UM Offense you would like to see...
I understand there is talk behind the scenes among coaches on which type of spread UM should run next season. Should they go run heavy like they did at WVU with Denard or do more of a Texas Tech passing offense with Tate. With each offense being based on the strength of each qb what offense would you like to see in 2010?
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:49 PM ^
The one that scores more points than the opponent.
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:52 PM ^
Why is it that all coaches don't think like you?
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:55 PM ^
this one.
I dont care if you run 3 yards and a cloud of dust, the air raid, run heavy spread, pro-style, balanced, triple option, the option attack. Just score more than the opponent
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:14 PM ^
I would love to see RR have the personnel to run his own ideal version of the offense that he created. Since it came from the run and shoot, I would have to extrapolate that it would contain a fair amount of passing.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:25 PM ^
But he did invent the zone-read so it'd be nice if we could run that a little bit better. And his offense has evolved a little bit, and of course it was successful at WVa primarily ground-based. I think that it should really probably be balanced, but it should reflect the abilities and skills of the players on offense, which seems to indicate that we should pass more.
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:48 PM ^
Somewhere in-between
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:49 PM ^
Balanced and high scoring. Other than that I don't care.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:03 PM ^
nevermind not thinking or writing coherently
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:52 PM ^
I prefer about 60/40 pass. It is better than getting one yard each time on the "Zone Read".
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:57 PM ^
60/40 pass with lots of tate and denard both in the backfield
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:57 PM ^
With the recievers we have and Smith questionable at the start of the year I'd like to see a 60%-65% passing attack.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:01 PM ^
sounds good, especially since we dont really have a bruising back anymore, and a lot of the running backs will get a lot of looks for screens and coming out of the backfield
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:07 PM ^
I'd love to see Fitz get a good number of reps his HS film was insane to watch. Steven Hopkins looks good in this years recruiting classtoo. He still needs to redshirt and maybe a few years learning, but he has a different running style that I really like.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:22 PM ^
Maybe I'm old school, but I definitely prefer an offense that can establish the ground game. If you can run the ball (or even just force the defense to put an extra guy in the box) you have a shot for big plays in the passing game. I'd go 60/40 run (and if the other team can't stop it I'd go 100/0 on the ground).
EDIT: Also, for all the talk of Tressel and OSU opening it up in the Rose Bowl, they still ran it 51 times to 37 passes. Oregon had to respect the ground game and that allowed Pryor to find guys down the field for big plays.
January 3rd, 2010 at 2:31 AM ^
Ingredients: Sugar, Water, and Purple.
January 3rd, 2010 at 2:02 PM ^
What the fuck is juice?
January 2nd, 2010 at 10:58 PM ^
I understand there is talk behind the scenes among coaches on which type of spread UM should run next season.Care to cite that?
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:12 PM ^
Sure not a problem. I will not give the name due to the info being behind a paywall and without his permission i will not state the source. but from what i understand there is 2 scenarios with each surrounding both sides of the ball. on "O" the OC wants to run more of a WVU offense and RROD has more belief in Tates skills. Take it for what its worth. On "D" RROD is allowing Gerg to run the "D" however he is very influential on wanting the DBs to be more physical at the LOS unlike last year.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:20 PM ^
Magee better want to open it up a little bit down the field passing, but RR probably will anyways. I'm glad to hear about the defensive backs though, physicality in the back seven was sorely lacking.
January 3rd, 2010 at 2:57 AM ^
It's hard to be physical when you're chasing guys from behind.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:21 PM ^
Wikipedia wouldn't even call that a cite. "A guy I don't want to name behind a paywall" is a rumor, not a source.
It's still an interesting question posed, but take the situation with a metric ton of salt. Rich Rod and Calvin Magee go together like bread and butter. I wouldn't assume that there is a lot of tension between the two because someone said it on the internet.
January 3rd, 2010 at 1:28 AM ^
Wouldn't the person behind the curtain paywall want you to say who and where you got the information from so that people will come checkout the site and, hence, maybe buy a subscription? The only thing out of bounds is cutting and pasting large swaths of material from behind paywalls; throwing out a couple of lines and a link is totally fair game and, I'd bet, desired.
January 3rd, 2010 at 7:23 AM ^
King Beaver said this last week. Come on, you guys have to know a Scoutie when you see one.
I told you guys there's a synergy between this board and Scout. MgoBlog is always being discussed/linked, behind The Paywall and many if not most of the posters there also pollute this blog now.
January 3rd, 2010 at 9:20 AM ^
What, you mean there is crossover between UM websites? How could that be....Imagine that, people who read Scout and Rivals, also read this site. Good thing you reported on that synergy...one would have never guessed it.
January 3rd, 2010 at 11:50 AM ^
MgoBlog is always being discussed/linked, behind The Paywall
I heard it smells like rotten fish on the other side of "the Wall". The result of a lack of showering, extra large heads, and overactive bladders anytime a recruit sneezes and they didn't hear about it.
Can you confirm?January 3rd, 2010 at 1:53 AM ^
I'm encouraged by the notion that our coaches are going back to the drawing board and rethinking the offense and defense they want to run. Some have worried that RR would be too married to the zone read to want to change. I also greatly welcome the part about our DBs being more physical. Giving up huge cushions all the time clearly isn't the answer.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:00 PM ^
I like the Oregon runs, but M needs to have a healthy passing game. A heavy run spread doesn't work against a strong defense. Pat White is the exception, not the rule. I'd like to see well-timed screens, good mid-range balls, and a few deep routes per game.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:03 PM ^
I'd like to see us go to a more pass oriented spread at least for now. Wait until we have seasoned upper classmen and the personnel to go back to a WVU style spread. In fact once the guys are all in place just do a balanced spread.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:04 PM ^
Let's be honest, we haven't seen RR's ideal spread offense yet because Tate and Denard can't run the zone read.
What do I want? All I want is for this simple, staple play to work. For someone, anyone to do it effectively. I want to be fooled sitting on my couch. If that happens, I'll be very happy.
January 3rd, 2010 at 12:47 AM ^
The Zenith of the spread option offense is when the guys shooting the game are regularly unsure of who has the ball.
January 3rd, 2010 at 8:44 AM ^
My father isn't a football fan and doesn't follow the sport at all, but does watch with me when there is a game on and he is at my house.
He saw a few of UM's games last year and asked "What is the QB trying to do with that fake handoff? You're grandmother is half blind but I bet any money she wouldn't even be fooled by that."
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:05 PM ^
There would need to be a big overhaul of the offense to run a pass-heavy spread. Michigan's passing game as of now is pretty simple (as it was at West Virginia). However, Michigan may have better personell at receiver than at runningback and Tate is a better passer than runner, so the offensive coaches seriously should consider moving to may more complex passing game and rely more heavily on passing. If RR is as innovative as we think he is, a move shouldn't be too hard.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:11 PM ^
You should change your name to "The Green Yoshi" now that you've changed your picture.....
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:16 PM ^
I probably should, but that's just how I envision myself when watching Michigan do something well. In fact, I think I will change it. If a mod sees this, please help.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:11 PM ^
I would also like to see more developments in the zone read also, such as 3 Tech-reads, H-back coming across the formation, addition of a third option such as a speed option after the read or a potential bubble screen in soft coverage. Hopefully the coaches will build on the basics in Tate's second year because the possibilities are endless with reads of linebackers, ends, and tackles in the run game, power runs, counters, traps, hot and read routes with fast receivers... etc.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:14 PM ^
I agree 100% thats exactly what we should do with the personel that we have, but I don't think it depends on how inivative he is it's how stuborn is he if he want to change things up.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:11 PM ^
No matter how they will change, i hope it would be a type of offense that can score more points and dominate the time of possession. We sometimes scored too fast and put our defense back on the field. They will be wear out before the half time. That's also how Oregon lose their game, either score too fast, or 3 and out. No good for defense.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:18 PM ^
we should just throw the ball to Roy
edit: typo
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:29 PM ^
I believe the strength of our program is currently via the passing game. Tate is a better passer than runner, we have all seen this. Losing the two best backs on the roster will hurt, not to mention V. Smith's knee and rehab time. In light of new information, I am frustrated that Minor did not redshirt this year with the lingering injuries. However, in the big ten the running game is as important as defense and we will need to improve both in 2010. I believe Robinson is best suited as a mix breed Percy Harvin/Antwan Randel EL. Let D. Rob run but give him some options and tricks. Bottom line we need to be consistent. Scoring quickly is nice but until we have a defense that can stop the other team, we need the offense to have the ability to control the clock, something we saw scarcely in '09. We need to develop the run but for now with the slot receivers and Tate's ability.... pass pass PASS!!!!!
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:35 PM ^
It would be nice to see a balance to keep the opposing defenses off-balance. Rodriguez should strive to do both especially given the weather up North. If it's cold and snowy against OSU we can run it more then throw (no pun intended) in more passing, weather permitting.
January 2nd, 2010 at 11:39 PM ^
D-Rob was a turnover machine last year--seriously. Plus, he never ran the zone read, which is the bread and butter of a run first spread. If he can change both, then I'm all for it--it has more potential.
Let's run the offense RR wants, he's the pro.
January 3rd, 2010 at 12:03 AM ^
a offense that explodes from any where. That is what the spread really is. It forces the defense to attempt to cover the whole field. Thus creating mismatches and big plays. Look at Florida last night. One week they run like crazy and last night was a passing attack. I know people hate Tebow and the Gators but that offense is scary good.
January 3rd, 2010 at 3:37 AM ^
pass more, plain and simple.
im not saying we have to become Texas Tech, but we'd do well to cater to the skills of our starters. we lose all of our proven and experienced RB's. the back with the most experience in the running game tore his acl at the end of the year. the strength of our most experienced QB is accuracy in the passing game. our WR's should definitely improve. our TE's are the best we've seen at Michigan in a while. the OL will improve.
combine aspects of the zone read, the passing game, and ways to use Denard Robinson like Percy Harvin!
January 3rd, 2010 at 1:40 AM ^
But I was a bit worried watching the Rose Bowl that OSU's defense was doing a good job handling Oregon's spread, especially if we all kinda thought that Oregon's spread was a more mature version of what UM is trying to be.
January 3rd, 2010 at 1:43 AM ^
I just want an offense where we can run the zone read effectively.
Hell, if Forcier were able to run the zone-read as well as threet, that'd be fantastic.
January 3rd, 2010 at 1:54 AM ^
I want the best QB to play. If the coaches feel that Tate is the best then I would like to see a more pass happy offense. If Denard is going to be the QB then lets get that ground game rolling. When it's all said and done though I just want the guy and offense that gives us the best chance of winning to be on the field.
January 3rd, 2010 at 1:58 AM ^
What is Texas Tech doing in its WR screen game that makes it so difficult to defend? Their bubble screens don't look too different from ours, but they're finding a lot more running room after the catch than our guys typically are. Is it really just a matter of them practicing it over and over, as the announcers claimed?
January 3rd, 2010 at 2:14 AM ^
I'm no expert, but I would assume that the threat of the very dangerous deep passing game would force the players covering the slot receivers to play further off and give a bigger cushion makes Texas Tech's bubble screens better than ours. Our passing game isn't complex, so safeties (starting with Notre Dame IIRC) played really close to slot receivers to take away the bubble without much threat of anything else. The bubble was our only successful passing play in '08, so teams looked to take that away (which opened up deeper routes with Roundtree later in the year).
January 3rd, 2010 at 2:23 AM ^
That would make sense, but it doesn't seem like TT throws downfield all that much, though. They have the ability to, but screens are really their bread and butter.
January 3rd, 2010 at 2:37 AM ^
I think that the threat of it is just enough to keep them off the line of scrimmage. Plus if you add it all the slants, curls, and outs they run, playing close would really leave you vunerable to the inside. Bubble screens work in general, but for us, there is no immediate threat of slots doing much otherwise, plus the outside receivers run more deep and intermediate routes. I wasn't being that attentive during the game, but IIRC MSU ran some zone which would require a bit of a cushion.