WTKA Roundtable 7/11/2019: The Game Plan
Special Guests: Hall of Fame coach and 1969 Michigan defensive coordinator Jim Young, 1969 Michigan person who coordinated the offense but did not have the title of offensive coordinator Jerry Hanlon, Michigan historian Steve "Dr. Sap" Sapardanis, and MGoBlog super-genius Seth Fisher.
Not appearing: Craig Ross & Ed Feng because this was a special episode: 1/2 where we discuss Hail to the Victors 2019, which is now available from the MGoStore, UGP, The Bo Store, Nicola's, Literati, and Amazon Kindle. And Flinties (or people coming home from up north): we plan to have it at The Split Mitt by Wednesday next week.
Things discussed:
- The 1969 Michigan-Ohio State gameplan: "Veer plug" defense to contain Rex Kern, Ohio State's own fullback dive, play-action, and their basic reverse-pivot handoffs to the running back and power gap blocking. Young recalled the special punt return package "right middle return" was a counter to the standard edge blocking.
- Woody playing up the "Greatest team in a century"
- "50" on everything
- Jim Young's "Those who stay…" sign
- Jim Young's other sign "Will you bow down…"
- Woody Hayes on the sideline
- That time Jerry Hanlon asked out Debbie Reynolds
- The fact that Debbie married a Jewish guy named Fisher (just saying)
You can catch the entire episode on Michigan Insider's podcast stream on Podbean.
Segment two is here. Segment three is here.
THE USUAL LINKS
- Helpful iTunes subscribe link
- General podcast feed link
- Direct download link (right-click/save as)
- What's with the theme music?
"What happened is we got our kids to block and tackle better than their kids, and that's how you win football games." –Jerry Hanlon
I fail to see how teaching kids to better handle these things translates to wins on the football field.
Reality ain't some Rocky montage, Jerry.
The correct term is, "Flintoid."
Maybe putting 62 on everything will bring a similar result!
This segment is a treasure. Hanlon and Young won't be with us forever, so I just kept thinking about how great it was to hear them reminisce with such clarity about the game, and also ribbing Hanlon about "dating" Debbie Reynolds. Awesome stuff.
While I'm at it, I want to retroactively commend the crew for their "top 20 moments of the era" podcast in the wake of Beilein leaving. The guys were having a blast and it was fun to listen to, and a reminder of just how jam-packed Beilein's years were with awesomeness. The absolute ONLY thing missing was that pinnacle title, otherwise I don't think we fans could have asked for a better decade.
I'd love to see somebody put together a "Big Ten Elite: John Beilein" documentary that spans that whole era of the team. Of course, while we might also like to see one also on 90's football, we wouldn't want to see certain rival teams' elite decades.
"What happened is we got our kids to block and tackle better than their kids, and that's how you win football games." –Jerry Hanlon
Jerry's one of the all-time Michigan greats and arguably its best OL coach in history, but I'm going to differ with him a bit on his analysis of why we won that day.
Michigan played a great game, but total offense for OSU and UM was virtually identical, 377 to 374.
The key to the big upset victory was the Buckeyes turning ball over 7 times, 6 of them on interceptions.
With respect to blocking and tackling being the key to winning football games—not play calling or strategy—does this mean that the reason Bo lost so many Rose Bowls is that the PAC 10 teams were simply better at blocking and tackling?
The yardage didn't get even until near the end, and the train of turnovers didn't start until very near the end of the second quarter. The surprise of that game was Michigan was moving the ball with their base stuff and stopping Ohio state with their base stuff. As you would see in years to come there was a lot of talent on Michigan's team but given the state of the two programs over the previous decade no one believed it until they saw it.
"there was a lot of talent on Michigan's team but given the state of the two programs over the previous decade no one believed it until they saw it."
My view of Hoke is that if he'd been given the ten years that Bump was given, he'd have accumulated the same kind of record: a bunch of mediocre years, a few really bad years, 1 or 2 good years, and one truly outstanding year. All while recruiting better than most of the record indicates.
Anyone else tired of reminiscing about beating Ohio State?
Comments