Pre-Snap Read: Michigan State vs Michigan
By Jim ComparoniSpartanMag.com
WARNING: This piece includes content that is complimentary to Michigan football. Reader discretion is advised.
(i.e.: don’t blame your friendly correspondent).
East Lansing, Mich. - I’m not here to play cartoons. This isn’t the Disney Network. We don’t guarantee happy endings.
Some of you get mad at me when you think I’m giving the opponent too much credit. I wish I could write a George Lucas script for you, but I cannot.
The margin or error for Michigan State in this game is tighter than I expected it to be when I began researching this thing. You will all agree that Michigan State had a lot of trouble against Indiana with blocking, penalties, and an occasional gap issue on defense. Michigan State was good enough to beat what I thought was a decent Indiana team on that day.
Michigan State had its stains against Rutgers, too, but found offensive explosives against a slowish, leaky secondary.
You will agree that Michigan State was fortunate to steal victory against Nebraska. You will remember that Michigan State didn’t get a first down in the second half of that game, but harnessed victory with great special teams play.
Michigan State has a great record and has had a great season to this point, but you will agree they have not been a great team.
Michigan has had some shaky moments, but not as many. Michigan had a bad second half against Rutgers. That was five weeks ago and doesn’t figure into my analysis of this game very much, other than the fact that QB Cade McNamara seemed to play worse when the game grew tighter. That right there is the one thing I would be worried about if I were a Michigan fan in this game.
Michigan fought back from a tie score and pulled out victory at Nebraska by leaning on its run game in the final minutes and basically didn’t let McNamara attempt a challenged pass in the late going.
That being said, McNamara looked improved coming out of the bye week. Michigan let him throw some deep play action passes early in the game last week, two things that the offense had not accentuated to that point. He didn’t connect all the time, but it loosened things up for Northwestern’s defense and seemed to dial McNamara in a little bit.
Michigan tries to keep things safe and easy for McNamara on third-and-long, and they’ve survived most of those situations. Last week, on a third-and-11, he delivered an 11-yard out route to WR Cornelius Johnson to the wide side of the field against a bailing cover-three CB.
It was good, basic QB play, but one - especially on third down - I had rarely seen him make. He has had other deep shots that have gone for big-gainers, sometimes in fluke fashion. But this was a good, pure QB play.
He threw the same route to Johnson on a 12-yard out to the wide side of the field against bailing cover-four in the 3Q against Nebraska.
Both times, he read a bailing CB, and delivered on some arm talent. He needs to show he can make more difficult reads elsewhere. I think he is improving, but he’s still on training wheels.
He has been the subject of harsh criticism in Ann Arbor. Thanks to the miracle of social media, Michigan fans have made life hellish for QBs in previous years. You can bet he’s heard the criticism. Tom Izzo says he has to play defense against social media for his kids every day.
“How can it not affect you?” Izzo says to writers when talking about the impact of negativism against athletes on social media.
He would know better than we do.
And is McNamara hearing that kind of noise? Has it affected his play? If so, he may feel the pressure become more severe in a game like this.
If you’re Michigan State, you need him to struggle with the moment. Meanwhile, Michigan has a serviceable back-up QB ready. That’s an edge. Michigan State’s status with Anthony Russo is unknown after his legal problems in the past two weeks. That’s a minor edge to Michigan which could become game-changing major in an instant.
As for McNamara, he has played in a hostile afternoon environment at Wisconsin against a good, hard-hitting defense. He has played in a hostile night environment at Nebraska.
He played better in the earlier and middle stages of the Nebraska game than he did late. His two most important passes against the Huskers were a pair of delay-release passes to the tight end over the middle on third-and-long. That’s basically a trick play concept. Michigan didn’t want him dropping and reading and making an intermediate throw against a problematic but fading Nebraska defense.
Nebraska was stupid enough to drop its linebackers too deep in zone coverage on both plays against a QB who almost never throws intermediate routes over the middle. They left the area vacated for the delayed release pass to the tight end not once, but twice.
And this was after Michigan had shown a propensity to attempt that pass on third down on two occasions against Wisconsin. Wisconsin wasn’t as stupid with its linebacker coverage and stopped both third down passes in that game.
But Michigan was smart to probe Nebraska’s stupidity on those plays, and moved the chains in crucial situations without asking its shaky quarterback to do anything dangerous. He moved the chains with two short passes in those situations that a high school quarterback could have thrown. Credit to Michigan scheming in those situations.
Against a quality team, at some point, McNamara is going to be forced to make difficult reads and intermediate throws. Good teams will stop the run, take away the short hitches that he has relied upon in other games, bring pressure against what has been a good pass pro offensive line, and heat up the griddle for a questionable quarterback.
Is Michigan State enough of a quality team to made McNamara pass those type of tests? Can Michigan State contain/slash/stop the run? Can Michigan State get pressure with four or five against a Michigan passing game that has allowed only two sacks all season?
Michigan’s pass protection has been successful to this point partly because Michigan does a good job of staying out of passing situations. When Michigan does get into third and long, it is careful in what it asks its quarterback to do. He’s rarely in the pocket making more than one read in long-yardage situations. Plus, their pass protection has been pretty good on the edges, although occasionally leaky in the interior.
Michigan is not great. But they are better than I expected them to be when I started studying these games.
They have been in tight games in the third quarter against Wisconsin and Northwestern, only to pull away with big margins of victory. The Nebraska game became tight, in part, because Nebraska was able to spring a couple of trick misdirection pass plays for touchdowns. That’s cute and all, but I would have been more bullish about MSU’s chances if Nebraska had gotten into the end zone by bludgeoning its way downfield time after time. That wasn’t the case.
The Rutgers game was so long ago that some of the elements are not applicable to this one. Rutgers found success with a QB power read option play that Michigan was uncomfortable defending, perhaps in part due to the pro background of its new offensive coordinator.
Nebraska scored a late TD inside the 5-yard line with a read option QB keeper that was similar to Rutgers’ staple play, but Nebraska didn’t attempt to replicate that exact play all that often.
Michigan State has some zone read option elements to its offense, but it’s not a play Michigan State runs more than two or three times a game, and it’s something Michigan State has struggled to execute in key short yardage plays when they have gone to it (see the fourth-down stoppage at Nebraska, and the fumbled exchange on third-and-short at Indiana which almost blew a field goal opportunity for the Spartans).
Michigan has been in tight games in the third quarter against some of these opponents largely because the Wolverines haven’t been explosive on offense in the first three quarters. But they have been dominant in their own way in those games in many aspects outside of the scoreboard. Michigan’s blowout victories have been slow drip blowouts. Michigan wins play after play. But it takes awhile for a comfortable leads to materialize due to the lack, thus far, of big-play explosiveness in the first half of games. But the wearing-down process of Michigan’s run game, and Michigan’s success, for the most part, in stopping the run, and playing good defense on third down, has eventually handcuffed these opponents.
Michigan fooled around and got into serious trouble against Nebraska. But at the line of scrimmage, Michigan was the better team most of the night, and let that one get close due to some clever scheming by the Huskers on a few key occasions.
Michigan State will need clever scheming in this game. Michigan State will need to have found a vast level of improvement during the bye week. And quite frankly Michigan State will need to play its best game of the year to win this game.
Based on the body of work and modes of operation of each team thus far in the season, if Michigan plays its B-game and Michigan State plays its B-game on a neutral site, I would expect Michigan to win, maybe by 10 or more.
However, in a rivalry game with as much emotion and animosity as this one carries, when playing at Spartan Stadium, Michigan State can get revved into an A-plus game. We’ve seen that scenario in the past. But, like Mel Tucker says, what has happened in past games will have no impact on this one. I would agree with that, aside from the human element of hatred and ultra focus which usually runs deeper for Michigan State in this game than it does for Michigan.
Michigan’s embarrassing loss to Michigan State last year, which short-circuited the Wolverines’ season and eventually led to Jim Harbaugh’s players quitting on him in the loss to Wisconsin in 2020 and might have cost him his job if their games against Ohio State and Iowa had been played, probably still resonates with the Wolverines today. That will help Michigan be more primed for this game than was the case last year.
I’ve been surprised and impressed that Harbaugh has managed to keep the players and team together for 2021. Coming into this year, I thought there was a chance that Harbaugh would have lost his team again by this point in the season, but I was completely wrong about that (so far), and you’ll hope that I’ll be completely wrong about my expectations for this game.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST
I’ve been wrong plenty of times over the years and you’ll be hoping I’m wrong in what I see for this matchup between No. 8 Michigan State and No. 6 Michigan in the biggest tilt between the two bitter rivals in decades.
I think this is a more difficult game for Michigan State than the 4-point spread would suggest, more difficult than one might think in a Top 10 battle between unbeaten teams. (I think the point spread is still 4. Someone mentioned to me at the beginning of the week that that’s what it was. I don’t go looking for point spreads and don’t pay attention to them. Usually, I don’t want to know what the point spread is).
Even in a game like this, with both teams undefeated, we’re supposed to throw the record books out the window, because it’s a rivalry game. I suppose that’s the right thing to do.
But if Michigan State wins this game, the Spartans will deserve great credit for overcoming an improving, physical Michigan team that bosts a strong, diversified running attack and a varied, talented, structurally-sound defense.
I’m not sure which game has been MSU’s best performance of the year so far. Maybe the Northwestern game. Michigan State will need to play much better than they did that night in order to win this game.
Sometimes things like that can happen in this rivalry, especially at Spartan Stadium. If Michigan State gets revved, the home crowd in this rivalry, when it’s played in East Lansing, can lift good players to great things. Michigan State is going to need some of that pixie dust in this game, and I’ve seen it happen before.
By now, you’re already ticked at me for making this sound like Vanderbilt against the ’85 Bears.
Michigan State is confident, crazed with enthusiasm, and packs talent at QB, WR, RB to go along with a quality defense.
The Spartans have already shocked me twice this season. Michigan State was far more explosive and buckled-down for its season opener against Northwestern than I expected. And then Michigan State was gritty, physical and (once again) explosive in taking the Hurricanes to the deep end and drowning them in Miami’s 90-degree heat and pulverizing humidity. I didn’t expect this team to have that skill, talent and determination in them.
But the Spartans are a one-minded, tunnel-visioned team. That’s dangerous.
Playing at home, in this horrible rivalry. That’s dangerous.
Payton Thorne has been good this season. Michigan State needs him to play like we don’t know he can. Similar to the way Bill Burke upped his game in 1999, and Tony Banks in 1995, and Rocky Lombardi last year.
Why must Thorne play “like we don’t know he can”?
Michigan’s pass defense is quite a bit better than I expected it to be when I started cramming their film this week. It’s tricky, it’s talented and they do a lot of shape-shifting and disguising of coverages. They do it with speed, and they do it behind a problematic pass rush.
Michigan’s pass defense is especially good on third down. They gave up a couple of screen passes on third down in the second half against Northwestern, but those were skin-of-the-teeth ploys that happened to work two times, but didn’t work the third time they tried it.
Wisconsin’s bad quarterbacks really struggled on third down against Michigan.
If Thorne is completing passes on third-and-long against Michigan, do not underestimate that accomplishment. Having time to throw on third down will be a problem. Determining which players are coming on the pass rush will be a problem. Getting them blocked will be a problem. Figuring out what coverage Michigan is in on third down, in less than two seconds, will be a problem.
Film study, calm nerves and an NFL level of ability to process information and coverages in an instant, along with great route running and play design by Michigan State, will be necessary in order for Thorne to have a chance to probe small windows and find open receivers on third down. And from there, he still needs to be accurate.
If he’s successful on third down, don’t underestimate the job he, the o-line and the coaches will have done. That part is going to be difficult. Maybe he can do it. He’s been excellent this year. He’s just beginning his metamorphosis at the position. Maybe he is ready to do that, but we don’t know for sure. Hence, he needs to take that next step in his metamorphosis and … play like we don’t know he can.
If he’s successful, and the pass game is successful on third down, and Michigan State wins this game, you are all free to send hateful emails to me.
But understand this: If Michigan State gets that done, then don’t underestimate how well this Michigan State team will have had to play to achieve it. If Michigan State can win this game, it will indeed rise near the Top 5 in the polls, and if Michigan State is able to win this game then, for the first time, I will have to begin to believe that the Spartans are capable of STAYING within the Top 5 in the polls for another few weeks. As of now, I don’t think Michigan State has that ability. But we’re still learning about them and they have proven me wrong before.
A QUESTION OF RELIABILITY
After studying Michigan’s slow drip blowout victories over Wisconsin and Northwestern, in addition to the win at Nebraska, I went back and rewatched the Michigan State vs Indiana game one more time. Credit to Michigan State for a gritty victory that day. Great job by the place kicker, and red zone defense. But Michigan State was messy the last time we saw the Spartans play. MSU’s defense was pretty good, but Michigan’s defense is steadier and more reliable at this point.
I’m sorry if this information makes you angry. I come in peace. I realize that writing these things could possibly cost our web site some subscribers. I’ve been disappointed to see how much some of our readers get angry with me when I compliment an opponent. I don’t understand that mindset, but it exists. And I’m writing this piece today with a feeling of risk, like I know people are going to be angry at me for complimenting Michigan, and there is risk in knowing that I could end up being wrong and looking like an idiot.
I’m not predicting that Michigan will win. I don’t usually do predictions. But my expectation, based on the body of work thus far, is that Michigan State will have a hard time stopping the run for four quarters and Michigan State will have a hard time being the team that can put McNamara in position to do difficult uncomfortable things in order to win.
MSU’s run game has been explosive at times against weaker opponents this year, but had trouble getting going against Nebraska and Indiana. You’ve heard that portion of the analysis by everyone this week, and there is some merit to it. I will be surprised and impressed if Michigan State is able to pop off more than 160 yards rushing. I’m expecting something under 120. That’s based on the body of work so far this season.
However, the body of work can change in this game when you get an 85-man football army armed with the type of focus and hatred that only the winged helmets can bring out in them. Sometimes, that’s not enough to win, but it’s usually enough to help Michigan State raise its level of physicality, focus and effort to a point that Michigan sometimes has trouble matching. Sometimes it is enough to pull an upset. And if Michigan State wins this game, it won’t be regarded as an upset, but it should. If the point spread is still 4, I think it needs to be more than that. But the rivalry factor probably has something to do with that.
Michigan fans and apologists have tried to discredit MSU’s accomplishments against Michigan in recent years by saying, backhandedly, that this game is MSU’s Super Bowl. Well if that’s true, then tell me what is Michigan’s Super Bowl? They can’t even find Indianapolis.
Michigan hasn’t beaten an AP Top 15 team on the road since Notre Dame in 2004. How long ago was that? A week after that game, Notre Dame had that 17-point comeback in the rain against Drew Stanton, John L. Smith and Michigan State. That’s how long ago it was, if you can remember that night. Not a great Notre Dame team. Long time ago.
But that information, like Tucker says, will have no impact on this game. However, the fact remains that Michigan has been woefully inept against good teams on the road for years. It’s gotten to the point that even highfalutin Michigan fans and followers who have been prone to over-estimating their team on an annual basis are fearful that the Wolverines have no robe again this year. They seem more quiet and worried than usual. That’s the effect the 0-17 streak on the road against AP Top 15 teams can have, even with this group of ostriches. They’re hoping they can pull their heads out of the sand by 4 pm on Saturday and be granted a stay of execution until their annual crucifixion against Ohio State. This time, Michigan may have a better record than usual when it loses to Ohio State.
Of course, I could be wrong. Michigan could blow this game again, and it might throw Wolverine nation back into panicked coach search desperation again. Based on how well Michigan has played this year, that would be the wrong reaction on their behalf. They need to continue to stay the course with Harbaugh, but I’m not sure they will see it that way if Michigan loses this game, and to Ohio State, and possibly to Penn State, and a bowl game. They’ll be on the ledge if that happens. That would be interesting television, but I don’t expect all those things to happen, this year. Michigan has been pretty solid.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME
As I rewatched the inner workings of these games, I arrived at the same analysis Ron Armstrong imparted upon us earlier this week during our SpartanMag LIVE! conversation. He talked about the importance of winning on first down. That’s often a cliché that’s important for most football games. But after studying Michigan further, I have a better understanding of his point. To me, winning on first down means staying away from getting into dreadful third down situations against Michigan.
These are fairly obvious football axioms, but they are crucial for Michigan State in this game. Be productive on first down. Stay out of third-and-longer than 5.
It seems to me that it’s a lot easier to move the ball through the air against Michigan on first-and-10 than it is on third-and-7. That’s not rocket science.
In the past two seasons, Michigan State has been aggressive and creative on the first play of each drive under Tucker and offensive coordinator Jay Johnson. It seems clear that Michigan State has a list of plays on p-and-10 (the first play of each drive), that they trot out specifically for those situations. Opponents are probably aware of it by now, and on alert for un-scouted looks on the first play of each drive. But Michigan State needs to score blows on those first down plays, and other first down pass plays, all day. Thorne, through the air, on first down, needs to be a positive element for Michigan State.
If you wait until it’s third-and-long, the table is going to tilt against you. Michigan’s third down pressures and coverages are excellent. Stay out of third-and-long.
You’re more apt to get clean reads and a clean pocket on first down against Michigan.
Michigan State has some dice-shooters, and some explosive connectors. They’ll let it fly. Jay Johnson has impressed me with his aggressive creativity and coolness. He and the Spartans will put pressure on Michigan, as they did last year. Michigan will have some tests to pass in order to get this done.
THE MACRO
In the broadest terms, if you’re an outsider looking at these two teams, what do we have here?
We have two unbeaten teams, each of which has yet to defeat a good, complete opponent.
Michigan hasn’t been tested by a quality passing attack.
Michigan State hasn’t been tested by a quality running attack.
Those are two huge variables, this late in the season.
That being said, MSU’s passing attack is good, and occasionally explosive, but maybe not good enough to be considered a legitimately strong aerial game. My opinion on that could change by 4 pm on Saturday. Maybe MSU’s passing attack is ready to carry the day, establish a level of balance and surpass anything Michigan is able to put on the scoreboard. That’s possible. I’ll need to see it to believe it. MSU’s passing game has hit some skids against Nebraska and Indiana.
Michigan’s running attack is in fact legitimately strong. Michigan’s running attack is the most consistent element in this game. When Michigan gets its run game going with pin-and-pull gap plays, it becomes an avalanche of physicality. I’ve seen respectable, hard-hitting, fundamentally-sound defenses take on blocks correctly against Michigan, hit hard, and still have a lot of trouble keeping Michigan from getting its ground gainers of 4, 6, 4, 3, 5 yards.
Wisconsin held Michigan to 2.5 yard per carry and did not allow the Wolverines to have a ground gainer of more than 8 yards. But Wisconsin’s ground defense is much better than MSU’s. And when Michigan really needed tough yardage on the ground in that game, Michigan was able to get it.
Michigan State hits hard. Michigan State needs to force some fumbles, maybe via the sack, maybe via helmets on the football at the end of some of Michigan’s runs. But Michigan has withstood hard hitting from Wisconsin without fumbling. Michigan State has to hope that trend ends. Michigan State needs to steal some possessions.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME PART II
There are going to be great, meaningful, hard-spirited collisions all over the place. This is a pair of programs - not merely a pair of teams but a pair of programs - driven to win viscious collisions away from the ball, where the collisions are the most important.
Mel Tucker implores his team, as Nick Saban does, to hit and hit and hit and be the last team hitting, make the opponent quit. Tucker and Saban both tell their men that the team plays the hardest the longest will win.
That’s a great, grim mindset to have. Michigan State has been of that mettle this year, so far.
Just because that’s MSU’s mindset and program philosophy doesn’t mean Michigan State will successfully carry out that mission in every single game. But that mindset, and the training that went with it, certainly helped carry Michigan State against Miami and Indiana, and probably Nebraska, although Michigan State was losing at the line of scrimmage for most of the second half of that game.
Harbaugh has talked in the past about wanted his team to carry out a level of physicality, to a cruel extreme. Cruel. That’s a word he used to use at Stanford. I’m not sure if he still uses it, but that’s the goal. Nothing unclean about it. Just physical. He wants a team that can impose it’s will. Some of his teams have gotten away from that a little bit on offense (speed in space), but not this year. They are the closest things he has had to some of his good Stanford teams.
Michigan State has earned so much respect with its ability to battle for 60 minutes in every game this season. You’ll hate me for saying this, but Michigan also packs heavyweight punching power for 15 rounds. The style of Michigan’s running game, with its pulling blockers, and its mobile car bombs known as tight ends, are going to present MSU’s 4-2-5 defense with frontal force like Michigan State hasn’t seen.
The problem is that as your defense is absorbing these point-of-attack blows from Michigan, even when you’re hard-hatting your way to “limiting” them to gains of 2, 3, 4 yards, your armor softens. Cal Haladay and Quavaris Crouch are physically tough. Crouch is a force, especially when he’s correct. Darius Snow is a good thumper for a nickel back, or any back. But Wisconsin and Nebraska had extremely tough guys too. More of them. And they softened too.
And as you soften, Michigan’s rotation of tailbacks gets better. They’re hard to tackle. One is quick and tough (Corum). The other one is extremely tough, and deceptively quick (Haskins). They get harder and harder to tackle as the game goes along.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME PART III
Can Michigan State keep Michigan’s ground game contained? That’s the main question everyone is pondering this week, and it’s the x-factor that will go further toward determining the outcome of this game than any other. It’s not THE factor that will determine the outcome, but it’s the chief factor.
Michigan State is allowing just 3.3 yards per carry this year, good for No. 5 in the Big Ten. Not bad.
Michigan is ranked No. 5 in the nation in rushing yards at 253.2 yards per game.
Michigan’s ground attack wasn’t great against Wisconsin or Rutgers, but I was impressed with the way Michigan rushed for 204 yards against a quality Nebraska defensive front, which has been losing its fizz since the Michigan State game.
I was impressed with the way Michigan was able to saddle up the run game in the fourth quarter against Nebraska and stage the game-tying field goal drive ON THE GROUND at a time when Michigan coaches didn’t seem to trust QB McNamara, and for good reason. Michigan did the same on its TD drive earlier in the quarter.
MSU’s ground defense, statistically, has been pretty good this year. But the Spartans haven’t faced a ground attack like this. I’m not saying it’s a great ground attack, but it’s a good one, a varied one, which uses tight end blocking with uncommon skill, power, mobility, agility and effectiveness.
The tight end collisions vs Michigan State defenders will be colossal. Michigan State has some good edge defenders, but it’s hard to defeat those blocks. The TE merely wants a stalemate. The Michigan tight ends are very good at getting stalemates, which lead to daylight, and Michigan has good running backs who make use of that daylight. And then those running backs are very good at churning, wiggling and blasting for the extra, fall-forward two yards (or more) at the end of each run.
Looking or a game within the game? Watch the final split second before the whistle of each Michigan running play. They get those extra four or five feet at the very end of a play that turn a 2-yard run into a 4-yard run. Then they do it again. And pretty soon it’s third-and-two instead of third-and-five. That’s part of their secret sauce. I hate to say it, but that’s part of what made Mike Hart pretty good, too. And he’s their RB coach.
Michigan at times will push the pile, and benefit from a slow Big Ten whistle. Michigan State will be prepped for this. Michigan State can’t afford to have leftover defensive players standing and watching at the whistle while the pile moves, as Nebraska, Wisconsin and Northwestern were caught doing a few times. Michigan State will be prepped to rally to the pile and gang tackle “through the echo of the whistle,” as Tucker likes to say. Michigan State will show up with more vigor in this area of the game than any opponent Michigan has faced. The battle for those final three or four or five feet at the end of every Michigan run will be more combative than anything Michigan has faced this year. That will be interesting theater. Collisions all over the place.
What makes Michigan’s ground game good? Well, the usual things. They have a good offensive line, with excellent running backs. They come at you a bit differently than most teams, with ability to pull the center and guards to join mobile tight ends in adding gaps for your defense to fill, while taking on heavy contact. That’s when they’re gap blocking. They are strong with inside zone blocking too. And when you lean too heavily on that, they’ll try to hit you with a fly sweep.
Michigan’s WRs do a good job of blocking on the edge and downfield, too. Tucker challenges his CBs to be physical in the run game. That’s going to be a battle on the edge, as Michigan’s WRs and MSU’s cornerbacks are both implored to win their collisions.
Michigan isn’t using new concepts in blocking. But some of it is a style of play that has been left behind nationally in recent years due to the onset of uptempo spread.
However, if you watched what Alabama did to Mississippi, and what Illinois did to Penn State, we are seeing sleeper cells of old-school, grind-it-out run game tapping out some of these built-for-pass defenses.
Michigan has been mixing fast tempo with its ground-and-pound style. This gives an extra edge to their physicality.
I’m trying to think of a power-running team in college football that has utilized fast tempo. I can’t think of one. Auburn used to have power elements within its spread-to-run philosophy in past years, but they weren’t as physical as Michigan is right now. I’m not sure the sport has seen physical run style with uptempo in large doses. Michigan doesn’t do it a lot, but there is devastating potential to that concept.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME PART IV
Michigan has been known to load up with “13 personnel,” one back and three tight ends. If they do this against Michigan State, does Michigan State stick with two linebackers and five DBs? Michigan State has stayed in the 4-2-5 basically in all situations in the past two seasons, other than goal-line situations.
Michigan State hasn’t faced many run-heavy type of teams in the past two seasons. Iowa was the closest thing to it, last year, and Michigan State struggled that day.
Michigan will undoubtedly probe the jumbo matchup. If it works, Michigan might stay with it, and stay with it, and stay with it, and stay with it. Remember that Harbaugh once had a Stanford team run something like eight straight identical power runs, all the way to the end zone against USC. He likes making those kind of statements, when he can. He hasn’t made many statements at Michigan in recent years. He’s a loud front runner, if he gets an edge on you.
Wisconsin is a base five-DB defense, and stayed with five DBs most of the game. Wisconsin went with a single deep safety and deployed a safety in the box to help with run support most of the day. Wisconsin dared Michigan to throw it, and Michigan didn’t throw it all that well for most of the game, but hit some game-breaking pass plays along the way to crack the game open.
So Wisconsin was basically able to contain the run with a five-DB alignment. Wisconsin didn’t have to come out of its 5-DB base. Wisconsin, on defense, is terrific. Michigan State isn’t at that level, yet.
Michigan also is a base five-DB team. But Michigan frequently went with four DBs (maybe 35 percent of the time) against the Badgers. They changed what they do in order to match up with the Wisconsin ground game. Will Michigan State be willing to make this kind of concession and go with three LBs instead of five DBs? I don’t think so. But we’ll learn as we go.
Michael Dowell is a decent nickel back when he comes off the bench to replace Darious Snow. Michigan State would be bigger and tougher against the run if Michigan State went with a linebacker like Ben VanSumeren or Noah Harvey instead of Dowell. But that would mean scrapping your base system, and make you slower against the pass.
Michigan State will undoubtedly begin the game by taking on Michigan’s heavy sets with its base 4-2-5. But if things go sour, does Michigan State have a Plan B 4-3 in the bullpen? I doubt it. But it’s something to watch for if Michigan’s battering ram offense begins to batter.
I tend to agree with Big Moobie on this one; you stick with your base. And that’s what I expect Michigan State to do.
Eventually, I would expect Michigan State to do what Wisconsin did, and go with a single safety deep (which means putting a safety in the box to help stop the run).
Wisconsin did it with an odd 30 front. Michigan State doesn’t use the same alignement. But I would expect Michigan State to replicate the same numbers situation. Try to outnumber the run game inside. This gives McNamara clearer avenues to throw the ball, but that’s the tradeoff you’re probably going to be willing to make in order to try to contain the running attack.
Wisconsin was successful with it. But it takes more than X’s and O’s. Wisconsin has some tough, hard-hitting guys on that defense, and they play together extremely well. Michigan State has a good defense, but not quite at Wisconsin’s level, especially against the run.
Wisconsin held Michigan to 2.5 yards per carry. That being said, Michigan got the tough yards on the ground when they needed to.
Michigan State has a better offense than Wisconsin of course. It won’t take a 2.5 yard per carry defense for Michigan State to win this game. But if Michigan State is able to stay at it’s conference seasonal average of 3.5 yards allowed per carry, then the Spartans will be right in this game.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME PART V
I’ve made it clear that “stopping” Michigan’s ground game will be extremely difficult. However, if you can contain the run between the 20-yard-lines, and then STOP THE RUN IN THE RED ZONE, that would be a major step on the path to victory for Michigan State.
Michigan State’s red zone defense has been excellent this year, especially against the pass.
Last week, Michigan blew a pair of trips inside the 5-yard line, getting too cute with some pass attempts. This week, I would imagine Michigan will be going full-bore, ground-and-pound inside the 10-yard line. MSU’s run defense is important all day, but especially in the red zone.
Michigan State will check VanSumeren and Harvey into the game in the red zone. The run game exchanges inside the 25-yard line, specifically inside the 15-yard line, will be crucial.
Know this about Michigan: They love to go for it on fourth down. And as an opponent, you hate to see them do it, because they are probably going to convert.
Michigan went for it twice on fourth down inside its own territory on the opening drive at Wisconsin. The second one was stuffed when LT Ryan Hayes was beaten inside by UW DE Henningsen. Michigan is 5-for-5 on its other fourth down attempts in Big Ten games this year.
Michigan will drive you nuts with short completions or a QB scramble on third-and-eight, just to set up fourth-and-short. And then they convert on fourth down, when you think you had them stopped.
APPLES TO APPLES
I like to do a tale of the tape in this manner to give readers an apples-to-apples view of the opponent in relation to the home team players that they are familiar with.
Of course these players don’t directly match up with one another, but it’s an interesting exercise.
Michigan State has the better QB and WRs, but the margin is not as large as I thought it would be when I began this study. Michigan’s WRs are improving and rising to the scene.
Michigan has the better blocking tight ends by far.
Connor Heyward is the best pass-catching threat at TE on the field for either team, but Michigan has pretty good ones, and they are way better blockers.
Michigan State is better at left guard if Trevor Keegan (77) plays for Michigan. If Barnhart plays for Michigan at left guard, it’s probably a wash, or maybe an edge JD Duplain. Keegan has started most of the year, but I don’t care; Barnhart looks better to me. Keegan has been hurt (shoulder) lately, so maybe he was playing hurt when he was grading out poorly earlier in the season. But he if plays, and he plays like he did in the first half of the season, he’ll have severe trouble against Michigan State right DT Jacob Slade.
Getting back to apples:
Michigan is better at center.
Michigan State is better at RG with Jarvis when Filaga (66) plays for Michigan. When Zak Zinter (65) is healthy and plays for Michigan, it’s maybe a wash.
Michigan is better at RT.
Left tackle is probably a wash.
Collectively, Michigan’s offensive line is better than MSU’s in run blocking and pass blocking. MSU’s depth at LT, C and G makes for fresher bodies, and that’s not a bad thing but it doesn’t change the overall edge to Michigan. Meanwhile, I’m hearing that one of MSU’s second-string o-linemen will miss the game due to an ailment.
When adding the TE blocking element, Michigan’s offensive front has definitely been better than Michigan State’s. MSU’s has not been bad at all, but Michigan’s has been more consistent.
On defense:
Michigan’s defensive tackles are good, but I’d give the edge to Michigan State. Mazi Smith (58) is improved at DT for Michigan, but he hasn’t been as good as Jacob Slade.
Chris Hinton (15) is improved at DT and has become pretty good after a mediocre 2020, but I’d go with MSU’s Simeon Barrow by a small margin. Yes, I would take MSU’s redshirt freshman over their five-star recruit junior.
Michigan’s first DT off the bench, Kris Jenkins (94), is better than MSU’s first DT off the bench, Maverick Hansen. I like Hansen, but Jenkins has the edge.
MSU’s second and third DTs off the bench are better than Michigan’s. Michigan’s Jeter and Speight were not good in short stints against Nebraska. MSU’s Dashawn Mallory is serviceable. Whether or not Jalen Hunt plays remains to be seen, but he was expected to be a plus player this year, but has been out with ailments.
At defensive end, Hutchinson is a little more active and consistent than Jacub Panasiuk, but Panasiuk is eager to prove he deserves equal billing. (Hutchinson is listed as a linebacker but he’s basically a stand-up defensive end and plays the same assignments and techniques of a defensive end). Panasiuk might change my mind on this one by the end of the day, but NFL scouts will still favor Hutchinson. Either guy is capable of making the play that changes this game. PFF has Panasiuk with 32 QB hurries on the year; Hutchinson has 21. They're both good against the run. Hutchinson is better in loose-play pursuit, keeping his balance, chasing to the sideline, that type of thing.
Michigan’s other defensive end (or OLB, if you will), David Ojabo (55), is better than Drew Jordan or Jeff Pietrowski. Maybe not better than a healthy Drew Beesley. Jordan is coming on, though.
As for Beesley, there are rumors he may play in this game. I don’t have any intel on that. But if he plays, what percentage of his usual excellence will he be able to present? I do not know.
But if you put a September version of Beesley on the field, MSU’s chances of winning go up a tick.
I like Pietrowski, but Michigan’s first DE off the bench, 90 Morris, is a titch better.
Michigan’s MLB Josh Ross (12) is a little better than Cal Haladay. I like Haladay. He’s solid, and has a good future. But the edge goes to Ross.
At the other inside LB position, Crouch is bigger, faster, more physical than Nikhai Hill-Green (41), but Hill-Green is probably more dependable to be in the correct gap. I would lean toward taking Crouch on the come, on the rise, but it’s hard to pick a winner between those two. Hill-Green is underrated. He’s a flat-back hitter.
Michigan’s Daxton Hill (30) is fast and more versatile than Darius Snow at the nickel, but Snow is more physical. Overall, Hill has the edge with his ability to roam the field as a safety, or a slot corner, or a blitz finisher. Hill plays fast. He’s an eraser.
At cornerback, MSU’s are on the rise. Michigan’s Vincent Gray (4) has been mediocre in the past and has benefitted from Michigan’s decreased use off press man-to-man this year. But he’s still a question mark. Michigan State embarrassed him last year.
The other Michigan cornerback is unproven. DJ Turner (5) was a surprise starter last week, making the first start of his career. He survived some deep shot attempts by Northwestern and became more comfortable as the game progressed. He replaced Gemon Green (22), who was out for unknown reasons.
Gray (4) and Turner (5) will be tested early and often. Game-changing moments could hang in the balance.
MSU’s cornerbacks (Ronald Williams, Chester Kimbrough) have settled in nicely. I give the edge to Michigan State.
Michigan State NEEDS to have the better cornerback play in this game (as in, Michigan State needs to test Michigan’s cornerbacks and find that they are as faulty as they were last year. Although they might not be as faulty as last year, MSU’s passing attack is also better than it was last year). (And MSU's cornerbacks need to continue to rise and become as good as I think they are becoming. This is an X-factor area for both teams).
Michigan safeties Brad Hawkins and RJ Moten haven’t been weaknesses, but again, they haven’t been tested by a good passing attack. And are they better than Xavier Henderson and Angelo Grose? I think not. I’ll go with Henderson and an improving Grose. Grose is going to hit some people. Henderson is an eraser.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME PART VI
Michigan is excellent on third-and-short. I mean excellent. And if you’re good enough to stop them on third-and-short, guess what? You will then have to stop them on fourth-and-short.
Haskins is simply a hard, tough running back in short yardage. And their o-line is tight. I saw TE Erick All miss a block on a third-and-short. And I saw left tackle Hayes miss a block on third-and-short. But I haven’t seen many other errors.
Meanwhile, think of the problems Michigan State has had on third-and-short. Meanwhile, add the fact that Michigan is pretty good at reducing inward on defense on third-and-short, making it very hard for opponents to convert between the tackles on a run play in a short-yardage situation. They are good at that end of it as well.
If we are to go by body of work to this point, I would expect Michigan to be the better team in third-and-short in this game.
Northwestern chose to go under center (which is uncommon for them) on a short-yardage play last week, and baited Michigan into reducing inward and crowding the line of scrimmage. Northwestern completed a little flare pass out to the flat for a short gain but also had a second receiver breaking wide open deep. If the QB had thrown deep, Northwestern likely would have stolen a TD.
Fourth-and-short could be a deep pass down for Michigan State.
GAME WITHIN THE GAME PART VII
We’ve talked enough about Michigan’s offense. Let’s talk about their defense.
Michigan’s base is two down lineman front, with two stand-up defensive ends.
The interior DTs are better than last year and that’s been a key to their success.
The d-ends (Hutchinson and Ojabo) are good two-way players. Good with the pass rush, and sturdy against the run. Well-rounded.
Their base defense plays with five defensive backs.
I don’t care what they call it, Michigan basically plays a 4-2-5 similar to Michigan State. The stand-up defensive ends can be called linebackers if you want, but they play the same techniques as defensive ends.
Be aware of this potential change-up:
Michigan went with three down linemen quite often against Wisconsin. I haven’t watched every snap of every game, but I haven’t seen them do that in most other games.
At times against the Badgers, Michigan went with a “Bear” front with those three down linemen. I didn’t chart it and count it up, but I would estimate that Michigan went with three down linemen maybe 55 percent of the time. Of those snaps, I would estimate Michigan was in a Bear front maybe 40 percent of the time.
In the Bear front, those three defensive linemen are reduced inside to cover the G-C-G area. The Bear front puts the two guards and the center in man-to-man confrontations. Those three o-linemen are unable to double-team anyone or climb out to the LB level, and this puts a dent in a lot of run schemes.
Michigan went with a 5-1 look when deploying the Bear. It essentially was a Bear nickel, which is pretty uncommon.
Sometimes, a safety came down to play at the linebacker level to create a 5-2.
A Bear front is done to stop the run. Michigan got it done against Wisconsin.
When in the Bear, Michigan dared Wisconsin to throw. They could not. Especially after starting QB Mertz went out for the game on the third play of the second half.
Wisconsin tried to trap-block Hutchinson two or three times when Michigan went to the Bear front. They might have gotten a first down or two that way, but had no significant success, and couldn’t protect on third down, and couldn’t pass the ball.
Would Michigan go with a Bear front to stop Kenneth Walker III in order to stop the run and make Michigan State one-dimensional? I doubt it. But Michigan has that at their disposal if needed, especially on third-and-short if they have time to sub.
Michigan will try to stop the run with its base two-down lineman alignment. They might get it done with their base, and not have to go to the Bear.
If they go to the Bear, Michigan has to go to a single safety deep (and bring a safety down near the box in order to host all edge gaps). If they do this, Payton Thorne’s passing lanes will open up a little bit, and that might not be a tradeoff Michigan needs to make or wants to make. Michigan will try to stop the run with its base, and might get it done that way anyway.
MICHIGAN DEFENSE: THE MACRO
Things to know:
* It’s hard to run between the tackles against Michigan in short yardage. Second-string DT 94 Chris Jenkins did a good job two-gapping, defeating a block, penetrating and getting an important fourth-down stoppage against Rutgers when Michigan was on the ropes. He did the same thing against Nebraska on a third-and-one power in the 3Q.
* Michigan did a good job of getting into Nebraska’s tendencies or signs on a third-and-three stoppage in the 1H. Nebraska attempted a fake pass right, counter screen pass left. But on that play, for some reason, Michigan’s stand-up defensive ends did not rush the QB, and instead surfed laterally expecting a screen pass. Stand-up DE 55 Ojabo covered the RB in the left flat, who was the primary guy on the screen. Nullified the play. QB had to throw it away. How did Ojabo know? I don’t know. But he did.
* Same thing in stopping Nebraska on a fourth-and-goal in the first quarter. The stand-up DE 90 Mike Morris wasn’t even looking at the ball in the backfield on a QB keeper run to his side. He was looking at the WR who was creeping in at pre-snap to crack block him. Morris absolutely knew the crack was coming and defeated that block and bounced the play for safety Brad Hawkins to make the tackle over the top at the sideline. Not sure if it’s film study across the board, a captain on the field, or tips yelled from the sideline, but they have had some key plays sniffed out a time or two.
* On third-down passing situations, Michigan will “mug up” seven players at the line of scrimmage, threatening to blitz them all. But usually, they send five and play zone behind it. You’ve heard of a zone blitz or a fire zone. That’s what they do. They do it well.
You have to figure out which five of those seven are rushing. Frequently it’s only four of those seven and they bring a fifth guy from somewhere deep, and he’s flying.
So you have to block those five, AND you have to deal with Hutchinson and Ojabo.
THEN you have to figure out what coverage they are in.
It’s usually zone, but not the same type of zone each time.
They do some man-to-man behind those pressures, just to keep it varied.
They got a key sack against Northwestern on a third-and-eight with cover-three/match with a robber, plus Hill playing MEG (man everywhere he goes) on the slot receiver. That was pretty intricate stuff, and I think Michigan switched to it as a result of a Northwestern motion to max protection.
So Northwestern kept the RB and TE in to pass block on that play. Michigan only ended up rushing four, with all that other business behind it. Northwestern had only three receivers out, against seven defenders, doing all that exotic stuff. The QB had no chance. Sack.
So a QB has less than a couple of seconds to get it all figured out, while you hope your guys can protect against Hutchinson and Ojabo.
Stay out of third and long.
* What has worked on third and long? Northwestern clipped off a screen against a seven-man zone, which shouldn’t have worked, but it did. Then they did a tunnel screen for another first down. That was one of their only decent drives. Then they tried it again, but failed, and missed a field goal when it was 17-7. Then they had a punt blocked. Ballgame.
* As for Hutchinson, he’s as good as the hype. If you run right at him, he’s sturdy enough to stack it up. If you option him, Rutgers (and Nebraska) had a little bit of success here and there with that. But that’s not MSU’s jam.
Wisconsin tried to trap him. That worked for a play or two, for meager gains. You’re not going to live on that. He’s smart and he takes on trap blocks aggressively and at good angles.
He is very good with the outside pass rush. He shoulder fakes to the inside to set up the outside pass rush. Far be it for me to suggest anything to him, but I’m a little surprised he doesn’t attempt more inside moves. When he has gone inside with the swim, he’s done well with it. But it might not be his choice. He might be assigned to the edge gap every single time and needs to carry out the assignment.
One other occasional negative is that he comes off the edge with so much speed that sometimes he isn’t able to turn the tight corner at the end to get to the QB and sometimes can be pushed behind the QB - something that would drive Nick Saban angry.
But Hutchinson is good. They have had some overrated players over the years, but he is not one of them.
* Michigan will play off of the blocking attention Hutchinson receives. On a third-and-10 against Wisconsin, Michigan had Hutchinson on the right side but overloaded the left side. They did this after dropping Daxton Hill into a two-deep while bring the previous safety, RJ Moten, on a blitz.
So to the QB, it looks like a safety blitz, but they replaced that safety with nickel back Hill. These are moving pictures and they are moving fast. QB pauses mentally for a second and it’s too late.
At presnap, they had their usual seven guys mugging up at the line of scrimmage, all of them threatening to blitz. The corners were showing press man. But at the snap, the corners bailed and three of the muggers dropped into coverage.
The three Badgers on the left side of the line had to block four rushers. Overload. It was a five-man rush that created a small-surface effect of an all-out blitz without the risk.
They’re pretty sharp on defense on third-and-long. Like I said, if Michigan State and Thorne and play design are able to carve out consistent success on third-and-long in this game, feel free to plant a flag. And take a selfie.
WHAT HAS WORKED AGAINST MICHIGAN?
Rutgers had success with a scrappy, running QB as part of a nice package of QB power read option plays. They got a lot of mileage out of that in the second half, in conjunction with Michigan’s offense going into hibernation.
Nebraska clipped off a pair of misdirection capers for big plays in the pass game. Both were tricks, and they tapped into Michigan’s tendency knowledge to do it. They used Michigan’s film study against them. They broke tendency.
Examples:
- Michigan allowed a 42-yard TD pass to Nebraska. Nebraska was able to get LB Nikhai Hill-Green to bite on cheese. They got him caught in man-to-man on the RB on somewhat of a trick play intended to turn Hill-Green inside-out, if he indeed was in man-to-man (that’s what it looked like to me).
Nebraska ran pin-and-pull run action that was very similar to the QB power read option that Rutgers had success with. Michigan no doubt worked on stopping that look. So when Nebraska presented it here, the LB (Hill-Green) bit hard on the QB run threat, by that time the RB had a step on him down the sideline on a delayed sneak-release wheel the other way.
That being said, Hill-Green wasn’t fooled for long and tried to catch up to the RB. RB beat him by 3 yards.
That play, and ploy, detonated at just the right time, turned a 19-7 Michigan lead into a 19-14 root canal with 1:24 left in the third quarter.
(Three plays later, my boy McNamara threw an interception that was returned 20 yards to the Michigan 13-yard line. At that instant, Harbaugh had the same look on his face that he had when they had trouble with the snap in 2015. This bunch is only one or two bad breaks away from needing straight jackets. Michigan State has shown some mental resiliency this year. They can fight back from problems partly because they are built to believe and they do believe, and there hasn’t been a lot of pressure on them. If Michigan has some problems, will they be able to overcome all that noise in their heads? That’s a real question, if Michigan State is able to present them with problems and alter their belief).
(As for McNamara on that interception, that play was Exhibit A as to why they don’t let him throw intermediate pass routes over the middle. It was third-and-10. Momentum had shifted. They asked him to push the envelope and do what every garden variety college quarterback SHOULD be able to do, and that’s read a coverage and attempt a pass, maybe even over the middle, on third-and-10. He failed miserably. He made one read and forced a bad pass to a TE on an over route into tight coverage).
- Next play: Nebraska 13-yard misdirection flare for a TD late in the 3Q at Nebraska. Nebraska was probably anticipating aggressive Michigan man-to-man blitz in a sudden change situation, which is exactly what Michigan did. This time, Nebraska got CB Vince Gray to bite the cheese. Again with a delayed sneak route.
Gray bit hard on orbit motion, which for Nebraska usually resulted in the WR as a pitch man on option to the other side. That’s not something Michigan State can replicate because Michigan State doesn’t run that type of option with orbit motion.
Gray bit hard and over-pursued to play the run, and completely lost the WR who circled back to the flat to give Nebraska a 22-19 lead.
Michigan hits the film room hard. You can tell. That’s part of what makes them good, on the majority of your plays. So you have to use your tendencies against them, break tendency, and score knockdown blows when the opportunity presents itself.
Michigan State has been pretty good at this during Tucker’s short tenure. What does Michigan State have in its toolbox that could go to work in this category? You could move the pocket with Thorne. He reads well on the run and throws well on the run. Moving the pocket isn’t as safe as you might think against Michigan. Ojabo and Hutchinson run well, contain well and converge well if you try to “naked” them.
Still, there are counter boot elements and sprint out pass schemes that can be probed. Northwestern’s first play of the game was a sprint-out pass. Michigan LB Junior Colson blew his assignment on a wheel route, and the play got out for 20 yards.
Michigan State adjusted to Indiana’s defensive success with a counter boot pass to Jayden Reed on the first play of the second half for 23 tone-changing yards. They came back to that play later for another 20.
Michigan State had great success with screen passes early in the season. Michigan State has had trouble getting them off the ground lately. Michigan allowed a pair of screen passes to get out against Northwestern.
Michigan State will attempt some screens. How good will their window dressing be? Will they catch Michigan in the perfect rock/paper/scissors decision to make it work? Games can pivot on such things. Getting the ball to Kenneth Walker III via the air game is something we haven’t seen Michigan State delve into a lot, but you know there are things in the pl aybook to do just that.
Nebraska used those two misdirection plays for a pair of quick TDs and a sudden 22-19 lead late in the third quarter.
Michigan’s defense is good. But if you can hit them with a couple of misdirection ploys AND hit two or three deep shots (which Michigan State is good at, and Michigan is unproven at defending), THEN you have a chance to match whatever Michigan can muster on the scoreboard with its run game.
And IF your defense can stiffen against the run IN THE RED ZONE, then it could add up to a good day on the scoreboard for Michigan State, even if Michigan “wins” the majority of the plays. You can win the majority of the plays, but lose on the scoreboard. See Indiana two weeks ago, and Michigan State vs Nebraska (to a greater extent) on Sept. 25. Michigan State might need to win in that fashion in this game too.
But that’s IF this game were in a neutral environment with no emotional factors.
Add the locale, and the emotional factors, and the IF/THEN path to victory for Michigan State could possibly become easier than it would be in a neutral local with neutral emotions.
HUNTING DAWGS MUST HUNT
Michigan State has some explosive play makers, and they need to make noise.
Michigan State leads the Big Ten in sacks with 25. MSU’s pass rush lacked a little juice against Indiana. The week off should help.
To the naked eye, I swear Michigan’s pass rush is as good as MSU’s but they have only 15 sacks on the year (tied for 7th-10th in the Big Ten).
Pro Football Focus has Michigan State with 127 QB hurries on the year. They have Michigan with only 71.
MSU’s edge in this area HAS to be felt. They have to make noise, hit a QB’s arm, get an INT that way, get at least three sacks, get a strip sack along the way. This is an area in which Michigan State can equalize or surpass any slow-drip success Michigan has with its run game.
As for McNamara, he isn’t a bad scrambler. He can help move the chains in that category, or scramble for some tough yards to set up fourth-and-manageable.
Sometimes he makes poor decisions. He hung out in the end zone too long, trying to make reads, early in the Wisconsin game, but escaped, valved it off to RB Corum, and he wiggled and rambled for a first down. Catastrophe averted. But he is capable of catastrophe.
Against Northwestern, he was enjoying a good two-and-a-half quarters, having been given freedom to attempt more downfield passes, more play-action passes. I thought he was growing.
But then, after Northwestern missed a field goal that should have cut the lead to 17-10 with 7:50 left in the third quarter, Michigan gave McNamara freedom to open another drive with a play-action pass. This time, he held the ball too long, stared down the middle receiver in a sail concept, and his arm was hit as he threw. He was darn lucky that his ill-advised, late pass wasn’t intercepted at the Michigan 30-yard line, and perhaps returned for more.
McNamara is improving. But Michigan State is going to need some relapses from him like this one, and Michigan State needs to be fortunate enough to turn any mistakes such as this into game-changing plays. He won’t give you many. They don’t let him try many. When he errs, you have to throat him.
ADD IT ALL UP
I wouldn’t be surprised if it comes down to a loose play or some sort of un-scouted, unscripted chaotic moment.
Nebraska looked like the Huskers were going to drive for a game-winning field goal attempt when the QB fumbled on a third-and-one sneak, due in part to a late whistle and a good hit.
Michigan State looked like it was going to lose to Nebraska when that game flipped on somewhat of a fluke punt return.
These games can turn on unexpected, unpredictable loose situations outside the realm of matchups or X’s and O’s. And my guess is that this game could pivot along those lines. Trying to guess which team is going to get that play at that time is like trying to predict a coin flip.
As for X’s and O’s and matchups, Michigan COULD have problems with MSU’s passing attack, IF Michigan State’s QB has time to go to work on them, especially on first down, and especially if Michigan State is able to establish a ground game and achieve balance.
MSU’s chances of establishing a ground game and achieving balance? Less than 50 percent in my book. I think that equates to rushing for fewer than 120 yards for Michigan State.
MSU’s chances of protecting the passer? Pretty good on most pass plays, but you only need to let the QB get hit on two or three situations to gum up field position and flip momentum. It’s hard to protect against and filter out all those Scud missiles. Especially on third-and-long. Stay out of third-and-long.
That goes both ways. MSU’s pass rush has been a great factor this year. But with the way Michigan’s offense operates, they don’t allow your pass rush to become a factor. They throw short, make short reads, attempt one-read pass plays, or they go deep with one read on time.
Michigan isn’t great. But they’re good. The Wolverines would be a lot better if they had a reliable, consistent quarterback and better talent at WR. Their WR talent is good, but not quite what WR talent at Michigan has been in other years. The injury to WR Ronnie Bell has something to do with that.
So what happens if you can take Michigan into the deep water, AND contain the run between the 20s, AND stop the run in the red zone, AND force McNamara to play with precision and poise and beat you that way? That’s what Michigan State is hoping to find out. That’s what Michigan State MUST find out.
Michigan wasn’t great on the ground against Wisconsin and Rutgers. Michigan State’s program isn’t quite mature enough on defense to replicate what Wisconsin has on defense. At least not on a normal Saturday. But this isn’t a normal Saturday. This is rivalry Saturday, a rivalry that elicits venom and performance that only a small handful of the most motivated teams in the best and worst rivalries would understand. Michigan State often harnesses that level of supernova infinity in this game. Michigan has to hope the Spartans Dawgs don’t go into werewolf mode in this game. Michigan can have a say in whether or not that happens. They better get it said.
PRE-SNAP POSTSCRIPT:
https://michiganstate.forums.rivals.com/threads/the-pre-snap-read-postscript.224210/
Last edited:
