemes on both sides of the ball.
It looked like Green-White Game type of execution on the OL and at LB last week a few times, and essentially that’s where this team is right now in terms of installation. They are two scrimmages and one public outing into the Tucker era.
Harvey is better than that, and he demonstrated it in the fourth quarter when Michigan State went to more one-gapping schemes, similar to what they did last year.
If he improves, the front six will improve.
* That’s the next question. Will Michigan State play the 4-2-5 that it played last week? That’s the norm for new d-coordinator Scottie Hazelton.
Last week, the seventh man in the box for Michigan State was 210-pound safety Xavier Henderson. He was good and comfortable at the linebacker level when Michigan State went with a single safety deep, which was quite often.
Now, can he and Michigan State hang with that type of alignment against Michigan? Michigan has some hammers on offense. Their o-line is good, and varied, with nice use of traps and powers and pin-and-pull. They supplement that with Ben Mason, a part time blocking back and part time H-back. He’s a hammer, who saw action on roughly half of the snaps last week.
Michigan has had excellent WR talent in recent years (forever, really). But they are more unproven in that area than usual this year. They have talent, it’s just new talent.
For now, Michigan looks like it wants to be more of a power run game outfit. Last week, in the first half, in 27 offensive snaps (not counting the two-minute drill at the end of the half), Michigan went with a 3-WR personnel group on only seven of those 27 snaps. That means Michigan State went two-TE, or two-back, or heavier, on 20 of the 27 snaps.
Michigan had a beautiful lead trap for a 70-yard TD by RB Charbonnet early in the game. Later, Michigan had a 66-yarder by RB Haskins on a play that wasn’t well-blocked, but the RB bounced outside the pile.
Michigan deserves those yards, of course. In Michigan’s other 28 run attempts (not counting victory formation), the Wolverines averaged a more human 4.4 yards per carry (120 yards).
The first trick is to prevent Michigan from popping off big plays such as those 70 and 66-yard runs, and the strip-sack TD, and the 60-yard kickoff return or whatever it was off a failed squib, and don’t help them with a foiled fake punt in at your own 25-yard line.
Michigan’s pass rush dominated the fourth quarter. But Minnesota “won” quite a few plays on this night, churning out 326 yards of offense and 21 first downs.
Michigan’s run defense yielded 129 yards. Not a terrible number, but Michigan didn’t hold up physically at the point of attack on a number of off-tackle runs. Michigan isn’t strong (or physically big) in that category. However, Michigan State doesn’t seem to have the tools to do anything about it - from what we’ve seen so far.
* Getting back to the 4-2-5 question: With the way Michigan State plays with a single safety deep, and linebackers that are either attacking with run blitzes or getting fogged out, the Spartans operate on a highwire trapeze without a net more so than in the past.
In the past, Michigan State liked to keep two safeties deep (although not all that deep). Michigan State “played square” with the front seven eyeballs on the run game, and the slot WR given a free release.
Opponents used to pepper MSU’s slot area with bubbles and hitches and slants. Michigan State was willing to concede that in order to (theoretically) stifle the run, prevent big plays, and - if you get to the red zone - stiffen up inside the 20 and make you kick field goals.
That often worked. Sometimes, against the better teams, it was merely a slow-death way of losing. But you can’t argue with Mark Dantonio’s macro success. He did wonders, and produced a great team at the high point of his tenure. He was quite a bit better at Michigan State than Nick Saban in each coach’s first five years in East Lansing in a straight apples-to-apples comparison, and took the Spartans to heights that I suspect even the great Saban would have failed to attain at Michigan State.
As for this year’s Spartan defense, they aren’t about slow death. They crowd the slot with nickel back Shakur Brown. And they even out the numbers in the box with Henderson (a safety) often playing at the LB level. This is nothing revolutionary. Many teams play it this way. The danger is that if a play gets past the linebacker level, there is more open grass and fewer Spartans to rodeo the ball-carrier to the ground than in past years.
You saw what happened last week when a simple QB lead draw resulted in an untouched 26-yard TD run.
Michigan State will roll the dice more on defense in this fashion, even when not blitzing. They are operating without a net. Thus the chances of Michigan continuing to pop off big plays this week after a smattering of them last week remains a great possibility. Yet that’s precisely the first thing Michigan State need to prevent from happening if it wants to stay competitive.
Can Michigan State with it’s new defense, and some foggy players, play that way and somehow prevent a simple inside trap from going 70 yards, or a QB draw from going 50? Those won’t be the most difficult equations the Spartan defense will need to solve, but they could be the most telling.
* Is it possible that Michigan State will use two different defensive philosophies: last week’s 4-2-5, and possibly a holdover version of the Tressel 4-3? Who would be the third linebacker if Michigan State dusts off last year’s defense? I’m guessing Chase Kline joining Noah Harvey in the middle with Antjuan Simmons back in the slot? Simmons is 10 pounds heavier than last year and says he’s just as fast. Maybe he is. I haven’t checked.
If Michigan comes out in run personnel for 20 of its first 27 plays like last week, I suspect Michigan State will try the 4-2-5 approach. But if more physicality is needed, if Michigan State needs an anvil against some of those hard-blocking Michigan hammers, I think Kline could offer a little heftier resistance. Henderson is good in at the linebacker level. But MSU’s run defense could be, theoretically, even better if Kline is on the field rather than a third cornerback and Henderson is able to support the run from traditional safety depth.
That’s just a guess-the-gameplan thing on my behalf. I have no inside info on that.
* Michigan’s offense has young skill players on the perimeter. Players who might be household names some day, but are just youngsters right now.
If you play the old Dantonio system, Michigan’s speed-in-space offensive approach could pepper the soft slot areas for nice yards-after-catch production. But good tackling would theoretically keep things contained for a date in the red zone.
If you play the Hazelton approach, Michigan will likely answer with last week’s approach - run-oriented personnel on 20 of the first 27 snaps. Of course they can throw out of these sets too, but they won’t be flooding your secondary with proven All-Big Ten wide receivers.
That’ll be intriguing football in and of itself: Michigan’s surprising offensive line, with Ben Mason as a battering ram blocking back, against what’s been a proud Michigan State run defense, one that played well last week, but now has to prove itself with a new system when the adversary comes a little bit bigger.
ANY PATHS TO VICTORY FOR MSU?
* The scores and outcomes of last week’s Michigan and Michigan State games were decidedly different last week. But if you just looked at the teams working as if it were a preseason high school scrimmage, these two teams wouldn’t seem as drastically different as the pregame suppositions we’re all hearing and feeling this week.
The one drastic caveat of that statement is that MSU’s o-line was indeed as terrible as initially perceived, and wasn’t nearly in the same stratosphere as Michigan’s offensive line last week.
If Michigan State can somehow show Cinderella improvement on the offensive line in one week, then this could become a competitive game. But you would have to believe in fairy tales for that to happen. I’ve seen a few football fairy tales come true, but not many.
The other less-drastic caveat is that Michigan indeed looked elite in the fourth quarter with its pass rush, once Minnesota lost all threat of offensive balance.
A big step in the path toward competitiveness for Michigan State in this game is staying out of passing situations, both in terms of down-and-distance and on the scoreboard. That’s easier said than done, but it’s crucial. Michigan’s pass rush is that good, and MSU’s pass protection help from RBs and TEs is that suspect.
Aside from that, Michigan State actually “won” a lot of plays against Rutgers last week (plant a flag!) and Michigan “lost” a lot of plays against Minnesota. That’s what I mean by high school scrimmage film. There was enough by both teams for an impartial observer, if we can find one, to conclude that these two teams - the Spartans and Wolverines - do indeed belong on the same field together. This isn’t Tyson vs Spinks. Although it could turn into that quickly if Michigan State becomes a unwilling accomplice (via turnovers and miscues).
* Obviously, Michigan State has to avoid mistakes, avoid turnovers, avoid penalties that prolong UM drives or shorten Michigan State drives. These are all clichés of course. But Michigan State can’t bounce back from bad leaks this week they way they almost did last week. A bad leak or two, and this game is over early.
* Path to Competitiveness? Choose slow death, if possible, Michigan State. Michigan’s offense is good. They’re going to drive and get points. Just don’t give up the big plays like Minnesota did (long kickoff return, strip sack defensive TD, 70-yard TD run, foiled fake punt resulting in a short 29-yard field). That’s 28 points without needing to collect first downs.
Get first downs, punt the ball, make Michigan with a still-developing QB go 80 yards.
It would be nice if you forced Michigan to punt four or five times, of course. Michigan didn’t punt once against Minnesota. You read that right.
By slow death, I mean if Michigan is going to score, make them eat some clock and shorten the game, and perhaps give the Spartans a chance to stiffen in the red zone and force field goal attempts … just in case you get some breaks with turnovers or on special teams or one of those Domato Peko scoop and scores from a hundred yards out. Just in case your offensive line joins the human race and helps you get 300 or more yards of offense. Just in case pass protection holds up, just in case Rocky Lombardi proves efficient at reading pressures and delivering the ball accurately, just in case you don’t turn the ball over seven times your damn self.
If all of those fairy tales come true, and you achieve slow death on defense, then Michigan State could conceivably be within 13 points going into the fourth quarter.
Michigan fumbled once inside the Minnesota 5-yard line, but Michigan recovered and soon scored a TD. Michigan fumbled a kickoff early in the 2H after Minnesota had cut the lead to 35-24, but Michigan recovered and soon scored a TD. If Michigan’s opponent recovers either of those two turnovers, you could conceivably get a 21-point swing. Football can swing that way, especially in fairy tales.
* If you can harness slow death and make Michigan go 80 yards, MAYBE Milton will make some mistakes. He looked cool last week (a well-managed 15 of 22 for 225 yards), with little evidence (for now) that he can be shaken into mistakes. But he’s still somewhat of an unproven starter. Maybe he can be coaxed into a misread INT or two.
- Milton stared down TE Erick All on a skinny post late in the 1H last week, and threw dangerously into double-coverage. That’s the type of mistake Michigan State needs, and needs to capitalize on. He didn’t make many.
Could Michigan State coax him into more bad decisions than Minnesota was able to do last week? Yes, and that’s a theoretical staple of the Hazelton defense. His Kansas State defense was very good last year at changing up its coverages, disguising those coverages, and playing a wide variety of them without fooling itself (based on the two games I reviewed against Oklahoma and Iowa State).
He did that in one year at Kansas State.
Last week, the secondary played 60-minutes of good, same-page football - albeit against a bottom division Big Ten team. But that was a good spring game outing by the back seven in pass defense.
If Hazelton is ready to play like he did at KSU, then the Spartans will be more aggressive on passing downs in showing blitz, making the opponent account for six or seven potential rushers, and then drop back into various coverages. I’ve not seen Michigan State do this ultra-effectively; and we’ve not seen Milton presented with it. I’m not sure Michigan State can present it. We don’t know how Milton will do with it.
MSU’s problem is that a good pass rush would do wonders to complement the type of moving pictures Hazelton wants to present to a quarterback. But MSU’s pass rush was limp last week. Drew Beesley isn’t bad. Jacub Panasiuk has been pretty good in the past but was quiet last week. The back-up defensive ends aren’t much help right now.
Might Michigan State be able to bring four-man pressures with d-linemen dropping into coverage and linebackers rushing? Sure. Does that change the world? Not really.
But Michigan State surprised Rutgers’ QB with Shakur Brown dropping into curl/hook zone coverage after a steady diet of man-to-man. Brown nabbed an interception, returned it for a TD (called back for an illegal block). That’s the type of mistake Hazelton needs Milton to make. There’s a Rapunzel’s chance of that happening once, maybe even twice. That won’t win the game, but it’s on the path to competitiveness radar.
LAST WEEK, OF NOTE:
* With 10 minutes left in the first half, Minnesota trailed Michigan 21-17, and had a TD taken off the board due to illegal formation (but earned it with the blocking up front). At that point, Minnesota held a 15-5 edge in time of possession.
The game was even initially. To Michigan’s credit, the Wolverine offense took control from that point forward. But Minnesota was still only a couple of bounces (fumble recoveries) away from keeping this a game into the fourth quarter.
Michigan was good, but they weren’t the 1984 BYU Cougars.
* Michigan's fine safety Daxton Hill missed half of the game last week with an undisclosed injury. He's excellent against the run and pass, and I wonder if he hurt himself while making a forceful tackle in run defense late in the first half. Anyway, his replacement was freshman Makari Paige. It was a colassal dropoff in effectiveness from Hill to Paige last week. I'm assuming Hill is going to be okay. The TV broadcast didn't pick up any lower body problems with Hill. But if Hill can't play, Michigan's defense will be operating with a flat tire in the secondary, unless there's a better replacement or combination out there that Michigan didn't show last week. Paige might be good some day, but that wasn't the case last Saturday.
COMPARITIVE QUESTIONS
* Minnesota had some success running the ball. Their TE blockers did a good job displacing Michigan’s excellent defensive end Aidan Hutchinson at the point of attack. (Hutchinson was better vs OGs and OTs than he was vs TEs). The question is whether Michigan State has tight ends, much less an offensive line and a RB that is capable of doing the same thing. Probably not.
From what I’ve seen, you’re better off running right at Hutchinson than trying to run your running game away from him. He’s better in run defense as a pursuit guy. Secondly Kwity Paye on the other side is legitimately good against the run. So if you run away from Hutchinson, you’re running at Paye. That’s not the best choice.
Of the success Minnesota had on the ground, it came when running at Hutchinson. OR it came when Michigan was dabbling with its 30 defense.
Michigan liked to run its 3-4 personnel (taking DT Hinton out of the game and replacing him with LB VanSumeren) on second down last week. When Michigan ran its 30 defense, Michigan didn’t bolster it with extra safety help. So a lighter front 7 was often left without extra help in the box. Michigan did this against Minnesota’s 12 personnel (1 RB and 2 TEs). That made no sense. Minnesota put seven blockers on seven defensive hats and had daylight.
On one occasion, Minnesota popped off 25-yard TD run via 7-on-7 blocking vs the light 30 defense - and this was on third-and-two! Michigan had two safeties deep on third-and-two in the red zone. Made zero sense. Michigan State will have to hope Don Brown pulls some more moves like that if Michigan State is fortunate enough to have a third-and-two in the red zone once or twice.
* By the way, Michigan went with its 30 defense in third-and-4 or third-and-3 type situations a few times last week, when the game was still in doubt. This is not a good run-defense personnel group for Michigan.
If Michigan State comes out with three WRs on third-and-three, don’t be shocked of Michigan State runs the ball. Don’t be alarmed that this is a return of Perles ball. If Michigan State does this, it will be because Michigan looked susceptible to it with its 30 defense on third-and-manageable last week. And quite frankly, you might have a better chance to pick up 3 yards on the ground than trying to pass from the pocket with Hutchinson and Paye coming after you.
* If Michigan continues to go with the 30 on second downs, I wonder if Michigan State will try to power the run game in those situations. Short pass on first-and-10, then second-and-seven is a run play against the lighter 30? If so, if Michigan State wants to go with a power run attack, is Connor Heyward still the guy? He started last week, but he’s limited. Elijah Collins hasn’t looked like himself. Freshman Jordan Simmons is a good quickness guys. Don’t sleep on redshirt freshman Brandon Wright. He’s a big back who had one carry last week (for a loss of 2 when LG Blake Bueter was blown up by two-gapping Michael Dwumfour). But Wright, if he’s right, might be able to play some power ball if and when Michigan goes light. This is all unseen, early-season football theory.
* Minnesota went deep twice and completed both passes. Neither receiver was open. The first one went for 45 yards against CB Gemon Green (a good player). Green had him well-covered, but the WR reacted well to an underthrown ball.
On the second one, Michigan CB Vincent Gray (a pretty good player) was beaten deep for 40 yards by Minnesota WR Bateman. Gray was flagged for pass interference, was working hands on Bateman the whole way, but Bateman still made the catch.
Can Michigan State go deep? Michigan State tried twice last week (Lombardi missed an open WR Reed on a free play that should have been a TD).
Lombardi’s arm accuracy on deep shots is an unknown, probably not a strength. But Michigan State will probably shoot some dice in that area. They need one.
* People ask about the Ohio State example. Why have Ohio State (and Alabama) been successful in victimizing Michigan’s Don Brown defense with simple crossing routes and devastating runs after the catch?
Well, first of all, Michigan showed less man-to-man against Minnesota. The Gophers were able to hit a crossing route for 15 yards in the fourth quarter, and it nearly got out for more. But Michigan didn’t play as much single-safety-deep, man-to-man as we’ve seen in the past.
As for the Ohio State example, much of it comes down to talent. Teams can try to emulate what OSU did vs Michigan’s man-to-man, but teams don’t have OSU’s speed and NFL talent at WR, they don’t have OSU’s ability to establish chunks in the run game with NFL o-linemen and NFL running backs, and they don’t have a national Top 2 quarterback engineering the locomotive, with QB-run ability sprinkled in.
Lombardi is capable, but he’s not Justin Fields. MSU’s o-line in comparison to OSU’s o-line? I guess we can stop there.
But MSU’s receiving corps is a group on the rise. They can provide some sparks, if the offensive line gets a pixie dust visit from a fairy godfather.
(MICRO PERSONNEL INFO TO COME)
I will get into the micro personnel and the "add it all up" in a few minutes:
The Pre-Snap Read: Michigan State vs. Michigan
By Jim Comparoni
SpartanMag.co
East Lansing, Mich. - It’s rare to see a team enter a game in crisis management mode from the opening seconds, but that will be the case for Michigan State in this game at Michigan on Saturday.
And there’s a path by which the Spartans can properly manage the crisis and keep this game competitive. I would say there’s less than 35 percent chance of this game remaining competitive, but that might be more of a chance than you might read or hear elsewhere. By competitive, I mean keeping the score within 14 points heading into the fourth quarter.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST:
* The Spartans have no shot of remaining competitive if their offensive line is as atrocious as it was last week. Might it be better this week? It would be hard to be worse. Meanwhile the defensive front is more talented this week, especially at defensive end.
* If the offensive line gets dominated and Michigan State has no run game, and problems with pass protection in passing situation after passing situation, don’t expect Rocky Lombardi to pull a David Copperfield. Magicians don’t play football.
Lombardi was quite good last week, better than I anticipated. You can win Big Ten games with him, especially if you can get a run game going and avoid last week’s count of turnovers. But he’s not going to rescue you to victory. But he’s better than I expected, which changes the face of the season and the future a bit, in my mind, for now. He can become the man, as a game-managing gamer.
But this game will be very difficult to manage if he doesn’t get help from teammates. Now, Michigan State needs to see OTHER Spartans play like we don’t know they can - which is something I say about this Michigan State-Michigan series all too often.
* Another thing I say all too often about this series is that Michigan State first of all merely needs to get first downs. Move the ball to midfield. Then punt. Then make Michigan go 80 yards. And try to prevent Michigan from popping off 70-yard plays in the run game like they did last week for a pair of TD drives (one early and one late).
Sounds simple. But first downs are the first step toward staying competitive. But it will be difficult if the offensive line doesn’t at least improve to a MAC level after the FCS-level problems we saw last week in the run game.
* The o-line’s pass protection was pretty good last week. Now, the pass rush personnel it will face on Saturday will be among the best in the nation.
MSU’s RB and TE “help” in pass protection was non-existent last week. Mel Tucker says communication will be a big factor in this game. Read: It was terrible last week, and needs to find a better frequency this week. But that’s the type of thing that is correctable from a bad first week to the second week.
* The benefit of playing this game early in the season, if there is one for Michigan State, is that the Spartans still believe. They’re still bushy-tailed.
"This might be the most intense week of Michigan prep I've had since I've been here,” senior defensive end Drew Beesley said last night on the Mel Tucker radio show. “And I've had some pretty intense Michigan Weeks over my 5 years here. Make what you want with that."
That means they’re still bushy-tailed. That’s nice, for now. They’re buying in, they have energy, they aren’t banged-up (although WR Tre Mosley’s condition is unknown after leaving last week’s game with a lower body injury).
They still believe. They’re in it to win it. That’ll count for something during the initial collisions. They won’t be as easily demoralized as might be the case if these teams meet in December.
* As for the short notes: Michigan’s offensive line was a big, surprising plus last week. They will match up against a fair-to-middling Michigan State defensive front.
MSU’s run defense was good last year, and held Michigan to 83 yards rushing.
MSU’s run defense seems pretty good this year, but lives more dangerously than in past years, with more use of single-safety deep coverages, and more eyeball attention given to slot receivers than the tackle box.
That was fine last week against Rutgers, holding the Scarlet Knights to 50 net yards and 1.3 per carry. But the eyeball test shows us that new defensive tackles Naquan Jones and Jacob Slade were just “guys.” They weren’t easily displaced but they weren’t playmakers. Michigan State will need Jones’ fuse to be better-lit.
Inside linebacker Antjuan Simmons is quality.
Middle linebacker Noah Harvey was functional last year at the end of the season. But there were two TD runs by Rutgers inside the 5-yard line last week when Harvey seemed to flat-out not know what to do, in terms of reading keys and fitting. That was a surprise. He’s a fourth-year junior who had 14 tackles in the Pinstripe Bowl. He can play football. But he was fogged out last week. It was clear that some players are still adapting to the schemes on both sides of the ball.
It looked like Green-White Game type of execution on the OL and at LB last week a few times, and essentially that’s where this team is right now in terms of installation. They are two scrimmages and one public outing into the Tucker era.
Harvey is better than that, and he demonstrated it in the fourth quarter when Michigan State went to more one-gapping schemes, similar to what they did last year.
If he improves, the front six will improve.
* That’s the next question. Will Michigan State play the 4-2-5 that it played last week? That’s the norm for new d-coordinator Scottie Hazelton.
Last week, the seventh man in the box for Michigan State was 210-pound safety Xavier Henderson. He was good and comfortable at the linebacker level when Michigan State went with a single safety deep, which was quite often.
Now, can he and Michigan State hang with that type of alignment against Michigan? Michigan has some hammers on offense. Their o-line is good, and varied, with nice use of traps and powers and pin-and-pull. They supplement that with Ben Mason, a part time blocking back and part time H-back. He’s a hammer, who saw action on roughly half of the snaps last week.
Michigan has had excellent WR talent in recent years (forever, really). But they are more unproven in that area than usual this year. They have talent, it’s just new talent.
For now, Michigan looks like it wants to be more of a power run game outfit. Last week, in the first half, in 27 offensive snaps (not counting the two-minute drill at the end of the half), Michigan went with a 3-WR personnel group on only seven of those 27 snaps. That means Michigan State went two-TE, or two-back, or heavier, on 20 of the 27 snaps.
Michigan had a beautiful lead trap for a 70-yard TD by RB Charbonnet early in the game. Later, Michigan had a 66-yarder by RB Haskins on a play that wasn’t well-blocked, but the RB bounced outside the pile.
Michigan deserves those yards, of course. In Michigan’s other 28 run attempts (not counting victory formation), the Wolverines averaged a more human 4.4 yards per carry (120 yards).
The first trick is to prevent Michigan from popping off big plays such as those 70 and 66-yard runs, and the strip-sack TD, and the 60-yard kickoff return or whatever it was off a failed squib, and don’t help them with a foiled fake punt in at your own 25-yard line.
Michigan’s pass rush dominated the fourth quarter. But Minnesota “won” quite a few plays on this night, churning out 326 yards of offense and 21 first downs.
Michigan’s run defense yielded 129 yards. Not a terrible number, but Michigan didn’t hold up physically at the point of attack on a number of off-tackle runs. Michigan isn’t strong (or physically big) in that category. However, Michigan State doesn’t seem to have the tools to do anything about it - from what we’ve seen so far.
* Getting back to the 4-2-5 question: With the way Michigan State plays with a single safety deep, and linebackers that are either attacking with run blitzes or getting fogged out, the Spartans operate on a highwire trapeze without a net more so than in the past.
In the past, Michigan State liked to keep two safeties deep (although not all that deep). Michigan State “played square” with the front seven eyeballs on the run game, and the slot WR given a free release.
Opponents used to pepper MSU’s slot area with bubbles and hitches and slants. Michigan State was willing to concede that in order to (theoretically) stifle the run, prevent big plays, and - if you get to the red zone - stiffen up inside the 20 and make you kick field goals.
That often worked. Sometimes, against the better teams, it was merely a slow-death way of losing. But you can’t argue with Mark Dantonio’s macro success. He did wonders, and produced a great team at the high point of his tenure. He was quite a bit better at Michigan State than Nick Saban in each coach’s first five years in East Lansing in a straight apples-to-apples comparison, and took the Spartans to heights that I suspect even the great Saban would have failed to attain at Michigan State.
As for this year’s Spartan defense, they aren’t about slow death. They crowd the slot with nickel back Shakur Brown. And they even out the numbers in the box with Henderson (a safety) often playing at the LB level. This is nothing revolutionary. Many teams play it this way. The danger is that if a play gets past the linebacker level, there is more open grass and fewer Spartans to rodeo the ball-carrier to the ground than in past years.
You saw what happened last week when a simple QB lead draw resulted in an untouched 26-yard TD run.
Michigan State will roll the dice more on defense in this fashion, even when not blitzing. They are operating without a net. Thus the chances of Michigan continuing to pop off big plays this week after a smattering of them last week remains a great possibility. Yet that’s precisely the first thing Michigan State need to prevent from happening if it wants to stay competitive.
Can Michigan State with it’s new defense, and some foggy players, play that way and somehow prevent a simple inside trap from going 70 yards, or a QB draw from going 50? Those won’t be the most difficult equations the Spartan defense will need to solve, but they could be the most telling.
* Is it possible that Michigan State will use two different defensive philosophies: last week’s 4-2-5, and possibly a holdover version of the Tressel 4-3? Who would be the third linebacker if Michigan State dusts off last year’s defense? I’m guessing Chase Kline joining Noah Harvey in the middle with Antjuan Simmons back in the slot? Simmons is 10 pounds heavier than last year and says he’s just as fast. Maybe he is. I haven’t checked.
If Michigan comes out in run personnel for 20 of its first 27 plays like last week, I suspect Michigan State will try the 4-2-5 approach. But if more physicality is needed, if Michigan State needs an anvil against some of those hard-blocking Michigan hammers, I think Kline could offer a little heftier resistance. Henderson is good in at the linebacker level. But MSU’s run defense could be, theoretically, even better if Kline is on the field rather than a third cornerback and Henderson is able to support the run from traditional safety depth.
That’s just a guess-the-gameplan thing on my behalf. I have no inside info on that.
* Michigan’s offense has young skill players on the perimeter. Players who might be household names some day, but are just youngsters right now.
If you play the old Dantonio system, Michigan’s speed-in-space offensive approach could pepper the soft slot areas for nice yards-after-catch production. But good tackling would theoretically keep things contained for a date in the red zone.
If you play the Hazelton approach, Michigan will likely answer with last week’s approach - run-oriented personnel on 20 of the first 27 snaps. Of course they can throw out of these sets too, but they won’t be flooding your secondary with proven All-Big Ten wide receivers.
That’ll be intriguing football in and of itself: Michigan’s surprising offensive line, with Ben Mason as a battering ram blocking back, against what’s been a proud Michigan State run defense, one that played well last week, but now has to prove itself with a new system when the adversary comes a little bit bigger.
ANY PATHS TO VICTORY FOR MSU?
* The scores and outcomes of last week’s Michigan and Michigan State games were decidedly different last week. But if you just looked at the teams working as if it were a preseason high school scrimmage, these two teams wouldn’t seem as drastically different as the pregame suppositions we’re all hearing and feeling this week.
The one drastic caveat of that statement is that MSU’s o-line was indeed as terrible as initially perceived, and wasn’t nearly in the same stratosphere as Michigan’s offensive line last week.
If Michigan State can somehow show Cinderella improvement on the offensive line in one week, then this could become a competitive game. But you would have to believe in fairy tales for that to happen. I’ve seen a few football fairy tales come true, but not many.
The other less-drastic caveat is that Michigan indeed looked elite in the fourth quarter with its pass rush, once Minnesota lost all threat of offensive balance.
A big step in the path toward competitiveness for Michigan State in this game is staying out of passing situations, both in terms of down-and-distance and on the scoreboard. That’s easier said than done, but it’s crucial. Michigan’s pass rush is that good, and MSU’s pass protection help from RBs and TEs is that suspect.
Aside from that, Michigan State actually “won” a lot of plays against Rutgers last week (plant a flag!) and Michigan “lost” a lot of plays against Minnesota. That’s what I mean by high school scrimmage film. There was enough by both teams for an impartial observer, if we can find one, to conclude that these two teams - the Spartans and Wolverines - do indeed belong on the same field together. This isn’t Tyson vs Spinks. Although it could turn into that quickly if Michigan State becomes a unwilling accomplice (via turnovers and miscues).
* Obviously, Michigan State has to avoid mistakes, avoid turnovers, avoid penalties that prolong UM drives or shorten Michigan State drives. These are all clichés of course. But Michigan State can’t bounce back from bad leaks this week they way they almost did last week. A bad leak or two, and this game is over early.
* Path to Competitiveness? Choose slow death, if possible, Michigan State. Michigan’s offense is good. They’re going to drive and get points. Just don’t give up the big plays like Minnesota did (long kickoff return, strip sack defensive TD, 70-yard TD run, foiled fake punt resulting in a short 29-yard field). That’s 28 points without needing to collect first downs.
Get first downs, punt the ball, make Michigan with a still-developing QB go 80 yards.
It would be nice if you forced Michigan to punt four or five times, of course. Michigan didn’t punt once against Minnesota. You read that right.
By slow death, I mean if Michigan is going to score, make them eat some clock and shorten the game, and perhaps give the Spartans a chance to stiffen in the red zone and force field goal attempts … just in case you get some breaks with turnovers or on special teams or one of those Domato Peko scoop and scores from a hundred yards out. Just in case your offensive line joins the human race and helps you get 300 or more yards of offense. Just in case pass protection holds up, just in case Rocky Lombardi proves efficient at reading pressures and delivering the ball accurately, just in case you don’t turn the ball over seven times your damn self.
If all of those fairy tales come true, and you achieve slow death on defense, then Michigan State could conceivably be within 13 points going into the fourth quarter.
Michigan fumbled once inside the Minnesota 5-yard line, but Michigan recovered and soon scored a TD. Michigan fumbled a kickoff early in the 2H after Minnesota had cut the lead to 35-24, but Michigan recovered and soon scored a TD. If Michigan’s opponent recovers either of those two turnovers, you could conceivably get a 21-point swing. Football can swing that way, especially in fairy tales.
* If you can harness slow death and make Michigan go 80 yards, MAYBE Milton will make some mistakes. He looked cool last week (a well-managed 15 of 22 for 225 yards), with little evidence (for now) that he can be shaken into mistakes. But he’s still somewhat of an unproven starter. Maybe he can be coaxed into a misread INT or two.
- Milton stared down TE Erick All on a skinny post late in the 1H last week, and threw dangerously into double-coverage. That’s the type of mistake Michigan State needs, and needs to capitalize on. He didn’t make many.
Could Michigan State coax him into more bad decisions than Minnesota was able to do last week? Yes, and that’s a theoretical staple of the Hazelton defense. His Kansas State defense was very good last year at changing up its coverages, disguising those coverages, and playing a wide variety of them without fooling itself (based on the two games I reviewed against Oklahoma and Iowa State).
He did that in one year at Kansas State.
Last week, the secondary played 60-minutes of good, same-page football - albeit against a bottom division Big Ten team. But that was a good spring game outing by the back seven in pass defense.
If Hazelton is ready to play like he did at KSU, then the Spartans will be more aggressive on passing downs in showing blitz, making the opponent account for six or seven potential rushers, and then drop back into various coverages. I’ve not seen Michigan State do this ultra-effectively; and we’ve not seen Milton presented with it. I’m not sure Michigan State can present it. We don’t know how Milton will do with it.
MSU’s problem is that a good pass rush would do wonders to complement the type of moving pictures Hazelton wants to present to a quarterback. But MSU’s pass rush was limp last week. Drew Beesley isn’t bad. Jacub Panasiuk has been pretty good in the past but was quiet last week. The back-up defensive ends aren’t much help right now.
Might Michigan State be able to bring four-man pressures with d-linemen dropping into coverage and linebackers rushing? Sure. Does that change the world? Not really.
But Michigan State surprised Rutgers’ QB with Shakur Brown dropping into curl/hook zone coverage after a steady diet of man-to-man. Brown nabbed an interception, returned it for a TD (called back for an illegal block). That’s the type of mistake Hazelton needs Milton to make. There’s a Rapunzel’s chance of that happening once, maybe even twice. That won’t win the game, but it’s on the path to competitiveness radar.
LAST WEEK, OF NOTE:
* With 10 minutes left in the first half, Minnesota trailed Michigan 21-17, and had a TD taken off the board due to illegal formation (but earned it with the blocking up front). At that point, Minnesota held a 15-5 edge in time of possession.
The game was even initially. To Michigan’s credit, the Wolverine offense took control from that point forward. But Minnesota was still only a couple of bounces (fumble recoveries) away from keeping this a game into the fourth quarter.
Michigan was good, but they weren’t the 1984 BYU Cougars.
* Michigan's fine safety Daxton Hill missed half of the game last week with an undisclosed injury. He's excellent against the run and pass, and I wonder if he hurt himself while making a forceful tackle in run defense late in the first half. Anyway, his replacement was freshman Makari Paige. It was a colassal dropoff in effectiveness from Hill to Paige last week. I'm assuming Hill is going to be okay. The TV broadcast didn't pick up any lower body problems with Hill. But if Hill can't play, Michigan's defense will be operating with a flat tire in the secondary, unless there's a better replacement or combination out there that Michigan didn't show last week. Paige might be good some day, but that wasn't the case last Saturday.
COMPARITIVE QUESTIONS
* Minnesota had some success running the ball. Their TE blockers did a good job displacing Michigan’s excellent defensive end Aidan Hutchinson at the point of attack. (Hutchinson was better vs OGs and OTs than he was vs TEs). The question is whether Michigan State has tight ends, much less an offensive line and a RB that is capable of doing the same thing. Probably not.
From what I’ve seen, you’re better off running right at Hutchinson than trying to run your running game away from him. He’s better in run defense as a pursuit guy. Secondly Kwity Paye on the other side is legitimately good against the run. So if you run away from Hutchinson, you’re running at Paye. That’s not the best choice.
Of the success Minnesota had on the ground, it came when running at Hutchinson. OR it came when Michigan was dabbling with its 30 defense.
Michigan liked to run its 3-4 personnel (taking DT Hinton out of the game and replacing him with LB VanSumeren) on second down last week. When Michigan ran its 30 defense, Michigan didn’t bolster it with extra safety help. So a lighter front 7 was often left without extra help in the box. Michigan did this against Minnesota’s 12 personnel (1 RB and 2 TEs). That made no sense. Minnesota put seven blockers on seven defensive hats and had daylight.
On one occasion, Minnesota popped off 25-yard TD run via 7-on-7 blocking vs the light 30 defense - and this was on third-and-two! Michigan had two safeties deep on third-and-two in the red zone. Made zero sense. Michigan State will have to hope Don Brown pulls some more moves like that if Michigan State is fortunate enough to have a third-and-two in the red zone once or twice.
* By the way, Michigan went with its 30 defense in third-and-4 or third-and-3 type situations a few times last week, when the game was still in doubt. This is not a good run-defense personnel group for Michigan.
If Michigan State comes out with three WRs on third-and-three, don’t be shocked of Michigan State runs the ball. Don’t be alarmed that this is a return of Perles ball. If Michigan State does this, it will be because Michigan looked susceptible to it with its 30 defense on third-and-manageable last week. And quite frankly, you might have a better chance to pick up 3 yards on the ground than trying to pass from the pocket with Hutchinson and Paye coming after you.
* If Michigan continues to go with the 30 on second downs, I wonder if Michigan State will try to power the run game in those situations. Short pass on first-and-10, then second-and-seven is a run play against the lighter 30? If so, if Michigan State wants to go with a power run attack, is Connor Heyward still the guy? He started last week, but he’s limited. Elijah Collins hasn’t looked like himself. Freshman Jordan Simmons is a good quickness guys. Don’t sleep on redshirt freshman Brandon Wright. He’s a big back who had one carry last week (for a loss of 2 when LG Blake Bueter was blown up by two-gapping Michael Dwumfour). But Wright, if he’s right, might be able to play some power ball if and when Michigan goes light. This is all unseen, early-season football theory.
* Minnesota went deep twice and completed both passes. Neither receiver was open. The first one went for 45 yards against CB Gemon Green (a good player). Green had him well-covered, but the WR reacted well to an underthrown ball.
On the second one, Michigan CB Vincent Gray (a pretty good player) was beaten deep for 40 yards by Minnesota WR Bateman. Gray was flagged for pass interference, was working hands on Bateman the whole way, but Bateman still made the catch.
Can Michigan State go deep? Michigan State tried twice last week (Lombardi missed an open WR Reed on a free play that should have been a TD).
Lombardi’s arm accuracy on deep shots is an unknown, probably not a strength. But Michigan State will probably shoot some dice in that area. They need one.
* People ask about the Ohio State example. Why have Ohio State (and Alabama) been successful in victimizing Michigan’s Don Brown defense with simple crossing routes and devastating runs after the catch?
Well, first of all, Michigan showed less man-to-man against Minnesota. The Gophers were able to hit a crossing route for 15 yards in the fourth quarter, and it nearly got out for more. But Michigan didn’t play as much single-safety-deep, man-to-man as we’ve seen in the past.
As for the Ohio State example, much of it comes down to talent. Teams can try to emulate what OSU did vs Michigan’s man-to-man, but teams don’t have OSU’s speed and NFL talent at WR, they don’t have OSU’s ability to establish chunks in the run game with NFL o-linemen and NFL running backs, and they don’t have a national Top 2 quarterback engineering the locomotive, with QB-run ability sprinkled in.
Lombardi is capable, but he’s not Justin Fields. MSU’s o-line in comparison to OSU’s o-line? I guess we can stop there.
But MSU’s receiving corps is a group on the rise. They can provide some sparks, if the offensive line gets a pixie dust visit from a fairy godfather.
(MICRO PERSONNEL INFO TO COME)
