As you are all assuredly aware, there's a TON of noise about our coaching search. So I thought this could be a place where we discuss the relative credibility of sources--especially the ones who make the strongest assertions (e.g. Football Scoop, GH, etc.).
So who do you find credible/not credible and why?
Gives Michigan the same odds as Harbaugh staying with SF.
EDIT: Odds starting to move in Michigan's favor.
EDIT TO THE EDIT: Odds significantly moving in Michigan's favor.
I thought that, for a slight conversational change-up, it might be nice to momentarily stop lusting after the Harbaugh and discuss football as a sport. In particular, offense, since that was the big issue this year.
I will preface this by saying that I don't think Michigan should hire or not hire a coach based on that coaches play style. All good coaches can adjust to what they find on a roster; this time, my hope is that we are hiring someone who can do just that.
With that said, I wanted to look at a few offenses that have always intrigued me and why. I also wanted to open this up to other MgoReaders and posters, since as a whole, I think we are all pretty interested in football at a schematic level.
Popular offenses now:
Pro-Style: This offense is generally mischaracterized as being "under-center" or "I-form" MANBALL. What a Pro-Style offense really is, as many successful NFL teams and College squads have shown, is any football scheme designed to be complex in its blocking and route running. Generally speaking, Pro-Style passing routes use a "Levels" concept, which forces defenders to commit to one particular level, those being shallow, middle and deep on every play. The advantages of this, is that it allows superior, NFL level talent to work. The downside, is that it forces a Quarterback to make complicated, multi-dimensional reads (both sides of the field, and depth) in less than three seconds, while also maintaining route timing (in regards to outs, slants, ins and curls).
Air-Raid: Air-Raid offenses are a form of the spread obviously, but when people say "spread" they usually think only of the Rich Rodriguez style read-option spread. Air-Raid then, for the purposes of my post, is the offense that is run by Mike Leach at Texas Tech and now at Washington State. This offense relies on the same match-up advantages seen in all spreads, with the goal being to put players with talent in space against sometimes superior talent in space, and see who wins in a one on one. However, the Air-Raid's major component is an option based system of route trees, which take years to actually ingrain in players, since the Quarterback and Receiver need to know which option the other will take in an instant. The beauty of the Air-Raid, from a coaching standpoint, is that it nullifies talent deficiencies, particularly at the Quartback position, by keeping all of the routes in a given pattern to relatively short patterns and giving "space" to throw to instead of relying on timing. Basically, receivers are taught to "find grass" and sit there against zone, or Mesh together against man, forcing defenders to essentially pick themselves out of the play, leaving to open grass for the QB to throw to.
Read-Option: This is an offense that most of us who have lived through the late 2000's remember well. When it works, it is perfect, (see OSU) when it does not, it looks bad (see us vs OSU in 2008-2010). The whole principal of the offense is to present the threat of a running quarterback, which evens the match-up numbers. Basically, in ANY other offense, the defense only has to worry about 10 men on a running play, since the QB serves only to hand the ball off. The read-option forces the numbers to at-least be even, since the QB himself is a legitimate running threat. Where the idea works to its ideal, is when the back-side defender is left unblocked and presented with a split second choice: take the RB and allow the QB to break contain (which usually results in a HUGE play when you have someone like Braxton Miller or Denard Robinson at QB) or you take the QB, which allows a back to break off the run inside--which, if everyone is blocked, should theoretically always allow the RB to get to the second level of the defense.
These are all "sexy" offenses. Others that aren't:
Flexbone/Wing-T: This offense, to me, is very cool. That might because I don't know that much about it; it might also be because watching Georgia Tech and Navy run it to perfection is beautiful. It literally neutralizes superior talent at the DLine positions, because it relies on schematic cut-blocking, the idea being that they can't penetrate your OLine or disrupt a play if they are on their backs. It then forces receivers to block, as the play could come to their side of the field depending on a pitch or dive. If any one else knows anything about this offense, please post, I love watching it.
My whole point with this, besides generating some non-CC football talk (since I love football but am stressing out massively during this search) and see what people think. I personally don't care what a coach runs, as long as it works. If Harbaugh wants to come in and run a Wing-T or an Air-Raid or whatever, I will let him. If Dan Mullen wants to come here and install his spread, I will want him to.
I just want to win. Period.
I found some articles on juco signings per football teams to see if signing jucos could really help win football games. The results were mixed. It appears that Big 12 teams primarily sign juco talent to improve their programs. This works from some such as KSU and Oklahoma State but not so well others such as Iowa State and Kansas. The most dominant programs such as Alabama, LSU, or Ohio State don't have more than 4 on their roster. The data appears to show that junior college transfers are usually only recruited heavily by lower tier schools and only work out some of the time. For Michigan to return to college football relevancy it is probably more important that we recruit 4/5 star high school senior talent like Ohio State, LSU, and Alabama do and save 2-3 spots on the 85 man roster for jucos to fill gaps like we had at last year in the OL, DBs under RR, or DL for Hoke's second season after losing Martin, Van Bergen, and Heininger. These articles don't account for oversigning which we should never do, transfers which we just got from USC or like Russell Wilson to Wisconsin. Probably not a sstainable option but if for example there's a 5th year grad transfer at qb like Russell Wilson for 2015 then by all means try to bring him in. There's also grayshirting which is sketchy if you try to do it to a bunch of people but if you have one lower heralded recruit like Pallante who wants to come to Michigan but you're also going after a guy like Dashawn Hand and both parties agree to it then it's fine I guess. http://www.onefootdown.com/2013/11/18/5094084/hittin-up-dem-juco-ranks http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2011/01/which_football_teams_sign_the...
Late to the party here, but didn't see it come up in the open thread.
With OSU jumping TCU and also staving off Baylor, does this show Patterson (and Briles I guess) that having 1 loss at a blue blood school will always trump their current schools and hamper their bids at getting to the NCG?? Could they see Michigan as an easier route to a title by being in a shittier conference and getting more credit for ending up at the top of that conference?
Could this help Patterson see the benefits of making a move to Michigan? Hopefully this is all moot once JH accepts the position, though Patterson could be the 2nd best option out there.
EDIT: Granted this is not enough to move the needle for Patterson to jump ship, however it does demonstrate the value of the big name programs right?
Outside of Hoke (who was obviously unheralded, especially in hindsight), who are some of the least heralded hires at a major program? More specifically, a coaching hire that had fans/media extremely underwhelmed from the get go. Also, how did they wind up doing?
I say this only because hiring Schiano or Addazio would definitely add one to that list.