So as I reflected on my outburst of frustrations regarding the Michigan vs. Ohio game combined with my loud eruption of confidence which, by most standards, certainly crossed into the regime classified as arrogance, I decided I would practice some introspection. I find myself in a similar predicament as Andrew Labovitz, who said in his most recent blog, “I became possessed by a feeling of ‘quiet confidence.’ I didn’t talk about it much, and I can’t really explain why I felt this way (though in retrospect, I was onto something), but I felt really good about Michigan’s chances against Nebraska." I too felt this “quiet confidence” going into the Nebraska game. When you look at the face of it, how different is Nebraska from Illinois? They both have mobile quarterbacks that have had limited success in the passing game and they both specialize in attacking the perimeter with option runs and spread formations. If Michigan can defend against Nebraska like they did against Illinois, this should be an easy win and I was completely lacking of any evidence to say they couldn’t. Then it happened. Michigan’s defense did exactly what my intuition said they would. They dominated. What I didn’t anticipate was the emergence of an offensive coordinator who can exploit his most dangerous pieces by putting them in positions where they will succeed.
To backtrack, when discussing football theory, I often refer to players as pieces on a game board or cards in a constructed deck. This makes sense to me because I’m very analytical and I take a very mathematical approach to football. To keep it simple, football philosophy can be divided into two categories, micro-strategy (micro-strat) and macro-strategy (macro-strat). Macro-strat is the overarching philosophy or system implemented by a coaching staff. It encompasses the scheme that will be used as well as defining the types of players required to run the scheme at optimal efficiency. Micro-strat would be all the technique coaches teach players with regard to executing the macro-strat. Most frequently, I am interested in macro-strat.
But I digress. Al Borges has done something that I did not anticipate. He conceded to his players which, you may recall, Calvin Magee and Rich Rodriguez refused to do in their time in Ann Arbor. Denard Robinson, Fitz Toussaint, the receiving corps, and the offensive line as a whole, are not equipped to run the West Coast offense this year. However, they are well equipped to run the read-option spread. That is what they did against Nebraska, to the tune of 45 points and 238 yards rushing. If this doesn’t excite the Michigan fan in you, then you don’t have a pulse. The second Denard becomes a read-option quarterback, this team becomes very dangerous.
Getting back to my introspection, it seams I extrapolated what I observed in the Illinois game to predict what might happen in the Nebraska game – which produced that “quiet confidence” Andrew was talking about. But what if I were to iterate this process further? How different is Ohio from Nebraska and Illinois? All three of them have mobile quarterbacks that aren't terrific passers, Ohio even more-so than the Huskers or Illini. Heck, Ohio hardly even attempts passing the ball! Again, I'm at a loss for any evidence to suggest that this year's Michigan team can’t dominate Ohio. That quiet confidence I had about the Nebraska game turned into this “loud confidence” I have about the Ohio game – and this confidence is completely justified. I am so confident in Michigan that I vented my built up frustrations a week early. Now it’s just a matter of time until the team vents their frustrations on the field. Hail!
Back to the Michigan Wolverines Newsfeed