My cake is not losing to shitty Nebraska and Iowa teams, can I have that?
Al Borges Tuesday Press Conference-Ohio State
That great spread offense of RR clearly wasn't where we wanted to stay. In 2010, we scored 34 first-half points in our 5 regular season losses before the opposing teams threw in the scrubs for "pity points". This year our team scored 40 first half points in our 4 losses. I'm not saying our offense is better, but the spread couldn't do shit against quality opponents.
teams. Most systems lose under than scenario. You might as well say "pro style can't do shit" against quality opponents.
This is the funny part. RR had primarily frosh and sophs in year 2&3. Yet they were productive. Compare the borges Os against RRs Os. It was RRs D that did him in. It will be hokes O that does him in if he doesn't make the necessary coaching changes.
Actually, only 33 points (one defensive td vs Iowa). They came on 3 TD drives, two of which were set up by turnovers on short fields and 4 FGs.
Over that span Michigan had 30 drives on offense. They accrued 434 yards of offense or roughly 14 yards per drive. They punted 16 times, committed 4 turnovers, 4 field goals and 3 touchdowns. The half ended mercifully three times. They averaged 1.1 points per possession against the #4, 13, 43 and 65th ranked scoring defenses.
Now to correct this fallacy that the spread was worse versus tough opponents in 2010 than our historically bad 2013 offense:
Over those five 2010 losses Michigan only had 28 offensive first half possessions. They scored 4 touchdowns (all of which were drives of 60+ yards) and kicked two field goals. They also missed 3 field goals, turned the ball over 7 times, punted 10 times and ran out the half twice.
Over those 28 drives they gained 994 yards of offense or roughly 35.5 yards per drive. They scored 1.2 points per possession although if they had had a competant place kicker like Brendan Gibbons back then (/sarcasm) it would have been 1.5 ppp. This was against the #5, 7, 25, 39, and 49th ranked scoring defenses.
TLDR Stat Conclusion:
In the first half of its losses the 2010 offense played against slightly better defenses but moved the ball more than twice as effectively and scored more total points despite having 18% fewer possessions.
Thanks for taking the time, I feel the same way, we were inept to punch the ball in and didn't take care of the ball too well, but that offense moved the chains, we have a better kicker now ( actually the same but you know what I mean) and take more care of the ball, although I do wonder if having Gardner so worried about losing the ball has taken away his ability to create more, at the start of the season he threw more interceptions but he also scored more points....
Down by 4 with two min to go. Which O do you want? 2010 or 2013? I don't think the answer is close.
2010, but its close. It depends on other factors, like timeouts.
If you have 3 timeouts, 2010. With no timeouts, I take this offense. Our 2010 offense wasn't a strong passing team, and without the play action (2:00 drill), I don't know how often they could push the ball down the field. Three timeouts lets you try a few Denard runs.
And if we're down by 3, I'll take this team. We can kick. And we can run a hell of a hurry field goal.
That said, I would love to choose door #3.
Because of the dilusional thought that 'this is Michigan' and the way coach Bo did it is the 'right' way to bring us back to the glory days. That's why D.B. brought Coach Hoke in here, to take us back to what worked in the past. It's irony on some level that our biggest rival employs the spread.
Yeah, they were quick to dump Woody-ball in the river. Could it be that they are actually more evolved that us?
...yes. As for other things...well, it's a pretty short, undistinguished list, consisting mainly of bodily excretions and all-meat + alcohol diets.
I always wondered why he told his Oline to get pushed four yards back into the pocket on pass plays.Dumb.
People don't give Al Borges enough credit.
Yeah, we know his play calling is pathetic. But there's more. Al Borges is destroying the mental toughness and competitive spirit of these young football players. Al has no swagger; they have no swagger. Al is conflicted about his strategy; they get confused. Al lacks confidence; they hesitate. Al is not a tough man; they lose toughness.
Watching the MGOBLUE clips, you sense these kids bring a good attitude. You want to see them do well. They deserve a coach who gives them the opportunity to enjoy this once in a lifetime opportunity and do the best they are able. Al is not living up to his responsibility.
We hear about how players must compete to be on the field. While this football fiasco is a downer for alumni and football fans, it's worse for these kids who work so hard, risk injury and play their hearts out. Al Borges is not doing his job at a competitive level. There is no reason for him to be anywhere near that field of honor.
In fact, he is doing a rather poor job. But your potshots at the man are out of bounds.
This offense is the worst in Michigan history. Worse than 2008 as they have a QB this year and still are terrible. So, basically, there is no hyperbole at this time, sorry,
Statistically, the Tiger's offensive ranks declined each year under Borges and currently ranks 101st in the nation in total offense leading into the bowl game with Clemson. After talking with head coach Tommy Tuberville, the two agreed that Borges' resignation was the best course of action for a floundering Auburn offense.
"After speaking with coach Tuberville for the better part of 20 minutes, it became increasingly clear that Auburn needed a new offensive coordinator," Borges said in a statement Tuesday.
See the same downward pattern going on here. Hopefully Hoke and Al have a similar talk after this weekend....
You gathered all of that from watching MGOBLUE Clips, did ya?
Do you you know some players or at least someone who does? If so, and this is what you have been told by them, then go ahead and say so. If not, then this is just somethng you pulled out of the air.
There is just no way that we, as fans, can ever know if Borges is "destroying the mental toughness and competitive spirit of these young football players" from watching games and reading a press transcript. Nor can we conclude that they would execute better if Al had more swagger. (To that point, please see any team coached by Lane Kiffin for an example of a guy who has tons of swagger but is not a good coach.)
More than that, based on what I have seem on the field, those kids are playing hard.
Al called a good game. OL blocked well. We had over 200 yrd of rushing. The offense looked good. What gives? Has Al forgotten how to game plan? Have other coaches figured out his schemes? Is it the personnel? OSU's defense was not great that year, but far far better than Iowa, NW, Akron, Uconn, etc. What happened?
Denard can save shit play calling. He was a complete diversion for Fitz, who can't run as a feature back
that first year, why fix what isn't broke. Also, they didn't want to alienate the fan base. It was the second year they decided to do that and it was galling; the ND game where Denard threw 5 interceptions in a row downfield, the coaching staff knowing that wasn't the type of quarterback he was, the Nebraska game where in hindsight it was OBVIOUS the QB who would have gave us a better chance at winning that game did not play, instead going with the guy who had a better grasp of the MANBALL system, and of course the OSU game where this conversion to MANBALL cost us the game, in my opinion. It was that game which really got the doubt rolling against Coach Borgess; instead of playing to win the greatest rivalry game in all of sport, he played to win using 'MANBALL' technique and it was nigh unforgivable.
David Molk and Mark Huyge graduated?
and lets not forget van Bergen, Martin and Kovacs ....
I've played for good coaches and bad coaches. Do you have any idea how important a coach's influence is on a young person? Brady Hoke said he's not concerned about fans, but the kids who play football. Trusting that he means what he says, he will see the players are given a better opportunity to achieve their best.
There's no requirement to be soft spoken when you speak up for other people.
Al came off as a human here, with emotions and all. He looked resigned to being a lame duck. Presented as a somewhat more sympathetic figure than previously. And yet there still isn't real accountability. Most of his comments were about lack of execution, not enough on his role in it. No mention of calling plays that maximize expectation of failure given the performance and execution problems. He seems like a good and decent guy, but still doesn't seem to have any answers. He solution was simply "we just have to get back at it and try harder." Sorry, he's making too much money to not have better adjustments than that. I wish him well, sincerely, but he should not be at Michigan next year. Let him have a quiet, low key exit and a future somewhere else.
This is a good post to say this.
First off, I am all for getting rid of Borges at the end of the season the sooner the better. In fact the group I went with to Iowa found me quite amusing for my rants against "execution" and "the man in the press box."
All that said I do think all the coaches including Al Borges are good, decent human beings and don't need to be subjected to kindergarten "lol fatties ha ha derp" statements. This is probably because I can stand to lose a few (ok a lot) pounds myself. Now, that said just think personal attacks on anybody are uncalled for. Performance sure. Attacking character not so much. I definitely understand the frustration through as I am equally if not more so frustrated.
personal attacks are not worthy, especially for a higher level blog like this. Performance is more than enough.
We're tryin' real hard, Ringo.
Tell the board to be cool, and that it's gonna be ok...
Cordone off his parking space.
Take his name off the door.
Have an Aloha Al party!
Squint real hard and tell him, "Get out of town while the gittin's good.:
Put a horse's head in his bed (A stuffed animal, of course.)
Bring in Donal Trump to say: "You're fired."
On second thought, don't bring in Donald Trump.
Don't say anything. Hire a different offensive coordinator and just, like, avoid Al completely.
Run him out of town on a rail, whatever that means.
Blast Metallica into his office, like they did to Noriega, until he runs away screaming.
Ask him in a nice way: "Oh pretty please with sugar on it Al, get the heck out of here."
Send him a singing telegram, that just goes, "Goodbye, goodbye, goodbye."
Have a pretty French girl tell him, "Au Revoir Monsieur Borges."
Have a pissed off Japanese girl tell him, "Sayonaro Al."
Have Dave Brandon tell him, "You're screwing up my plans to be governor, knucklehead."
Most brutal of all, lock him out of the cafeteria.
You see, no problem.
That was hilarious. Tears.
The offense has progressivly gotten worse as the season went on. Oh my, what is this weekend going to bring?
He does seem to know something we don't. Dead man walking.
I don't think so. I don't think Brady Hoke would tell him he is a dead man walking before the biggest game of the year. Or before any game at all. We need good Al Borges, and its hard to get that from a lame duck.
He might be gone, and he might have intuited this, bit I don't think he "knows" anything.
For taking more blame than ever, I heard alot about "individual breakdowns". In fact, in the first answer he used the phrase at least three times.
And of course this was referenced before, but at the end he says: "We play poorly at times, I'm the first one to tell you that. But when this team wants to show up and go, I think we can play with anybody."
It seems pretty obvious to me that he lays the blame for this teams performance on the players, and if I were to guess, he would probably consider the necessary changes going into the bowl and next season amounts to "finding better players".
to be the truth after a careful watching of the last game. If he's to be relentlessly criticized then let it be for his inability to infuse experience into a woefully inexperienced unit. Play calling is the least of their most recent problems.
Borges is saying that his offense can play with anyone, that they are capable of being great. You look at it as throwing players under the bus...I guarantee you Borges meant it as an offer of hope that his guys are more than capable of getting the job done.
I guess you can read it that way, but intent is important here. And I very highly doubt Borges is trying to put down his guys.
"...becuase anybody can win this game. That's been proven, and we're not a bad team. We have played poorly at times, but I'm the first one to tell you that. But when this team wants to show up and go, I think we can play with anybody. But...and...we're playing at home in front of our crowd, our kids are fired up to play this game, and um...we do what we're capable of doing, we can win this game. And um...and I don't think we have to talk ourselves into it. I don't think we need any of that, we just need to go do what we're capable of doing."
- It's a real quote.
- Context doesn't help him out. In my opinion, may make it worse.
- Add to that, he vibes like a whipped dog.
Now, while I disagree with him making these statements to the press, I don't disagree with him, and I feel bad for the guy. The fact of the matter is, there's a boat load of MAs, and even if they're young players, this shouldn't be happening to the extent that it is this far into the season. When players are missing this many assignments, and the scheme has been simplified for them over and over, they're doing it b/c:
- They're not smart enough to get it, or
- They're choosing not to study the playbook and film enough, or
- They're being insubordinate.
Whichever it is, someone better (in the words of Bo), "coach attitude every day of the week with every player he's got." Changing a guy's attitude is something that takes time, or may never happen. Certainly, it usually happens in the offseason, not during. To me, this is encouraging, because it's Hoke's greatest strength.
#4 - bad coaching.
What simplification there has been has been completely undermined by several coaching moves:
1) Constant shuffling of personnel
2) Shuffling and introduction of new formations
3) The nature of the offense seems to have caused the simplification to cause formation to be huge tip offs for the defense.
#3 is more speculation, but the first two are spot on. He goes in the press conference complaining about the guys not playing "in-sync". Well, coach, you've had three LG, two centers, and three RGs. You have bounced around the star and leader of your OLine to TE and H-Back. Wonder why the kids aren't playing in-sync, even this late in the season.
It is of note that the defense can't just seem to let things be either, so it goes above the offensive coordinator. Hoke may be a bit panicky at this point.
Looks like it was taken down...
Not to be that guy who refuses to take a side (the Swiss of MGoBlog if you will), but I find myself in the middle of the great Brian vs Space Coyote or the Anti vs Pro Borges groups. Is the offensive line a tire fire of missed blocks, lack of experience, lack of basic comprehension of high school blocking schemes? Yes, yes it is. Is our QB's confidence to the point where I'm seriously concerned he may begin to bawl uncontrollably after his 7th INT against OSU? Yes. Did we continue running the same damn plays over and over even though it was proven we couldn't run those plays? Yes. Are we seemingly incapable of adapting to a new wrinkle thrown at us by a defense? Yes.
In summation, we have a beaten-down QB, an inexperienced and untalented offensive line with an offensive coordinator who was unable to adjust to overcome those problems and now appears to be throwing whatever he can at the wall and hoping it sticks.
These guys have been to enough rodeos to know this is the end of the line. Saturday will be their last game as Michigan's official coaching staff. They'll be allowed to coach the bowl game as lame ducks.
It's in their faces.
You can look into Al's face and tell the future! Can you tell me if the dog I had as a kid is in heaven? I really miss him.
What's with the haircut? It looks like he shaved the sides of his head where the earmuffs go, but nowhere else. Not poking fun, just never noticed this before.
and put Nair on his headset
They always make you shave there before you're taken to the chair.
Borges was the OC of a team that had a QB throw for over 3,500 yds, a RB who had 1,500 yds and not one but two WR's who had 1,000 yds receiving. These were guys recruited by Chuck Long, except for the RB, who was a redshirt freshman.
That's why I just don't get it, that QB, Ryan Lindell, was able to read defenses well, maybe that is one of the huge problems. In 1998, Borges was the OC at UCLA and helped improve Cade Mcnown into being an awesome QB that year and he sucked in the NFL with NFL coaching.
In 2004 at Auburn, Borges was the OC for a team that went undefeated, had a quality QB who has done pretty decent in the NFl and not one, but two RB's who had 1,000+ yds rushing and both were 1st rd. picks.
The reason I mention these things that many people on here are already aware of, is he showed he was able to coach talented guys and coached them well, why are we not succeeding now with him? This is a mystifying question for me, is it the players? The QB? What?
Because he needs ready-made players. Not works in progress.
I think there is a lot of truth to this.
Borges is an intellectual coach with complex schemes and play designs. He likes to mix in lots of different looks.
I think his stuff overwhelms young inexperienced players, especially when they make up most of an entire unit. He'd actually be a better NFL OC than a CFB OC in my opinion.