10/7/2023 – Michigan 52, Minnesota 10 – 6-0, 3-0 Big Ten A couple years ago I watched Michigan beat Ohio State for the first time since the paleolithic era and I couldn't really commit emotionally. I fundamentally could not let myself believe they would win. This feeling extended into the distance; even after it was clear they were going to win I did not feel the same kind of thing it appeared other people were feeling all around me. The same thing happened last year. While I've made the argument that the postgame success rate/"it was just five plays" takes were bad, it is true that the nature of the game lent itself to believing OSU was far better down-to-down, at least through 30 minutes. Michigan was bleeding OSU down the field and relying on their short-yardage deficiencies to prevent points; Ohio State was maniacally determined to not let Hassan Haskins 2.0 happen to them. So you're watching this and it feels like Michigan is hanging on by a thread. On
The one takeaway from the Nebraska game that isn't crushing dominance was Michigan's zone defense on in-breaking routes (slants/digs) needed a lot of cleanup. What went wrong wasn't hard to figure out, but there's some understandable confusion I think about how, or in some cases whether, it was supposed to go right. ZONE REFRESHER Cover 3 at its core has three deep zones, two Curl/Flat zones, and then you can vary how many players you want to drop into Hole zones. Drawing circles is a bad way to represent zones, however, because it makes it seem like defenders are tasked with sitting in the middle of their circles and projecting strength over their fiefdoms. We call that "covering grass." You do that, you end up like Stephen of Blois with rebellions springing up everywhere around you. You have to play zone defense with the constant movement of a Henry Plantagenet: anticipating trouble, heading it off, harrying it out of your kingdom, then snapping quickly
9/30/2023 – Michigan 45, Nebraska 7 – 5-0, 2-0 Big Ten This column is about being grateful but first a digression into obscure lexicography, as the readership demands. Despite an Atlantic article that accidentally implies that the noun "fantods" was a neologism sprouted from David Foster Wallace's mother, Merriam Webster asserts that Charles Fredrick Briggs deployed in 1839; indeed, it actually found its way in to Huckleberry Finn: "They was all nice pictures, I reckon, but I didn't somehow seem to take to them, because … they always give me the fantods." I think it is probable that DFW's mother is the originator of the phrase "howling fantods," which does feel like a temple erected on top of a previous religion's foundation. Fantods are one thing. When they howl, wow. Buddy. I mean. It's not good. I was put in this frame of mind in the midst of Michigan's comprehensive dismantling of Nebraska because whilst I was enjoyi
Is this where we come to talk about the slants? Usually we take care of some housekeeping first. UFR GLOSSARY is here. FORMATION NOTES: Nebraska used a lot of them with varied personnel. This fullback (#16, Janiran Bonner) is more of a 6'2"/220 running back so I counted him as a back, but he also lined up at TE and WR. Michigan responded to him with their 5-2 personnel. There was also a 3-3-5 look from Michigan I called a 30 stack. SUBSTITUTION NOTES: The starters were done after 20-something snaps in this one, with Grant limited to just 17. Harrell and Colson were regulars while the starters were in both Harrell and Stewart were on the field for obvious passing downs. Michigan was also playing around with different secondary configurations like +Sabb (Sainristil at CB, Moore at Nk), and +CB (Wallace at Nk). Other than that it was the usual rotations before backup time, which they used to rep Wallace and Moore in the slots with one-high looks. Amorion Walker returned and go
The one takeaway from the Nebraska game that isn't crushing dominance was Michigan's zone defense on in-breaking routes (slants/digs) needed a lot of cleanup. What went wrong wasn't hard to figure out, but there's some understandable confusion I think about how, or in some cases whether, it was supposed to go right. ZONE REFRESHER Cover 3 at its core has three deep zones, two Curl/Flat zones, and then you can vary how many players you want to drop into Hole zones. Drawing circles is a bad way to represent zones, however, because it makes it seem like defenders are tasked with sitting in the middle of their circles and projecting strength over their fiefdoms. We call that "covering grass." You do that, you end up like Stephen of Blois with rebellions springing up everywhere around you. You have to play zone defense with the constant movement of a Henry Plantagenet: anticipating trouble, heading it off, harrying it out of your kingdom, then snapping quickly