mGrowOld

January 25th, 2015 at 12:24 PM ^

Am I the only one who thinks the S & C coach is WAY overblown in terms of the team's performance?  I mean when Barwis came in we were led to believe his amazing approach to lifting was going to absolutely revolutionize our team's strength and endurance but I sure dont remember us owning the 4th quarter in too many games those years.

And now Wellman is gone and with him will be our soft OLine and knee injuries it seems accoriding to some of the comments in this thread.  It just seems to me like the Strength and Conditioning coaches are one of those roles that get far too much credit when things are going well and way too much blame when things are going poorly.

Joined: 10/04/2010

MGoPoints: 212941

CaliforniaNobody

January 25th, 2015 at 12:32 PM ^

Eh. Obviously doesn't go like that but I feel like both sides are exaggerating, and those in your camp tend to under exaggerate. Preventing injuries and being in game shape plus a huge part of player dev is pretty damn important.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 12/18/2014

MGoPoints: 14230

Reader71

January 25th, 2015 at 12:53 PM ^

There are a lot of Michigan players who would tell you that Mike Gittleson was just beneath the head coach in terms of importance to the program. Its passe to say that about Gittleson at this time and in this place. But a great S&C guy (and one deeply ingrained in the fabric of the program) is a huge factor. If Turley is who we think he is, for example, he could outlast Shaw and lend stability to the Stanford program. I've said a lot of times, the S&C staff is who players spend most of their time with. The weight room is where the freshman class bonds closest, because they aren't seeing the field together. Its where most guys earn (or lose) the respect of their peers. Its huge. Now, a great S&C staff is nothing without good football coaches. Good football coaches can succeed without their S&C guys (Coach Rod in AZ). But when they come they come together, its great.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

mackbru

January 25th, 2015 at 12:46 PM ^

Thank you for saying this. Sure, S&C coaches are important. But jeez. Rare is the S&C coach who's a game-changer, one way or the other. I'm sure Barwis is a perfectly good one. But mostly, it seemed, he just had a good branding thing going. When a team is no good, everyone always points to the S&C coach. Usually, though, it's more complicated than that.

Joined: 09/01/2009

MGoPoints: 34121

RobM_24

January 25th, 2015 at 1:05 PM ^

It's overblown. A lot of it has to do with the drive and discipline of the athlete. Making sure you are actually pushing yourself during your workouts and not just going through the motions. And the hardest part IMO is the diet/nutrition -- which can be greatly affected by the many distractions on a college campus.

Joined: 01/27/2014

MGoPoints: 63498

egrfree2rhyme

January 25th, 2015 at 1:47 PM ^

I get what you're saying and I kind of agree that the S&C coaches tend to get more credit/blame for the performance of the team than they deserve... but I believe rivals said that Michigan was offering Turley 7 figures or close to it, so that does seem to indicate that Harbaugh thinks the SC coach is a big deal.

Joined: 08/21/2012

MGoPoints: 2238

Sione's Flow

January 25th, 2015 at 12:41 PM ^

Look at Stanford as an example. Since Harbaugh's days there, they have been one of the most physical teams in the country. They don't do that without a good S&C program.

Joined: 06/05/2011

MGoPoints: 5193

Bluverine

January 25th, 2015 at 12:58 PM ^

No question at all that Tolbert may be the most important addition to the team. I need not recount the number of anterior cruciate liga,ment tears we see every year under Wellman who uses very traditional strength training techniques.

Tolbert trained with Shannon Turley at Stanford. His program has resulted in an 87% reduction in injuries including anterior cruciate tears. 87%!!!!

NYT recently did a feature story that told Turley's story.

The Packers are going to install it.

Here is another weblink describing program.

http://orthopedicsurgerysandiego.com/preventing-sports-injuries-through…

Joined: 11/30/2014

MGoPoints: 26

wolverinebutt

January 25th, 2015 at 1:06 PM ^

I'm leaning toward the S & C staff as being pretty darn important.  

They spend more time with the players than anyone.  They have to push the players that need a push and  think help build the work ethic and toughness of the team.  They are an important piece of the puzzle, but not as important as the Coaches.

Back in my D2 playing days in the mid 70's the Coaching staff ran S & C in the winter.  We used natutilus equipment only.  It was the big thing back then - LOL.       

Joined: 06/05/2011

MGoPoints: 3461

MaximusBlue

January 25th, 2015 at 1:22 PM ^

Very important part to the program. I don't know what everyone else has been watching, but I seen a weak, un-athletic looking team that couldn't push around MAC schools. S&C program and staff are far from overrated. I don't think Harbaugh was trying to bring Turley aboard just for familiarity purposes.

Joined: 07/31/2012

MGoPoints: 9765

bronxblue

January 25th, 2015 at 1:29 PM ^

I think people ascribe too much of the on-field success or failure to S&C, but it certainly seems like UM has a different approach going with Tolbert.  I don't think Wellman was some terrible guy or that his players were abnormally prone to injury, just like I never truly believed Barwis's training was making Michigan tougher/faster/weaker/slower like people thought during his time under RR.  You need a good coach who is willing to look at the new science, so that might be a legit knock against a guy like Wellman (I don't know), but people saying this team will/won't be pushed around as much because of the amount of weight they lift versus playcalling, play development, overall improvements due to age, etc. are looking at the wrong factors.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 171625

Coldwater

January 25th, 2015 at 1:39 PM ^

Imo, he didn't do a good job. He wasn't successful here. Our team always looked physically weaker and less explosive than other teams on our level. When did Michigan ever seem "fast" under Wellman? Other than Denard, NEVER!

Joined: 12/14/2008

MGoPoints: 11234

CoachBP6

January 26th, 2015 at 12:15 AM ^

I don't think Aaron did a very good job. Our guys consistently tore ACL's or had other season ending injuries under his watch. The guys on the field looked slow and got pushed around, and the body development wasn't nearly as noticeable as under barwis.

Joined: 12/18/2013

MGoPoints: 7967