Michigan beat Washington 24-7 in Ann Arbor last Saturday. Let’s just jump right into it:
Passing Offense – 4/10
Quarterback – 4/10
Offensive line – 5/10
Receivers/tight ends – 6/10
Three picks is three picks, and Washington is unlikely to win many games losing the turnover battle 3-0. Now, one wasn’t Demond Williams’ fault, but there was another throw that should have been a pick, as it hit a Michigan defender in the hands that wasn’t reeled in. The pass catchers were just okay in this game. They made some plays – Denzel Boston had a 48 yard reception and Raiden Vines-Bright had a 31 yarder – but later, Boston’s bobbled catch ended up in the arms of a Michigan defender. While it’s nice that TE Decker DeGraaf is getting more involved, it certainly looked like he ran the wrong route, leading to another Williams interception. His three picks were the first multi-turnover game of his Husky career. The offensive line gave up a lot of pressures (16), but just one sack. Losing Maximus McCree and being forced to play a third string left tackle, as expected, didn’t go great.
Rushing Offense – 4/10
Offensive line – 4/10
Running backs – 5/10
Another game, and another underwhelming rushing performances (18 carries, 59 yards, 1 touchdown for running backs). Jonah Coleman has not had a 100 yard rushing game since UC Davis, but he’s been more involved in the pass game and did good work on screens in the Michigan game, including a 27 yarder. But, it seemed like time and time again both he and Adam Mohammed ran into a wall of Michigan defenders on every rush attempt. Collegefootballdata.com cites just 38 “line yards” for Washington and a stuff rate of 13%. Not good enough.
For only the second time this season, Coleman had no 10+ yard runs. Per PFF, he was only responsible for four first downs and two forced missed tackles, both of which are the second fewest totals of the season (you can probably guess which red colored Michigan rival limited Coleman even more).
Passing Defense – 5/10
Defensive backs – 6/10
Pass rush – 4/10
Washington allowed one of the worst statistical passing QBs in the conference to throw for 230 yards and two touchdowns, on 21/27 passing, with no turnovers. He mostly threw short, with a modest 4.3 average depth of target. But, the Huskies could not generate enough pass rush to impact Bryce Underwood’s game, and the coverage didn’t make enough plays. Per PFF, the Huskies had just two forced incompletions, second fewest total of the season. On the pass rush side, the 12 total QB pressures were also second fewest of the season.
Rushing Defense – 5/10
Michigan running backs totaled 31 carries for 153 yards and a touchdown. The numbers don’t reveal a dominant Michigan performance, but the Huskies just couldn’t match the physicality for 6o minutes. That said, they deserve recognition for the 4th down stop in the shadow of their own goal post, early in the game. However, that was the high point. Michigan was missing their best offensive player, RB Justice Haynes, and still managed to bludgeon the Huskies on the ground with their powerful offensive line. Collegefootballdata.com gives 142 of Michigans 153 yards as offensive line yards. Washington had just three TFLs in this game.
Special Teams – 5/10
I’ll give the special teams credit, it’s not the disaster of last season. But it’s not significantly better, either. K Grady Gross missed a sub-40 yard field goal and is 6/8 0n the season. P Luke Dunne dropped two punts inside the 20, but also had a terrible shank punt early. Throughout a game, it seems like Dunne either makes a pretty good-to-great punt, or miss hits it for 18 yards.
Coaching – 4/1o
Michigan was significantly more physical than Washington, top to bottom. Every single Michigan defensive player is a physical, no-nonsense tackler. Every time a Washington player got the ball, they were met immediately by a Michigan player. Michigan’s Jordan Marshall was running through Washington defenders most of the game. There were also more procedural errors, including two false starts and a mistimed snap that Williams almost mis handled. This was always going to be a tight, physical contest for the majority of the game. Similar to the Ohio State game, the Huskies were getting beat in the trenches but made some plays to stay in it for large stretches of the game. On the other hand, they completely fell apart at the end, with three interceptions in their final four drives. A well drilled and coached team doesn’t crumble like that at the end of games. I come away thinking that there were coaching opportunities to keep this game much closer, and score more than seven points (hot take, I know).