Michigan (?) vs. Utah

Full disclosure: I write for some other sites. Nothing really official, although in some realms I'm referred to as an "expert." I've been asked, twice, to write a preview for the upcoming Michigan vs. Utah game, and I have done so - weakly. There is no preview that can be written for a game with so many question marks. What would I do? Re-hash what Brian's done? Re-hash the re-hash, also done by Brian? I won't because I can't.

Here is what I will do. I will provide you with, hopefully, a concise preview on what to expect out of Utah - the players to watch for, and the matchups to exploit. There is nothing I can effectively write about Michigan, because frankly, nobody knows what it's going to look like. This ain't Mike DeBord's offense, and will hopefully not lend itself to the predictibility that failed the previous regime. It is impossible to preview a question mark, because there is nothing you can expect out of a question mark - it simply exists: large, looming. The question for Michigan fans is whether that question mark explodes into fireworks, or whether it will deflate into a crumpled mass of what used to be a really fun moon-walk. All Michigan fans can do is wait around until 3:30 on Saturday, praying for fireworks.

UTAH OFFENSE:

Quarterback: Brain Johnson returns for his third year as the Utah starter - but he didn't exactly follow the normal path. He redshirted in 2006 for knee surgery, and when he returned last year, it took him awhile to get back into the flow. Relevent stats for last year:

Passing completion/attempts: 181/272
Percent: 66.5%
Total Yards: 1847
TD/INT: 11/10
Rushing: 150 yards, 2 TD's

Those stats were nearly all significant drops from his 2005 season, when he threw for ~2900 yards and 18 TD's. Which quarterback shows up for Utah will largely determine their success against Michigan. Those paying attention at home know that Johnson did miss some time last year with a broken collar bone, but the yardage and TD totals are still down, even if you take the missing time into account.

Running Back:

Both Derrell Mack and Matt Asiata bring the power in the rushing game. These guys aren't the types that will burn you, but they will move the chains. Utah lost Asiata to injury in last season's opener, but with both backs healthy, they have a great power running combo that will keep Michigan's defense busy. The good news for Michigan is that this type of attack plays into what used to be their strength. Given the relative lack of turnover and the continued use of the base 4-3, this shouldn't change too much: Michigan should be able to stop this running attack. Both backs are very good - but they're at Utah for a reason. Given the whole "Michigan as question-mark" metaphor, however, these two backs demand attention.

Offensive Line:

Sophomore guard Caleb Schlauderaff is probably Utah's best player here, and that's not good. He was a former 1 star to Scout, and the aforementioned "sophomore" label tends to send up some red flags. However, he is supplemented by two other offensive linemen that crack the "pretty good" mark in Zane Beadles and Robert Conley. Given Schaffer's penchant for blitzing, I expect this line to have their hands full all day.

Receivers:

Senior Brent Casteel leads the way here, and if "brentcasteelforheisman.com" is any indication, expectations are high. [upon further investigation, that site is registered, however, it is currently showing "symptoms of an overdoes." My guess is that it was registered, and is currently void of content. - B2]. He missed most of last year with knee surgery, but his 10 TD's in 2006 is impressive. He's a senior with something to prove, and he will be a major contributing factor in Brain Johnson's quest to regain form.

UTAH DEFENSE:

The summary of the defense for Utah is that the front 7 are bad, the secondary is good. The Mike Linebacker is appropriately named Mike Wright, and he will be the leader on an interior defense that was decimated by attrition. He was a walk on. The secondary, on the other hand, should be quite good, with senior CB Brice McCain leading the way. McCain also returns kicks, and runs for President [boooooo - ed.].

I'm not going to make a special place for him, but kicker Louie Sakoda is excellent.

MATCHUPS TO WATCH FOR:

Michigan's bevy of RB's vs. Utah Interior D

If there is one thing about Michigan that we're fairly certain of, it is that they will deploy several RB's, sometimes 3 at a time. If there is another thing we can be fairly certain of, it is that Rich Rodriguez will try to run the ball early and often. If Utah's interior defense - currently dressed as a big fuzzy question mark - can hold Michigan's running game (whatever form it takes) in check, then Michigan's offense will have failed.

Michigan QB dejour vs. Utah Secondary

Regardless of the success rushing attack, there will come a point in Saturday's game that the Michigan QB will be asked to throw. This could take on many forms, including screens, slants, etc., but there will a point in time when the Michigan QB lofts the ball through the air with the desired outcome being that the receiver catches it, and moves upfield. He will be doing this into the strength of the Utah defense. If Sheridan/Threet/Feagin/Brown are forced into tough throws, it's turnover central.

Utah Power Rush vs. Michigan Front 7

Just as critical to Utah, the rushing attack must get off the ground. There are several factors that play into this. First, the Utah Offensive line have to be able to hold thier blocks long enough for Mack/Asiata to get into the Linebackers. If they can do that, the RB tandem has a good chance of moving chains, keeping the defense honest, and opening things up for Johnson's passing game. Michigan's front 4 look to be the best we've seen in some time, and if they start penetrating, they could make Utah's offense look like what everyone expects Michigan's offense to: unprepared, inefficient, and fail.

Brian Johnson vs. Himself

Man vs. Self; how literary of me. What I mean is simply this: Brian Johnson is a dicotomous quarterback. If he's rattled, pressured, and taken out of synch, he will suck. But if he gets on a roll and gains confidence, he has the skills to beat you. What Johnson needs to realize is that, in all likelyhood, he is going to get hit this game. Shaeffer (Michigan DC) brings heat, and frankly, the Utah O-line has no business stopping it. If Johnson allows this to take him out of his rythm, he will take himself out as a contributer to the offense. If Utah is going to be successful, they will need Johnson to be the potential MWC MVP that he is capable of being. It will be Michigan's job to make sure that his ass hits the turf as much as possible.

Pray for fireworks.

Penn State 2008 (it rhymes!!!)

Masks? Check. Football Unis? Check. Joe Pa get-up? You betcha. Smart-phone nicely clipped to football pants? Um... check.

So, having poked around BSD for most of this off-season, I feel decently comfortable in placing the majority of Penn State fans' expectations for this upcoming season at: "high" on the big board. Why not? There's a lot to be confident about from a Nittany Lion perspective, there are also a few things that I don't see getting a lot of mention around the Blue and White corner of the world that one might go ahead and place on the "question mark" list. How does it all sort out? Well let's embark upon that mystery together dear reader!

One thing the media will harp on that is ridiculously off-base: Well, it will be next to impossible for anyone to top the pure buffoonery that was Kirk Herbstreit's prediction of greatness from Anthony Morelli to lead Penn State to the summit of the Big 10 mountain. I wish I had taped a few of those segments prior to last fall, but this will have to suffice: go ahead and scroll down to the "What a Difference a Year Makes" category and enjoy.

This year? I don't know. Much focus will undoubtedly be on JoePa, but I have a feeling we'll hear more about the way that the old coach is "opening back up the offense" for his new quarterback(s)... a return to 2005 no less. That statement in and of itself isn't off-base, but here's the rub. Penn State has shown a tendenancy to play several BIG games in a very close to the vest fashion, particularly on the road. Last year that was the Michigan game in Ann Arbor. We've been down this road, but suffice to say that Michigan couldn't possibly hope to stop an offense in the spread formation at the start of the year... surely, Penn State and staff were well aware of this... and instead of simply following a blueprint that had been clearly laid out two weeks in a row for them by App State and Oregon, they came into Michigan Stadium and threw rock...

Turns out we have a bigger rock

Oh sure, it's a bit self-serving to throw up that picture (sue me) but it does illustrate a point. Penn State was #10 in the nation that day and had a chance to really make a run at the rest of their schedule after this hurdle... suffice to say it was a big game for them against an ailing Michigan squad, and they packed it in. Penn State fans will tell you it's not the first time. If Penn State has success with this new offense, it won't mean much if they don't take it with them to Camp Randall and to the Shoe. Yes the offense is experienced at most spots, yes the defense looks to be another strength, but what has changed on the staff and in the recruiting game that makes this Penn State team different from so many that have come before it? That's a question I just don't see being asked or answered much thus far this year.

One thing the media will completely ignore that is integral to this team's success: This team's lack of a reliable and/or proven offensive weapon. Having a new QB isn't as huge of a hindrance to your offense if you have a go-to guy who can bail you out when needed, but when I look at this Penn State offense, I have a hard time picking out that guy. Is there talent? Sure. But what has it done thus far that makes you comfortable pointing as anyone being the "go-to" playmaker in '08?

Something else you won't read about coming into this season:
1. Over the last 8 years, Penn State is a .500 football team in the Big 10 conference.
2. Over the last 5 years, Penn State is a sub .500 football team in the Big 10 conference.
3. Last year's record against winning football teams was... you guessed it, .500.

So that begs a question or two if you ask me. Yes Penn State returns a lot of players, especially on the lines, but the key question is not just of experience, but of talent. Just how good is this team? Who has the chance to become the playmaker on this football team? Who is going to be a guy on offense who will give Penn State a deep threat? Oh, and just one more thing: yes Penn State is returning to a more "2005" offensive approach, but Michael Robinson isn't the guy handling the pigskin, will whomever assumes that role be able to manage an offense that doesn't seem to feature any kind of a safety blanket? At what point will PSU's inability to bring in offensive firepower become an issue that people outside of the PSU circle (aka the media) start to discuss?

Oh, and we'll hear plenty about Sean Lee's absence from the field, but perhaps a more intriguing question is how much his leadership will be missed as well.

Area that scares you as an opponent: D-line. This D-line will be the heart and soul of what figures to be another solid defense. They are talented and they are deep. If the front four play well it will make the loss of Sean Lee not nearly as big of a deal from an on-field standpoint. The offense has loads of experience (perhaps not the talent to match) in nearly every position with the exception of the backfield. If Daryll Clark and Steven Green step up into serviceable roles, there's going to be reason for some of the optimism circulating in Happy Valley. Michigan had a similar set-up in '04 and took two freshmen in Chad Henne and Mike Hart to the Rose Bowl... of course we also had a Braylon Edwards...

Area that makes you salivate as an opponent: JayPa. He's the Penn State Mike DeBord.

Random factor that you think will come into play this season: A joke of an out-of-conference schedule sets up PSU for a run of @Purdue, @Wisconsin, Michigan, and @OSU. Let's just imagine that PSU runs out to 6-0... that leaves three HUGE games:
- @ Wisconsin (a team Penn State DRILLED last year)
- Michigan (a game most Penn State fans are oddly overlooking...)
- @ Ohio State (a team that has somewhat owned Penn State in Columbus)

That's quite a stretch in the heart of the season, and two out of three on the road no less. If anything, I doubt the ability of the coaching staff to put together three straight solid gameplans, especially with having to travel to Columbus. Penn State has every opportunity to field a very solid football team, but I think this stretch (and really the overall stretch of 4 road games in 5 weeks) will cost them a truly great season.

Overall record: 9-3

Final Big 10 standing: 5-3, pick two from the following: Michigan, Purdue, and Wisconsin. Chalk another up to the Buckeyes.

Bowl destination: New Year's Day somewhere.

Examining the Company Line...

A few friends and I were discussing this interesting point the other day, and I think it's a fun hypothetical:

If Lloyd Carr were still the head coach in Ann Arbor, with Mike DeBord and Co. still around, what would be the expected record for this upcoming season? No other changes in the team here, Mallet is still gone, Arrington and Manningham too. You really think the "experts" would be predicting the same season of woe for the Wolverines? Let's save that for just a moment.

For all those doom and gloomers regarding the offense, I invite you to look back at our offensive output over the past several years (highs in bold). Not exactly overpowering in any way, shape, or form...

2007 - 27.2 points/game, 68th in total offense (dear God...) ---> 9-4
2006 - 29.2 points/game, 38th in total offense ----> 11-2
2005 - 28.75 points/game, 55th in total offense ----> 7-5
2004 - 30.83 points/game, 46th in total offense ----> 9-3
2003 - 35.4 points/game, 15th in total offense ----> 10-3 (oh what could've been... @!#% punt formation)
2002 - 27.7 points/game, 52nd in total offense ----> 10-3
2001 - 27.5 points/game, 70th in total offense ----> 8-4
2000 - 33.9 points/game, 11th in total offense ----> 9-3

West Virginia under Rodriguez?

2007 - 39.6 points/game, 15th in total offense ----> 11-2
2006 - 38.8 points/game, 5th in total offense ----> 11-2
2005 - 32.0 points/game, 50th in total offense ----> 11-1
2004 - 30.0 points/game, 26th in total offense ----> 8-4
2003 - 28.9 points/game, 72nd in total offense ----> 8-5
2002 - 30.4 points/game, 18th in total offense ----> 9-4
2001 - 21.3 points/game, 80th in total offense ----> 3-8

Now then, I can foresee a lot of people pointing to that 2001 number in Rodriguez's first season at WVA and going berserk... but take a moment and glance up at our offensive outputs for the '01 campaign in Ann Arbor... just about 6 points more a game and an offense that was marginally better ranked (although undoubtedly 10x more talented than what WVA had at the time) and you get 6 more wins and 5 less losses. Does anyone here want to try to argue that Michigan has had less talent than West Viriginia over any of this time period? Anyone? Not me, that's for sure. Is it not at all conceivable that PERHAPS, just MAYBE, Rich Rodriguez knows what he's doing from a game planning, X's and O's, and play calling point of view? You know, the kind of ability that means he doesn't exactly HAVE to have a Pat White on his team for that team's offense to be functional?

But what about the pre-Rodriguez WVA team? Perhaps that offense was solid and capable, and his new system set them back until they got the hang of it? Here we go:

2000 WVA - 27.9 points/game, 73rd in total offense ----> 6-5

So, um... not exactly the most catastrophic drop in the world eh? Even with the most complex, highly finnicky, player-specific-offense-that-man-ever-created?

Every time someone starts going all "woe is us" or "hahahahaha" regarding this year's offense and completely ignores the following, it drives me crazy:

1. The offense here has hardly ever been lights out over the past 8 seasons, despite being choked with talent across the field more often than not. It has been mostly slaps to the forehead infuriating with momentary bursts of brilliance. If you could've taken a snapshot of each and every Michigan fan's expression after the opening drive of the bowl game this year you would've seen two things: A) Joy and B) Rage... we had been waiting for that for YEARS.

2. Our returning defense certainly holds the potential to be a solid unit, which, might occasionally figure into an outcome come fall.

3. For AGES we Michigan fans have howled about the play calling, absolutely SCREAMED about it, I'm one of the chief perpetrators believe me... I can honestly say that the removal of DeBord from the press-box already has this new offense off on the right foot.

So now that we have a guy who's regarded as one of the top in the game at scheming and game planning and running an offense... why are we all jumping off bridges because we have an inexperienced offense? Isn't it conceivable that less talent (for Michigan standards) with better play-calling and game-planning and conditioning somewhat evens the equation out a bit?? You think the Michigan advantage in talent might be worth one more TD a game than what the Mountaineers had in '01? Because if you do, you're looking at an offense that is right on the average of the past eight units we've put on the field numbers-wise. A thought worth considering when you're lobbing out predictions of a record that hasn't found the books in over 40 years.

When I talked about this on one of the boards I post on, I stated that I don't care one iota about those who go on and on about running "his system", the important point (as I see it) is that the guy will try to put the ball in his play-makers' hands and if the past is any sort of indicator, he'll be aggressive about it... something we've, as Michigan fans, all been BEGGING for over the past decade. What people seem to miss is that you don't have to run the exact Pat White WVA offense for things to work. Let's just imagine if Michigan decided to relentlessly use it's best players... the few times that they took this approach, the results have been pretty nice: ND '06... Florida '08... OSU '03... MSU '02, etc. You could also look at any drive late in a game where they found themselves in a dire situation and were literally forced to open up the offense... another angering trend that had many of us going "duh".

It's not exactly a huge stretch to say that we've gone X-3 and X-4 for ages running half-back traps nearly exclusively to the left side and then throwing over the top 3 times a game to an all-world receiver. Sure that's a generalization, but it's not like you've walked away from many Michigan games going "whew, we just out game-planned them there"! All of the jokes about running to the left on first down and wide receiver screens behind the line of scrimmage on 3rd and 7 aren't actually jokes, they've been tried and true predictions over the years. Imagine how Steve Breaston might have developed with someone in place who might have had a better idea of how to use him?

When Michigan finally went for broke this New Year's Day, the result was the highest bowl offensive output in a century... Suffice to say that aggression when combined with talent can have some nice after-effects. Now listen, I fully understand that we don't have that offense this year, and I'm not trying to argue that we wil not miss a beat. BUT, Rodriguez will have players at his disposal who have the ability to do things with the football. His job is to figure out how best to get them the ball in the best position to do something with it, you know, take advantage of things the defense will give... He happens to be pretty good at that sort of thing if you glance back at his extensive track record. He also has a chance of finding a few solid football players out there in Maize and Blue. The running back position is as deep this season as it has been in years, despite those outside the program not being familiar with all of the names, Michigan still trots out a number of wideouts who will be dangerous, and I think it will be interesting to see how we integrate Carson Butler into the offense at the TE spot.

Where people seem to get stuck is in thinking that because Rodriguez "can't run his system" they automatically assume that he can't field a competent offense in any regard. Folks, it doesn't take a ton of complexity to put points on the board. When I look at the defensive potential along with the schedule, I don't see a lot of instances where Michigan will have to score 35 a game to win. Perhaps I am mistaken?

So back to my original question, do you think the predictions for the upcoming season would be as universally dour if the old staff were in place? Allow me to answer for you: the answer would be no. Predictions would be middling, likely another 4 loss season sort. I can draw a lot of parrallels between this upcoming year and the Wolverines' 2001 campaign. You may recall 2001 as a year of utter dispair heading into the season, Michigan had just graduated Anthony Thomas, and later in the spring lost Drew Henson and David Terrell to early jumps to the MLB and NFL... That season represents the low water-mark offensively over the last eight years... 70th overall... the result? 8-4.

For years the accusation has been that Michigan has gotten by on superior talent... I don't think it would be unreasonable to say that the last coaching staff had an approach that focused more on perfecting execution than trying to seek out any and all weakness in the opponent and how to attack them. I imagine if we boiled down the approach, it was essentially: "We have the better players, if we play well, we will beat you". That will not work this season, and I think it's also safe to say that Rodriguez has NEVER relied on that approach. He has been forced to figure out how to win with lesser talent, how to attack opponents and create matchups that favor his team, how to plan and prepare his teams... he's proven this, and it's because of this that I think that he'll be capable of fielding an offense that will be better than the "miserable" that has been the company line all off-season. No, the huge talent advantage won't be as apparent this year, but the coaching advantage will be, and I think many are overestimating the effects of one, and underestimating the impact of the other.