The Wolverine: Covering University of Michigan Football and Sports
Issue link: http://read.uberflip.com/i/80972
Just The START Greg Mattison Expects Coordinator Breakthrough Defensive Effort To Build Off Last Year's G BY MICHAEL SPATH reg Mattison wasn't coaching in Ann Arbor during three of the most wretched defensive seasons in Michigan's history, but he could see the pained look on his players' faces when he stood before them for the first time in the spring of 2011. DEFENSE Q&A Players such as Mike Martin, Ryan Van Bergen, J.B. Fitzgerald and Troy Woolfolk did not want their legacies defined by the video game-like numbers that went up on the score- board during the 2008, 2009 and 2010 cam- paigns. In those years, the Wolverines allowed combined averages of 405.0 yards and 30.7 points per game, including program-record worsts of 450.8 yards and 35.2 points in 2010. In 2011, instilling worn-away confidence, and a 4-3 scheme that put the Maize and Blue personnel in the best position to make plays, the coaching staff helped bring pride back to the defense, and with each week, each positive performance, the Wolverines began to believe more in their individual and unit capabilities. The results were staggering. Michigan finished its 13-game schedule ranked 17th nationally in total defense (322.15 yards per game) and sixth in scoring defense (17.38 points per game), improving 93 and 102 spots, respectively, in the NCAA rankings. U-M also jumped from 95th in rushing de- fense to 39th (131.69 yards per game), and improved its pass efficiency defense from 103rd to 36th (120.49 rating). In 37 games, from 2008-10, the Maize and Blue surrenderd 30 or more points to 22 op- ponents, but they gave up that many in 2011 to just two, Notre Dame (in a 35-31 win) and Ohio State (in a 40-34 win). However, Mattison, who was the chief architect responsible for the dramatic turn- around, is far from satisfied. In his estima- tion, Michigan simply wasn't good enough. He points to losses in which U-M allowed 28 points to Michigan State and 24 to Iowa. He's not happy the Wolverines forced their offense to score 40 to beat the Buckeyes. He understands the enormity of the task the Wolverines confronted and was proud of his players for their effort, but he demands more from them now. Greater consistency, greater production, more sacks, more turnovers and fewer big plays allowed. Mattison has set the bar at a, seemingly, impossible standard — being the nation's best (a feat achieved by Alabama in 2011) — and only then might he be satisfied. The Wolverine: Do you think the 2011 defense overachieved? 140 s THE WOLVERINE 2012 FOOTBALL PREVIEW Mattison: "I think if I said we over- achieved I'd be insulting our defense, in- sulting our players. I don't think you ever overacheive at Michigan. When you're a defensive football player here, there is a bar, and when you step on the field, this is the level at which you play [raising his right hand higher than his head], and that's where we expected them to play, and it's what we practiced every day for." The Wolverine: Did the defense meet the bar for a Michigan defense? Mattison: "No. Did they approach it? Did they do it in certain plays? Yes. But when you reach that bar, you play every play, four quarters, every game that way, and we ob- viously didn't. Were there more and more plays every game as the season went on? Yes. I keep going back to the Illinois game. We got real close. The Nebraska game we got closer, and then the Ohio game and bowl game, there were too many plays we didn't get to that bar. "Our players gave great effort. They wanted to be a great defense. They were