Playing Young and the "Barwis Effect"

Submitted by bonobojones on

I would assume that a certain percentage of us that would be sad to see RR go would also be very sad because it would mean Mike Barwis would leave. From the voice and attitude to the Brock story, he has been a huge positive at the University. One of the things that excites me about his program is the emphasis on replacing bad mass, fat, with good mass, muscle.

In interviews with him and players, it comes across that your first year with him is amazingly dificult.  So I've always wondered, does the change take place? And, does this make playing young even more dificult? For a young player must not only learn to play the game at a higher rate with a higher level of sophistication, they must also do it while massively transforming their bodies. This could lead to big problems as seen by the defense this year.

So what follows is a big chart based on official team rosters 2008-2010.  The % column is the percent body weight change, and the bottom is the overall % change for that position group that year.

 200820092010
playerWt.ClassposWt.Classpos%Wt.Classpos%
Forcier   188FRQB 190SOQB1.1
D. Robinson   185FRQB 193SOQB4.3
----------------------------------------------------------2.7
Cox206FRRB208RFRRB1.0211RSORB1.4
Shaw185FRRB178SORB-3.8188JRRB5.6
V. Smith   168FRRB 180SORB7.1
Toussaint   185FRRB 200RFRRB8.1
------------------------------------------------1.4---------------5.6
Gallon   165FRSR 188RFRSR13.9
Odoms171FRWR172SOWR0.6175JRSR1.7
T. Robinson170FRWR171RFRWR0.6176RSOSR2.9
Roundtree154FRWR170RFRSR10.4176RSOSR3.5
-----------------------------------------------3.9---------------5.5
Hemingway214SOWR220RSOWR2.8225RJRWR2.3
Stokes   181FRWR 193SOWR6.6
Stonum190FRWR196SOWR3.2195JRWR-0.5
-----------------------------------------------3.0---------------2.1
Koger220FRTE249SOTE13.2256JRTE2.8
Webb249SOTE245JRTE-1.6268SRTE9.4
-----------------------------------------------2.9---------------3.0
Barnum,265FROL275RFROL3.8286RSOOL4.0
Dorrestein308RSOOL306RJROL-0.6321RSROL4.9
Huyge292RFROL288RSOOL-1.4306RJROL6.3
Khoury280FROL283RFROL1.1295RSOOL4.2
Lewan   268FROL 294RFROL9.7
Molk282RFROL275RSOOL-2.5287RJROL4.4
Mealer280FROL299RFROL6.8313RSOOL4.7
Omameh260FROL276RFROL6.2305RSOOL10.5
Schilling295RSOOL304RJROL3.1308RSROL1.3
Washington   325FROL 315RFRDT-3.1
-----------------------------------------------2.0---------------4.7
Banks258RSODE266RJRDT3.1285RSRDT7.1
Cambell   318FRDT 331SOOL4.1
Heininger239RFRDE261RSODE9.2277RJRDT6.1
Martin285FRDT292SODT2.5299JRDT2.4
Patterson259JRDE263RJRDE1.5276RSROL4.9
Roh   238FROLB 251SOLB5.5
Sagesse308FRDT279JRDT-9.4289srdt3.6
RVB265RFRDE271RSODT2.3287RJRDE5.9
Watson242RFRTE257RSOOLB6.2268RJRDE4.3
       2.2   4.9
Bell   220FRLB 245RFRLB11.4
Demens226FRLB236RFRLB4.4246RSOLB4.2
Ezeh247RSOLB243RJRLB-1.6244RSRLB0.4
Fitzgerald230FRLB232SOLB0.9244JRLB5.2
Herron218RFRLB220RSOLB0.9220RJRLB0.0
M. Jones   203FRLB 208SOLB2.5
Mouton230RSOLB228RJRLB-0.9240SRLB5.3
-----------------------------------------------0.7---------------4.1
Floyd190FRCB183RFRCB-3.7183RSOCB0.0
Rogers180SOWR182SOWR1.1188SRCB3.3
Woolfolk195SOCB193JRS-1.0195RSRCB1.0
------------------------------------------------1.2---------------1.4
C. Gordon   208FRWR 207RFRS-0.5
T. Gordon   205FRS 205RFRS0.0
Hawthorne   198FRLB 205RFRS3.5
Kovacs   194RFRS 195RSOS0.5
Williams185RFRS188RSOS1.6200RJRS6.4
-----------------------------------------------1.6---------------2.0

Hmmmm.

I will preface my this by acknowledging that this is probably a terrible analysis. I once spent good time and money with someone with a doctorate trying to teach me an intro to stats. It did not go well, my future studies avoided stats classes.

In every position group besided WR, the overall % weight gain was larger in year 2 vs. year 1 under Barwis. Anecdotal evidence supports the first year being a mix of removing bad weight and putting on good weight.

Looking at the large changes taking place with OL, DL, and LB, it's obvious that these players should not be playing young. Or at least we should not be judging them so much based on performance in their first couple of years.

This also seems true with the smaller explosive athletes at RB and Slot. These players all underwent pretty massive changes. Shaw especially lost a good amount of weight and put it back on. I think he was noticeably a more powerful runner this year when healthy.  This also goes for Vinnie, who not only had to recover from a massive injury, he put on a large amount of weight.  

There is a lot more analysis to be done if this info was to be truly useful. I feel I need to adjust for age for example. But like I said, I'm pretty terrible at stats, so maybe someone else can use this info paint a clearer picture. Just wanted to share it and see what others thought about it and the idea of the dificulty of playing young under Barwis.

Football
eeeee barwis

Comments

SirJack

December 13th, 2010 at 11:16 PM ^

I don't think this is Barwis's fault or anything, but I've never seen Michigan physically dominated like it has been this year by OSU, Wisky, and MSU. Carr's S&C strategy might have been dated, but on the field we never got pushed around like this. 

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 645

oakapple

December 13th, 2010 at 6:09 PM ^

I haven’t seen the evidence that Michigan is noticeably faster or better-conditioned than most of its opponents. Clearly, Barwis is a very good S&C coach, but does he bring something that the other elite programs lack? I do not see it.

Arguably, the S&C program lagged under Carr, and Barwis has now brought it up to where it should have been all along. But should Rodriguez leave, I am not worried that the next coach would have trouble finding another very good S&C guy.

Joined: 02/06/2009

MGoPoints: 2130

phil.hersey

December 13th, 2010 at 6:17 PM ^

I'm 51 but have played rugby last two seasons with U.Nevada (ahhrrooo, we beat Boise!. I am also UM BSEE 1981.) Anyway, it's hard trying to keep up with 21yr olds but I found that the more aerobic conditioning I did the better, running, sprinting etc... BUT I quickly dropped all my weight lifting (I like power and hang cleans most) because it was slowing me down in practice. The other players likewise told me not to seriously weight lift in season. So yeah, I think the first year transformation is going to make playing as a freshman more difficult.

Joined: 03/05/2009

MGoPoints: 56

lukepanici

December 13th, 2010 at 6:51 PM ^

To be honest, outside from the quarterback position, I haven't seen the team speed increase, really at all. I've supported Rich and Barwis since they got here and I will continue to support them if they are retained, but I wouldn't mind seeing a S & C program that brings back the bulk and size we are used to seeing from Michigan teams.

Joined: 12/13/2010

MGoPoints: 817

jmblue

December 13th, 2010 at 9:27 PM ^

I would venture to say that QB, the OL positions, and TE are faster than they were under Carr.  The rest of the team is about the same or possibly worse. Other than Denard, we don't have much real blazing speed at the skill positions, and have a tough time getting separation downfield.  Meanwhile, our defensive guys are frequently beaten to the corner and then often give up long runs downfield.

Joined: 11/07/2008

MGoPoints: 102712

Jon06

December 14th, 2010 at 1:00 PM ^

that ray vinopal is ungodly fast, or is it just that people don't want to attribute that particular speed demon to barwis?

edit: i see he was labeled slow as a recruit, so either this is hugely barwis or i was hallucinating when i saw him closing after opposing skill position guys who had badly beaten the rest of the defense, clearly the only guy with the speed to be catching up.

Joined: 09/19/2009

MGoPoints: 15297

Jon06

December 14th, 2010 at 2:12 PM ^

Did you even read the comment I was responding to? And what makes you think my entire point was to assert that Barwis made him fast? Somebody said we were faster than before at a few positions and left Ray's out, so I'm not sure why your panties are in a bunch because I asked why. Then I edited it with what was obviously a guess and you showed up to troll.

Anyway, watching him fly around the field makes me think he's ungodly fast. It's similar to how watching you post cartoons and neg every one of my posts, related to this or not, makes me think you're a dbag. But if you want to have a conversation like grown ups, we can do that next time.

Joined: 09/19/2009

MGoPoints: 15297

TheMadGrasser

December 14th, 2010 at 3:20 PM ^

that ray vinopal is ungodly fast, or is it just that people don't want to attribute that particular speed demon to barwis?

Maybe that's what made me think that? Pretty telling, no? Could it be that some guys are just faster than others? You claimed Ray was slow and now he's "ungodly fast". You have no basis for that claim, at all. From everything I heard about him (I sited a link), he was pretty fast. So, at least someone thought he was fast, right? So you asserting that he was slow is just laughable.

As for responsding with cartoons: that's all I can muster when you talk about muscles getting so strong that bones can't keep up with them.

The problem was that bones gain strength more slowly than muscle, so I injured the bones in my forearms doing it.

So I wonder if the broken bones and everything are a result of players being stronger than they're used to being.

You're saying something totally idiotic (sorry, it is). And then you site rock climbing and DB curls as your evidence....If you can't see that this is kind of funny, then I'm sorry.

 Neg all your posts? No, just the one where you say something as fact when it's not. Don't get so bent out of shape about "e-points" man, it will be okay, I promise. Calling other posters "dbags" sure is "adult-like".

Keep it classy fella.

Joined: 11/11/2009

MGoPoints: 1256

Jon06

December 15th, 2010 at 12:19 AM ^

1. thanks for conveniently leaving out part of the quote. i said,

have you guys somehow failed to notice that ray vinopal is ungodly fast, or is it just that people don't want to attribute that particular speed demon to barwis?

in response to this comment

I would venture to say that QB, the OL positions, and TE are faster than they were under Carr. The rest of the team is about the same or possibly worse. Other than Denard, we don't have much real blazing speed at the skill positions, and have a tough time getting separation downfield. Meanwhile, our defensive guys are frequently beaten to the corner and then often give up long runs downfield.

I know it's hard to interpret other people if you don't have much social interaction but, as the question mark indicates, that was a question. Helpful answers might be things like: "hadn't noticed, good point!" or "it's not barwis because he was always fast." It's actually unclear if you tried to respond to this part of my post at first or just the next part, so without further adieu...

2. Here's my "assertion" that he was slow:

edit: i see he was labeled slow as a recruit

I provided a link, too, in which multiple sources said not fast. So, at least someone thought he was slow. Again, helpful response: "some reports said he was slow, but there's lots of evidence they were wrong, so not barwis." Your unhelpful response: "Here's one place saying he was fast. God you're so dumb and I'm so good at using Google."

3. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3912/is_200410/ai_n9464201/ <--evidence that increasing load on bones too quickly, as happened in the anecdote, can cause stress fractures.

4. The anecdote was labeled 'anecdote' and not labeled 'evidence'. You have to have a brain to see why it was a relevant anecdote, in order to realize that the suggestion was that, if you are able to do things you could never do before, you might hurt yourself doing them if the rest of your body isn't up to it. This was meant to include slamming yourself into other people at greater forces than before. Sorry I didn't idiot-proof the comment. I assumed the anecdote would be understood for what it was, not taken as if I were claiming to have evidence that getting stronger/faster makes you break your leg by playing football. 

You may go misinterpret someone else now. Don't forget to keep Google open in another tab so you can be an asshole with links.

Joined: 09/19/2009

MGoPoints: 15297

Jon06

December 15th, 2010 at 7:28 PM ^

huh. in 20-some years of watching M football, i'd never thought "boy, that safety sure is fast" until vinopal got out there. some of those years will have been being too young to notice, but i don't know. maybe he just seems faster to me because of slow guys (like kovacs) being on the field at the same time? color me surprised that others don't think he's impressively fast when giving chase.

Joined: 09/19/2009

MGoPoints: 15297

vaneasy2338

December 13th, 2010 at 7:06 PM ^

like to see put on some weight this offseason:

Cullen Christian- I think if he does so he can be something special

Craig Roh- still gets abused in the run game every once in a while

Vinopal- the kid is good in coverage, but really struggles against power backs

Joined: 11/10/2010

MGoPoints: 196

Brightside

December 13th, 2010 at 7:40 PM ^

More than just the size, the speed of this team has been exciting.  I agree that every program is bulking up the young players, but this team has had a noticeable increase in speed as well...

Joined: 02/17/2010

MGoPoints: 1244

tybert

December 13th, 2010 at 10:23 PM ^

Graham was already playing better for Lloyd as a SOPH. He was more of a factor on the '08 D, but we had so many guys regress (Trent, Harrison, etc.) that he was missing getting a lot of credit.

I look at the 2009 Graham as a guy who, with talent, drive, and the right S&C can blow through lines that are trying to prevent him from single-handedly beating them.

Before MSU's chop block on Martin, he was a monster in the middle. I'm expecting great things from him on NY Day. Again, the same talent + drive + S&C combo.

Roh would have red-shirted in the UM program 10 yrs ago, even 5 yrs ago. This should have been his RS Fr season.

Look at the talent on D...even a good S&C program can only do so much against guys who make the All B10 teams (or honorable mention).

Joined: 11/17/2008

MGoPoints: 8308

ebv

December 13th, 2010 at 11:20 PM ^

If you want to draw conclusions from this you need to provide a basis for comparison. For example, what did this chart look like for three representative years under Carr?

Joined: 07/02/2010

MGoPoints: 371

StephenRKass

December 14th, 2010 at 12:00 AM ^

I do believe our conditioning has improved, but by the 2011 season, we should have enough years of seasoning and conditioning to really see whether or not and to what degree Barwis has made a difference.

I do think that the players relate very well to him. Barwis seems to be more of a coach and motivator than Gittleson. Certainly, Barwis gets a lot out of them, in terms of effort.

In terms of the past, going to the Rose Bowl, i had a sense that Michigan was gassed and not as well conditioned as USC. I think this will make a difference between a win and a loss in at least a couple of games next year.

Joined: 07/15/2008

MGoPoints: 22989

plev72

December 14th, 2010 at 6:34 PM ^

I'm not sure that the chart provides much if any value - without having access to % of lean mass --- Herron, Floyd, and Gordon could all be significantly stronger than they were (or just the same) - despite have a 0% change in weight - but without known the before and after fat... hard to judge.

Joined: 11/05/2008

MGoPoints: 57

bighouseinmate

December 14th, 2010 at 1:10 PM ^

.......problem in this thread when people are comparing Barwis and Gittleson against one another by using the records of the teams that trained under them. It is an apples and oranges type comparison, and completely unfair to either one.

Gittleson's players may have ended up with better team records, but that does little to show how his players fared strength-, and speed-wise under him. All of you that are doing this do realize that those teams had vastly superior initial talent, do you not? Can one wonder at how good those teams would have been under a more up-to-date S&C program that increased strength while keeping speed, and not just pure bulk(much of it gained from fat)?

Barwis has an enormous effect on the players themselves, and not just in the S&C training. To judge him, like some of you are, by the wins and losses of the team does not really tell the story of how his S&C program affects the players. The losses we've incurred since he has been here have never been due to the players health. Some of you talk about how our players seem like they are pushed around by the top teams. I beg to differ on this point of yours. Even when Wisky was running up and down the field in the second half, it was never due to our players being run over. The scheme employed was more at fault than anything else.

It is stupid, and quite idiotic, to suggest that mostly 9-win seasons under Carr(with Gittleson) shows how little effect Barwis has on the program, like some of you are suggesting.

Joined: 12/19/2008

MGoPoints: 4951

bighouseinmate

December 14th, 2010 at 2:11 PM ^

....post in this diary topic before replying. I don't recall anyone stating that UM struggled under Carr. Someone did state, however, that UM "underacheived", which arguably is the case considering the talent UM had then.

And, even if it was a response to the poster who stated UM underacheived, to throw out the records of the teams as somehow being proof that Barwis hasn't brought our S&C program up equal, or better, than the top teams in the country is really an intellectually dishonest comparison.

One poster even stated "I'll take pizza and winning over chocalate milk and losing, please", as if the S&C program was at fault.

Another poster replied to your post about the last eight years under Carr being 9+ wins in 6 of 8 years, by stating that was proof that the S&C program under Carr was "good enough" for an elite program. How in the heck does one make that leap of logic?

Yes, Barwis gets a ton of love here, and on other UM sites, but most of it is well-deserved, particularly given the praise he has received from former players who train with him in the off-season, the Mealer story, and the host of other UM athletes that train with him over the course of the year.

My point of the above post of mine was simply that throwing out the team's record under Carr does not prove, nor disprove, anything about the S&C program under Gittleson, and now under Barwis. One needs to look further into it than just the end result on the field.

Joined: 12/19/2008

MGoPoints: 4951

SirJack

December 14th, 2010 at 3:49 PM ^

I was not judging Barwis by the team’s wins and losses. Not at all. My comments make sense in the context of the snarky comments made (yet again) about Carr’s S&C program.

I think Barwis is perfectly fine as an S&C head, but I also (brace yourself) think that Carr’s S&C program was perfectly fine as well.

I think this because having watched Carr’s teams compete well with the best teams in the country for years, I see no reason to think otherwise. Maybe they couldn’t dead lift 1,000 pounds or whatever, but that’s not the point of football, is it.

It's fine that you want to look beyond the end result on the field, but I don't think it's uncalled for to judge Carr's S&C program by the result on the field when it's being mocked.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 645

bighouseinmate

December 14th, 2010 at 6:29 PM ^

mocking Carr's S&C program. One big difference I've seen between the two is that under Gittleson, the team, particularly the linemen, looked bulkier. That may not have been a good thing though, as bulk gained more by fattening up isn't necessarily useful on the field. One merely needs to look at guys like Martin to see how bulk made up mainly of muscle looks.

Carr used what he knew, the same as RR is using now. Each has it's merits, probably, but for me, I'd go with Barwis over Git.

Joined: 12/19/2008

MGoPoints: 4951

goblubigguy

December 14th, 2010 at 4:57 PM ^

Of the S&C Program under Carr was that the UM defense tended to appear tired and slower as the game went on, particularly in the fourth quarter.  While I am not able to cite specific instances, I thought there were a number of games in Carr's last season where we lost leads in the fourth quarter and ultimately the game.

Barwis seemed to bring a new element to Strength and Conditioning, or Strength, Speed and Conditioning.  We were certainly impressive in the triple overtime game with Illinois, where it really seemed that we had as much gas in the tank in the overtime as we did earlier in the game.  I doubt that we could say that about the Carr teams, though I would welcome any discussion to dispute that issue.

Joined: 02/22/2009

MGoPoints: -78