Al Borges Tuesday Press Conference-Ohio State
http://www.mgoblue.com/allaccess/?media=422512 Here's Al Borges's awaited Tuesday press conference. Seemed to take more of the blame for the recent offensive struggles this week, than he ever as.
November 26th, 2013 at 10:42 PM ^
November 26th, 2013 at 11:02 PM ^
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".
November 27th, 2013 at 12:08 AM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 9:12 AM ^
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.
November 26th, 2013 at 11:07 PM ^
"...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.
November 27th, 2013 at 12:06 AM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 1:39 AM ^
WOW, Al! That is some seriously super motivating stuff right there. I don't see how this team could possibly lose this game with the blistering confidence and energy their offensive coordinator is showing four days before the game.
This guy is as done as it gets.
November 27th, 2013 at 7:39 AM ^
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.
November 27th, 2013 at 12:41 AM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 1:16 AM ^
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.
November 27th, 2013 at 1:17 AM ^
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.
November 27th, 2013 at 8:22 AM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 1:30 AM ^
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.
November 27th, 2013 at 9:31 AM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 9:44 AM ^
They always make you shave there before you're taken to the chair.
November 27th, 2013 at 2:57 AM ^
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?
November 27th, 2013 at 3:15 AM ^
Because he needs ready-made players. Not works in progress.
November 27th, 2013 at 9:48 AM ^
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.
November 27th, 2013 at 3:24 AM ^
The offense he ran at SDSU looked nothing like what is being run at Michigan. Every game I watched of SDSU it looked more like a passing spread than anything resembling a pro style offense.
At Auburn he ran a pro style offense and had one good year with two NFL running back, then eventually was run out of town.
I have no idea about UCLA.
November 27th, 2013 at 8:17 AM ^
At those stops:
1) That 2010 SDSU team had 6 future NFL guys that I can think of starting on offense. In the MVC.
2) That Auburn team was Borges' first year there and had overwhelming talent. The offense declined sharply afterwards, ultimately resulting in Borges getting resigned.
3) That UCLA team put up great offensive numbers in Borges first few years, that Borges couldn't replicate in 99 and 00 with Cory Paus at QB. One big consideration here is that UCLAs head coach, Bob Toledo, was promoted from offensive coordinator in 1997, and had been a OC for a decade prior. How much of 97-98's success was orchestrated by Toledo and how much was orchestrated by Borges is an open question.
November 27th, 2013 at 8:44 AM ^
We all need to remember that even though Gardner is a true senior, he has only played QB for like 15 games. He was a turnover machine his first 10 games and has since corrected that issue (in part), but now the problem is very poor / tentative decision making. Clearly the game hasn't slows down for him yet. I am hopeful he will show great progress soon.
November 27th, 2013 at 9:45 AM ^
"he needs an NFL caliber QB to run his offense."
I don't understand this logic. The two quarterbacks who were studs under him both failed miserably in the NFL. McNown was terrible, and so far Ryan Lindley has thrown 0 touchdowns and 7 interceptions in his short career. Meanwhile, Jason Campbell has been a journeyman who hasn't done much of anything. If they're so supremely talented, then why hasn't one of them turned into a decent NFL starter?
I get it - the offense is bad, we're losing games, blah blah blah. But we can find positives and negatives about any coach. Nick Saban hasn't produced a good NFL quarterback. Does that mean he and his offensive coordinators over the years have been bad? Or since a few of them have become crappy backups, does that mean Saban has only had success because of his NFL-caliber quarterbacks?
There are way too many illogical conclusions being tossed around here. I guess this is what people do. They get angry and just lash out at anything that isn't perfect, regardless of whether their actual criticism makes sense or not. Borges has his flaws, sure. But let's not pretend that the overwhelming physical gifts of Cade McNown were the only impetus for UCLA's offensive success.
November 27th, 2013 at 10:20 AM ^
You could even say the fact that he put those guys in the NFL was because he actually coached them up to their maximum ability and that the fact that they made the NFL then hardly progressed is in fact a positive of his QB coaching abilities.
I agree with your conclusion. There are things to be upset as Borges about. There is plenty to be upset with as far as this offense. But the people jumping to illogical conclusions has gotten to the point where it was just a few, to it becoming the majority, and often times based on things like a sentence said in a presser. It makes no sense.
November 27th, 2013 at 11:37 AM ^
Agree to the extent the competence doesn't necessarily just lie with the QB in order to run Al's system. But how can you deny that when a coach draws to the NFL for his schemes as Al does, he might be prone to projecting the competence required to effectively operate complex NFL schemes, in light of the disparity between all-world NFL athletes who have been coached for years, vs freshman/sophomore middling college kids.
No matter what anyone says about Al's schemes, given the flexibility he showed his first two years to leverage Denard, this year will go down as the year Al Borges made the colossal mistake of thinking he had the parts at QB, RB and O line, TE to finally begin UM's transition to a pro-style, "you know what we're going to do so we'll do it anways because we're manball" scheme, and will have cost him his job.
With Devin's legs, Trouissant's poor blocking but excellent shiftiness in space, and a young interior O line, he should have stuck with spread schemes that put his QBs and RBs in space, and alleviated the need for all 11 players to execute in order to get positive yards.
We didn't have the parts to run what he wanted, but he ignored or didnt' realize that, and along with poor RPS play calling, and poor coaching, this all will cost him his job.
November 27th, 2013 at 9:08 AM ^
compare SDSU and playing in the B1G? That's rediculous. Focus on the present not the past ... Borges is outmatched playing "big boy" football.
Go Blue!
November 27th, 2013 at 9:46 AM ^
That makes sense. So what's your excuse for his success at Auburn?
November 27th, 2013 at 11:29 AM ^
...even a blind squirrel finds a nut on occassion.
...and was he really "successful" at Auburn? In my mind one good year doesn't equal success.
November 27th, 2013 at 11:13 AM ^
...but there's no excuse for not being able to spell ridiculous.
November 27th, 2013 at 11:20 AM ^
At which point, the spelling is understandable, but you've have to be about 3-4 years past when that saying has come and gone.
November 27th, 2013 at 11:22 AM ^
The part where the game has passed Al by.
November 27th, 2013 at 1:56 PM ^
The game hasn't passed Al by. It's football. It's the same damn game it always has been. There's a football, you have 11 guys, and you have to move the ball down the field. Teams successfully run all kinds of systems (passing spreads, running spreads, I-formations, triple options, etc.). Just because he's not having success this year doesn't mean "The game passed him by."
If you're in the party that thinks UCLA and Auburn had success despite him, then how do you explain the fact that he was at UCLA 15 years ago? Had the game also passed him by back then? Or are you just talking out of your hindquarters?
November 27th, 2013 at 9:12 AM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 9:34 AM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 9:48 AM ^
Somebody has to take the fall for the offense this year. That's just the way the world works these days. It's not going to be Hoke. It might be Borges. It might be Funk. It might be Jackson. It might be some combination of the three.
But I'm pretty confident in saying that the offensive coaching staff will not be the same in 2014.
November 27th, 2013 at 10:45 AM ^
Does Borgess teach the fundamentals or is that the job of the position coach?
(This is an honest to God question because I have no clue and it seems relevant to your point.)
November 27th, 2013 at 12:14 PM ^
Mattison does on the defensive side of the ball.
November 27th, 2013 at 10:54 PM ^
Still, is that Borges's job?
November 27th, 2013 at 10:34 AM ^
that is worried about his job. He recognizes a familiar pattern. He knows someone will take the fall and he did take the rap at times during the press conference. It would also appear that he doesn't know exactly what to fix or change. Lots of squirrely body language when talking about what's required to fix the offense. I wonder if he will fall on the sword to save his friend Brady's job.
November 27th, 2013 at 4:42 PM ^
i'm not angry with him anymore. I can only be angry for so long. Part of the emotional detachment I guess.
I think it's obvious to just about everyone that Al needs to go, except for, possibly, the man running the program (sob)
November 27th, 2013 at 4:46 PM ^
It's time to clean house and find a coach with a winning record much like Jim Tresell. In my opinion winning in the past is a indicator of future success.
November 27th, 2013 at 8:59 PM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 5:58 PM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 7:26 PM ^
November 27th, 2013 at 7:48 PM ^
How is Michigan being "stuck in the past?" Because they've chosen not to run a spread offense?
Personally, I think all teams going forward are going to be multiple teams with both MANBALL and spread elements. But, IMO, you build a scheme from the MANBALL side first, then introduce spread elements, not the other way around.