UM Defense: Take All the Yards You Want

It’s rivalry week in the state of Michigan.

Both teams are trying to gear up for the upcoming gridiron showdown in East Lansing this coming Saturday, where Michigan State (1-3) hosts No. 22 Michigan (4-0). These days it is probably true that when it comes to rivalry football games at the collegiate level, you can pretty much throw out team records. Conference rivalry games are different than your run-of-the-mill conference games in that there’s a massive amount of external pressure placed on players and coaches from partisan fans and alumni heading in to the game. There’s a lot of internal pressure generated from the players themselves as well. As a result, emotions really run high heading in to such games. They can get so high sometimes that players and coaches become blind to important assignments and game preparation. After the first hits are exchanged, both teams eventually start to settle down, and the very nature of the college game takes control and gradually overrides all of those pre-game emotions. It’s part of what makes the college game eleventy billion times better than NFL football could ever hope to be.

One month ago, one would have been hard pressed to convince anyone in the Michigan and Detroit sports media, let alone national college football fans, that the Michigan Wolverines would be unbeaten and ranked heading into this football game Saturday.

Going one step further, it would have been next to impossible to convince those same sports pundits that Michigan State would be 1-3 at this stage of the season and positioned last in the Big Ten. I include myself in that group of “would-have-been-difficult-to-persuade’s”.

I thought the “Bakery Basket Opponent” for the Spartans would be Montana State, and I was right. I thought the “Falling Anvil Opponent” for Michigan State would be Michigan.

But today I don’t know. I really don’t know.

If we look at both teams and what they’ve achieved so far, there are some very interesting similarities. In any college football match up, we tend to focus on the differences and any identifiable competitive advantages between the two opponents. Let’s took at some important statistics to compare these two teams after just 4 football games.

Michigan State's Offensive and Defensive Yards Per Point Statistics:

MSU	MSU	Opp	Plays	Yards	PPP	YpPlay	YpPoint	Opp Yards	Def YpPoint
Mont.St.	44	3	75	493	0.59	6.6	11.2	160	53.3
CMU	27	29	56	316	0.48	5.6	11.7	418	14.4
at ND	30	33	65	459	0.46	7.1	15.3	437	13.2
Wisc	30	38	68	486	0.44	7.1	16.2	436	11.5
Total	131	103	264	1754	0.50	6.6	13.4	1451	14.1

Michigan's Offensive and Defensive Yards Per Point Statistics:

UM	UM	Opp	Plays	Yards	PPP	YpPlay	YpPoint	Opp Yards	Def YpPoint
WMU	31	7	78	439	0.40	5.6	14.2	301	43.0
ND	38	34	71	430	0.54	6.1	11.3	490	14.4
EMU	45	17	56	448	0.80	8.0	10.0	285	16.8
Ind	36	33	74	372	0.49	5.0	10.3	467	14.2
Total	150	91	279	1689	0.54	6.1	11.3	1543	17.0

MSU Offense Vs. Michigan Defense

Michigan State’s offense is currently 22^nd in the land, average a staggering 438 yards per game. They are ranked 34^th in scoring, averaging 33 points per game. How do the Spartans attack their opponents offensively? They throw the football. They throw, and throw, and then throw some mo’. It’s a weird change from 2008, particularly when one considers the young talent and speed of the MSU backfield of Caulton Ray, Larry Caper and Glenn Winston. Yet Michigan State’s passing attack is ranked 3^rd in the country right now! I read that and think, Christ, does former quarterback Ed Smith have another year of eligibility we didn’t know about? Did Dantonio hand over the keys to former coach Darryl Rodgers before heading to the Bahamas or something? MSU averages 321 yards passing to only 118 yards rushing per game. While on paper the Spartans are looking powerful offensively, the problem for Michigan State football this year has been translating all of that marching up and down the field into something meaningful on the scoreboard. MSU has been outscoring it’s opponents only 33 to 26 over the last 4 games. Unfortunately, their offensive Yards per Point have been increasing each week against tougher and tougher defenses. MSU’s average Yards per Point statistic is currently 13.4. For every 13 yards gained offensively by Kirk Cousins and Co., they score 1 point.

So what happens when the Spartans unleash their aerial assault on Michigan this coming Saturday? They’re going to gain lots and lots of real estate, that’s what. In 2009 Michigan defensive team can only be described in four words:

“Aaaahhhhhhrrgghhhaaaaawwgodt!”

OK, actually I really meant “Bend But Not Break”.

Against the pass this year, Michigan has been spectacularly awful (to put it mildly): 975 yards given up, 244 yards per game, ranked 102^nd of all 120 FBS teams. Rushing defense is only slightly better, but nothing to crow about: 568 yards given up, 142 yard per game, and ranked 77^th in the land.

But when it comes to scoring defense, Michigan’s "Bend But Not Breakedness" in 2009 shows up on Saturday like an unexpected jack-in-the-box, giving up only 23 points per game and ranked 58th in the country against the score. Michigan’s Defensive Yards per Point after 4 games is, well, startling: 17.0. This means that UM opponents need to gain 17 yards to score a single point (on average) against the Wolverines.

So yes, Michigan’s defense has allowed opponents of every level of offensive potency to march up and down their backyard. For all I know, GERG and the Michigan defensive players may as well be serving their opponents free refreshments while they toil away running max protect 52 red stack all game long. But despite all their “fun in the sun” against Michigan offensively, Wolverine opponents have been so far unable to capitalize on such efforts and place points to the scoreboard.

That’s where the bending comes in.

You know – bent over completely with discoloration at cracks and the seams, coming damn close but not quite snapping right in half?

Yeah. That’s Michigan’s defense this year.

Yet, with this being Michigan’s first road test against a hated cross-state rival, one might call into question Michigan’s ability to successful mix past fortune with the walking disaster that represents Michigan’s overall defense and expect anything but a huge letdown this week.

Michigan Offense Vs. MSU Defense

If there’s any goods news in 2009, it’s that Michigan has officially turned the corner offensively. That’s right. It hasn’t always been pretty, and there will most certainly be moments of horror to come in 2009, but even the most disingenuous doubters must now admit that Rodriguez has done his homework and laid a foundation for those same strategies and tactics that worked so well at West Virginia between 2002 and 2007 to find root and flourish at Michigan.

Offensively, the Wolverines are ranked similarly to the Spartans nationally, averaging 422 yards per game, 38 points per game, and ranked 30^th in total offense. When it comes to running the ball, Rodriguez has proven that his methodology for this game delivers results in about 24 months. Michigan’s rushing offense is currently ranked a jaw-dropping 7^th in the country. The Wolverines now average 240 yards per game on the ground per game. The Wolverine passing offense is certainly not high on yardage, 182 yards per game and ranked 69^th nationally, but Michigan already has 7 passing TDs in 4 games.

Defensively, Michigan State is about as pathetic as Michigan has been. The Spartans are almost identically useless at pass defense, giving up 997 yards passing so far, 249 yards per game, and ranked 105^th nationally. Against the run, MSU is clearly better than Michigan, giving up 114 yards per game, ranked 52^nd nationally. Against the score, the Spartans are giving up a comparable 26 points per game on average.

So What Gives?

OK, so Michigan State slays opponents by carpet bombing them from the air and displaying some decent run defense. Meanwhile, Michigan shreds you to ribbons with a deceptive read option rushing attack and just outscoring you because they know the defense couldn’t stop a 90 year old lady from Pasadena from rushing 85 yards for a touchdown.

Is that all? Is there any other compelling difference here between the two teams?

Above we noted that MSU’s offensive yards per point has been 13.4 so far. Michigan’s offensive yards per point is 11.3. So one difference is that offensively speaking, Michigan has been less prolific than Michigan State, but far more effective in terms of translating yards gained into points scored.

While MSU is doing an equally horrible job on defense of stopping anyone this year as Michigan, their total defensive Yards per Point is 14.3. This is worse than Michigan’s defensive yards per point of 17.0 so far after 4 games. This means that Michigan’s defense is forcing opponents work harder and gain more yards in order to score points than Michigan State’s defense is.

The Good Match Ups Unfortunately Don’t Match Up

When MSU is on offense, it will be MSU’s strength (awesome passing) versus Michigan’s weakness (god awful pass defense).

Sparty, here’s that perfect scenario you’ve been looking for but could never find after the first 4 games.

Wolverines, wake up! Coffee’s on! Hibernation time is over!

When Michigan is on offense, it will be UM’s strength (turf shredding, rototiller ground game goodness) versus MSU’s strength (run defense). Optimal situation for Sparty. Not the end of the world for Michigan, but certainly not ideal.

Unbreakable my ass

Michigan will not be able to stop Michigan State offense from gaining continent-sized chunks of yardage in Spartan Stadium. It would require a Herculean defensive effort and a major overhaul of the Wolverine linebacking corps and secondary to make stopping MSU an even remote possibility.

In summary, defensively speaking, Michigan is a bad football team. As if the Indiana and EMU games didn’t make that abundantly clear. The Spartans will ensure plenty of exposure to this truth on Saturday. Offensively speaking, this is the perfect game for Michigan to unleash the throwing prowess of Tate Forcier and his long list of healthy receivers like Greg Mathews, JR Hemingway and Kelvin Grady. By now there is no mystery anymore that Michigan State cannot stop and will not stop anyone through the air this fall. Unfortunately, Forcier is injured, may not play, and even if he does will not be 100%. Due to the anemic play of the Michigan defense, Forcier will also likely find himself in circumstances that require him to try to do too much. Whereas Indiana’s defensive front 7 was pretty tough at times, Michigan State’s might be the best defense Michigan has faced all season.

Penalties and Special Teams

Sometimes rivalry games go down to the wire and like that ridiculous sport called "soccer", it can all boil down to penalties and infuriating sissy kicks in the final moments to determine the victor.

Michigan and Michigan State are comparable in the penalties department. MSU has 28 for -221 yards, and Michigan has 25 for -209 yards. So both teams probably cancel out on the probability of penalties, though I would be unsurprised to see UM to get the shitty end of the stick with penalties and officiating on the road in East Lansing this weekend. Just somebody watch the clock, please.

As for special teams, both punters are excellent. Michigan’s Zoltan Mesko has a 44.3 average while MSU’s Aaron Bates is just killing it this year with a 45.6 average. For PATs and field goals, both teams have been extremely well served by their specialists. Michigan’s walk-on kicker Jason Olesnavage is 19 of 19 on PATs and 3 of 4 on FGs with the longest being 44 yards. MSU’s Brett Swenson is 14 of 15 on PATs and 6 of 7 on FGs with a long of 45 yards.

A final game preview of Michigan at Michigan State will be coming soon later this week.....

Michigan's Mental Edge on Defense: Where Did It Go?

ErocWolverine hits it out of the park at the GoBlueMichiganWolverine Blog today about Michigan's trials and tribulations on defense. I particularly enjoyed this excerpt:

2) Michigan has lost its mental edge. The UM defense has lost that nasty, mean "I am going to rip your d*MN head/arm off and beat you to death with it type of attitude.

Quarterbacks, running backs and wide receivers have no fear at all lately against Michigan’s defense. Bo's teams scared the H*LL out of people. No UM team over the last five to ten years merits such old school comparison.

We refer back to an article not that long ago which stated that back in Bo's day the Big Ten coaches complained to the Big Ten about how physical the wide receivers were, and how they kept blocking right up to the whistle; sometimes past it.

The Big Ten sent a letter to Bo asking him to change or modify his approach. He actually framed the letter and said if other teams are worried so much about our wide receivers just wait till the other position players get a hold of them. Bo believed other teams would not be able to game plan to maximum effectiveness.

Hell yeah! I second that motion. There should be much more "I-am-going-to-rip-your-DAMN-head/arm-off-and-beat-you-to-death-with-it-type-of-attitude"!

And I agree that nothing creased that ear-to-ear grin on Schembechler's face more quickly than reading a begging letter from Big Ten coaches and Big Ten commissioner Wayne Duke saying essentially: "Hey Bo, stop playing so rough!"

I've been thinking a lot lately about Michigan's defense for 2009. And folks, I'm worried. For all of the advances that may be made offensively this fall with a better quarterback situation and improved offensive line play, I'm concerned how they could all be canceled out rather quickly with continued frustration and big play gift-giving on defense. One school of thought says, "Well, hey it can't possibly be any worse than last year!".

To that I'm here to say: "Yes, it could be worse".

Michigan lost 3 pretty decent and experienced front lineman in Tim Jamison, Terrance Taylor and Will Johnson. At linebacker Logan and Thompson are also gone, albeit on-off starters at that position. The secondary sees Stevie Brown moving from safety to linebacker, plus the loss of corner backs Morgan Trent, Charles Stewart and Brandon Harrison.

As a result, this is going to be a very young Michigan defense peppered with a few experienced starters coming back. My generous count includes:

DE Brandon Graham
LB Obi Ezeh
LB Jonas Mouton
LB Stevie Brown
CB Boubacar Cissoko
CB Donovan Warren

The safety positions are such a frightening situation right now for Michigan, I've purposely chosen not to discuss it very much on this blog. Michigan certainly has some talent there in Troy Woolfolk, Michael Williams, Vlad Emilien (Fr.) and Brandon Smith. Just not a whole lot of meaningful experience. The defense is probably going to be quicker from now on than Michigan fans have observed in the past. More importantly, major strides need to be made in the departments of tackling (see Morgan Trent in photo above) and pursuit angles.

I'm grateful for ErocWolverine's post on this subject today, because it encapsulates what I believe as well. There are some pretty damning reasons why Michigan has lost it's way defensively in recent years. Even the great 2006 team was marred by rather poor performances versus Ball State, Ohio State, not to mention versus USC in the Rose Bowl. Whether Robinson is the right guy to instill that merciless attitude, time will tell. Ken Norton Jr. did a great job of instilling defensive rage at USC, multiplied, of course, by several magnitudes of improved team speed at every position.

For now there's really only hope, that Greg Robinson and crew might bring some mental edge back to the Wolverine side of the field this year on defense.

Revisiting Former Michigan Defensive Coordinator Scott Shafer

I seem spend an awful lot of time on this blog looking in the rear view mirror, over-analyzing the living crap out of stuff that happened in the past. I would apologize for this if past events were not so damn interesting with 20/20 hindsight.

Rich Rodriguez himself frequently quotes the classic line of the Disney movie “Lion King”:

“It doesn't matter. It’s in the past”.

Rodriguez is right. Dwelling on the past is unwise. You’ll miss what’s happening in the here and now. Oh and there’s probably more than a few opportunities and threats up ahead, by the way. Looking backward, one can quickly forget to make important adjustments and make things right next time around. The least anyone can hope to do is learn something from the past. This rule applies whether you’re a national championship caliber college football team like the Florida Gators, or a 3-9 Michigan Wolverines football team.

Great Expectations
Soon after accepting the head coach position at Michigan, we know that Rich Rodriguez decided to fire all of Lloyd Carr’s staff save one, running backs coach Fred Jackson, and bring in his own guys. The services of Michigan’s defensive coordinator Ron English were not retained. Instead Rodriguez brought in Scott Shafer. Shafer had served as a defensive secondary coach and defensive coordinator at several division 1 schools including Northern Illinois, Illinois, Western Michigan and Stanford.

The responses to the Shafer hire in the college football community were universally positive. Stanford head football coach Jim Harbaugh (Shafer’s previous boss) described him as "One of the most creative and innovative defensive minds in the country." As we’ll explore below in some detail, there were some very compelling reasons why Mr. Harbaugh would hold such an opinion.

In early 2008, it was said that Shafer would bring his own opportunistic brand of defensive play to Ann Arbor in the form of a higher-risk, 4-3 “flex” defensive set that would blitz frequently and force gobs of turnovers. Wolverine football fans suddenly grew nostalgic from this news, reminiscing about those hard-hitting, bulwark Michigan defenses of the past - those coached by Bill McCartney, Gary Moeller and former head coach Lloyd Carr. Sacks galore, interceptions, fumble recoveries and memorable reversals in game momentum that gave 98% of Ann Arbor residents acute laryngitis. It all sounded so familiar and welcoming.

But perhaps what excited Michigan fans most about Scott Shafer at the time was the sort of “coming out of nowhere” results at places like Northern Illinois, Western Michigan and Stanford. This is made most evident when we review the numbers during Shafer’s career. These were football programs that seemed to have been literally “switched back on” defensively upon Shafer’s arrival. From these great stories, it was believed that Shafer, combined with Rodriguez’s offensive ingenuity, would bring the much needed breath of fresh air to the “stale” Michigan football program.

This was an interesting slice of time, in my view, that many fellow UM fans, I suspect, would just as soon forget. I took a closer look at some of the key defensive achievements during Scott Shafer’s career as a defensive coordinator up to his brief stint at Michigan, including:

• Total Defense
• Turnovers Gained
• Scoring Defense
• Rushing Defense
• Passing Defense
• Sacks (I only found data from 2005 on)

So just what do I intend to prove by revisiting former defensive coordinator Scott Shafer, who presided over the worst defensive performance at Michigan in a generation?

I wanted to show that it was reasonable for expectations of Scott Shafer to be very high as he joined Rodriguez’s football staff for the 2008 season. High expectation always comes with this territory at Michigan - the college program with the most football victories on the face of the planet. At Michigan championships are won with great defense first. I also wanted to remind people that Scott Shafer was a proven, successful defensive coordinator well before he arrived at Michigan. There was every reason to believe that this guy would take Michigan’s talented roster of defensive players, shape them into exponentially better football players, and turn the Wolverine defense into something goddamned scary on the gridiron.

Of course, we all know this did not happen. And there is plenty of speculation as to why it did not. Some state that Shafer never meshed well with Rodriguez and the rest of the new Michigan football coaching staff. Some refer to Shafer’s accountability for the defensive team discipline, which was sub-par by Michigan’s traditional standards (missed assignments, giving up many big plays, inappropriate sideline behavior). Others mention that Shafer was way too hands-off in the first place, that he coached the defense from the booth and would have been much more effective coaching the young, inexperienced Michigan team from the sidelines. Still others try to excuse Shafer because of the horrendous performance of Rodriguez’s first year offense, which frequently placed near impossible demands on Shafer’s defensive unit game after game.

In my view, Michigan’s 2008 results were probably a function of all of the above. There’s a lot to consider here.

Scott Shafer as Huskie DC
Huskie head coach Joe Novak certainly took his sweet time to turn things around in DeKalb, but the UNI administration apparently had patience-a-plenty, or they didn’t know any better. Well either way, it turned out ok, because Novak gradually built Northern Illinois football into a respectable football program that no one would take lightly anymore. Scott Shafer was there with Novak from the beginning, first as the Huskies’ defensive secondary coach from 1996-1999, and then as defensive coordinator from 2000 to 2003. Checking out UNI’s defensive numbers as defensive coordinator, it’s easy to see why Shafer’s efforts early in his career would raise more than just a few eyebrows:

Total Defense
Year	Team	Team Record	Total Defense Rank
2000	Northern Illinois	6-5	53rd
2001	Northern Illinois	6-5	70th
2002	Northern Illinois	8-4	73rd
2003	Northern Illinois	10-2	16th
Turnovers Gained
Year	Team	Turnovers Gained	Turnovers Gained Nat. Rank
2000	Northern Illinois	27	23rd
2001	Northern Illinois	21	67th
2002	Northern Illinois	28	40th
2003	Northern Illinois	31	14th
Scoring Defense
Year	Team	Pts Allowed/Game	Scoring Def Rank
2000	Northern Illinois	25.5	60th
2001	Northern Illinois	26.5	68th
2002	Northern Illinois	24.8	49th
2003	Northern Illinois	21.5	31st
Rushing Defense
Year	Team	Rush Yrds/Game	Rush Def Rank
2000	Northern Illinois	150.7	60th
2001	Northern Illinois	157.6	66th
2002	Northern Illinois	131.8	38th
2003	Northern Illinois	140.3	55th
Passing Defense
Year	Team	Pass Yrds/Game	Pass Def Rank
2000	Northern Illinois	210.09	53rd
2001	Northern Illinois	227.82	69th
2002	Northern Illinois	254	103rd
2003	Northern Illinois	162.5	5th
Notable Wins
Year	Opponent
2000	None
2001	None
2002	Beat Wake Forest 7-6, Beat Miami(OH) 7-5, Beat Bowling Green 9-3
2003	Beat Maryland 10-3 (OT), Beat at Alabama 4-9,

Northern Illinois’ 2003 season would be Novak’s finest. Shafer’s Huskie defense was spectacular in almost every respect except perhaps rushing defense that year. Over his 4 year career at UNI we see steady improvement in scoring defense and forced turnovers, while the passing defense seemed to worsen each year until the glorious 2003 season. With Shafer’s defensive unit and Novak’s improved running game, UNI knocked off Alabama on the road and Maryland. (This was not the best ‘Bama team ever seen, but this WAS the same Maryland team that dismantled WVU twice in one year 34-7 and 41-7 in the Gator Bowl.

Shafer left UNI to become the defensive secondary coach for Ron Turner at Illinois in 2004. The Illini proceeded to go 3-8 in 2004. Turner was fired at season’s end. Replacement coach Ron Zook told Shafer to hit the road.



Scott Shafer as Broncos DC
Shafer landed softly, however, into the welcoming arms of new MAC coach Bill Cubit of Western Michigan in 2005. The Broncos had just fired long-standing head coach Gary Darnell who suffered 4 straight losing seasons (2001-2004) in Kalamazoo. Shafer would be replacing former WMU defensive coordinator J.C. Harper (current head coach at Stephen F. Austin). A lot has been written about Bill Cubit’s explosive, +400 YPG offenses at WMU. Cubit and Shafer would introduce a major step change at Western Michigan that is still being marveled today by many in the college football media. The Broncos’ national defensive rankings under Scott Shafer broke several school records. We see a dramatic turnaround in defensive performance the moment Shafer arrives at work:

Total Defense
Year	Team	Team Record	Total Defense Rank
2004	WMU (DC J.C. Harper)	1-10	115th
2005	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	7-4	108th
2006	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	8-5	11th
Turnovers Gained
Year	Team	Turnovers Gained	Turnovers Gained Nat. Rank
2004	WMU (DC J.C. Harper)	16	97th
2005	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	25	32nd
2006	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	34	3rd
Scoring Defense
Year	Team	Pts Allowed/Game	Scoring Def Rank
2004	WMU (DC J.C. Harper)	39.6	114th
2005	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	32.18	29th
2006	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	19.9	39th
Rushing Defense
Year	Team	Rush Yrds/Game	Rush Def Rank
2004	WMU (DC J.C. Harper)	215.4	108th
2005	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	147.5	56th
2006	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	76.1	6th
Passing Defense
Year	Team	Pass Yrds/Game	Pass Def Rank
2004	WMU (DC J.C. Harper)	165.18	108th
2005	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	303.1	116th
2006	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	199.31	57th
Sacks
Year	Team	Sacks	Sacks Nat. Rank
2004	WMU (DC J.C. Harper)	?	?
2005	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	31	23rd
2006	WMU (DC Scott Shafer)	46	1st
Notable Wins
Year	Opponent
2004	None
2005	Beat So. Illinois 9-4, Beat Bowling Green 6-5, Beat Central Mich 6-5, Beat UNI 7-5
2006	Beat at Virginia 5-7, Beat UNI 7-6,

While there may have been fewer victories of note while at WMU, the statistics of Shafer’s WMU defenses, particularly total defense, turnovers, sacks and rushing defense were impressive in a conference that by this time was notorious for being rather “WACish” (i.e. lots of offense, not much defense).

The Cardinal DC
Following the 8-5 season at WMU in 2006, Schafer joined Jim Harbaugh at Stanford for the 2007 season. How did Harbaugh choose Shafer? He discovered the internets. Harbaugh was replacing former Cardinal head coach Walt Harris who had finished 1-11 in 2006. Shafer would be take over the job of former Stanford defensive coordinator A.J. Christoff. Like Western Michigan, the Stanford job from the outset looked to be a major overhaul project. On paper, at least, it would not be difficult for Shafer to improve upon the god awful defense exhibited by Stanford the prior year:

Total Defense
Year	Team	Team Record	Total Defense Rank
2006	Stanford (DC A.J. Christoff)	1-11	97th
2007	Stanford (DC Scott Shafer)	4-8	98th
Turnovers Gained
Year	Team	Turnovers Gained	Turnovers Gained Nat. Rank
2006	Stanford (DC A.J. Christoff)	15	108th
2007	Stanford (DC Scott Shafer)	26	39th
Scoring Defense
Year	Team	Pts Allowed/Game	Scoring Def Rank
2006	Stanford (DC A.J. Christoff)	31.4	108th
2007	Stanford (DC Scott Shafer)	28.3	65th
Rushing Defense
Year	Team	Rush Yrds/Game	Rush Def Rank
2006	Stanford (DC A.J. Christoff)	210.5	117th
2007	Stanford (DC Scott Shafer)	169.3	77th
Passing Defense
Year	Team	Pass Yrds/Game	Pass Def Rank
2006	Stanford (DC A.J. Christoff)	177	23rd
2007	Stanford (DC Scott Shafer)	266.17	107th
Sacks
Year	Team	Sacks	Sacks Nat. Rank
2006	Stanford (DC A.J. Christoff)	14	111th
2007	Stanford (DC Scott Shafer)	38	11th
Notable Wins
Year	Opponent
2006	None
2007	Beat No. 1 at USC 11-2, Beat Cal 7-6

In almost every individual category, Stanford’s defense excelled - and not by just a little bit. It is interesting to note, that in terms of total defense, Stanford actually worsened under Schafer. Stanford’s total yards surrendered per game in 2006 was 387.5 (5.51 ypp) but 435.5 per game in 2007 (5.82 ypp).

But when your team “comes out of nowhere” beating No. 2 ranked USC on national television in the Coliseum (USC was favored by 41 and had a 35-1 record at home up to that point), and then you end up shocking your top rival Cal, and all the while you increase Stanford’s overall sack total by an unheard of factor of 3 from the previous year, well, let’s just say you’re gonna get noticed. All of this helped raise Schafer’s stock considerably as a proven defensive coordinator.

The Wolverine DC
Schafer entered a very different situation at Michigan. Although Michigan defensive staffs since 1998 were now infamous for wholesale incompetence when it came to holding a candle against read option spread offenses with mobile quarterbacks, the Wolverines still managed to field comparatively high ranked defensive units by both Big Ten and national standards. Shafer would replace Ron English, who had demonstrated a strong start as Michigan’s defensive coordinator for the first eleven games of 2006. However, Michigan’s defensive performance seemed to erode down the stretch versus opponents like Ball State, Ohio State, USC. This lackluster play continued versus Appalachian State and Oregon in 2007. With 7 returning starters for 2008, it was believed (incorrectly) that Michigan’s team offered more tools for Scott Shafer to work with than he ever possessed at UNI, WMU or Stanford.



The on-field results at Michigan were surprising:

Total Defense
Year	Team	Team Record	Total Defense Rank
2007	Michigan (Ron English)	9-4	24th
2008	Michigan (Scott Shafer)	3-9	67th
Turnovers Gained
Year	Team	Turnovers Gained	Turnovers Gained Nat. Rank
2007	Michigan (Ron English)	29	20th
2008	Michigan (Scott Shafer)	20	77th
Scoring Defense
Year	Team	Pts Allowed/Game	Scoring Def Rank
2007	Michigan (Ron English)	21.4	23rd
2008	Michigan (Scott Shafer)	28.9	84th
Rushing Defense
Year	Team	Rush Yrds/Game	Rush Def Rank
2007	Michigan (Ron English)	156.8	58th
2008	Michigan (Scott Shafer)	136.92	50th
Passing Defense
Year	Team	Pass Yrds/Game	Pass Def Rank
2007	Michigan (Ron English)	178.85	8th
2008	Michigan (Scott Shafer)	230	87th
Sacks
Year	Team	Sacks	Sacks Nat. Rank
2007	Michigan (Ron English)	32	33rd
2008	Michigan (Scott Shafer)	29	33rd
Notable Wins
Year	Opponent
2007	Beat PSU 9-4, Beat NW 6-6, Beat Illinois 9-4, Beat Purdue 8-5, Beat MSU 7-6, Beat Florida 9-4
2008	Beat Wisconsin 7-6, Beat Minnesota 7-6

There were games where Michigan’s defense played well enough to forgive the anemic performance of Wolverine offense (Miami, Wisconsin and Minnesota games). In other games, one wondered if the repertoire of opponent big plays would ever come to an end. Michigan’s defense in 2008 did not “come out of nowhere” with incremental aggressiveness. There were fewer sacks and fewer turnovers gained from the prior year.. Michigan’s scoring defense worsened considerably. While the rushing defense did improve under Shafer: 157 yards per game in 2007 versus 137 yards per game in 2008 (50th rank nationally in 2007 to 58th!), this would be completely cancelled out by the sieve that was the Michigan pass defense: 179 yards per game in 2007 to 230 yards per game in 2008 (8th rank nationally in 2007 to 87th!). Poor emphasis on pass defense appears to have been a recurring theme for all of Shafer’s defenses at WMU, Stanford and Michigan. This might be the resulting tradeoff when you utilize a defensive set that involves incessant blitzing.

Lessons Learned
We know the rest of the story. The three and nine record, Shafer’s resignation, and another new sheriff in town named Greg Robinson.

I don’t profess to know all of the reasons why Scott Shafer did not succeed at Michigan. I do know this: Michigan returned an experienced defensive line, and known trouble-spots at linebacker and a vulnerable secondary. As coach of the defense, one would have hoped Schafer could have easily identified Michigan’s obvious weaknesses right off the bat, fortified those areas appropriately, or taken some other corrective action, just as he appeared to have done while at UNI, WMU and Stanford.

Michigan’s youth, poor depth at key positions, poor tackling fundamentals and angles of pursuit, poor coverage communications, and lack of chemistry no doubt all contributed to the 3-9 record. But weren’t such challenges and attributes also present at UNI, WMU and Stanford? They must have been present there too.

Perhaps Shafer recognized all of the defensive team weaknesses, but was not given freedom to make the changes he felt were needed? Or perhaps he used trial-and-error to implement such changes only to encounter significant resistance from players – and/or from fellow assistant coaches?

I don’t know.

My suspicion is that faith was lost in Shafer early on in the season, and the situation only worsened as the year progressed. I welcome readers to offer their own views.

When I look at the numbers and still consider Scott Shafer to be a good defensive coordinator. He may be the kind of coach who excels under certain circumstances like those present at UNI in 2000, WMU in 2005 and Stanford in 2007 – i.e. recovering programs under reconstruction, where the pressure to succeed is still high, but for different reasons: Trying to build something exciting and new out of nothing. The new construction project that lies before Scott Shafer today at Syracuse might be right up his alley.

More power to him.

A Final Word
The Scott Shafer episode reminded me that

a. College football is a business.

b. We live in a Drive-Thru society.

As Americans we seem to feel entitled to ours, and we want it now. Instant gratification - or there will be consequences. There are certainly some merits to this within our American experience. But there are drawbacks as well.

In college football, the gradual and time-consuming rebuilding projects that took place at Indiana under Bill Mallory, or Kansas State under Bruce Snyder, or Iowa under Hayden Fry, tend to get short shrift in today’s media. Hayden Fry’s first years at Iowa were 5-6 (1979) and 4-7 (1980). In year three Iowa beat UCLA, Nebraska and then Michigan in Ann Arbor, and was playing in it’s first Rose Bowl in something like 30 years. By today’s threshold of administrative patience, Fry would probably have been kicked out on his ass after the 1980 season.

Some wanted the very same for Shafer and Rodriguez after last fall.

My petition would be that before any more boos start raining down on Greg Robinson and this young Michigan defense this coming fall, maybe fans could pause for a second and consider what Scott Shafer said when he first accepted the offer to come coach at Michigan:

"It was tough leaving Stanford. Working with Coach (Jim) Harbaugh, we had a blast. I felt like we were doing something special there. But I'm really excited to be here. There are a few jobs you drop everything for, and this is one of them. My wife, Missy, my family - they're fired up to be here."

I wish Mr. Shafer great success in the future.