Mailbag question: Defensive question and rant

Mailbag question: Defensive question and rant

Hey GBMW,

Does it make you sick to hear Rich Rod comment that the Notre Dame, Penn State, Wisconsin, and most likely OSU, lineman and players are much bigger than our players and that our players are going to get banged up?

I certainly am frustrated that he acknowledges our lack of size but offers no significant remedy for it. Clearly, he is in charge of recruiting because Greg Robinson does not travel and recruit players. That's fine; I don't think it's necessary. I get that everyone loves speed, but when you're recruiting (or not in our case) defensive players, I would imagine size AND speed are important. Even with experience, if we continue to recruit sub-par defensive players and wide receivers to play our safety/CB positions, and move our safeties to play linebacker, move our linebackers to play DL, and essentially stop recruiting DL, with the exception of smaller DL, then wouldn't you say our defense will continue to be the butt of the joke every week?

I understand that you guys prefer a traditional defense with a fundamentally sound D-line - not having the D-line pushed back 3-6 yards on rushing plays and offering sub par pressure on the QB on passing downs- and you would align that preference with appropriate activities such as recruiting to acquire that type of defense.

Has Coach Rod ever commented that a 3-3-5 stack with smaller players shifted from other defensive positions to positions with greater size, e.g., safety to LB is not a successful strategy? In the end there are many options and there's uncertainty about which one will work. However, you choose the strategy with the greatest chance of success. That's not to say I believe a 3-4 or 3-3-5 is a bad scheme. On the other hand, I would recruit bigger DL and LB’s who combine speed and size.

Sorry for the length of the question...can you tell I've been screaming about this for over a year? Thanks for your time!

Rich Rod prefers a 3-3-5 stack or we can pretend like it's a 3-4.

Anish P.

------------------------

Thanks for the question and do not worry about the length of your question and rant.

This is a place where we want people to talk about football and frankly rant and hopefully get their questions answered.

There are no bad schemes, just different philosophies. We actually like three man fronts, if used properly. And we would be very happy if Michigan used a 3-4 like the ones played by the Pittsburgh Steelers or the New England Patriots.

We would have no problem if Michigan played a 3--3 odd stack as part of their nickel package. What we are not fans of is using hybrid /nickel defenses as the base. We just believe it sets up to many mismatches. We also do not mind having some smaller defenders, as long as they have the other skills necessary to be successful.

We just believe playing and recruiting a defense with some size, especially up the middle, is the best way to go.

Big inside defensive tackles like Cody from Alabama, who command double teams, and who create a new line of scrimmage almost every play make for a superior defense.

Also recruiting for this hybrid defense becomes challenging. Many high school recruits do not know where they would fit into the scheme and some do not want to play in a funky defense. They want to know if they are going to be the next Charles Woodson, LaMarr Woodley, Larry Foote, etc.

In this defense you need great linebackers that can make plays by tackling, playing in pass coverage and moving from side to side and frankly right now we do not have this commodity, therefore part of the big picture problem.

Also, as implied in the previous paragraph, the personnel for this defense is not ideal either for what Coach Robinson wants, but hopefully soon enough they will have the talent and the players to execute this defense.

Thanks for stopping by Go Blue Michigan Wolverine
If you have any questions please E-Mail

Written by GBMW -- CoachBt and ErocWolverine