Thought experiment (be honest): Do you want big rushing numbers or big passing numbers?

Rushing because it shows you just plowed the shit out of the other team and probably had the ball most of the time.

I literally don’t care. Just don’t be one dimensional. It’s fine to have a clear strength but it shouldn’t be at the cost of the other.

I don’t think that’s the case at all though. I think we have a very good passing attack. But our run game is on another level, and if an opponent is dumb enough to not load the box then we would be dumb not to play to our strength and run it down their throats.

Drive for show

Putt for dough

Someone has probably already mentioned this, but it was super windy on Saturday. So much so that they had to hold the ball for kickoffs. Keep the ball on the ground on a day like that! Especially when the wind is against you (as in the 2Q).  JJ did throw a bit more in the 4Q.

Rushing because if you have 400+ rushing yards, you have 100% won the game. 400+ passing yards probably means you've won but also means you could be in a shoot out

Raw numbers are a bit misleading. I’d absolutely take 418 yards rushing and 145 passing if those attempts were like yesterday. You have to be able to threaten deep consistently to lighten the box enough to get advantageous run looks. Conversely if you throw for 418 you’re probably loving 145 rushing yards because those runs are keeping bodies in the box. If we’re cranking out good, effective game plans each week it doesn’t matter at all. 

How many games have you watched where the good guys could salt it away if they could just grind out a predictable 3 yards a carry? Prior to the last year and a half not enough. 2016 Iowa. 2016 OSU are two games that come to mind that getting 1 yard would have iced the game.

I want the team that can run at will. It wears the other team down and keeps your own defense fresh as well.

There’s no question that 418 rushing yards is far superior to 418 passing yards.

The correlation between rushing yards and winning is much better than the correlation between passing yards and winning.  Unless you’re playing against MSU, throwing for 418 yards sounds like a sign of desperation — that’s what you do when you’re trailing and trying to score points in a hurry despite the risks.

I feel like the post is missing a point. Most of the gripe about passing from yesterday's game seems to be about two things. 1) Why are we not throwing downfield? 2) Why didn't we try to throw at times when we are in the RZ. Fair comments I think.

I would say if the yardage was the same as yesterday's game, but if we had two 30 plus yard completion with one of them being a TD along with a passing TD in RZ, you would not have heard many comments about passing.

For me, I love the art of running. Everyone plays a huge part including WRs. There is something about blowing people off the line is a little macho to me. But, I will take the win with passing IU game or win with running like PSU. I think it is not the yardage, but leaving points on the field that bothers people and they worry about not able to recruit top level WRs and QBs. I say Harbaugh will find QBs and WRs who will fit our system and our players seem to do well. 

Big rushing numbers are more correlated with winning than big passing numbers, I think.  Certainly that's true for Harbaugh's teams.

Take what the defense gives you. Plan A, run. Plan B balanced, Plan C Air Coryell.

Running.

But I want clutch passes completed. Watching Hendon Hooker last night made me feel a classic, primal feeling, of why I watch foot. Scrambling, and completing that long pass that got them into field goal range, made a feeling of resonance to other games, when a pass like that was completed, happen in me. Like Doug Flutie on Thanksgiving day. And lots of others.

I'm not just talking about long passes with just seconds to go. But also, short passes that keep the chains moving, in clutch moments.

Watching the running yesterday gave me a feeling about Michigan football of winning that I haven't felt all year. And I want a whole lot more of it against Mich St. Hope the point spread it 40+.

Well, Alabama had 455 yards passing and 49 points against Tennessee last night and still lost by 3. I would obviously like a balanced attack but Jim Harbaugh has been able to prove that he knows what he is doing with the rushing attack. I will take 418 yards rushing. Go Blue!

Passing.  It seems much harder to be dominant rushing each game.

Rushing, and it's not even close:

- Rushing means you are pounding the hell out of the opponent's defense, wearing them out.

- Rushing means you are controlling the clock.  The fewer times the opponent has the ball, the fewer chances the opponent has to keep up with you.

- Rushing the ball, a team is less likely to turn the ball over.  Interceptions are more common than fumbles.

I like the win column to have big numbers, like say, 15, and the loss column to always stay 0.

I do like big butts.  I can not lie.

Balance

Rushing. Because it means my team won at the line of scrimmage, which almost always means a win on the scoreboard.

Either is fine with me, though it's really satisfying to get the yards you need on the ground whenever you want it.

I'm just glad we aren't talking about 27 for 27 like we were nine years ago!

I know of exactly one football game in which a team rushed for 400+ and lost: Minnesota in our 2003 game against them.  Of course, they had a 21-point lead, and it took our largest comeback in school history to win.  

I don't know of a single other time when it's happened.  I'm sure it does happen once in a while, but I'd guess teams with that total win in the 98-99% range.

OTOH, it's not that hard to find games in which a team passes for 400 and loses.  That still will give you a strong chance of victory, but probably more in the 80-85% range nowadays.   

Give me the dominant rush attack.

What's the old golf saying?  Drive for show, putt for dough.  In football terms it can translate to "pass for show, rush for dough".  It's dumb, yeah, but my point is that big passing numbers get your team a lot of chatter and television ratings because people eat up the air show.  Rushing, not so much.  But successful ground attacks win football games.  It can make for ugly television (not in the case of Michigan-PSU when BC and DE are breaking off 60+ yard runs) but it is a tried and true formula for success.

To answer the OP's question, no wuss bets here.  I would rather 400+ yards on the ground and 150-ish through the air, than vice versa.

If the number of scores is the same I'd honestly prefer the passing yards.  I don't really know why I feel this way though *insert indifferent shrug*

I think the goal is to be good enough at both that you don't give your opponent the opportunity to gameplan on shutting down what you do best. Last year, Georgia shut down our run game, and we had no answer. This year, we may have the ability to attack through the pass game, traditional run game, and QB run game. That's why JJ is the key. Offensive line is always most important bc without that foundation, you can't have anything. But JJ as a run threat and good (maybe great) passer is the key to hitting National Championship caliber offense. 

I’ve always been a wuss.
I want Michigan to win. Only thing that matters 

Fans seem to love passing over running but I just want the W 

"The only number that matters is the score."

Passing honestly. That usually means more big plays. A 20 yard run is equivalent to a 40 yard pass as far as excitement. You can get to 400 yards on 45 pass attempts, yet 250 on 45 attempts is around the same possibility in the same amount of attempts.

I think the implication is that running is boring and passing is exciting and people like exciting. But I ask you - were the Edwards and Corum 60+ yard runs not every bit as exciting as a bomb? I was literally dancing some kind of demented Irish jig in the aisle after those runs. It was a great day to be in the big bowl at Stadium and Main. 

Rushing is more sustainable and less fluky. 

rushing please.

Give me a dominant running game!  I'm probably showing my age but I prefer a result like last Saturday vs. throwing the ball around the yard.  It's just so demoralizing to have someone run up and down the field while o-line pushing you around.  My son's team runs a wing T in high school and they throw the ball a max of 3-4 times in a game, it doesn't matter though because they can run the ball and win far more than they lose.

My favorite quote, I attribute it to Bo but I'm not sure who said it.  "We didn't throw the ball because we could run the ball."  This makes perfect sense to me.

Honestly I just agree with Mitch

Rushing.  More sustainable week to week and suggests domination at the line of scrimmage. 

Obviously whatever wins the most is what I want, but I think it would be cool to see a great season where Michigan has a legit top passing attack and ELITE QB throwing for 4K yards and 35+ TDs just to see something different that Michigan has never seen. 

Just win baby.

At this point in the season, give me the rushing numbers so Blake can go after the Heisman. Let the WRs go crazy next year so that JJ can win it.