This is not the complete format that I usualy follow, but I needed to break it off and post this thing:
I might add some film clips to support some of my assertions later. (Always battling the clock)
Pre-Snap Read: MSU vs Michigan
EAST LANSING - I was planning for this week’s Pre-Snap Read to be an unveiling of some crazy ideas about Michigan State’s chances of making this game competitive and possibly even stealing a victory.
But it sounds like there are plenty of fans and media with even stronger ideas about Michigan State’s chances in this game against No. 7 Michigan than mine. Basically, my thunder has been stolen.
I might even be in the negative minority now. I think Michigan State has a chance to win this game, but I would put the chances at less than 45 percent. So I guess I’ve gone from kool-aid glasses to a Negative Ned in a matter of days.
Above all, I’m hoping that those who attend the game have a safe, enjoyable afternoon and evening. There is some anxiety about crowd control matters, to the point that the university’s presidents released a joint statement in hopes of “civility and respect.”
I think the statement was a good step, but it would have been even better-received if they had found a way to let former University of Michigan president Mary Sue Coleman recite the statement with her trademark gameday cadence.
I think things will go fine at the Stadium on Saturday night. I would be more concerned if this game were played in East Lansing, judging by the rogue behavior of visiting fans during last year’s game. There was a noticeable uptick in cement-head antics last year from the visitors, a problem that I don’t think was met with enough security and law enforcement. The visitors didn’t used to be this bad, but society has changed, attitudes toward sports have intensified, and the belief that it’s okay to provoke perfect strangers due to the colors they are wearing has become commonplace and even regarded as acceptable behavior in some circles. I think there will be much, much, much less of that from the visitors for this week’s game than there were last year.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST - For 11 and a half months, many of us thought (probably most of us), assumed that this game would likely be a Michigan victory, probably an easy one, possibly an ugly one.
A comfortable victory for Michigan is still a possibility, but there should be plenty of pre-game anxiety for Wolverine fans, if they are honest with themselves. And there is plenty of reason for optimism for Michigan State fans, that this game could and should be competitive.
What happened to create this change?
Michigan has had trouble with middleweight and lightweight foes such as Air Force and Purdue (being entrenched in tight battles for more than three quarters before pulling away in the final minutes).
Michigan’s run game has been inconsistent (mediocre last week), due to hot-and-cold blocking and inconsistent (of late) ball carriers.
Their passing game has been mired in third-down and red-zone problems - some of which MIGHT have been cured in the second half of last weeks game. Everyone wanted to blame former QB Wilton Speight, and/or the inability of WRs to gain separation, for the problems. But I think the route combinations, mixed in with poor pass protection, continually put Speight in position to fail.
Speight is out with an injury. He went down in the second quarter of last week’s victory at Purdue. His replacement, John O’Korn, played well against the Boilermakers, leading Michigan fans to think that the quarterback situation will be improved for the long haul, which will alleviate the problems Michigan has had in the red zone and on third down.
Purdue’s pass defense ranks No. 99 in the nation, allowing 254 yards per game.
O’Korn was pretty good - against Purdue. And I think route combinations changed (for the better, for Michigan) in the second half of that game. O’Korn made some plays on his own, but he also had more open intermediate targets to choose from than Speight had in the first half of that game and most of the Air Force game.
O’Korn is capable. But the Michigan coaches need to make sure they don’t choke things down and saddle him with poor choices the way they did all too often with Speight. Michigan’s coaches have puckered a bit when things have gotten tight in rivalry games. Two years ago, playing with the lead, Michigan netted only 6 yards on its last 13 plays against Michigan State, leaving the door open for the Jalen Watts-Jackson play. If Michigan had gotten one first down in the fourth quarter, rather than four three-and-outs, the Wolverines would have won. But they choked it down.
Last year against Ohio State, Michigan ran six offensive plays in the fourth quarter, with the lead, and netted 0 yards. One first down in the fourth quarter and Michigan most likely wins that game.
If Saturday’s game is close in the fourth quarter, sphincters will be tight on behalf of Michigan coaches and fans, and likely their players. The opposite will be true on the Michigan State sideline, UNLESS the Spartans have blown a lead, like they did in 2004, in which case the tightness will revert to MSU’s side. Football has a funny way of redistributing the pucker factor.
**
As we stated in the Skull Session Podcast, I think the most likely scenario on Saturday is that both teams will have trouble running the ball. There’s a chance both teams will get stopped cold on the ground. If that happens, and there are no game tilts with turnovers or special teams, then the game will be in the hands of the quarterbacks.
In the Skull Session, I stated that Michigan State QB Brian Lewerke was undoubtedly better than O’Korn. I still give Lewerke the edge, but I no longer think it’s much of an edge. O’Korn was crafty against Purdue.
Earlier in the week, I was less-sold on O’Korn’s abilities. I have to admit now that the cut-ups I watched from the Michigan-Purdue game were not complete. I make snap judgements on O’Korn based on a shortened compilation of footage. It sounds silly, but I didn’t see O’Korn’s entire body of work from that game until later this week. He was good. I can see why Michigan fans are excited about the change. Now he needs to show he can do it on a regular basis, and do it against a quality defense, and the Michigan coaches need to show they can set the table for him.
The worst-case scenario for Michigan in this game might be a prolonged 6-point lead, keeping things tight and conservative.
**
The real challenges for Michigan State begin when the Spartans have the ball, going against the nation’s No. 1 ranked defense.
My colleagues Rico Beard and Doug Warren pointed out that none of Michigan’s opponents to this point rank in the national Top 75 in total offense: Purdue (No. 80), Air Force (86), Florida (98) and Cincinnati (116).
[Michigan State ranks No. 52 in total offense, by the way, and Michigan is 73.]
Those numbers are true, but all you have to do is watch Michigan’s 11 on defense run, pressure, tackle, cover and hit and you can see they have terrific talent, and play well collectively. Will the Wolverines be the No. 1 total defense in the country all year? No. But they’re a noisy handful.
How can Michigan’s defense be attacked? What are the vulnerable areas?
There are only two vulnerable area that I can see.
1. Lack of quality depth, especially on the defensive line and at some linebacker positions. Michigan has been reluctant to play many reserves in the front seven. This is due partly because they have had success in getting off the field quickly, but it’s also due to the fact that there seems to be quite a dropoff in talent when they do go to the second string.
This hasn’t been a major problem for them yet, aside from Purdue’s first TD drive two weeks ago (in which Michigan defensive players were left on the field too long, and they didn’t have an adequate substitution plan in place, compared to the way Michigan State has evolved its sub patterns, for example), and it also happened during a late Air Force drive three weeks ago during which AFA went to an uptempo attack and Michigan’s defense, with too many players playing too high a percentage of team snaps, grew tired, allowed some breakout plays and had to blow a time out rather than get a 12-men-on-the-field penalty when Michigan belatedly tried to sub Chase Winovich out of the game.
Here’s The Thing: The biggest kryptonite to Michigan’s defense is an uptempo offense that can keep Michigan on the field, force the Michigan coaches to play its starters too longer, get them to start laboring and conserving. We saw this in limited doses against Purdue and Air Force. But they weren’t good enough to sustain it, and in Air Force’s case they weren’t smart enough to employ that style of attack earlier.
Most teams and defensive coaches around the country have realized the need to go 22-deep on defense through the course of a game against uptempo teams, and maybe three-deep at some positions. Defensive football is changing. Hockey line style of subbing on the fly is becoming commonplace. Michigan State was ahead of the national curve in this area, due to lessons learned and tactics attempted against the state-of-the-art attacks of Baylor in 2014 and Oregon in 2014 and ’15.
Michigan had a great defense last year, great talent and good depth. They forced teams to go three-and-out so often that playing subs was never a consideration, until the team achieved blowout situations.
Michigan lost a lot of talent from last year. Everyone knows that.
Here’s what people didn’t realize at first: Last year’s second-stringers were ready to rise up and play at All-America caliber at various positions. The starting 11 is outstanding.
Here’s the other thing people might realize in the future: the back-ups are a major question mark and potential Achilles heel.
This only becomes a problem if there are injuries, or when facing an uptempo team that forces you with the decision of going to the bench or tiring our your starters.
I’m not absolutely sure that the Michigan second-stringers are a major weakness. I haven’t seen them fail. I’ve only noticed their absence, and I’ve noticed the starters being left on the field too long on a small handful of occasions. But those occasions can become more commonplace as the season progresses.
So that begs the question: Might Michigan State go to an uptempo offense in order to attack this question mark area?
Answer: probably not. Michigan State is almost always going to do what they do, and stick to it.
Michigan State does run a little bit of “fastball” uptempo, maybe one or two snaps of it per game. Not much. If they do it, it’s after their initial first down of a possession.
Might Michigan State INCREASE the use of “fastball” for this game? I think it would be a good idea. Michigan has few weaknesses, might as well take a direct frontal assault on one of them.
Will they do it? You’ll know when I know.
Is Michigan State CAPABLE of doing it effectively? Sure. If they have worked on it enough over the years to put “fastball” into the playbook, then they have the capacity to expand it.
Am I guaranteeing that it would be a huge success if Michigan State went uptempo? No. I’m just saying it’s something to watch for. And if Michigan State does more of it in this game, you’ll know why - because it’s a potential kryptonite of this very-good Michigan defense.
2. The other weakness: Well, it’s not really a weakness, it’s just the vast areas of the field that Michigan is willing to leave thin in order to execute their shock-troops style of pressure.
Michigan loves to bring five or six defenders, storming the gaps with quickness and force, fast racehorses who can run, hit, tackle, cover. They slant and attack from different angles and gaps, making it difficult for blockers to anticipate who is coming from what direction. The mystery helps make their quickness and power even more effective an intimidating.
Michigan sells out to pressure the gaps with more than the standard four rushers. They play a lot of man-to-man in the back (although they like to mix in zone on second down. So don’t run your throwback screens and reverses on second down).
Their linebackers join the rush, or scrape aggressively to the perimeter on run action or play action in that direction.
So what’s the weakness?
Use that speed and pressure against them.
That’s easier said than done.
Michigan knows that teams are going to try to counter them with misdirection plays, get the defense flow going hard in one direction and strike them in the other direction with quick-hitting pass plays. Purdue did a little bit of this. Air Force popped off a long TD pass doing this.
Purdue scored a TD on a short throwback TD pass, and nearly had a big play on a quick-hitting scatter concept to a RB out of the backfield midway through the game, but the QB missed him wide open over the middle.
There are various little tricks on the chalkboard to get this done. But you can’t live on misdirection pass plays alone. They only work if used sporadically. You can’t go misdirection pass after misdirection pass, although Purdue was kind of effective for awhile in sprinkling them in about as often as possible without reaching a point of diminishing returns.
The misdirection strikes have to be well-times, and you MUST capitalize on them when you get your chance, like Air Force did, with the one TD that kept them in the game well into the fourth quarter.
Michigan State did the same thing two years ago. One play after a Michigan field goal stretched the lead to 23-14, the Spartans opened the next series with a little misdirection throwback to fullback Trevon Pendleton for 74 yards, to the Michigan goal line. That was a major turning point in the game, with the coaching staff coming up with great chalk and precisely the right time.
Michigan State will have some cartoons drawn up for this game. Must execute. Must be well-timed. Must be fortunate enough to work them when Michigan is in pressure man-to-man, using that pressure against them, rather than in zone. Purdue attempted several throw
Michigan knows the opponent is going to cook up some misdirection, quick-hitting pass plays. They just bank on getting to the QB and affecting his throw or judgement before the plays can get executed.
Michigan lives by the sword so much on defense that they will inevitably die by it at times for isolated plays. But they’re also banking that they’re going to force you into more bad possessions over the long haul. But they also expect to get better help on the offensive side of the ball than the Wolverines’ No. 73-ranked offense is providing, made worse by the problems on third down and in the red zone.
Prior to last week, Michigan had scored just one TD on 10 trips into the red zone. Michigan was averaging just 2.0 yards per carry in the red zone prior to last week. Speight was throwing uncatchable passes in the red zone and his coaches weren’t giving him good route combinations to work with.
Michigan made progress in the red zone last week. O’Korn hooked up with tight end Zach Gentry on a shallow crossing route as part of a mesh concept, caught 2 yards downfield and turned into a 12-yard TD pass play. That’s progress. They need more.
THE MUST LIST:
And that’s what this game will come down to: Which team has made the most progress in the last week, the last two weeks.
Both teams are still under construction. There are still unproven commodities.
* Michigan MUST improve its pass protection, run blocking, o-line communication.
* Michigan MUST reach a level of consistency in the red zone.
* Michigan MUST improve pass protection at the RB position. Two RBs were guilty in giving up sacks last week. That’s poor quality control. So is poor communication between the left tackle and his blocking back (on one QB pressure/hit last week) and his left guard on one TFL last week. Quality control. It was such a strength for Michigan the last two years. It needs to become that way again.
* There are questions about Michigan’s new passing game coordinator, Pep Hamilton. He was an assistant with J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh at Stanford, then four years in the NFL.
Michigan’s offense had terrific simplistic two years ago under Jedd Fisch. And the offense continued to be good last year. He’s now at UCLA.
Michigan still has Tim Drevo at offensive coordinator and J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh calling the shots. But too many shots have been strange blanks this year. And that’s something Michigan needed to begin figuring out during the bye week.
But right now, the screws in the Michigan program are more loose than they’ve been at this time of year in the previous two seasons under J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh. They need tightening. That’s why J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh called last week’s bye a “week of improvement,” or words to that effect. He knows the screws need to be tightened. The team is still under construction.
Have the Wolverines indeed improved? You’ll begin to find out when I do.
* Like Michigan State, Michigan’s running backs need to stop fumbling. Yes, this has been a problem in Ann Arbor with two running backs, Chris Evans and Karan Higdon. Maybe these were just isolated incidents, but they need it to stop before it becomes a problem.
Michigan has done a good job of going to its tight ends and developing them as a weapon, but they have gotten away from utilizing their wide receivers, especially since losing their favorite third-down target, Tarik Black, to an injury in the Air Force game (likely out for the year).
And I think Michigan needs to do more to manufacture depth on defense. Get second-stringers more playing time. They’ll need more dependable bodies when facing uptempo teams. Penn State comes to mind as a potentially problematic matchup.
These things on “the must list” might not hurt Michigan this week. But those areas will hurt Michigan later in the season. And they MIGHT hurt Michigan this week, IF Michigan State has managed to harness improvement of their own, such as:
* Finding a consistent ground game. MSU’s lack of quality play from the running back position has been a surprise this season. Last week, every offensive lineman (except maybe Cole Chewins) was beaten by an Iowa d-lineman during run stoppages. Some o-linemen, such as Tyler Higby, were beaten more than once.
Iowa plays a tough, two-gapping style. MSU’s young o-line took some lumps last week, but didn’t give up any fatal plays that turned a negative tide. And the o-line pass protected well.
Michigan can do some two-gapping, but is mostly an attacking, slanting, slashing, aggressive, one-gap style. It’s possible that MSU’s o-line might be better equipped to deal with Michigan’s d-line than Iowa’s. You’ll begin to know when I know. It’s possible. We have only four games to view as a body of work. We’re guessing on a lot of things. Teams are still under construction.
* Both teams obviously MUST avoid turnovers. That’s the same thing for every team in every game every week. Don’t commit the bad give-away.
Lewerke had two bad ones vs Notre Dame and RB L.J. Scott had one. You know the result.
O’Korn had a bad INT last week, throwing unnecessarily into traffic, and stared it down a bit to do so.
Both teams need to avoid those things.
As for FORCING turnovers, Michigan has done a great job of that in the past but has forced only three INTs so far this season. More are probably coming.
As for the blind-side sack producing a fumble? Both teams are capable of delivering in that area.
MSU’s pass protectors are better than Michigan’s in preventing blindside sacks, but Michigan State has yet to face a pass rush like Michigan’s.
Michigan’s pass protectors haven’t been nearly as good as MSU’s (Michigan has allowed 12 sacks, Michigan State has allowed 6). And now Michigan is going to see a good, improving Michigan State pass rush.
I expect Michigan’s pass protection to have improved during the bye week. The communication problems at left tackle with a senior seem correctable, as do the problems with RB pass protection. UM will still be limited by mediocre play at right tackle. But the bye week should help in this area, plus O’Korn is more mobile than Speight, and has a knack for the escape.
Thus you have to go with Michigan State has the team most likely to cough up an expensive fumble.
THE IF/THEN LIST
If Michigan State is able to get the ground game going, to the tune of maybe 130 yards rushing in this game, then you know the rest of the theory: It helps open up the pass game. I don’t need to explain why.
But this is the rest of the positive chain of events if the run game is working: It will help Michigan State possess the ball, move the chains, get first downs.
We discussed the VITAL importance of this simple little concept during the Skull Session podcast. And I said the same thing about playing Michigan’s fine defense last year, and the year before.
Merely getting first downs is a huge step toward remaining competitive in this game, and possibly winning.
Of course you need first downs. You need them to drive in order to score points and win. Duh.
But there is compound positive interest in this game for Michigan State if the Spartans can merely GET … FIRST … DOWNS.
Get first downs and you run clock, shorten the game against a team that likely has more talent in the starting lineup than you do.
Get first downs, move the ball, flip the field, punt it, tackle the punt returner (Don Peoples-Jones) - give a questionable Michigan offense an 80-yard field rather than the 50-yard fields Michigan so often had two years ago in this game.
Get first downs, move the ball, KEEP THE THIN GROUP of Michigan regulars on defense ON THE FIELD. Keep them on the field, tax their gas tanks and you’ll see their vigor, speed and effectiveness dulled just a bit, seven or eight plays into a drive.
If you keep them on the field for four or five plays, Michigan usually checks super DT Maurice Hurst out of the game. His replacements (sophomore Michael Dwumfour, 6-3, 350; freshman Aubrey Solomon, 6-3, 297, will be good some day, but not yet. The other reserve, senior Bryan Mone, 6-4, 325, used to be pretty good as a starter but last year’s injury seems to have taken too much air out of his wheels).
As for the other d-linemen, they usually don’t get breaks. It hasn’t hurt them that much yet, but it could.
Same with the linebackers.
Get first downs, and this hard-charging, ferocious defense becomes a little more manageable. Baby steps.
Michigan State watched film of Michigan struggle for three quarters with Air Force and Purdue and Michigan State is not intimidated. The Michigan defense is very good and needs to be managed. The rest of it is extremely do-able.
WHAT ABOUT MSU’S DEFENSE?
Michigan is ranked No. 1 in the nation in total defense.
This just in: Michigan State is No. 5.
Michigan has been playing great pressure-oriented defense.
Michigan State has had fun ratcheting up a new package of pressures as well. Michigan State has brought those pressures with good athletes (not as good as Winovich, Gary and Bush, but pretty good athletes).
And Michigan State has covered well behind those pressures. We haven’t seen any miscommunications in the defensive backfield this year, despite using a slightly expanded volume of material.
Michigan State used to play its base defense 65 to 75 percent of the time. Now, I would estimate Michigan State runs “base” maybe 40 to 55 percent of the time. Michigan State is running cover-one (single safety deep/man-to-man underneath) far more frequently than the first eight years of the Dantonio era, and more than last year, when the Spartans first started to expand toward more man-to-man.
Michigan State has run a good balance of base, then cover-one/man, some two-deep/man under, and some varied blitzes. Opponents haven’t been seeing the same, predictable base defense, down-after-down, followed by predictable blitzes in front of cover-three in the back. They’ve switched things up, given QBs more to think about, and a little more to read.
So now, might Michigan State ratchet up the pressure even more? Michigan State’s pressures have been good and successful this year, but we haven’t seen blitz-a-poola from them. Might they shift gears more in that direction for this game? Air Force and Purdue had success against Michigan’s offensive line and pass protections with heavy percentages of blitzes and pressures. Michigan State has more firepower to work with on defense in this area than those two teams. But we know Michigan has been working to become better-equipped to handle blitzes. Have they improved enough during J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh’s week of improvement? You’ll begin to find out when I do.
A CLOSER LOOK AT O’KORN
QB 8 JOHN O’KORN (6-4, 211, Sr., Huntingdon, Pa/transfer from Houston)
* He was a 5.7 three-star recruit, ranked No. 94 in Florida and the No. 31 pro style QB in the nation.
* Is the new starter, with Wilton Speight having been lost to injury last week.
* O’Korn had a ton of experience as a starter at U of Houston.
* Was 18-of-26 pass against Purdue, playing about three quarters of the game, finishing with 270 yards with one touchdown and one interception and also ran for a first down while leading touchdown drives of 84 and 86 yards.
* At this point, it seems strange that Speight was able to beat out O’Korn for the job on two occasions (last year, and this year). If O’Korn emerges to ignite this offense, the decision to go with Speight all that time will remain a head-scratcher. As of now, it’s just a question.
* O’Korn started as a freshman at Houston, and threw for 3117 yards.
* He went 40 of 54 against BYU in 2014. He threw for 364 yards against Rutgers in 2013.
* He had some off-field challenges, lost his starting job, transferred to Michigan looking for a new beginning, and now - after a long wait - he has that beginning. And so might the Michigan offense, and team as a whole.
* Last week, he stared down receivers a couple of times a little too long, but wasn’t as bad with that area of the game as I thought he was, the first time I watched it.
* He has some mobility, and ability to throw from the pocket. There were no noticeable defects in anything.
In the Skull Session podcast, I said that MSU’s Brian Lewerke was “definitely” the better of the two QBs. I will retract the word “definitely” at this time. It’s a tight comparison right now.
* On his very first pass attempt of the game, he was into his trigger as soon as his back foot hit the ground on the last step of his drop. Decisive and on-target for a gain of 13 to walk-on WR Nate Schoenle against a bailing corner.
Plusses and minuses:
Looked good on his first drive.
+ counter half boot to fullback Poggi, completed behind the line of scrimmage, gain of 12.
+ short curl at 5 yards to TE 84 Sean McKeon vs cover-three, vs blitz, gain of 13.
+ short out to TE aught at 1 yard, gain of 10, good forward burst after the catch McKeon.
+ 12 yard TD to 83 shallow crossing as part of a mesh combo vs man to man. On time and on target, caught at two yards.
(In bold: Throwing short, getting him into a rhythm).
second drive
- INT, shooting dice a little bit, stares it down, intended for Perry, into a little bit of a crowd, tip drill INT.
third drive
= Inc third-and-4 hitch and go vs cover two into the cover-two hole, INC too far.
= WR hitch vs off coverage caught at line of scrimmage gain of 7.
= Deep ball to Peoples-Jones at end of first half, thrown a little short. WR was open.
Second half
+ play action 81 WR drag caught at 6, gain of 14. Ball came out on time, smooth delivery.
= Deep fade 1 inc, well-defended.
+ three step out route to TE caught at 3 yards gain of 5 (84)
- third-and-four INC to Perry on flat route on interior snag concept out of a tight bunch. Thrown too high.
next drive
+ play action, moved out of the pocket, on the run threw to Peoples-Jones, finding him late on a dig at 20 yards. (Called back for holding) Impressive play by the QB.
+ crosser to 84 TE gain of 12. Getting into a rhythm.
+ TE short tout dropped by 83.
+ Elude sack on third-and-six, spun away found Perry on scramble rules gain of 12. Might be the turning point of the game, the play that started to take the air out of Purdue.
+ third-and-7: pass to 84 TE on a crossing route for 29 yards. Perfect pass.
- Threw late over the middle, Eubanks hit hard, flagged for targeting.
next drive
+ elusive in the pocket, side step found Perry at 12 yards for total gain of 22.
+ third-and-8, slot out to the short side gain of 8.
+ sit down to the TE McKeon gain of 21.
In all: He started short, gained a rhythm and did some impressive things midway through the second half.
ADD IT ALL UP:
* Michigan is pretty good at QB with O’Korn. I’ve come around on him.
* At WR, Michigan has a revolving door of capable guys, but nothing great. Grant Perry seems to be becoming their favored third-down target, with T Black out. But Perry is averaging just 40 yards receiving per game. Michigan needs a WR or two to step up. Slippery, slender walk-on Nate Schoenle got some run against Purdue. Auditions are taking place on gameday.
Don Peoples-Jones has great potential but is going through the proving-grounds process.
Michigan used a lot of TE-heavy formations against Purdue, often eschewing the use of WRs.
* At TE, Michigan has a deep, evolving cast. They’ll use three or four of them at any given time. Sean McKeon (6-5, 248) is an emerging factor at 6-5, 248. Good player.
Michigan State pass defense vs Michigan passing game? Is O’Korn ready to be the real deal, or are there problems present that prevented him from winning the job over Speight?
Michigan State ranks No. 2 in the Big Ten in pass completion pct allowed (48.2), which is a reflection of playing more man-to-man.
Michigan State is No. 9 in the nation in pass defense (allowing 152 yards per game through the air).
Iowa passed for 212 yards against Michigan State, the highest Michigan State has allowed. Iowa was 17 of 32 through the air.
Michigan, despite its passing game woes, has eclipsed 218 yards passing in three of its four games.
Michigan State can play quality pass defense and still allow 175 through the air to these guys.
I would expect Michigan to be in the neighborhood of the 212 yards passing that Iowa amassed against Michigan State, and slightly more efficient. If O’Korn struggles to match what Iowa did through the air, then Michigan could struggle to exceed Iowa’s scoring output (10 points).
* At RB, Michigan has talented guys who have made big plays in the past but have hit some snags this year.
Ty Isaac is pretty when he gets going, but he seemed to be playing hurt against Purdue, tip-toeing into the line in short yardage situations. I was stunned that Michigan stayed with him.
Karan Higdon is a quick slasher. Quality back, but he had a fumble after a reception last week. No big deal.
Chris Evans has been a game-breaker in the past. Fumbled early against Air Force and then rode the bench. Had a 10-yard TD run against Purdue. He’s good when he’s right.
But Dantonio’s teams have done a great job for nine straight years of containing or stuffing the Michigan ground attack.
Michigan does some good things on the ground, but it’s kind of sporadic. They didn’t run the ball well against Purdue, averaging about 2 yards per carry on plays other than a 49-yarder that broke with 6 minutes to go.
Michigan is largely an inside zone ground team. When they have run power, they have done it kind of well lately. But they don’t run it a lot - I think because big right guard Michael Onwenu might only have a couple of pop-and-pull runs in him per game. The left guard can do it a little bit. I’m a little surprised they don’t do it more. It would make them a little tougher to defend if they mixed it up more on the ground.
Can Michigan State stuff the run with the standard number in the box (7 vs 2-WR sets/ 6 in box vs 3-WR sets)? If so, they can keep safeties more obstructive in the pass game.
With Michigan’s o-line, you don’t see guys (other than the LT) losing individual battles all that often. But you don’t see them winning, either. They don’t cave people in. I think Michigan State’s defensive front will win more than it loses.
I think Michigan rushes for about 125 this year.
I would EXPECT Michigan State to rush for less than 95 yards in this game, based on Michigan’s ground defensive dominance and MSU’s problems in that area. But I thought the same thing last year and the Spartans managed to rush for 217 against a rush defense that might have been better than this year’s Wolverine rush defense.
That’s a rivalry game/holy war type of statistic. There was no reason to anticipate that MSU’s ground game could produce like it did for that game.
And Michigan State will need another heroic effort on the ground in this game. If they get it, the Spartans will be in much better shape to win than last year, because Michigan State has most of the other areas better-equipped than a year ago.
* On defense, Michigan plays three down linemen most of the time in a 3-3-5 type of look.
The three down linemen are NFL guys. Maurice Hurst at DT is as good as it gets in the Big Ten, although I expected him to be even more dominant. The d-ends are fast, tough, difficult to block, on you RIGHT NOW.
Bush, the MLB, is part tank, part fighter jet. He’s a problem. You know about him.
Furbush is underrated at outside linebacker. He is a big frame guys with wheels.
McRay, the other OLB, can thump, too. He doesn’t seem as fast as he used to be, but he scrapes well when pursuing to the edge. Gets a good jump on things, probably good in the film room. When he scrapes to the edge, it’s hard to knock him off track because he has good size to go with it.
The viper position is the fifth guy in the defensive backfield, 6-0, 205-pound Khaleke Hudson. He had a season- and career-high seven tackles against Cincinnati. I’m still forming an opinion on him. He played kind of a deep middle safety against Air Force’s option. Against other teams, he plays more of a traditional outside linebacker in a 3-4 - and I would expect that to be the case with him against Michigan State.
Hudson doesn’t accumulate a lot of stats because other guys eat up all of his work, and the defense is off the field before anyone can put together big numbers.
At safety, I don’t see weaknesses.
The corners press, get their hands on you, disrupts things and don’t draw a lot of flags.
* Can Lewerke throw against Michigan’s terrific pass rush, and a handsy, pressing secondary that is allowing only 41 pct completions.
MSU’s coaches get accused of being conservative and unimaginative. I don’t put them in that category. I think they are pragmatic. They play the percentages. They’ll want to establish the run in most games, but they’ll go to the gun and air it out if the run ain’t working. And then they’ll go back to the run even if it isn’t working, in order to play the clock and play to their defense. They play percentages.
In a game like this, they’ll try the run, of course. And it might surprisingly gain traction, like last year. I have no way to explain what happened last year and no grounds to predict that that type of run success will happen again. But it might. That’s football. That’s why we love it.
They’ll try to run, and they’ll have new wrinkles installed for the run game. And who knows, Michigan State’s young, quickish o-linemen might actually match up better against the quick, athletic, one-gapping slants and stunts of the Michigan defense than the heavyweight two-gappers from Iowa. I don’t know. You’ll find out when I do. That might be part of the explanation from last year.
They’ll try to run, but Michigan State - when it’s an underdog facing a challenge like this - will have some air game wrinkles. You can count on that. There will be plays you and I and Michigan haven’t yet seen. They might be subtle, they might be substantial (like the throwback to Pendleton). But they will have some cartoons in place, and Michigan State will need to pop a few of them in order to support Lewerke in what will otherwise be a tough chore for him, in terms of standing in the pocket and trying to find open receivers against handsy man coverage with limited time to read and release.
Lewerke’s ability to move the pocket, MSU’s ability to change the launch point with its play calling, is an interesting wildcard in this game. You don’t want to have to sit back in the pocket every single time against this Michigan pass rush. Yet you can’t afford to roll out every single time and expose your QB to the edge with No. 10 Bush freight-training at him from inside-out. Bush converges so quickly, and delivers a heavy load when he gets there. Lewerke must be aware of where No. 10 is at all times, and awareness alone might not be enough to elude him or evade his impact on the pass game.
I liked Lewerke’s brain on some reads last week (discussed in the Skull Session). His 15-yard run on third-and-12 was key to burning clock and cementing victory. Of equal importance, he showed guts in trying to beat No. 27, Hooker, Iowa’s hard hitting safety, to the line of gain, and diving to do so. Gutty move. Michigan is a little more equipped at making you pay for gutty moves. Lewerke needs to keep those gut-check plays to a minimum, which I think he will do. He knew he HAD to do it on that play against Iowa.
Also, on that 15-yard scramble, he read two-deep zone with man-to-man underneath and knew they wouldn’t have anyone accounting for the QB, and he was eager to tuck and run. The read and anticipation are as impressive as the foot-quickness and guts at the end. He is becoming a total-package threat - maybe not great in any area, but good in many areas.
His mobility, his mind and his guts give him a chance to be the type of quick-trigger, quick-minded QB that is needed to navigate this tight-grip Michigan defense.
Will this UM defense play with even more RPMs due to the nighttime energy? Yes. Can Lewerke handle this defense, on this stage, at night? You’ll find out when I do.
* On special teams, Peoples-Jones had a smooth punt return for TD vs Air Force. He’s a long strider, which is a little rare for a punt returner. He’s talented, but I don’t think he’s an every-punt problem.
Michigan will leave one, sometimes three, rushers to spy on the punter to make sure he punts it. At least that’s what they did against Air Force. That’s not a complete punt-safe mentality. They try to negate the fake while peeling enough guys back for a return. Will Michigan State probe something there? With one to three spying the punter, there’s still time to throw to the sidelines with the other Wolverines’ backs turned - something Tyler O’Connor was supposed to do, to a wide open Monty Madaris two years ago, but he choked it down instead and was stopped short of the first down, giving UM a short field and setting up a Wolverine TD. A pass play to the sideline might still be open, based on what I saw against Air Force.
Can Michigan be wise to the fakes while still trying to set up returns for Jones? It’s hard to do both well.
* In the kickoff return department, Michigan doesn’t seem all that special. They rank No. 11 in the Big Ten with a 17.6 average.
* The Michigan kicker, freshman Nordin, is very good and has had a lot of work, due to red zone woes. He is 11 of 13 on the year and can hit from 50-plus. Michigan State has a pretty solid kicker in Coghlin, but Michigan has the edge here. Either are capable of hitting the 45-yard game winner at the buzzer, but Nordin a better bet.
* Michigan State usually tries to steal a possession somewhere, with a special teams fake or on-side kick or some sort of surprise. They might need it, and if they get it, THAT could tip the scales …
* Most-likely scenario: Overall, we have two good defenses, two capable QBs … Michigan State has better talent at WR than Michigan, but can Lewerke nagivate, operate and capitalize? Will he have enough pass protection to do so? Will he have a run game complement to give him balance and favorable down-and-distance? … The advantage at WR was the edge Michigan State needed to ride last week against Iowa, and Michigan State did just that … This week, the edge might not be as pronounced as last week, but it’s there, and Michigan must snuff it out or at least contain it … Will Michigan’s defense show some of that fatigue for the first time this year if Michigan State becomes the first offense that can keep them on the field? Coming off a bye week, fatigue won't be a factor. But I wonder about the tread on Michigan's tires on defense for the long term, into November if they don't start developing more depth … Lewerke is ready to do some good things in this game, but so is O’Korn … O’Korn’s job is a little easier, but he doesn’t have Lewerke’s WRs … Can O’Korn continue to ride those tight ends? Will Michigan’s coaches provide better pass schemes and route combinations than some of the ones Speight has had to deal with? … MSU's coaches have come up with some dice-shooting magic in this series and as the aggressive underdog, they'll have some stews brewing for this one ... Michigan’s advantage at kicker could be a difference in 3 or 6 points, and could be the difference in the game. That edge is more of a known commodity than trying to measure vague MSU coaching concontions … Can MSU’s ground game pull a sequel similar to last year? … Did Michigan’s ground blocking improve during the bye week. If not, O'Korn's job gets a little tougher ... Did Michigan's pass protection improve? I'm guessing yes. If no, then O'Korn's job gets tougher still … Overall these are two teams still under construction, and we’re still learning of their capabilities, but Michigan has better starting talent on defense, buoyed by the home night crowd, and Michigan has the kicker, and enough at QB and tight end to make the Wolverines the percentage favorite to win.
(I could write another 10,000 words about Michigan’s starting 22 and key reserves but I’m out of time).
I might add some film clips to support some of my assertions later. (Always battling the clock)
Pre-Snap Read: MSU vs Michigan
EAST LANSING - I was planning for this week’s Pre-Snap Read to be an unveiling of some crazy ideas about Michigan State’s chances of making this game competitive and possibly even stealing a victory.
But it sounds like there are plenty of fans and media with even stronger ideas about Michigan State’s chances in this game against No. 7 Michigan than mine. Basically, my thunder has been stolen.
I might even be in the negative minority now. I think Michigan State has a chance to win this game, but I would put the chances at less than 45 percent. So I guess I’ve gone from kool-aid glasses to a Negative Ned in a matter of days.
Above all, I’m hoping that those who attend the game have a safe, enjoyable afternoon and evening. There is some anxiety about crowd control matters, to the point that the university’s presidents released a joint statement in hopes of “civility and respect.”
I think the statement was a good step, but it would have been even better-received if they had found a way to let former University of Michigan president Mary Sue Coleman recite the statement with her trademark gameday cadence.
I think things will go fine at the Stadium on Saturday night. I would be more concerned if this game were played in East Lansing, judging by the rogue behavior of visiting fans during last year’s game. There was a noticeable uptick in cement-head antics last year from the visitors, a problem that I don’t think was met with enough security and law enforcement. The visitors didn’t used to be this bad, but society has changed, attitudes toward sports have intensified, and the belief that it’s okay to provoke perfect strangers due to the colors they are wearing has become commonplace and even regarded as acceptable behavior in some circles. I think there will be much, much, much less of that from the visitors for this week’s game than there were last year.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST - For 11 and a half months, many of us thought (probably most of us), assumed that this game would likely be a Michigan victory, probably an easy one, possibly an ugly one.
A comfortable victory for Michigan is still a possibility, but there should be plenty of pre-game anxiety for Wolverine fans, if they are honest with themselves. And there is plenty of reason for optimism for Michigan State fans, that this game could and should be competitive.
What happened to create this change?
Michigan has had trouble with middleweight and lightweight foes such as Air Force and Purdue (being entrenched in tight battles for more than three quarters before pulling away in the final minutes).
Michigan’s run game has been inconsistent (mediocre last week), due to hot-and-cold blocking and inconsistent (of late) ball carriers.
Their passing game has been mired in third-down and red-zone problems - some of which MIGHT have been cured in the second half of last weeks game. Everyone wanted to blame former QB Wilton Speight, and/or the inability of WRs to gain separation, for the problems. But I think the route combinations, mixed in with poor pass protection, continually put Speight in position to fail.
Speight is out with an injury. He went down in the second quarter of last week’s victory at Purdue. His replacement, John O’Korn, played well against the Boilermakers, leading Michigan fans to think that the quarterback situation will be improved for the long haul, which will alleviate the problems Michigan has had in the red zone and on third down.
Purdue’s pass defense ranks No. 99 in the nation, allowing 254 yards per game.
O’Korn was pretty good - against Purdue. And I think route combinations changed (for the better, for Michigan) in the second half of that game. O’Korn made some plays on his own, but he also had more open intermediate targets to choose from than Speight had in the first half of that game and most of the Air Force game.
O’Korn is capable. But the Michigan coaches need to make sure they don’t choke things down and saddle him with poor choices the way they did all too often with Speight. Michigan’s coaches have puckered a bit when things have gotten tight in rivalry games. Two years ago, playing with the lead, Michigan netted only 6 yards on its last 13 plays against Michigan State, leaving the door open for the Jalen Watts-Jackson play. If Michigan had gotten one first down in the fourth quarter, rather than four three-and-outs, the Wolverines would have won. But they choked it down.
Last year against Ohio State, Michigan ran six offensive plays in the fourth quarter, with the lead, and netted 0 yards. One first down in the fourth quarter and Michigan most likely wins that game.
If Saturday’s game is close in the fourth quarter, sphincters will be tight on behalf of Michigan coaches and fans, and likely their players. The opposite will be true on the Michigan State sideline, UNLESS the Spartans have blown a lead, like they did in 2004, in which case the tightness will revert to MSU’s side. Football has a funny way of redistributing the pucker factor.
**
As we stated in the Skull Session Podcast, I think the most likely scenario on Saturday is that both teams will have trouble running the ball. There’s a chance both teams will get stopped cold on the ground. If that happens, and there are no game tilts with turnovers or special teams, then the game will be in the hands of the quarterbacks.
In the Skull Session, I stated that Michigan State QB Brian Lewerke was undoubtedly better than O’Korn. I still give Lewerke the edge, but I no longer think it’s much of an edge. O’Korn was crafty against Purdue.
Earlier in the week, I was less-sold on O’Korn’s abilities. I have to admit now that the cut-ups I watched from the Michigan-Purdue game were not complete. I make snap judgements on O’Korn based on a shortened compilation of footage. It sounds silly, but I didn’t see O’Korn’s entire body of work from that game until later this week. He was good. I can see why Michigan fans are excited about the change. Now he needs to show he can do it on a regular basis, and do it against a quality defense, and the Michigan coaches need to show they can set the table for him.
The worst-case scenario for Michigan in this game might be a prolonged 6-point lead, keeping things tight and conservative.
**
The real challenges for Michigan State begin when the Spartans have the ball, going against the nation’s No. 1 ranked defense.
My colleagues Rico Beard and Doug Warren pointed out that none of Michigan’s opponents to this point rank in the national Top 75 in total offense: Purdue (No. 80), Air Force (86), Florida (98) and Cincinnati (116).
[Michigan State ranks No. 52 in total offense, by the way, and Michigan is 73.]
Those numbers are true, but all you have to do is watch Michigan’s 11 on defense run, pressure, tackle, cover and hit and you can see they have terrific talent, and play well collectively. Will the Wolverines be the No. 1 total defense in the country all year? No. But they’re a noisy handful.
How can Michigan’s defense be attacked? What are the vulnerable areas?
There are only two vulnerable area that I can see.
1. Lack of quality depth, especially on the defensive line and at some linebacker positions. Michigan has been reluctant to play many reserves in the front seven. This is due partly because they have had success in getting off the field quickly, but it’s also due to the fact that there seems to be quite a dropoff in talent when they do go to the second string.
This hasn’t been a major problem for them yet, aside from Purdue’s first TD drive two weeks ago (in which Michigan defensive players were left on the field too long, and they didn’t have an adequate substitution plan in place, compared to the way Michigan State has evolved its sub patterns, for example), and it also happened during a late Air Force drive three weeks ago during which AFA went to an uptempo attack and Michigan’s defense, with too many players playing too high a percentage of team snaps, grew tired, allowed some breakout plays and had to blow a time out rather than get a 12-men-on-the-field penalty when Michigan belatedly tried to sub Chase Winovich out of the game.
Here’s The Thing: The biggest kryptonite to Michigan’s defense is an uptempo offense that can keep Michigan on the field, force the Michigan coaches to play its starters too longer, get them to start laboring and conserving. We saw this in limited doses against Purdue and Air Force. But they weren’t good enough to sustain it, and in Air Force’s case they weren’t smart enough to employ that style of attack earlier.
Most teams and defensive coaches around the country have realized the need to go 22-deep on defense through the course of a game against uptempo teams, and maybe three-deep at some positions. Defensive football is changing. Hockey line style of subbing on the fly is becoming commonplace. Michigan State was ahead of the national curve in this area, due to lessons learned and tactics attempted against the state-of-the-art attacks of Baylor in 2014 and Oregon in 2014 and ’15.
Michigan had a great defense last year, great talent and good depth. They forced teams to go three-and-out so often that playing subs was never a consideration, until the team achieved blowout situations.
Michigan lost a lot of talent from last year. Everyone knows that.
Here’s what people didn’t realize at first: Last year’s second-stringers were ready to rise up and play at All-America caliber at various positions. The starting 11 is outstanding.
Here’s the other thing people might realize in the future: the back-ups are a major question mark and potential Achilles heel.
This only becomes a problem if there are injuries, or when facing an uptempo team that forces you with the decision of going to the bench or tiring our your starters.
I’m not absolutely sure that the Michigan second-stringers are a major weakness. I haven’t seen them fail. I’ve only noticed their absence, and I’ve noticed the starters being left on the field too long on a small handful of occasions. But those occasions can become more commonplace as the season progresses.
So that begs the question: Might Michigan State go to an uptempo offense in order to attack this question mark area?
Answer: probably not. Michigan State is almost always going to do what they do, and stick to it.
Michigan State does run a little bit of “fastball” uptempo, maybe one or two snaps of it per game. Not much. If they do it, it’s after their initial first down of a possession.
Might Michigan State INCREASE the use of “fastball” for this game? I think it would be a good idea. Michigan has few weaknesses, might as well take a direct frontal assault on one of them.
Will they do it? You’ll know when I know.
Is Michigan State CAPABLE of doing it effectively? Sure. If they have worked on it enough over the years to put “fastball” into the playbook, then they have the capacity to expand it.
Am I guaranteeing that it would be a huge success if Michigan State went uptempo? No. I’m just saying it’s something to watch for. And if Michigan State does more of it in this game, you’ll know why - because it’s a potential kryptonite of this very-good Michigan defense.
2. The other weakness: Well, it’s not really a weakness, it’s just the vast areas of the field that Michigan is willing to leave thin in order to execute their shock-troops style of pressure.
Michigan loves to bring five or six defenders, storming the gaps with quickness and force, fast racehorses who can run, hit, tackle, cover. They slant and attack from different angles and gaps, making it difficult for blockers to anticipate who is coming from what direction. The mystery helps make their quickness and power even more effective an intimidating.
Michigan sells out to pressure the gaps with more than the standard four rushers. They play a lot of man-to-man in the back (although they like to mix in zone on second down. So don’t run your throwback screens and reverses on second down).
Their linebackers join the rush, or scrape aggressively to the perimeter on run action or play action in that direction.
So what’s the weakness?
Use that speed and pressure against them.
That’s easier said than done.
Michigan knows that teams are going to try to counter them with misdirection plays, get the defense flow going hard in one direction and strike them in the other direction with quick-hitting pass plays. Purdue did a little bit of this. Air Force popped off a long TD pass doing this.
Purdue scored a TD on a short throwback TD pass, and nearly had a big play on a quick-hitting scatter concept to a RB out of the backfield midway through the game, but the QB missed him wide open over the middle.
There are various little tricks on the chalkboard to get this done. But you can’t live on misdirection pass plays alone. They only work if used sporadically. You can’t go misdirection pass after misdirection pass, although Purdue was kind of effective for awhile in sprinkling them in about as often as possible without reaching a point of diminishing returns.
The misdirection strikes have to be well-times, and you MUST capitalize on them when you get your chance, like Air Force did, with the one TD that kept them in the game well into the fourth quarter.
Michigan State did the same thing two years ago. One play after a Michigan field goal stretched the lead to 23-14, the Spartans opened the next series with a little misdirection throwback to fullback Trevon Pendleton for 74 yards, to the Michigan goal line. That was a major turning point in the game, with the coaching staff coming up with great chalk and precisely the right time.
Michigan State will have some cartoons drawn up for this game. Must execute. Must be well-timed. Must be fortunate enough to work them when Michigan is in pressure man-to-man, using that pressure against them, rather than in zone. Purdue attempted several throw
Michigan knows the opponent is going to cook up some misdirection, quick-hitting pass plays. They just bank on getting to the QB and affecting his throw or judgement before the plays can get executed.
Michigan lives by the sword so much on defense that they will inevitably die by it at times for isolated plays. But they’re also banking that they’re going to force you into more bad possessions over the long haul. But they also expect to get better help on the offensive side of the ball than the Wolverines’ No. 73-ranked offense is providing, made worse by the problems on third down and in the red zone.
Prior to last week, Michigan had scored just one TD on 10 trips into the red zone. Michigan was averaging just 2.0 yards per carry in the red zone prior to last week. Speight was throwing uncatchable passes in the red zone and his coaches weren’t giving him good route combinations to work with.
Michigan made progress in the red zone last week. O’Korn hooked up with tight end Zach Gentry on a shallow crossing route as part of a mesh concept, caught 2 yards downfield and turned into a 12-yard TD pass play. That’s progress. They need more.
THE MUST LIST:
And that’s what this game will come down to: Which team has made the most progress in the last week, the last two weeks.
Both teams are still under construction. There are still unproven commodities.
* Michigan MUST improve its pass protection, run blocking, o-line communication.
* Michigan MUST reach a level of consistency in the red zone.
* Michigan MUST improve pass protection at the RB position. Two RBs were guilty in giving up sacks last week. That’s poor quality control. So is poor communication between the left tackle and his blocking back (on one QB pressure/hit last week) and his left guard on one TFL last week. Quality control. It was such a strength for Michigan the last two years. It needs to become that way again.
* There are questions about Michigan’s new passing game coordinator, Pep Hamilton. He was an assistant with J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh at Stanford, then four years in the NFL.
Michigan’s offense had terrific simplistic two years ago under Jedd Fisch. And the offense continued to be good last year. He’s now at UCLA.
Michigan still has Tim Drevo at offensive coordinator and J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh calling the shots. But too many shots have been strange blanks this year. And that’s something Michigan needed to begin figuring out during the bye week.
But right now, the screws in the Michigan program are more loose than they’ve been at this time of year in the previous two seasons under J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh. They need tightening. That’s why J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh called last week’s bye a “week of improvement,” or words to that effect. He knows the screws need to be tightened. The team is still under construction.
Have the Wolverines indeed improved? You’ll begin to find out when I do.
* Like Michigan State, Michigan’s running backs need to stop fumbling. Yes, this has been a problem in Ann Arbor with two running backs, Chris Evans and Karan Higdon. Maybe these were just isolated incidents, but they need it to stop before it becomes a problem.
Michigan has done a good job of going to its tight ends and developing them as a weapon, but they have gotten away from utilizing their wide receivers, especially since losing their favorite third-down target, Tarik Black, to an injury in the Air Force game (likely out for the year).
And I think Michigan needs to do more to manufacture depth on defense. Get second-stringers more playing time. They’ll need more dependable bodies when facing uptempo teams. Penn State comes to mind as a potentially problematic matchup.
These things on “the must list” might not hurt Michigan this week. But those areas will hurt Michigan later in the season. And they MIGHT hurt Michigan this week, IF Michigan State has managed to harness improvement of their own, such as:
* Finding a consistent ground game. MSU’s lack of quality play from the running back position has been a surprise this season. Last week, every offensive lineman (except maybe Cole Chewins) was beaten by an Iowa d-lineman during run stoppages. Some o-linemen, such as Tyler Higby, were beaten more than once.
Iowa plays a tough, two-gapping style. MSU’s young o-line took some lumps last week, but didn’t give up any fatal plays that turned a negative tide. And the o-line pass protected well.
Michigan can do some two-gapping, but is mostly an attacking, slanting, slashing, aggressive, one-gap style. It’s possible that MSU’s o-line might be better equipped to deal with Michigan’s d-line than Iowa’s. You’ll begin to know when I know. It’s possible. We have only four games to view as a body of work. We’re guessing on a lot of things. Teams are still under construction.
* Both teams obviously MUST avoid turnovers. That’s the same thing for every team in every game every week. Don’t commit the bad give-away.
Lewerke had two bad ones vs Notre Dame and RB L.J. Scott had one. You know the result.
O’Korn had a bad INT last week, throwing unnecessarily into traffic, and stared it down a bit to do so.
Both teams need to avoid those things.
As for FORCING turnovers, Michigan has done a great job of that in the past but has forced only three INTs so far this season. More are probably coming.
As for the blind-side sack producing a fumble? Both teams are capable of delivering in that area.
MSU’s pass protectors are better than Michigan’s in preventing blindside sacks, but Michigan State has yet to face a pass rush like Michigan’s.
Michigan’s pass protectors haven’t been nearly as good as MSU’s (Michigan has allowed 12 sacks, Michigan State has allowed 6). And now Michigan is going to see a good, improving Michigan State pass rush.
I expect Michigan’s pass protection to have improved during the bye week. The communication problems at left tackle with a senior seem correctable, as do the problems with RB pass protection. UM will still be limited by mediocre play at right tackle. But the bye week should help in this area, plus O’Korn is more mobile than Speight, and has a knack for the escape.
Thus you have to go with Michigan State has the team most likely to cough up an expensive fumble.
THE IF/THEN LIST
If Michigan State is able to get the ground game going, to the tune of maybe 130 yards rushing in this game, then you know the rest of the theory: It helps open up the pass game. I don’t need to explain why.
But this is the rest of the positive chain of events if the run game is working: It will help Michigan State possess the ball, move the chains, get first downs.
We discussed the VITAL importance of this simple little concept during the Skull Session podcast. And I said the same thing about playing Michigan’s fine defense last year, and the year before.
Merely getting first downs is a huge step toward remaining competitive in this game, and possibly winning.
Of course you need first downs. You need them to drive in order to score points and win. Duh.
But there is compound positive interest in this game for Michigan State if the Spartans can merely GET … FIRST … DOWNS.
Get first downs and you run clock, shorten the game against a team that likely has more talent in the starting lineup than you do.
Get first downs, move the ball, flip the field, punt it, tackle the punt returner (Don Peoples-Jones) - give a questionable Michigan offense an 80-yard field rather than the 50-yard fields Michigan so often had two years ago in this game.
Get first downs, move the ball, KEEP THE THIN GROUP of Michigan regulars on defense ON THE FIELD. Keep them on the field, tax their gas tanks and you’ll see their vigor, speed and effectiveness dulled just a bit, seven or eight plays into a drive.
If you keep them on the field for four or five plays, Michigan usually checks super DT Maurice Hurst out of the game. His replacements (sophomore Michael Dwumfour, 6-3, 350; freshman Aubrey Solomon, 6-3, 297, will be good some day, but not yet. The other reserve, senior Bryan Mone, 6-4, 325, used to be pretty good as a starter but last year’s injury seems to have taken too much air out of his wheels).
As for the other d-linemen, they usually don’t get breaks. It hasn’t hurt them that much yet, but it could.
Same with the linebackers.
Get first downs, and this hard-charging, ferocious defense becomes a little more manageable. Baby steps.
Michigan State watched film of Michigan struggle for three quarters with Air Force and Purdue and Michigan State is not intimidated. The Michigan defense is very good and needs to be managed. The rest of it is extremely do-able.
WHAT ABOUT MSU’S DEFENSE?
Michigan is ranked No. 1 in the nation in total defense.
This just in: Michigan State is No. 5.
Michigan has been playing great pressure-oriented defense.
Michigan State has had fun ratcheting up a new package of pressures as well. Michigan State has brought those pressures with good athletes (not as good as Winovich, Gary and Bush, but pretty good athletes).
And Michigan State has covered well behind those pressures. We haven’t seen any miscommunications in the defensive backfield this year, despite using a slightly expanded volume of material.
Michigan State used to play its base defense 65 to 75 percent of the time. Now, I would estimate Michigan State runs “base” maybe 40 to 55 percent of the time. Michigan State is running cover-one (single safety deep/man-to-man underneath) far more frequently than the first eight years of the Dantonio era, and more than last year, when the Spartans first started to expand toward more man-to-man.
Michigan State has run a good balance of base, then cover-one/man, some two-deep/man under, and some varied blitzes. Opponents haven’t been seeing the same, predictable base defense, down-after-down, followed by predictable blitzes in front of cover-three in the back. They’ve switched things up, given QBs more to think about, and a little more to read.
So now, might Michigan State ratchet up the pressure even more? Michigan State’s pressures have been good and successful this year, but we haven’t seen blitz-a-poola from them. Might they shift gears more in that direction for this game? Air Force and Purdue had success against Michigan’s offensive line and pass protections with heavy percentages of blitzes and pressures. Michigan State has more firepower to work with on defense in this area than those two teams. But we know Michigan has been working to become better-equipped to handle blitzes. Have they improved enough during J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach Jim Harbaugh’s week of improvement? You’ll begin to find out when I do.
A CLOSER LOOK AT O’KORN
QB 8 JOHN O’KORN (6-4, 211, Sr., Huntingdon, Pa/transfer from Houston)
* He was a 5.7 three-star recruit, ranked No. 94 in Florida and the No. 31 pro style QB in the nation.
* Is the new starter, with Wilton Speight having been lost to injury last week.
* O’Korn had a ton of experience as a starter at U of Houston.
* Was 18-of-26 pass against Purdue, playing about three quarters of the game, finishing with 270 yards with one touchdown and one interception and also ran for a first down while leading touchdown drives of 84 and 86 yards.
* At this point, it seems strange that Speight was able to beat out O’Korn for the job on two occasions (last year, and this year). If O’Korn emerges to ignite this offense, the decision to go with Speight all that time will remain a head-scratcher. As of now, it’s just a question.
* O’Korn started as a freshman at Houston, and threw for 3117 yards.
* He went 40 of 54 against BYU in 2014. He threw for 364 yards against Rutgers in 2013.
* He had some off-field challenges, lost his starting job, transferred to Michigan looking for a new beginning, and now - after a long wait - he has that beginning. And so might the Michigan offense, and team as a whole.
* Last week, he stared down receivers a couple of times a little too long, but wasn’t as bad with that area of the game as I thought he was, the first time I watched it.
* He has some mobility, and ability to throw from the pocket. There were no noticeable defects in anything.
In the Skull Session podcast, I said that MSU’s Brian Lewerke was “definitely” the better of the two QBs. I will retract the word “definitely” at this time. It’s a tight comparison right now.
* On his very first pass attempt of the game, he was into his trigger as soon as his back foot hit the ground on the last step of his drop. Decisive and on-target for a gain of 13 to walk-on WR Nate Schoenle against a bailing corner.
Plusses and minuses:
Looked good on his first drive.
+ counter half boot to fullback Poggi, completed behind the line of scrimmage, gain of 12.
+ short curl at 5 yards to TE 84 Sean McKeon vs cover-three, vs blitz, gain of 13.
+ short out to TE aught at 1 yard, gain of 10, good forward burst after the catch McKeon.
+ 12 yard TD to 83 shallow crossing as part of a mesh combo vs man to man. On time and on target, caught at two yards.
(In bold: Throwing short, getting him into a rhythm).
second drive
- INT, shooting dice a little bit, stares it down, intended for Perry, into a little bit of a crowd, tip drill INT.
third drive
= Inc third-and-4 hitch and go vs cover two into the cover-two hole, INC too far.
= WR hitch vs off coverage caught at line of scrimmage gain of 7.
= Deep ball to Peoples-Jones at end of first half, thrown a little short. WR was open.
Second half
+ play action 81 WR drag caught at 6, gain of 14. Ball came out on time, smooth delivery.
= Deep fade 1 inc, well-defended.
+ three step out route to TE caught at 3 yards gain of 5 (84)
- third-and-four INC to Perry on flat route on interior snag concept out of a tight bunch. Thrown too high.
next drive
+ play action, moved out of the pocket, on the run threw to Peoples-Jones, finding him late on a dig at 20 yards. (Called back for holding) Impressive play by the QB.
+ crosser to 84 TE gain of 12. Getting into a rhythm.
+ TE short tout dropped by 83.
+ Elude sack on third-and-six, spun away found Perry on scramble rules gain of 12. Might be the turning point of the game, the play that started to take the air out of Purdue.
+ third-and-7: pass to 84 TE on a crossing route for 29 yards. Perfect pass.
- Threw late over the middle, Eubanks hit hard, flagged for targeting.
next drive
+ elusive in the pocket, side step found Perry at 12 yards for total gain of 22.
+ third-and-8, slot out to the short side gain of 8.
+ sit down to the TE McKeon gain of 21.
In all: He started short, gained a rhythm and did some impressive things midway through the second half.
ADD IT ALL UP:
* Michigan is pretty good at QB with O’Korn. I’ve come around on him.
* At WR, Michigan has a revolving door of capable guys, but nothing great. Grant Perry seems to be becoming their favored third-down target, with T Black out. But Perry is averaging just 40 yards receiving per game. Michigan needs a WR or two to step up. Slippery, slender walk-on Nate Schoenle got some run against Purdue. Auditions are taking place on gameday.
Don Peoples-Jones has great potential but is going through the proving-grounds process.
Michigan used a lot of TE-heavy formations against Purdue, often eschewing the use of WRs.
* At TE, Michigan has a deep, evolving cast. They’ll use three or four of them at any given time. Sean McKeon (6-5, 248) is an emerging factor at 6-5, 248. Good player.
Michigan State pass defense vs Michigan passing game? Is O’Korn ready to be the real deal, or are there problems present that prevented him from winning the job over Speight?
Michigan State ranks No. 2 in the Big Ten in pass completion pct allowed (48.2), which is a reflection of playing more man-to-man.
Michigan State is No. 9 in the nation in pass defense (allowing 152 yards per game through the air).
Iowa passed for 212 yards against Michigan State, the highest Michigan State has allowed. Iowa was 17 of 32 through the air.
Michigan, despite its passing game woes, has eclipsed 218 yards passing in three of its four games.
Michigan State can play quality pass defense and still allow 175 through the air to these guys.
I would expect Michigan to be in the neighborhood of the 212 yards passing that Iowa amassed against Michigan State, and slightly more efficient. If O’Korn struggles to match what Iowa did through the air, then Michigan could struggle to exceed Iowa’s scoring output (10 points).
* At RB, Michigan has talented guys who have made big plays in the past but have hit some snags this year.
Ty Isaac is pretty when he gets going, but he seemed to be playing hurt against Purdue, tip-toeing into the line in short yardage situations. I was stunned that Michigan stayed with him.
Karan Higdon is a quick slasher. Quality back, but he had a fumble after a reception last week. No big deal.
Chris Evans has been a game-breaker in the past. Fumbled early against Air Force and then rode the bench. Had a 10-yard TD run against Purdue. He’s good when he’s right.
But Dantonio’s teams have done a great job for nine straight years of containing or stuffing the Michigan ground attack.
Michigan does some good things on the ground, but it’s kind of sporadic. They didn’t run the ball well against Purdue, averaging about 2 yards per carry on plays other than a 49-yarder that broke with 6 minutes to go.
Michigan is largely an inside zone ground team. When they have run power, they have done it kind of well lately. But they don’t run it a lot - I think because big right guard Michael Onwenu might only have a couple of pop-and-pull runs in him per game. The left guard can do it a little bit. I’m a little surprised they don’t do it more. It would make them a little tougher to defend if they mixed it up more on the ground.
Can Michigan State stuff the run with the standard number in the box (7 vs 2-WR sets/ 6 in box vs 3-WR sets)? If so, they can keep safeties more obstructive in the pass game.
With Michigan’s o-line, you don’t see guys (other than the LT) losing individual battles all that often. But you don’t see them winning, either. They don’t cave people in. I think Michigan State’s defensive front will win more than it loses.
I think Michigan rushes for about 125 this year.
I would EXPECT Michigan State to rush for less than 95 yards in this game, based on Michigan’s ground defensive dominance and MSU’s problems in that area. But I thought the same thing last year and the Spartans managed to rush for 217 against a rush defense that might have been better than this year’s Wolverine rush defense.
That’s a rivalry game/holy war type of statistic. There was no reason to anticipate that MSU’s ground game could produce like it did for that game.
And Michigan State will need another heroic effort on the ground in this game. If they get it, the Spartans will be in much better shape to win than last year, because Michigan State has most of the other areas better-equipped than a year ago.
* On defense, Michigan plays three down linemen most of the time in a 3-3-5 type of look.
The three down linemen are NFL guys. Maurice Hurst at DT is as good as it gets in the Big Ten, although I expected him to be even more dominant. The d-ends are fast, tough, difficult to block, on you RIGHT NOW.
Bush, the MLB, is part tank, part fighter jet. He’s a problem. You know about him.
Furbush is underrated at outside linebacker. He is a big frame guys with wheels.
McRay, the other OLB, can thump, too. He doesn’t seem as fast as he used to be, but he scrapes well when pursuing to the edge. Gets a good jump on things, probably good in the film room. When he scrapes to the edge, it’s hard to knock him off track because he has good size to go with it.
The viper position is the fifth guy in the defensive backfield, 6-0, 205-pound Khaleke Hudson. He had a season- and career-high seven tackles against Cincinnati. I’m still forming an opinion on him. He played kind of a deep middle safety against Air Force’s option. Against other teams, he plays more of a traditional outside linebacker in a 3-4 - and I would expect that to be the case with him against Michigan State.
Hudson doesn’t accumulate a lot of stats because other guys eat up all of his work, and the defense is off the field before anyone can put together big numbers.
At safety, I don’t see weaknesses.
The corners press, get their hands on you, disrupts things and don’t draw a lot of flags.
* Can Lewerke throw against Michigan’s terrific pass rush, and a handsy, pressing secondary that is allowing only 41 pct completions.
MSU’s coaches get accused of being conservative and unimaginative. I don’t put them in that category. I think they are pragmatic. They play the percentages. They’ll want to establish the run in most games, but they’ll go to the gun and air it out if the run ain’t working. And then they’ll go back to the run even if it isn’t working, in order to play the clock and play to their defense. They play percentages.
In a game like this, they’ll try the run, of course. And it might surprisingly gain traction, like last year. I have no way to explain what happened last year and no grounds to predict that that type of run success will happen again. But it might. That’s football. That’s why we love it.
They’ll try to run, and they’ll have new wrinkles installed for the run game. And who knows, Michigan State’s young, quickish o-linemen might actually match up better against the quick, athletic, one-gapping slants and stunts of the Michigan defense than the heavyweight two-gappers from Iowa. I don’t know. You’ll find out when I do. That might be part of the explanation from last year.
They’ll try to run, but Michigan State - when it’s an underdog facing a challenge like this - will have some air game wrinkles. You can count on that. There will be plays you and I and Michigan haven’t yet seen. They might be subtle, they might be substantial (like the throwback to Pendleton). But they will have some cartoons in place, and Michigan State will need to pop a few of them in order to support Lewerke in what will otherwise be a tough chore for him, in terms of standing in the pocket and trying to find open receivers against handsy man coverage with limited time to read and release.
Lewerke’s ability to move the pocket, MSU’s ability to change the launch point with its play calling, is an interesting wildcard in this game. You don’t want to have to sit back in the pocket every single time against this Michigan pass rush. Yet you can’t afford to roll out every single time and expose your QB to the edge with No. 10 Bush freight-training at him from inside-out. Bush converges so quickly, and delivers a heavy load when he gets there. Lewerke must be aware of where No. 10 is at all times, and awareness alone might not be enough to elude him or evade his impact on the pass game.
I liked Lewerke’s brain on some reads last week (discussed in the Skull Session). His 15-yard run on third-and-12 was key to burning clock and cementing victory. Of equal importance, he showed guts in trying to beat No. 27, Hooker, Iowa’s hard hitting safety, to the line of gain, and diving to do so. Gutty move. Michigan is a little more equipped at making you pay for gutty moves. Lewerke needs to keep those gut-check plays to a minimum, which I think he will do. He knew he HAD to do it on that play against Iowa.
Also, on that 15-yard scramble, he read two-deep zone with man-to-man underneath and knew they wouldn’t have anyone accounting for the QB, and he was eager to tuck and run. The read and anticipation are as impressive as the foot-quickness and guts at the end. He is becoming a total-package threat - maybe not great in any area, but good in many areas.
His mobility, his mind and his guts give him a chance to be the type of quick-trigger, quick-minded QB that is needed to navigate this tight-grip Michigan defense.
Will this UM defense play with even more RPMs due to the nighttime energy? Yes. Can Lewerke handle this defense, on this stage, at night? You’ll find out when I do.
* On special teams, Peoples-Jones had a smooth punt return for TD vs Air Force. He’s a long strider, which is a little rare for a punt returner. He’s talented, but I don’t think he’s an every-punt problem.
Michigan will leave one, sometimes three, rushers to spy on the punter to make sure he punts it. At least that’s what they did against Air Force. That’s not a complete punt-safe mentality. They try to negate the fake while peeling enough guys back for a return. Will Michigan State probe something there? With one to three spying the punter, there’s still time to throw to the sidelines with the other Wolverines’ backs turned - something Tyler O’Connor was supposed to do, to a wide open Monty Madaris two years ago, but he choked it down instead and was stopped short of the first down, giving UM a short field and setting up a Wolverine TD. A pass play to the sideline might still be open, based on what I saw against Air Force.
Can Michigan be wise to the fakes while still trying to set up returns for Jones? It’s hard to do both well.
* In the kickoff return department, Michigan doesn’t seem all that special. They rank No. 11 in the Big Ten with a 17.6 average.
* The Michigan kicker, freshman Nordin, is very good and has had a lot of work, due to red zone woes. He is 11 of 13 on the year and can hit from 50-plus. Michigan State has a pretty solid kicker in Coghlin, but Michigan has the edge here. Either are capable of hitting the 45-yard game winner at the buzzer, but Nordin a better bet.
* Michigan State usually tries to steal a possession somewhere, with a special teams fake or on-side kick or some sort of surprise. They might need it, and if they get it, THAT could tip the scales …
* Most-likely scenario: Overall, we have two good defenses, two capable QBs … Michigan State has better talent at WR than Michigan, but can Lewerke nagivate, operate and capitalize? Will he have enough pass protection to do so? Will he have a run game complement to give him balance and favorable down-and-distance? … The advantage at WR was the edge Michigan State needed to ride last week against Iowa, and Michigan State did just that … This week, the edge might not be as pronounced as last week, but it’s there, and Michigan must snuff it out or at least contain it … Will Michigan’s defense show some of that fatigue for the first time this year if Michigan State becomes the first offense that can keep them on the field? Coming off a bye week, fatigue won't be a factor. But I wonder about the tread on Michigan's tires on defense for the long term, into November if they don't start developing more depth … Lewerke is ready to do some good things in this game, but so is O’Korn … O’Korn’s job is a little easier, but he doesn’t have Lewerke’s WRs … Can O’Korn continue to ride those tight ends? Will Michigan’s coaches provide better pass schemes and route combinations than some of the ones Speight has had to deal with? … MSU's coaches have come up with some dice-shooting magic in this series and as the aggressive underdog, they'll have some stews brewing for this one ... Michigan’s advantage at kicker could be a difference in 3 or 6 points, and could be the difference in the game. That edge is more of a known commodity than trying to measure vague MSU coaching concontions … Can MSU’s ground game pull a sequel similar to last year? … Did Michigan’s ground blocking improve during the bye week. If not, O'Korn's job gets a little tougher ... Did Michigan's pass protection improve? I'm guessing yes. If no, then O'Korn's job gets tougher still … Overall these are two teams still under construction, and we’re still learning of their capabilities, but Michigan has better starting talent on defense, buoyed by the home night crowd, and Michigan has the kicker, and enough at QB and tight end to make the Wolverines the percentage favorite to win.
(I could write another 10,000 words about Michigan’s starting 22 and key reserves but I’m out of time).
