Michigan vs. UNLV Awards

Michigan vs. UNLV Awards


September 21, 2015

Jourdan Lewis


Let’s see more of this guy on offense . . . 
Ty Isaac. This is not a new refrain for me, but it’s worth repeating. I think Isaac is the most talented back on the roster, and while his best career game did come against UNLV – which is not a quality opponent – it’s important to note that starter De’Veon Smith didn’t perform very well, either (13 carries, 33 yards). Meanwhile, Isaac had 8 carries for 114 yards and 1 score. Take away his 76-yard touchdown run, and he still ran 7 times for 38 yards (5.4 yards/carry). As things stand right now, Smith is averaging 3.9 yards/carry and Isaac is at 8.9, while Derrick Green sits at 3.5 and Drake Johnson has 5.2. Yards per carry is not the only measurement of a running back, but his primary job is to gain yards on the ground. Smith has 53 attempts this year, while Isaac has only 18. That’s too much of an imbalance.

Hit the jump for the rest of the awards for this week.

Let’s see less of this guy on offense . . . De’Veon Smith, I guess. I think for the most part, the right guys are playing. If I want Isaac to play more, I guess Smith should play a little less. Quarterback has been a bit of a weak point, but I don’t believe that Shane Morris would be a better option than Jake Rudock.

Let’s see more of this guy on defense . . . James Ross III. Ross made 5 tackles and 1.5 tackles for loss in Saturday’s game. I think Ross is a better football player than Michigan’s third safety, whether it’s Delano Hill or Dymonte Thomas. Certain packages are going to require a nickel or dime look, but even so, I would not be disappointed to see Ross take some of Desmond Morgan or Joe Bolden’s snaps. The Wolverines have a good crew of linebackers this year, and it’s difficult to find a good balance of snaps.

Let’s see less of this guy on defense . . . nobody. This has been a place inhabited by Channing Stribling, but Stribling staved off my calls for his position with an interception and a pass breakup. He also did not lose outside contain, which was an issue early in the year. I’m not entirely convinced that Stribling is the right guy, because Jeremy Clark made his second interception of the year and Jourdan Lewis had 4 pass breakups. I’m in a little bit of a wait-and-see mode since this was the worst opponent of the year.

Play of the game . . . Ty Isaac’s 76-yard touchdown run. Not only was it the longest run by a Michigan player since 2012, but it was just nice to see someone, anyone, make a big play. Isaac got a toss to the left and a couple decent blocks, ran through some meager tackle attempts, and outran the defense down the left sideline.

MVP of the game . . . Jourdan Lewis. I thought Isaac, Stribling, Ross, and others had good games. Ryan Glasgow had a field day up front, too. But Lewis seemed like the best player on the field, batting down 4 passes, coming up in run support, and generally shutting down his side of the field. For whatever reason, UNLV tested Lewis throughout the game, and he was up to the challenge.

26 comments

  1. Comments: 1356
    Joined: 8/13/2015
    Roanman
    Sep 21, 2015 at 7:42 AM

    I’ll support Jourdan Lewis for best player on the field Saturday.

    Since Thunder has temporarily lost his go to guy to see less of on defense, I will again flog my choice to see more of on defense. James Ross was quick, certain and effective on Saturday ….. yet again.

  2. Comments: 1364
    Joined: 8/11/2015
    WindyCityBlue
    Sep 21, 2015 at 9:25 AM

    Let’s see more of all of our TEs on offense. Not sure why they disappeared against UNLV, but we can’t afford to limit our offense that much going forward.

  3. Comments: 522
    Joined: 8/12/2015
    DonAZ
    Sep 21, 2015 at 11:07 AM

    Let’s see less of … Blake O’Neill. He punted 5 times against UNLV, vs. 3 or Utah and 3 for Oregon State. Yes, his punts were good (except for the one). But 5 punts against UNLV means drives stalled. 3rd down conversion was a paltry 6 for 13.

    I’m joking … sort of. O’Neill is a good punter. It’s just I’d rather he not see action as that means we’re driving, getting first downs and scoring.

    • Comments: 522
      Joined: 8/12/2015
      DonAZ
      Sep 21, 2015 at 11:08 AM

      “…as that means we’re NOT driving, getting first downs and scoring.”

      We need an “edit” button.

      • Comments: 522
        Joined: 8/12/2015
        DonAZ
        Sep 21, 2015 at 11:51 AM

        Sheesh … I can’t read my own writing.

        My sentence is correct as originally posted. O’Neill not punting –> we’re moving.

    • Comments: 48
      Joined: 8/11/2015
      Nick.
      Sep 21, 2015 at 11:34 AM

      I agree Don. We had two stalled drives right before the half and another to open the second half. O’Neil has been lights out, but I would rather not see him either.

  4. Comments: 48
    Joined: 8/11/2015
    Nick.
    Sep 21, 2015 at 11:30 AM

    I agree with the TE’s disappearing during this game. Although there were several times that both Butt and Williams were wide open up the middle and Rudock just didn’t see them.

    One could argue to see more of Hurst and Charlton on defense as well. They both had pretty solid days.

  5. Comments: 6285
    Joined: 8/11/2015
    Lanknows
    Sep 21, 2015 at 12:44 PM

    I got more from this game than I thought I would (after watching most of the replay). I think Michigan established an identity – though I don’t mean that as necessarily a positive thing.

    What we saw was more of the same. The defense will shut you down, more often than not. It’s going to take an excellent gameplan or some talented individual players to score consistently on Michigan’s defense. Their domination of UNLV isn’t a major data point, but it’s another sign that what we saw against Utah wasn’t a fluke and our expectations for a very good (albeit not elite) defense are in line. I thought it was encouraging to see Clark and Stribling get INTs to put doubts at ease about the second corner spot. I don’t care which of them wins the plurality of snaps in the end, but I’m confident whoever does will be an above average big 10 starter. Both have talent and size. The INTs change nothing – these are guys who are sticking to their WRs very well and eventually they will probably get lucky and or take advantage of QB mistakes. Hopefully it happens again against a meaningful opponent, and hopefully the cover holds up against better players.

    As for linebacker, I’m going to concede my argument that Bolden and Morgan are very good. They’re OK, but even against UNLV they are a step slow and make mistakes too often. I’m not going to jump on the “play the backup” bangwagon, I’m just going to acknowledge that, despite their experience, our LBs are a couple steps from being elite. Seemed like Bolden was horsing around on one play after he got blocked easily, which turned me off. Even if the game is out of hand that seems bush league and not becoming of a captain.

    Grading on a curve for a Power 5 team, I would say our D is a B+ overall. A- DL, B- LBs (if you include the buck end) and B+ secondary (which could get to a A- as the season progresses). I give the secondary more upside because only Wilson and Lewis are experienced starters. Stribling, Clark, Peppers, and Hill should continue to settle in and may in the end be great complements to Wilson and Lewis.

    ———————

    Very different story on offense. Rudock was flat out inconsistent and inaccurate this game. Not going to worry too much, but clearly what we saw at Utah wasn’t just one off game. He isn’t a great player and he isn’t as reliable as advertised. Chalk this up to transition costs perhaps but there are some mistakes there that shouldn’t be made. I agree with Thunder that he could be getting more help from the receivers, but still… his ceiling is “good”, not “very good’.

    The OL also remains as this team’s achilles heel IMO. The short-yardage problems — against UNLV — are flat out embarassing. Smith getting stuffed on 3rd and 1 and 4th and 1 consecutively was something that just can’t happen for this team to be what it wants to be. A good point that WindyCityBlue made in his comments in the game thread was that we can’t tell if this OL was getting any better because OSU and especially UNLV are far below what Utah brought forward as level of difficulty. Maybe they are, but we don’t know that, at all, because our 3 opponents have had 3 very different levels of talent.

    I’m past calling these offensive skill players unexplosive. Darboh and Chesson are explosive with the ball in their hands. Ty Isaac showed you what he can do with blocking and bad tackling, and Drake Johnson continues to look like he is getting shot out of a cannon. We have Peppers in our back pocket.

    The problem with this team is beyond that. The OL (as also the TEs and fullbacks) doesn’t block well enough to open holes that make explosiveness an issue. They need DeVeon Smith to create those extra 3 or 4 yards he does regularly. They need WR who can adjust and catch the ball, because Darboh and Chesson don’t have it. Everyone remembers that Grbac to Howard TD against Notre Dame because Howard saw the ball in the air and turned on the jets and made a leap. Our guys don’t have that instinct (though I still have some hopes for Canteen and Harris once they bulk up a bit.) Hemingway and Gallon had it, they don’t. Screens will only get you so far against good teams.

    I still have great faith that Harbaugh can put this team in a position to win, but I have my doubts that we have the talent to put it together against quality opponent. WindyCity also argues that Michigan doesn’t have anything hiding in it’s backpocket and I disagree with that. One need only to see the last couple years against OSU and remember Lloyd Carr’s infamous “scoring offense” to know that what we see in one game isn’t necessarily what we’ll see in another.

    Grading the O: Skill guys: C+, OL C – QB: C+ TE/FB: B
    ——————————————-

    We’ll learn so much more about this team against BYU, but I have a feeling we kind of already know what we have. I think our D will keep their big-armed QB and big play-making WR in check. But I think their defense is going to contain our run game, stuff it in short-yardage situations, and at this point I doubt that Rudock and the WRs are good enough to make a defense pay for cheating on a mediocre run game.

    I wasn’t disappointed at all with the performance against UNLV (other than maybe Rudock), but I WAS hoping that we’d see more obvious signs of improvement from the OL and a flawlessly efficient offense.

    • Comments: 522
      Joined: 8/12/2015
      DonAZ
      Sep 21, 2015 at 1:46 PM

      “They need WR who can adjust and catch the ball, because Darboh and Chesson don’t have it”

      Agree. There’s been a couple of long balls that could have been caught. If the ball is in the air, it is the duty of the receiver to adjust to it and go get it. Some of the blame falls on Rudock, but not all of it.

      I think Michigan *can* beat BYU. I do not think it’s a certain thing. We shall see.

      • Comments: 6285
        Joined: 8/11/2015
        Lanknows
        Sep 21, 2015 at 2:30 PM

        Yeah, it’s on both WR and QB, but there have been catchable balls that haven’t been.

        Throwing more to the TEs (as suggested above) could help, but the offense is fighting an uphill if the WRs aren’t any sort of vertical threat at all.

    • Comments: 1364
      Joined: 8/11/2015
      WindyCityBlue
      Sep 21, 2015 at 5:15 PM

      I don’t put the whole blame on failing to gain a single yard on third and fourth down on the OLine exclusively. It was scared, predictable play calling that left them facing a defense loaded up to stop what they KNEW was coming. I expected that from Lloyd Carr, but hoped for better from Harbaugh.

      • Comments: 6285
        Joined: 8/11/2015
        Lanknows
        Sep 22, 2015 at 12:02 AM

        It’s not ALL on the OL, but mostly it is. Smith make a terrible run on that 4th down play, but it’s hard to be patient when all you need is a yard and you haven’t developed faith in your linemen to execute (and for good reason).

        As for the assertion that the coaches were scared… OF UNLV??? C’mon man. It’s one thing to call them obstinate or bull-headed or boring or uncreative, but scared is just ridiculous.

        The whole premise of Harbaugh’s offense is to base everything off the power run game. Michigan HAS to establish that and UNLV is the perfect practice dummy to build from. They didn’t though, and that’s a huge concern for the rest of the season. But it’s not ‘scared’ anymore than Rich Rodriguez is ‘scared’ when he calls a zone read. It’s trying to get good at what you want to be good at.

        • Comments: 1364
          Joined: 8/11/2015
          WindyCityBlue
          Sep 22, 2015 at 9:54 AM

          No, not scared of UNLV. Sheesh. Please tell me you didn’t think I was saying that.

          Trying to avoid the criticism he’d get if he calls a pass on fourth and 1 and doesn’t make it. Making only the CALL that will get the least criticism even if it doesn’t work, no matter how predictable it is, as opposed to a call that the opposition isn’t expecting and that has at least as good a chance to get one yard and a much better chance to get a lot more. As I said, that’s Lloyd Carr thinking. I expected a little more boldness and less tight-sphincter conservatism in play-calling from Harbaugh.

          And yes, in the future, Harbaugh may want to run the ball between the tackles 60-70 times a game and not give a shit if the opposition knows it’s coming, but this year he isn’t even close to having the personnel to make that a winning strategy. We do not HAVE to establish anything this year, because we really can’t. There’s a word for trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results, and it isn’t “brilliant”.

          • Comments: 6285
            Joined: 8/11/2015
            Lanknows
            Sep 22, 2015 at 12:17 PM

            I see you wanted him to call a pass. You did notice that our QB wasn’t exactly exhibiting peak accuracy right?

            I don’t think there’s much to be gained by calling a pass in that spot. Again, Michigan is trying to establish an identity. If they are going to go against the trend/expectation, they should save that for meaningful situations. Not UNLV.

            Furthermore, the idea that ANY coach would get criticized for passing on 4th down is a little hard to fathom. It’s one thing if you have Marshawn Lynch and are moving the ball, another thing when you just got stuffed and haven’t shown a good running game since 2010. Most fans want coaches to take risks.

            Anyway – Jim Harbaugh has so much fan goodwill to burn through that he can’t possibly be worried about public reactions to playcalling.

            While I agree with you that Michigan might not be able to successfully assert its identity this year, I disagree with you that it’s not worth trying to do so. I said the same thing for Rodriguez in 2008. You have to be who you are. Michigan may have to resort to more gimmicks and trickery to move the ball but they are still going to run the power plays that form the core of their offensive philosophy. And the damn well should against UNLV, even if it’s not the methodology that leads to the biggest blowout on the scoreboard.

  6. Comments: 6285
    Joined: 8/11/2015
    Lanknows
    Sep 21, 2015 at 12:47 PM

    I’ve already made my opinion on the Issac/Smith and Clark/Stribling situations be known.

    To me, it’s obvious that Smith is the primary back. He’s earned it, and he deserves it, even if he does too frequently miss his holes or misuse his block. Isaac showed that he could put up 5 YPC against bad defenses not only in Trojan colors, so that’s good… making a big deal about it is foolhardy IMO, but I’m not going to change anyone’s mind. People will see what they want to see when it comes to games vs overmatched teams.

    • Comments: 3844
      Joined: 7/13/2015
      Sep 21, 2015 at 12:52 PM

      I guess you’ll just choose to ignore the fact that Isaac has put up a better yards-per-carry average in every game this year, including against Utah. And keep in mind that it’s not like Isaac started against UNLV while Smith sat on the bench with a bum ankle or something. Both guys played, and yet Smith did nothing while Isaac had a very good day.

      If you’re insisting that others are stubborn, I think you might want to look in the mirror.

      • Comments: 6285
        Joined: 8/11/2015
        Lanknows
        Sep 21, 2015 at 2:57 PM

        ““Um, I guess I’m not as concerned with statistics as you two seem to be”
        -My buddy Jim

        Haha. YPC based on 18 carries? YES. You should ignore it. Against bad teams mostly, especially.

        I’m not going to comb through the data to prove my point, instead I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’d acknowledge that Smith is getting ‘different’ carries than Isaac. He is working inside more, getting more short yardage carries, getting more ‘difficult’ playcalls against stacked boxes, etc.

        I wish those fancy OL and running stats football outsiders put together were readily available somewhere for college RBs because I think you’d see a far more compelling and nuanced story than YPC.

        The most cogent point you raised about the ypc was that Smith’s numbers were similar to Isaac’s against a cupcake last year, when HE was the backup. He had a 60 something yard run that game. Does that dispel the concerns about his lack of big play ability? – of course not. Bad defenses can make anybody look good. Isaac made a nice play on that long TD run, but a better opponent is going to get stiff-armed so easily. Isaac dodged one tackle and broke another – Smith’s done far more impressive things on a lot of 4-yard carries.

        My view has been consistent – garbage time carries and production against garbage competition are not very meaningful. This isn’t being stubborn this is reflective of a basic philosphy that I view to be correct. If you want to call me stubborn for thinking that the sun will come up everyday I’ll do that too. We see bad players put up good stats against bad teams all the time.

        If Isaac and Smith each get 15 carries against BYU, rotate in and out throughout the game, get similar goalline vs 3rd and long carries, and one outproduces the other then I’ll call that a meaningful piece of information. Outlier plays against chumps are not. Small sample sizes are not. etc.

        The fundamental difference in our views is that I take outlier-influenced statistics with a grain of salt and recognize context in the numbers while you view the numbers as generally reflective of overall ability, even early in the year (i.e., sample size issues). You’re certainly nowwhere near the NFL-meatheads who think superbowl rings are the ultimate statistic for assessing individual players, but I think you’re a little more towards that end of the statistical interpretation continuum than I am.

        If you want to go that route fine — Smith has a higher ypc mark on receptions than Isaac. Therefore Smith needs to get more 3rd down work than Isaac. (Note, I actually think the opposite, because Isaac should be a bigger threat there if he can get blocking down.)

        I don’t have a problem with giving Isaac more carries to be honest, though I don’t really think it’s a good idea, I think he’s done enough to earn some carries. To me – Drake Johnson looks better with the ball on outside runs than Isaac, but that’s beside the point. Smith is playing very well, running hard, and he’s a far better fit for what Michigan needs. If this was a dominant OL I might feel differently. Right now the OL is best described as “developing” and for that you need a guy like Smith.

        • Comments: 3844
          Joined: 7/13/2015
          Sep 21, 2015 at 10:48 PM

          Your argument is really falling apart. You say things like “garbage time” but Isaac has been playing throughout the games, not in garbage time. Was the second quarter of last week’s game “garbage time”?

          You’re also now resorting to stuff like “Well, De’Veon Smith has tougher runs.” WTF is that supposed to mean? They’re tougher because he’s not fast enough to get through the hole, and sometimes he doesn’t see the hole. If he were faster or had better vision, he would get some of those runs. But then we’re not really talking about De’Veon Smith anymore, because we’re creating a hybrid of him and someone who’s fast with good vision.

          I’ve read some advanced stats stuff, and those advanced stats guys actually think “yards per carry” is a decent measurement of running ability.

          Also, I hope when you talk about Isaac’s yards per catch vs. Smith’s, you factor in Smith’s wide open drop against Utah. There’s nowhere in running stats to hide something like dropped passes, and Isaac has yet to drop one.

          • Comments: 6285
            Joined: 8/11/2015
            Lanknows
            Sep 21, 2015 at 11:56 PM

            Tougher runs because he has defenders in his face 3 steps after he gets the ball far more often. Tougher runs because he has to break more than 1 tackle to get beyond 2 yards. Tougher runs because there’s 8 guys in the box. Garbage time = late in decided games. Garbage teams = app state and unlv.

            How many runs did Ty Isaac get when Tom Stroblel was inserted as an OLmen and summarily tossed aside by the UNLV DL? A lot fewer than DeVeon Smith.

            You’ve been arguing you know better than the coaches which RB should play for a few years now. It’s one thing if that coach is Hoke and Borges caliber, and another when it’s Jim freaking Harbaugh. Nobody is perfect and nobody is right all the time, but you made the Mike Cox argument over and over and over again, you made the argument for Mike Shaw over and over again, and now you’re doing the same with Ty Isaac. Rich Rodriguez and JIm Harbaugh know a few things about offensive coaching and personnel. I’m going to trust them and trust what I see on tape versus whatever you decide to see against lesser competition.

            You’re entitled to your opinion. I’m entitled to disagree.

          • Comments: 3844
            Joined: 7/13/2015
            Sep 22, 2015 at 7:45 AM

            Okay, so now Tom Strobel is to blame for De’Veon Smith’s lack of yardage…

            Again, these players have played the same teams, and there hasn’t been a great deal of garbage time.

            I would say Super Bowl champ Tom Coughlin knows a thing or two about coaching, too, and he liked Mike Cox enough to have him on his NFL roster. I don’t really get your point about Mike Shaw, because I never really had a strong pining for Shaw. My only point with him was that he might be better than Vincent Smith, and Smith is currently posting on MGoBlog and doing good things, but he didn’t sniff a football career after college. We’ve had this argument before, but using Mike Cox against me is an extremely lame argument.

            Anyway, I don’t really get what you’re arguing. Didn’t you agree that Isaac should get more carries? And isn’t it logical that the extra carries he would get would come from Smith’s allotment? Didn’t I say in the countdown that I thought Smith would be the starting running back? Have you seen me say that Isaac should start over Smith?

            You’re arguing over nothing, but it’s a really weak argument when the numbers don’t back you up. I mean, if you want to say that 18 carries is a small sample size, then let’s go along with that for a minute… Is 53 carries a big enough sample size three games into the year? Because that’s what Smith has, and he’s averaging less than 4.0 yards/carry. If any running back is averaging fewer than 4.0 yards/carry, you shouldn’t be surprised if there are rumblings for other guys to get more chances.

          • Comments: 6285
            Joined: 8/11/2015
            Lanknows
            Sep 22, 2015 at 12:07 PM

            No – DeVeon Smith is to blame for Ty Isaac’s lack of yardage. Smith leads the team in rush yards.

            But yes – blocking affects YPC. Strobel is an example of how Michigan still has a long way to go to be Alabama, Stanford or pre-Debord Michigan.

            I think you’re playing dumb for the sake of argument to assert that UNLV is representative of the defenses Michigan will have to face the rest of the year (or completely disregarding that it isn’t).

            Wow…Tom Coughlin. I seriously lost some respect for you there. Apparently you are a lot farther along on the RINGZ continuum than I thought. Tom Coughlin’s barely able to get above 500 during the regular season for his career and has as many losing seasons as winning seasons since 2000. He’s been fired once, almost fired twice, and is most likely headed for being fired again within a matter of months. But I’m sure that this man drafting Mike Cox for special teams duty proves your point somehow.

            The point of raising Smith/Shaw (which we debated extensively you might recall) and Cox (who has never been a productive RB outside of NE prep school, unless you want to count his 3.6 YPC season at UMASS) – is to say that you have an extensive track record of calling for the backup, even before Ty Isaac hit campus. Now you’ve pushing HARD for Ty Isaac for over a year. This is to say, you have an M.O.

            No – I do not agree that Isaac should get more carries. I don’t really have a problem if he does, but I think Smith has established himself as a THE primary back on this team with the way he played against Utah and Oregon State. I’d like Drake Johnson to get the bulk of backup carries. What I’d like for Ty Isaac is what I wanted for him in the offseason – to be the 3rd down back. But blocking is what RBs do on most plays, and if he isn’t good at that he shouldn’t play (just as Shaw and Cox didn’t play much in large part because of their blocking).

            I think if anyone is disgruntled with DeVeon Smith they aren’t paying much attention or watching the games. Yes, he’s still making some mistakes and can be impatient, but his ability to break tackles and get extra yards is special — and EXACTLY what this OL/team needs.

            If Michigan is going to play manball despite an OL that is struggling to execute it, they need a back like Smith. In an alternative universe where Michigan has an OL that is busting open big holes consistently, then it might be worth debating big play ability and straightline speed. Through 3 weeks of football that does not appear to be reality against meaningful competition. BYU’s big veteran DL appears to qualify as meaningful competion and if Michigan tries to manball them with Ty Isaac at TB it’s not going to go well. (Note: it probably won’t go well with Smith either, but at least the TFLs will be minimized.)

          • Comments: 3844
            Joined: 7/13/2015
            Sep 22, 2015 at 1:47 PM

            I’m not saying Tom Coughlin is an offensive genius. But the guy has won two Super Bowls, which is more than Harbaugh and Rodriguez. He knows more than you (and more than me), and he felt okay having Mike Cox as one of the 53 football players on his team for two years. He could have easily chosen Vincent Smith or someone else to play special teams, return kicks, and play running back, but he didn’t.

            Smith leads the team in rushing yards by way of having more carries. I think it’s funny that you’re calling me a Neanderthal for using yards/carry, and then you whip out the idea of “advanced stats” while touting Smith’s “total yardage” advantage. If you’re such an advanced study of these newfangled metrics, you would know that total yards are not a guru-approved measure of success. Your argument is falling apart.

            Where did I assert that UNLV’s defense is on par with the rest of the defenses Michigan will play this year? Nowhere.

            It’s even more astonishing that you’ve now said that Ty isaac shouldn’t play, simply because he’s not a great blocker. So…wait wait wait…you’re telling us that the guy who averaged 2.5 yards/carry against UNLV should be the starter, the guy coming off ACL surgery should be #2, and the guy averaging 8.9 yards/carry who just broke a 76-yard touchdown should ride the pine? Yikes.

            I’m done with this one. You’ve gone a little too far over the edge for me to continue in this discussion.

          • Comments: 6285
            Joined: 8/11/2015
            Lanknows
            Sep 22, 2015 at 2:29 PM

            Cox was promoted from the practice squad after injury. So Coughlin might not have felt good about it. Anyway, we’re talking about who should play RB, not who should return kickoffs.

            Rodriguez and Harbaugh are better coaches. Rodriguez has been fired once, like Caughlin, and has otherwise been very successful. Harbaugh’s has an NFL winning percentage of 70%, vastly superior to Caughlin’s 54%. You can bring up Ringz all you want, I have far more respect for Harbaugh and Rodriguez because their success isn’t tied to a fluke-laden run with a wildcard team eking out narrow victories.

            I brought up total yards because you wanted to cast blame for a “lack of yards”. Any stat-head will still acknowledge playing time as a reasonable measure and the dangers of comparing disparate data. If you compare temperature at different times of the day you might conclude that sunny days are colder than cloudy days. That’s what looking at YPC that includes cupcakes can do.

            The guy who has shown himself to be the best player (by virtue of on-field performance and in practice, via Harbaugh and his staff, not to mention Hoke and his) should be #1. Yes. The guy who looked like the best player by the end of last season looks like he should get carries as the #2 back. Yes. The guy who STILL hasn’t done anything against a good defense (despite being a junior) shouldn’t be higher than 3rd string. Yes.

            I’ll admit I was wrong about Isaac, as I said before, when he shows it against a good team. Now, I don’t expect he ever will because Devon Smith will continue to get the hard carries, difficult situations, and Isaac will continue to step in as a complementary guy in lower leverage situations.

        • Comments: 6285
          Joined: 8/11/2015
          Lanknows
          Sep 22, 2015 at 12:10 PM

          Honestly you’ve been calling for Ty Isaac so frequently and consistently that I thought you intended for Smith to be displaced as starter. e.g., You contrasted your opinion on Rudock/Morris with that of Smith/Isaac.

          • Comments: 6285
            Joined: 8/11/2015
            Lanknows
            Sep 22, 2015 at 12:36 PM

            Maybe if I have time I will start tracking Michigan RB success rate after the BYU game. This would lead some data to the debate. RB success rate should be more instructive than the YPC number, just as QBR and other QB measures are more effective ways to evaluate a QB than TDs or YPA.

            As this author notes:
            “Playing your backups against an FCS team while using probably about 20% of the playbook is never a good situation from which to formulate an opinion.”

            http://www.rollbamaroll.com/2014/11/24/7272777/alabama-running-back-success-rate-game-11

            UNLV might not be an FCS team, but they are closer to it than they are BYU, Northwestern, Minnesota, or MSU.

            Mgoblog’s Mathlete wrote an ANTI-success rate post (for evaluating teams) but even he acknowledged it was a good tool for RB evaluation, especially in an old-school system.

            “Success rate does a good job evaluating running backs in traditional ground games. It might not totally align with scoring points and winning games, but it does align well with accomplishing a team’s offensive objectives. Running backs often get tightly bunched near the mean in an EV model but success rate can be a way to further separate individual backs. Success rate will hold up between the tackle pounders but knock down the home run threat. EV may consider them the same (or more likely the home run threat will be higher) but the consistency of the old school back will be valued better by success rates.”

  7. Comments: 6285
    Joined: 8/11/2015
    Lanknows
    Sep 22, 2015 at 12:21 AM

    Lot of negativity, so I’m going to point out some positives from the game.

    1. Peppers – looked absolutely dynamite on that return. I’m hoping we see him on offense against MSU, because that kid on a screen pass or reverse could do some work.

    2. Stribling – speaking of impressive returns. Stribling showed us why he’s been a contender for kick return duties over the last couple years.

    3. Chesson/Darboh – they might not be natural receivers but the horizontal plays (reverses, screens, pop passes) are giving them an opportunity to show off their athletic talent.

    4. Pass blocking – it was just UNLV, but the OL continues to keep Rudock clean

    5. Health – Kerridge got dinged and Mone is out for the year, but DT and FB happen to be the deepest positions on the roster. Through 3 games Michigan hasn’t lost anybody of note and guys like Johnson, Harris, Hill, Canteen, and Lewis seem to be recovering well. Put yourself in BYU’s shoes: losing your starting senior QB and having to go with a true freshman, in the midst of a brutal 4-game stretch to start the season.

    6. O’Neil & Baxter – Despite all the talk, I didn’t fully appreciate how much better our punt units would look than they did last year. Amazing.

    7. Houma – I know Kerridge is probably the better player, but every time I watch Houma he seems to lay good blocks and he looks far better with the ball in his hands. What a luxury to have a senior like him as a backup.

    8. Clark – still very green as a CB, so he should improve significantly… and he’s already pretty decent. BTW – Marcus Ray gained a lot of credibility with me for calling for Hill at safety and Clark at CB.

    9. Kenny Allen – what a luxury. I’ll still not be able to watch a game-deciding FGA without having a heartattack, but I’m glad it’s not a total disaster.

    10. Rudock – maybe he just had a bad day – it happens! Maybe he’s saving the good throws for BYU! No more INTs the rest of the year – right? ? ?

    11-9999999999999999. HARBAUGH!

    I get that we are in the early stages but the team just feels so much better organized already. The decisions seem on point. The players just seem to know what they are supposed to be doing – 3 weeks into the regime, when they looked clueless under Hoke often times 3 and 4 YEARS into it.

You must belogged in to post a comment.