I've been in "wait and see" mode with Borges. I've seen now.
I've been in "wait and see" mode with Borges. I've seen now.
I have never been so firmly in agreement with a guy named "turd."
Your previous support for Turd was squishy?
I will not allow such corny jokes to be made about poo. #fireborges
A corny poop joke.
So now everybody is in agreement that he's forecasting his runs?
is a load of information.
I can't believe we got this far without Borges or Funk being called a steaming pile of shit. Well, that has now been rectufied.
I don't remember eating any corn!
I had seen him at Auburn enough to know there was no need to wait around for him.
I've actually always wondered this and since you made this comment I'll ask you; why did Borges get fired or move on from previous jobs? Was there a trend that kept getting him removed as OC at his other stops (SDSU not included)?
I haven't watched enough games of him as an OC prior to Michigan to have any clue. Is it similar to this years debacle? i.e. lack of adjustments and regression without top level or NFL talent?
There was a decline in offensive production.
Just using points scored/game:
2004 - 32.1 (18th of 120)
2005 - 32.2 (30th of 119)
2006 - 24.8 (56th of 119)
2007 - 24.2 (85th of 120)
Borges inherited 3 future NFL starters in Jason Campbell, Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams. Once they graduated in 2004 it was a steady decline.
Hoke won't care. He'll say something like "We're not trying to hide anything. It's our job to make it work anyway. We're gonna be physical!!"
I've had enough. It all started with the Ohio State game last year when every single time Denard came in he might as well have had a sign on his chest that said, "I AM RUNNING THE BALL"
Hey look, Norfleet is in the game. Prepare for jet sweep.
The end around to funchess was nice as was the pass to kerridge. The problem was the other 61 plays
exactly right. There was no imagination and Borges fucking blew that game himself. And I've hated that pompous ass ever since.
the Iowa game and then became apparent last season and is now so painfully obvious that watching a Nicolas Cage movie seems more bearable than watching this offense.
Blood, as another poster put it, is in the water.
President Johnson once said that if he had lost Angelique Chengelis, then he had lost middle America.
"There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine."-Kyle Kalis. I can see now that with the help of poor line play, it will be Borges' blood.
If our playcalling is that obvious where we line up in a specific formation and do a certain play, then that is the fault of the OC for not running mutliple plays out of one formation. For next week we should run the exact same formations as the past two weeks, but do completely different plays out of them. Example - line up with our usual pass set with Funchess and Gallon stacked, and do a run. Or line up in a formation we usually run from and throw a bubble screen or super quick out to the wide receiver. In general we should be doing more screen passes anyways, our O-line is looking like swiss cheese as it is, so a screen up the middle would be nearly indistinguishable to the D from our O-line looking like a revolving door anyways.
If Borges is too stupid to change anything despite our opponents basically admitting that they are stealing our playcalls based solely on formation, then he needs to be fired, no excuses. I agree with the OP that someone needs to bring this up in the presser to Hoke.
I'll be at the game Saturday, and I am sorely tempted to bring a "Fire Borges" poster into the stadium to unveil if he keeps being a dumbass with his playcalling.
Get your sign ready Mike. You'll want to put it up probably mid-way through the first quarter.
are in section 107, which is between the 30 and the 40 yard line on the Michigan side of the field. I'll be directly across the way from the press box cameras, so odds are good that it'll be visible on the telecast. At least assuming the NW security people don't take it away if people behind me complain.
Bring a bunch of signs with play calls and hoist them up once you see the formation. Maybe we can mass produce and hand them out before the game.
you read this diary post: http://mgoblog.com/diaries/lets-turn-wrathimpatiencewhatever-happy-fun-challenge
And if I was the person he was referring to in his post, then I am not ashamed at all. I may just bring three posters- run, pass, and fire borges. Unless Borges dramatically changes his tendencies from the past two weeks, I feel I could probably predict the playcalls with 75% accuracy or so. I've done it before. It's sadly not that hard.
would be to hire a plane pulling a "Fire Borges" banner. We are the laughing stock of the B1G and its all on Borges shoulders - I have never heard of a team having back to back negative rushing yards for a game. What is the NCAA record ?
for a sky writer?
"Keep Borges ... Please".
if someone starts a kickstarter I promise to donate...
that would be amazing!!!
Slam the team, recommend hiring a plane to fly a sign over an opposing teams stadium critical of the coaching staff, then top it off with a "Go Blue".
Why didn't you just post, "We suck", "Go Blue"
Borges' playcalling alone is indefensible. The team is only following orders and playing to the very best of their abilities. I have not once criticized a player on this team. Go Blue supports this football team ... I do not support the continued employment of our offensive coordinator.
that it is NOW Hoke's job to let Borges go. I also agree that there is NO REASON to wait any further - we have plenty of evidence as to AB's inability to plan an offensive strategy - and it shows on the field. It is NOT lack of effort from the players. C'mon Coach Hoke - it's time to be the HEAD football coach.
Let's hire the same plane to fly over the stadiums of our rivals! Let's make sure they get the message too. It seemed to work last time we hired a plane to deliver a message.
Playground rules are saying you're to pile on Borges, not Hoke.
No, in all reality I haven't given up on Hoke. Borges on the other hand needs to kick rocks.
But don't most teams in CFB run their base/basic stuff out of sets that have been on tape for 8 or 9 games now and it's just up to the defense to stop it? I don't think teams are putting in a lot of new stuff in November. The good teams run what works and try to make the defense stop it, the bad teams are Michigan. I really don't think this is anything eye-opening.
Most good offenses can and do run quite a few things out of the same formation so the defense might know "ok, it's probably one of these 8 plays" but that's not terribly helpful because if you guess one of those plays and you're wrong you probably get roasted.
I think this is generally true. Teams probably aren't adding a ton of stuff this late in the season. But that's not exactly the point. The point is, your offensive scheme should have some base formations from which you can run different plays. That way when the D sees a formation, they still have to respect both the run and the pass. Constraint should be a fundamental part of the scheme, not just something new that you add in November.
Do you see a lot of these kinds of comments? I don't, except for when a losing opponent says "we knew what they were going to do but couldn't stop it."
It's not about "putting new stuff in November." It is about not having utterly predictable formations that opposing teams can key on. That is not normal. That is why most teams self-scout, precisely so that they make sure that they don't slip inot a situation where opponents know that is coming based upon formation.
moth teams have intra-formation variety. So that when they line up in say a standard I with FB, they do multiple things; and on different downs and yardages. With Michigan that formation is one of two things only; it's a pitiful power run - usually tipped by the downs or personnel on the field (eg early on, Williams = run, Funchess = pass), or it is a play action of that same run. In very basic schemes the former there should set up the latter, you show a formation and run out of it to set up the play action; but when you do absolutely nothing else out of it, and the run game is a complete nonthreat even when not directly accounted for, you lose all viability of play action.
Teams may not know the exact play like they suggest, but it is fairly easy for Michigan to look at the formation they come out in, the players on the field, and the down/yards to go and have about a 90% success guessing Run/Pass. Then when you factor in for runs that we go to the strong side of our formation probably another 90% of the time you're doing good. Then add in for passes the vast majority are going to be targeted to one of 2 players and the defense has an advantage before the ball is snapped almost all the time. They can literally double Gallon and Funchess on expected passing plays, and more often than not Devin will either throw it to one of them either, or he will wait long enough for one of them to be open that he gets sacked.
The slightly more frustrating part is that EVEN with that; those 2 are good enough they will get open if Devin has any bit of acceptible pocket time. Just a couple of seconds and one will be open; but often by that point a block has been blown and someone is either slamming the poor guy into the turf or has made him have to scramble out to the point he can't see his awesome TE wide open in the middle of the field. It just sucks, yo. Teams that have dominant talent can offord to be a little predictable; teams that can't execute a simple run against even numbers for a single yard absolutely cannot afford to be predictable. And that's what we are, a bad offense that is easy to predict.
I tend to think of this in terms of Tecmo Bowl. In old school Tecmo Bowl, you had about a 25% of chance of having your play blown up by the defense guessing right. In Tecmo Super Bowl, there were twice as many plays, so the chances dropped to 12.5%--still a decent percentage, but not ridiculous.
If opponents know to a practical certainty that you're only going to run 1 or 2 different plays out of a formation, then you're just asking to be Tecmo Bowl'd.
And now I want to go play some Tecmo Bowl.
I think the only way the current playcalling would actually work is if we had Tecmo Bowl Bo Jackson starting at RB as well as QB Eagles in our offense.
Good teams self scout and try to identify their own tendencies before opponents can take advantage of them.
They also have a cohesive base offense that they can execute well and does not tip off the defense early.
Let's take the example of OSU:
They run almost all of their plays out of 11 personnel (1 RB, 1 TE), and their base play, the Inside Zone read, looks identical to their base play action passes for the first several seconds of the play.
The defense knows that they can run the zone read, where they have to focus on stopping Hyde first and foremost, but also worry about containing Miller. They also know that they can run it with play action with a variety of routes, but linebackers and safeties are in a bind, as cheating towards either the run or the pass leaves them vulnerable to the other, and there isn't much of a way to determine what is coming until after the play action fake/handoff.
Even if corners play off the WRs to prevent the deep ball, they have built in package plays that allow the QB to fake the handoff and fire a hitch out to the WR while the line run blocks.
In Michigan's case, new formations are being wheeled out mid-season. These plays sometimes work when the defense is unprepared (i.e. Minnesota and tackle over), but once it is on film the defense knows what is coming and the offense does not seem to expect this and come prepared with effective counters to what the defenses will do to attack it.
When Funchess is lined up in line at TE, how many of those plays are running plays? Probably not a ton. Even if they are, it has been established that Funchess is not particularly effective at run blocking.
Defenses at this point in the season can know the possible plays that the offense can run out of a formation. A cohesive offense, however, makes the defense worry about covering the entirety of the field from any given formation, and punishes them harshly for cheating on a play.
Even bad defenses like Nebraska are cheating as hard as they can and bringing guys right where they think the play is coming, and they were right more often than not and continued to do so because they were not sufficiently punished for it.
Borges just has to go. Other teams know what plays you are running. That should never happen. You're a "quarterback coach/guru" and Gardner went to see somebody else to get better, and halfway through the season he starts to regress.
To be fair, Borges can't coach him over the summer. It's either someone else or nothing.
Who the heck are you to be letting the facts get in the way of a good story?
They were running manball against Oregon, and Oregon seemed to know what was coming and couldn't stop it. We can't do that though, and it's very clear to everybody. They knew this in 2011 and we adjusted appropriately and had success. Why are the coaches refusing to adjust now? When we have the personnel to back up stubborn playcalling, by all means, go for it, but pack this playcalling up for the rest of 2013, it's not going to work.
We "adjusted" by just letting Denard run the ball like crazy. That wasn't really an adjustment. It was just backyard football, and Denard was an unreal talent.
Denard isn't here anymore and there is no one to just give the ball to and "make something up".
but they chose a style of offense that would be successful with the personnel, rather than try to run the type of offense Hoke and co. wanted to from day one, which is what we're getting this year. I 2011, they accepted that they would not be successful doing so from day one. I think after Akron and UConn, our coaching staff probably should have come to that conclusion.
I don't consider myself very knowledgeable about playcalling, and didn't come to this conclusion until after this game, where Michigan couldn't rush against a team with a terrible rush defense. Now, it's pretty clear. Considering it's their profession, I'd think it should become clear sooner for Hoke and co. The refusal to adapt is what hurts. I'm still not calling for anyone's job, but I think it will be justified if if we don't see adaptation in the final stretch.
There are few teams that can let you stack the box and run anyway. I don't know if that is a reasonable place to try to be.
Of course having that type of offense allows you to have play action passing that just sucks the life out of the other side.
it looks like they were getting the type of players that had the potential to pull that off, and down the road, maybe they will. I'm happy with them going for it, watching what Stanford did was a lot of fun, but if it doesn't work, and it becomes abundantly clear where less offensively-knowledgeable people can predict plays, you have to be willing to adjust, that's all I'm asking for. Even if the adjustment isn't as successful as we'd like it to be. I truly believe if we did adjust after the UConn game, we'd only have one loss.
Well to put things in perspective:
I was blitzed during the game and could predict the plays Michigan was going to run. I was somewhere between 50%-75% accurate.
So anybody who actually studies the film on Michigan and gameplans against them and isn't 8 beers deep would easily be able to stop them.
You were blitzed during the game? That must have been traumatic.
Holy shit, our OL and RB's can't even protect the fans in the stands.
I should have switched from Two-Hearted Ale to something Sam Adams...
Even if I execute I'm just way too predictable.
Congratulations on your retirement, President Coleman.
That Gregory guy really was everywhere.
adapt or go the way of the Dodo bird
If they have 8 or 9 in the box because they know what is coming your 6 maybe 7 blockers can't block everybody. Therefore the likelyhood of success isn't very good.
While I'm not a Hoke fan I refuse to believe he is so dumb about football that he actually likes the play calling as he stated yesterday. Borges called two screens yesterday and they went for 23 and 27 yards. He must have forgot about the play working as we never saw another one. That is a major issue especially since screens are one of the ways to ease defensive pressure.
I think Al just calls those to appease the modern fan and then he goes back into the cave and gets his playbook out and says," this has got to work this time!"
"One year ago, we knocked on the door. This year, we beat on the door. Next year, we're going to kick the son of a bitch in." Bum Phillips
"Last quater we ran into the line and lost 1. This quarter we ran into the line and lost two. Next quarter, we're going to run into the line and get positive yardage." Al
In both cases, they were wrong.
This is very true. While I have been just as frustrated as everybody else that our young line seems to be struggling mightily, if the other team essentially knows what play is likely to be run, then they can simply outnumber us at the point of attack. This puts additional pressure on the young guys up front, as even a seasoned line will struggle if they don't have the numbers that they need to block all of the defenders. If we had some truly innovative (or at least less predictable) playcalling, I wonder if our line would at least look serviceable.
He'll most certainly be asked about the quotes, but I won't put much stock in his response. Hoke plays things close to the vest, which is why I wasn't bothered by his comment in the postgame presser that he saw nothing wrong with the playcalling. Of course he's going to say that; he's not going to throw his own offensive coordinator under the bus. All I care about is what he actually does to fix the problem. If Borges resigns quietly during the offseason without comment from Hoke (or some generic statement thanking Borges for his service and explaining that the parting was Borges' decision), then we'll know that Hoke sees what everyone else sees.
is like watching all of the bad beats from Pat Shurmur's 1992 WCO as depicted by the Browns the previous two NFL Seasons, right down to the "We know what's coming" quotes from opposing teams, and the inability/unwillingness to audible and/or have hot routes.
Check out this quote, from Mike Lombardi (who is now the Browns "GM")
Lombardi says each week, he calls a former coach on the phone and plays a game with him. “I tell my friend the personnel group, the formation, where the ball is located on the field and what hash mark and describe the motion — if there is any — and ask him to tell me the exact play that will be run. He is correct about 95 percent of the time. No lie. “The Browns are so integrated into the West Coast system that their predictability is becoming legendary around the league,” Lombardi writes.
(and I hate to say anything because I know what I don't know, but when I watch football and feel like I'm getting trolled because no one could possibly be so unwilling to adapt, I just wonder...oh well.)
Insightful and terrifying.
Pat Shurmur or Mike Holmgren, but you are 100% right.
If it wasn't for the Trent Richardson trade, 2 first round picks consisting of Richardson and Weeden would be legendary, even for the Browns.
Quick Thread Jack....
You realize that if we win this Sunday in Cincinnati we'll be tied for first place in the loss collumn with 3-1 division record? I havent been this fired up for the Browns since 07.
Here we go Brownies....HERE WE GO!
You may now resume discussion of the village idiot. Or, as he was described yesterday and it STILL makes me laugh today:
"Borges is like a retarded cow that keeps trying to stick his head through the electric fence"
even better was when that guy asked why he continues to love watching michigan football. a responder wrote "maybe you are the retarded cow". hilarious.
I know. That was from Eric the Actor and was equally hilarious. I actually started laughing in bed last night when I thougt of that exchange. Wife asked me why was I laughing and trust me the story did not translate well.
they're going to be just good enough to get us excited before the pull the rug out from under us.
That muni lot for the Steelers game will be EPIC, absolute bedlam.
you spelled "browneyes" wrong...
"Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." -Albert Einstein
You don't have to be a genius to know Einstein was looking into the future and referring to our offense when he said this.
It simply boggles my fucking mind that something I could see (and post about to the point of other people telling me to shut up about it) our coaching staff is completely oblivious to and seems unwilling or unable to change. When I was coaching 7 YEAR OLDS in football we knew to disguise plays as much as we could to keep the defense from being able to key on our formations but our highly paid OC doesnt know this? How could he not know this?
And yet he will be defended and supported by his boss cause heaven forbid we say or do anything that might hurt Mr Borge's feelings. To me he's like the idiot Generals in WWI who ordered their men out of the trenches and straight into machine gun fire and then blamed them for not executing their plan correctly. But even worse - If Borges was the general he'd probably have a little sign up saying "about to attack now. We're all going to run over here (with an arrow pointing to where his troops were going)".
I'm so not surprised cause if mGrowOld can see the play in advance you can be damned sure any (well maybe not Indiana's but everyone else) DC can see it and will adjust accordingly. And rest assured NOTHING WILL BE DONE TO CHANGE THIS INSANITY this year or next.
It's just not the Michigan way.
You sure think a lot of yourself. People disagree with other people all the time. Why do you feel the need to throw it back in the face of the people who disagreed with you earlier on? You coaching 7 year olds is not relevant whatsoever. Stop trying to build yourself up. You're not on the level of these coaches and nobody on this blog is.
Has the game passed Borges by? It sure looks like it but his experience in the field of football is something none of us can imagine. He most certainly needs to go but to act like you're on the level of someone who has coached football for his entire adult life is a poor attempt at an ego boost and it makes you look silly.
You thought it was a good idea to compare our OC to WW1 generals who had to deal with trench warfare? I understand you don't like this guy but death and football are not peanut butter and jelly. Time to remove head from anus. You then refer to yourself in the third person. I've posted a lot of stuff on here to be a novelty and bring levity to the blog but holy shit. It is a true shock that you went to Michigan but that was before standards were so high and they let anyone in, my aunt included.
Welcome back Gary. You didnt like me or my posts before you left and obviously nothing's changed since your return.
I suppose you don't have the wit to respond with anything furthering the assumption, now an almost certainty, made at the end of my post.
Gary, I learned long ago not to try and debate with crazy people. Especially crazy people who don't like you (and you clearly don't) so I have no intention of doing anything more than simply welcoming you back to the board.
Some of the gif's you used to post were funny.
When someone plays a role that role does not embody who they are whatsoever. Christian Bale isn't really Batman, btw. Protip for ya there.
Both of you should just stop before this goes any further.
Calling someone out for a self aggrandizing post is something that should be done. If he is old, probably north of 50, and he posts crap like that, and is sincere in it, then I guess there is no point in trying to help him realize what a bafoon he is.
& obviously he thinks highly of his wife and deservedly so, but that doesn't make what he said wrong.
Misdirection and hiding plays makes a team successful. My high school football team had only a handful of formations, and we ran 30 different plays out of them, and we could and did run every single play out of every single formation. It's not rocket science. As someone else said earlier in the thread, it goes back to last year's OSU game. Devin in as QB = pass. Denard in as QB = run.
Yes, comparing football to war is stupid, as usually people don't die from football. That doesn't make his point about failing to change tactics in light of new advancements any less valid. The US won the revolutionary war in part because we realized the European way of fighting "i.e. line up in neat lines and stand there and shoot at each other" would not work well with how outgunned we were, so we resorted to ambushes and bushwhacking. WWI was a meat grinder because the generals were content to send men running (and even men on horseback) directly into machine gun fire without any sort of cover. WWII was a disaster for the Allies in the early years because the French thought that WWI tactics would work against WWII tanks and planes of Germany's blitzkrieg.
Just because Al has had a lifetime of coaching football doesn't mean that he knows more than everyone else. In fact, it could very well be why he's so set in his ways and obstinate in the face of change. His contempt for Heiko's bubble screen references in the press conferences is proof of that. When the other team is gifting us 5 yard gains minimum by having their DBs way back from the line of scrimmage, and him refusing to take those yards because they don't meet his definition of what he wants to do is idiocy at its finest.
I'll say this once because any further talk of it would not be for the truth. The part you said about deservedly so is at the opposite end of the spectrum. I've met her.
There is a way to go about saying things in a right and a wrong way. It involves a fairly large spectrum and you most certainly colored within the lines. The former did not.
I completely disagree with your point about him not knowing more. If someone devotes their life to something and an observer, somewhat educated or otherwise, thinks that they know more then they're just giving themselves too much credit. I'm not arguing the point that he needs to go, btw. I want to make that clear. He has habits that are detrimental to the production of the offense and are easily read by the opposing defenses. He also seems stubborn to stick with concepts that don't work. Those are the things that are a problem. The plays are fine but the order in which he calls them, especially situationally, are what has been so egregious.
Classy move Gary.
I think the WWI comparison is annoyingly accurate. It boils down to stubbornness and hubris. Both sides in WWI did this. The plan is perfect. Follow the plan. Not working? You must not be following it well enough. Double down and try harder.
Incidentally football is riddled with war references. Throw a bomb, lineman do battle in the trenches etc.
is like that pansy "spread" stuff. Real manly Michigan Men just out-execute a defense, so they can't stop it even if they know it's coming. We will continue to out-execute our opponents even when we don't have the personnel or experience to out-execute the defense. We will exectute our execution until our exectuion out-executes our opponents.
This is Real Michigan Football, dammit. You love this, whether you realize it or not. We will execute it until you figure it out.
in God's name can they not do both? It's starting to seem like Hoke and Borges want to blindly follow a "we're going to run this, try and stop us" mindset. That's fine, if it works. With Stanford's offense, it can work. WIth our OL, it cannot.
It's asinine to think that Michigan shouldn't spread the field and force the opponent to adjust away from blitzing just because it's not their mantra. IT makes no sense. If it gets you yards, why not?
Shoot, OSU is the perfect example. Urban likes to sprea dthe field, do quick bubble screens, all that stuff. He also knows that sometimes you just need to line up and outpower the other team right up the middle. And he has had some success, particularly late in close games, using Hyde for that.
I hope Hoke isn't this stubborn.
You know you love it.
That's exactly our offensive philosophy.
"We are going to do this. Try to stop us."
Why anyone thinks that is a great idea is beyond me, but that's what we WANT to do. We are accomplishing our goals as an offense. That's what makes all of this so sad.
Blah Blah Manball, Blah Blah Blah Execute Better, Blah Coaching Blah Good Playcalling, Blah Blah Blah. Fluffy Kittens.
Fat Albert is just doing this so he can go to the all-you-cant-eat pizza party at the Little Caesars Pizza Bowl.
My thought is if all the blame is on the youth of the line (which is a joke), shouldn't the coaching staff have seen this coming? One thing they could have done is went and got a couple of experienced linemen from a junior college to help the transition. .
I thought it has been a long-standing policy that Michigan did not accept JUCO transfers for Athletics?
I don't think it's a policy, it's just that transferring to Michigan, even as a normal student, is pretty hard.
And since some of those JUCO schools are basically "Bump your GPA up to a 2.5 anyway possible", it's not likely any JUCO guys could make it to Michigan
why not a graduate student transfer with one year left? like wisky did with QB wilson. hoke could have made it known but didn't. we could have used an addition for this year and next.
Comments made after the Jan. 1 2007 Rose Bowl against USC:
"USC center Ryan Kalil knew Michigan's defensive front had been feared most of the season, but he said the Trojans were totally prepared for everything they saw.
That's just pathetic. No changes from then to now. A real indictment of this program.
There was a time, in between 2007 and 2013, when Michigan began to run a dynamic offense that, by 2010, put up Conference-leading numbers.
Too bad it went away in games not against shitty opponents.
7, 10 and 7 against ohio.
17 in 2010 against state, 28 in a 20 point loss to wisconsin, 14 in a bowl game.
It was pathetic against teams with good defenses.
Thank you. If the opposing defense had a pulse, our offensive numbers were pretty pedestrian.
As opposed to pathetic against all opponents?
I hate to say this, but I actually kind of agree with you but with two notable exceptions:
The ND offense was as good as any RR 2010 offensive output. The Indiana offense was better than any RR 2010 offense. Those games were both examples of what the offense that Borges wants to run could look like, if executed well. Perfect balance of run and pass, long and short balls, etc. Just great offensive output. By contrast, I always found the RR 2010 offense when it worked not to be that the offense worked well, but that Denard was able to run by a lot of people, either by sheer athleticism or by crappy defensive play. The 2013 Indiana / ND games were more balanced.
All that said, the MSU / Nabraska / PSU games this season, as well as the Akron and Uconn games if you adjust for the fact that both of these teams unbelivably bad at playing tackle football, were worse than anything that RR put on the field. No excuses.
but "balanced" or not, the 2013 indiana offense at it's slowest tempo is 3X faster than anything Borges could muster. His lethargy is part of the problem.
Yeah, I also remember that offense. It dominated against every MAC team that it faced by 2010, and even against the lower B10 teams. How did it do against Ohio? Or MSU? Or in the Bowl game? Yeah, about as poorly as our horrible, pathetic 2013 offense.
Even with Denard, who really was a once in a decade level athlete, that dynamic offense of 2010 couldn't do shit against decent teams.
It struggled to score at willl against good defenses. that is not a criticism that sticks, IMO.
And there was this nugget from Miss State player K.J. Wright after THAT bowl game:
"I knew from watching film they were real predictable with what they were doing. I just looked at the formation and before the ball was snapped, Chris (White) and I knew what they were doing."
I'm not football-smart enough to give an answer to our issues, but there's evidence that no one scheme is the be all/end all.
I love you Wilford Brimley.
Every opponent on Michigan's schedule had one of its worst defensive days of the year in terms of total offense. With average field goal kicking, starting field position, and turnover generation rate, Denard wins the Heisman that year hands down.
Don, I can't imagine local talk radio right now. If I still lived in MI, i'd be listening to Xmas music all day.
Why do people always dismiss Thanksgiving? There is a holiday in between Halloween and Christmas, people.
But does Thanksgiving have MUSIC?
You don't know the classic, To Gut A Turkey? How about one of my favorites, Chase Your Cousins with the Gizzard?
I've always received Turk-Day (that's what we call it) presents. Cornicopias, traditional native american head dresses, traditional pilgrim attire to wear to school. You must be from the south.
Ferndale is south of some stuff
I can't speak for anyone else...
however, I see no reason to get excited about a fake ass celebration of the fact that we lied, killed, and decieved the native people to oblivion when we arrived here...
like the great NAS said 'I call your holiday hellday'.
The real story about Thanksgiving is sickening but we've brought a different meaning to it now. It is utterly deceiving but to take the principles away from what it's supposed to represent is something everyone can benefit from. Not knowing the truth, however, is doing yourself a major disservice like Nas so eloquently stated. Every nation witnesses the atrocities. People in power try to fulfill the prophecy, or something like that.
I listen to the local AA station WTKA most mornings from 6 till 10am. They do a fantastic job covering UM sports, and the hosts are (IMHO at least) very informed, passionate, and balanced. Some others here think they're nothing but homers, but it's highly unrealistic to expect radio guys who regularly interview coaches and players in featured live-on-location events to be calling for anybody's heads on the air.
While there is your standard proportion of callers into the show who are incensed that Hoke doesn't wear a headset or say the defense is doing a terrible job or assert that Devin Gardner isn't tough, for the most part callers into the show are very upset/unhappy/bewildered but fairly rational, given the subject.
I don't bother listening to shows coming out of Detroit or other locales, though. The few times I've heard segments of other shows, it's unbearable the amount of stupid that comes out of the pie holes of people who call in.
... By any player after losing to Bama? By any team that played RichRod's offense?
How about by people that play Oregon or Stanford say the same thing.
Defensively, we knew exactly what MSU was going to do on defense.
The point is:
1. Teams have a system and style and rarely change that dramatically because a player gets hurt or because they face a certain team.
2. It is a bad idea to really change up play calling with college kids. They are working on fundamentals and you want them to learn a bunch of new plays every week when things don't work?
3. Opposing players are ALMOST never going to admit they didn't know what was coming.
As long as you have a diverse enough play book (and Borges proved he does over these three years), the thing you need to win is great players and great execution.
The question is how long do you give Borges to coach em up?
He didn't come in and abandon Gardner or Shoelace. He adapted a bit. Aside from the recent swoon that coincides greatly with the OL personnel shift, the offenses have been okay. He is not what GERG was to the defense.
Give him time.
Most teams at this point have certain tendencies out of formations but this has become almost comical. I read a couple of weeks ago from a poster that every time Devin Funchess is in a TE that it's been run almost 95% time. I'd love to see the breakdown of the run pass percentages out of the I formation, Then spread when running the inverted veer and what routes are being run when the receivers are stacked like they are
The buckeyes are going to destroy Michigan. Yet again, I'm in the mode of "I cannot wait for this season to be over so we can look forward to next season."
The game will be somewhat close in the first half, as our defense will not be too tired yet. Ohio scores maybe 2 or 3 times in the first half. Then, in the second half, after the rails have finally come off for the offense after yet another three and out or turnover, the defense will just be tired and worn out. Ohio will score every series after that, running up the score. It'll be just like the end of the MSU game where the defense just crumbled after the offense failed on their last chance to make a game of it.
Our D is decent, but they'll get tired eventually having to be on the field so long without getting any rest. OSU is going to run up the score as high as they can, in part to help them with the voters for the title game.
I can't say I disagree with anything you said, especially your comment about runnin the score up. Meyer knows that he needs to continue to annihilate his opponents and beating Michigan handily on the road where Hoke is undefeated (oops, never mind that) would be good for the voters. He's coming for blood and I have a feeling this will be like the 2010 game where Michigan is just totally outmatched in every facet. That game, if you recall, was similar to what you just described. It was 14-7 at halftime and ended 37-7.
I wasn't even watching the game after the first quarter and could have been accused of clarvoyance.
I don't even let my cats see me do the same thing twice right before I feed them, otherwise they'd blitz the food bowl.
but Brian has been TELLING us in the offensive UFR's for the past two seasons that Borges' play-calling has been tipping plays by formation. And also that the play-action is bullshit and just for show. It was only a matter of time before every d-coordinator in the league that was any good figured out the same thing.
Good grief, anyone who has played a few games of Madden knows you can just call the same play out of the same formation every time. Why would you EVER want to give your opponent information about what you are running, outside of situations where you are setting up a misdirection play later in the game?
Any offensive coach in today's game that isn't running a significant number of run/pass options out of every formation so that the defense can't possibly know what is coming at them is worthless. Today's offenses are more complex and more disguised than EVER. This isn't the early 1980's.
Borges has been a complete failure. I don't think he's been a failure on the level of our defense under Rodriguez yet, but he is getting there.
I think this is the response to all the annoying idiots that like to show how smart they are by pulling the "How much experience do you have? I think Borges knows more than you!" argument. If this stuff is obvious to a blogger/computer engineer with no real football experience, imagine what actual experience defensive coordinators think when they see it.
Borges is garbage. That is known now. The same was true of our offense under Carr, though. Do you not think that a litany of teams fall under this same problem or it's just relegated to Michigan? This was a serious problem for the Cleveland Browns. Just because an armchair coach can decifer the play doesn't mean that the person calling the play has bad plays it just means he has well known tendencies and is a creature of habit. Most humans fall into this catergory.
the same was true of our offense under Carr at times, especially when we used to motion our H-back directly to where we were going to run every time (ugh I hated that) but Carr had about a 10,000 times better offensive line to work with. When your O-Line consists of almost nothing but upperclassmen future NFL players and you have Mike Hart running the ball, you can telegraph where you are going and still get 4.5 ypc.
The problem I have is that Borges REFUSES TO ADJUST. He bashes his brain out against a brick wall, and then, like the Black Knight in Monty Python, comes back for more. 22 carries for -40 yards? Who cares!! RUN IT UP THE MIDDLE!!!!!!
Carr usually got tired of having his brains beat in by halftime and would then let his stud QB and WR's de jour put up 300 yards of passing in the second half to try and pull out the game. Drove us nuts and didn't always work, but at least he was willing to give up on his gameplan when it didn't work. Borges seems incapable of ever giving up on his gameplan, no matter how many negative rushing yards it has accumulated.
You can't show your hand because then you feel as though since it has worked against all of these teams then it will always work. Don posted somewhere about USC knowing the plays that were coming and we saw what happened with that. It works against under matched opponents but not against your equals or those superior to you.
Borges is not good. I agree. He's undefendable (is that a word? I don't think it is. I will use it to reference Borges, though). That was very frustrating with Carr but what was the worst was his last game against Florida. Brutal because you saw what the team could have been all along. This team looks like air raid might be it's only salvation. That doesn't mean go Al Davis and deep ball it every time but a passing spread looks to be the only option at the moment.
this kinda makes me respect Devin, Fitz, and the entire O-line a whole lot more... I mean, we all kinda knew all along, however I was begining to wonder if our players just weren't that good: but what can you do when the defense knows your play? That we even get first downs is a miracle.
Generally, I am very content and comfortable when I find that I understand what the "blogosphere" is saying and I disagree with it.
Now I find I may agree. Something is terribly wrong - either with me or with the world.
"There is nothing redeeming about the Wolverines’ statistics from the Nebraska game. They were 3-of-15 on third down, including 1-of-7 in the second half."
In other unkind numbers, we were also outgained by an average of 1.36 yards per snap, but also managing a marginally worse performance than the MSU game on a yards per play basis actually. At MSU, we managed 2.85 yards per play. On Saturday, 2.78 yards per play. Also of note, this is the fourth game this year in which we've lost the third down battle, but we're 2-2 now in those games.
Our offense averages 9 TFL per game. Only Idaho is as bad. Only 4 other teams average as many as 8. The national median is less than 6.
Quote this Nebraska player's comment at the presser directly to Borges or gtfo.
He kept telling me over and over again "Don't worry, we can't stop the run, we can't stop anyone, we're completely and totally awful." To which my response was "oh no, don't you worry, you're going to stop us. The only way you don't stop us is if we actually start running out the shotgun on passing downs after we've set up the pass."
True to point, in the second half we lined up in manball formation and the second I saw the formation I said "and here comes a TFL..." and... ta da, -2 yard TFL. My buddy just laughed at how ridiculous it was that I could tell him exactly what was going to happen.
We're not at the place we we can line up and say "hey, we're running it, stop us." I don't know when, if ever, we'll get there but we clearly aren't there now so what gives? What piece of awful data is Borges holding on to that makes him think we can do that? Is he just trolling us until the ohio game at which point we run out of all our passing formations and throw out of all our rushing ones? And then actually, ya know, mixes in a bunch of random stuff just to screw with ohio?? I'm not even sure a win over ohio would save his job (nor should it). It would make me happy (albiet insanely frustrated) but, seriously, the guy needs to go...
I'd take UT's OC, Baylor's OC, Stanford's OC, Oregon's OC, A&M's OC, the list goes on and on...
Is it odd that Hoke is the only person who doesn't realize that Borges is a clown?
What a man speaks is not always indicitive of what he thinks. Give Hoke a chance to make a change before passing judgement on an unknown action.
the borges apologists have been saying for weeks that we run different plays out of those sets. like, remember that one screen pass out of the I formation? you know, the one that we never went back to again. i knew borges was going to cost us several future games after witnessing the iowa game...in 2011.
Are there still Borges apologists?
there are. Beyond Hoke, that is.
They used to say the same things when Lloyd Carr coached, especially players from USC. This is just more proof that Dave Brandon and the Carr-tel got exactly what they wanted: a return to "Michigan Football." Those of you who didn't want Michigan to join the 21st century got exactly what you wanted. You have absolutely no right to bitch.
The good part about this: people know exactly what is coming when they play Bama, too. Bama wins with the same kind of predictabliity because they have superior personnel.
The only way that MIchigan is going to win championships if they don't go to the spread is for everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, to support the school, the coaching staff and the players. Bama has proven that MANBALL can win national championships as long as you have the personnel to back up your scheme.
This staff has proven that they are brilliant at recruiting. They deserve the support of anyone who calls himself or herself a "Michigan fan" until a sufficient sample of their work has been provided. They also deserve to be allowed enough time to amass the personnel that it takes to execute the MANBALL mandate from David Brandon.
That works out to five years in this case.
If they lose four or five in 2015, then we have a right to complain. Until then, I would suggest relaxing and trying to enjoy watching the program and its young players grow.
Play calling only gets you so far. Watching LSU Saturday they were all praising their OC the first half. Well that didn't produce much the second half. At some point football is about your assignment and executing, as much as people hate to hear it.
People love to bitch about play calling and don't focus on the players. That may even be a good thing at the college level, but it is what it is.
MSU fans derided their offensive play calling when their line was banged up last year and not cohesive this year.
In reality, almost every system/scheme has strengths and weaknesses. A 3-3-5 can work very well with the right coaches and the right players executing.
MANBALL can work very very well under the same conditions.
So, the real question is…... How long do you wait to see if it is working?
Fans never want to wait. Ever. That is what makes them fans. Thank goodness they are powerless.
I watched Bama play LSU and even they pulled out a fake punt and a flea flicker in that game.
Their offense is also cohesive in that they run believeable play action passes off of an effective running game, keeping the defense off balance.
What Borges is calling would not be idiotic if there were a believable run game to accompany play action passing. But the fact of the matter is that everyone knows Michigan can't run the ball from under center, so continuing to pretend to do so only results in a very beat up Devin Gardner.
Unfortunately for Borges, this is not a perfect world where he has a dominant, experienced O-Line, and he gets paid to put the players he has in a position to succeed. He is most certainly not doing that right now.
Comparisons to Bama, and Saban, are null and void.
There is no person on Earth who would compare Saban and Hoke - it's like they have different jobs, one is so good at his, and the other so seemingly mediocre.
These coaches actually haven't proven anything much even on the recruiting front, if you think about it: only when players they recruit start becoming dominant ON THE FIELD will that be true. If you reel in five-star recruits, and play like they did last week, well, that's when Hoke becomes something other than Saban entirely: Lane Kiffin.
Heard this plenty of times in the Carr era.
Hell maybe you have a point, John U Bacon has said that Brandon sits in film sessions with the Coaches.
Maybe he is the puppet master. lol, this is a total mess.
I just hope when Hoke gets let go he just leaves and doesn't try to get back at the University in an attempt to show all he was right all along.
I question whether Borges knows what he is calling, so this seems impossible.
I think he will remain loyal to his staff, the way RR was to his. DB will be happy when Hoke becomes a consistent 8 or 9 win per year coach. For Michigan to be a factor in the NC picture or go against Urban, DB would have to hire an elite coach! I don't think this will happen, so we should be happy with a LC type team, minus the '97 and '06 seasons. Though, Hoke could get lucky and win the B1G once or twice in his 15 year stint here.
In all fairness RR fired his DC after year 1 and I'm assuming would have fired GERG after year 3 if he stayed. I think a lot of people would be happy if Hoke did this with the OC. Who know's if its the right move but it goes to show you that I think we would be somewhat happy with a RR level of loyalty.
She's just recycling kids' tweets and Hoke quotes. I think I need a job with the DetNews. That column would have been pretty darn easy to write.
The issue is that the offense we stive to be (aka Stanford) doesn't really care if you know what's coming. Did you watch them against Oregon? They lined up with 8+ guys in the box and said "here it comes" and were still able to dominate Oregon. The issue we have is that we know certain plays won't work, yet we continue to use them not just occassionally, but as the focal point of our offense.
I think the implication with Stanford is vastly superior OL coaching. The question is how much is coaching and how much is our players being bad. If our players are being poorly coached or just soft, it really would only take one year for a solid improvement with a better coach. Remember the leap our D made from 2010 to 2011 with Mattison?
Take a look at Stanford's line. Seniors and fifth year seniors. We have two of those. The middle three are freshman and RS frosh. Stanford has guys who are four or five years older with tons more experience.
But, I guess that it is just easier to call the players "soft" or the coaches. "poor" than to face the fact that it takes years to develop a line like Stanford's. So go with whatever feels good to you.
I don't think anyone is questioning that it takes time to put meat on young lineman and to develop talent and proper technique. I just think that what we should be capable of doing right now is teaching the players we have how to block something they have now seen multiple weeks in a row.
When players are out of position, that's coaching. When you see the same thing happen over and over, but you call that play again (but to the other side), that's coaching. When you can't even slow down a pass rush, that's coaching.
I am no expert, I won't pretend to know exactly how everything should be blocked, but mass player confusion is a reflection on coaching. Poor coaching is like porn- you know it when you see it.
In addition to being extremely predictable by formation and personnel, our running plays do not seem to be well conceived. They often take too long to develop and in other instances seem to place too much pressure on particular linemen. The end result is that our TB is usually hit well before the line of scrimmage. I didn't watch the Stanford game but would be willing to bet that was not the norm when Stanford ran the ball.
Just a reminder, this isn't a recruiting contest, it's a football contest. All the staff as shown the ability to recruit, their ability to develop their recruits is lacking substantially.
I said it before and I'll say it again, play calling right now is as predictable as death and taxes.
The worst thing that could have happened for us this season was the Indiana game. Playing that JV high school defense got Borges smug about his offense again.
Hey, remember that thread where MGoBloggers were actually posting the plays about to be run? Yeah, me neither.
because it happens a lot in the live blog
And it's missed a lot too.
No one can do it with consistency that shows more than chance.
We said "we need to coach better" 7 times.
He won't fire borgess unless DB makes him.
Our offense is predictable. It's one thing to be predictable when you have the horses to do it (even then I don't like it), but we don't have that luxury right now. Right now, Borges needs to be creative, and less predictable. It blows my mind when I think about how much money Borges is getting paid to be a turd of an OC.
Speaking of turds, I'd rather have chicken-shit bingo when calling the plays. Just lay the OC's play sheets on the ground, and whichever play the chicken shits on, is the play we call. At least we wouldn't be predictable.
We would still be predictable, because the Nebraska players are telling us that the formation and the personnel allowed them to determine the play. Even chicken shit bingo can't fix that. We need to be running plays in a manner where neither formation nor personnel tell the other team what we are going to do.
One to crap out the formation, and a second to crap out the play. Boom- problem solved. Plus, think of how funny it would be if first chicken craps out a goal line formation but the second chicken craps on "hail mary." It'd probably still be more effective than our O now.
It's not just the plays being called, but the design of the plays, formation, and personnel. That's what I meant, but I didn't articulate well, because I got caught up in the joy of picturing a chicken pooping on a call sheet, and an entire team waiting anxiously for the chicken to finish it's business.
I got caught up in the joy of picturing a chicken pooping on a call sheet, and an entire team waiting anxiously for the chicken to finish it's business.
Even with that wait, we'd still get play calls in faster than we do now.
Sad but true.
Dymonte Thomas(RB) and Jourdan Lewis(WR) earned raves at camps on offense. On this theme, UCLA used their starting LB Myles Jack at RB this past week with great success.
I realize our line is young/not good but Thomas is too good of an athlete to play as sparingly as he has on a punchless team. If he's not ready at DB, then let's get the ball in his hands and see what he can do.
Simiarly, unless Derrick Green turns into Earl Campbell, I'd like to see Jabrill Peppers get some looks at RB for next year.
While this may not change the 'they know what's coming factor' from Borges, at least some explosive guys can have the ball.
From the comments to the Detroit News article: "How did Nebraska know what was coming when Borges seemed to have no idea what to do?" The fact is that we are all pretty well able to predict what is going to happen as soon as we see the formation, and we all have come to realize that the only thing a play-action passing effort accomplishes is to put Devin's back to the defense with the usual result being that by the time he turns around he is wearing 2 or 3 defenders. No team does well when the other side knows what it is going to do on any sort of consistent basis. That's why QB sneaks are intended to get about 1 yard and are not usually tried when 2 or more yards are needed.
This was pretty much Rich Rod's criticism of how Denard was going to be used after he left.
We should use signs to call play like Oregon does, but instead of miscellaneous pictures we should just put a picture of Fitz running up the middle when we want Fitz to run up the middle.
As funny as that sounds isnt that basically what we are doing right now?
LMAO! That would be so perfect!
Make sure it's sturdy and laminated - it will get a lot of use.
Hoke does not give a shit what Angelique writes, what we post on MGoBlog, or what is said on the radio. That's not the criticize Hoke, it's just the reality of the situation. Coaches are arrogant by nature. Nobody is going to tell them what to do, especially a bunch of internet message board geeks. Until HE decides in HIS mind that changes need to be made, nothing is going to happen.
My fear is that he totally believes in Borges and Funk, and that youth is, in fact, the reason for our demise. I'd like to think a quote like this from your last opponent would open his eyes. The problem is, coaches stop reading the paper or listening to the radio when the ship starts taking on water. My guess is Brandon will have to bring this quote to Coach Hoke's attention. He's busy getting the kids ready to compete and execute.
Can someone please bring this up at a presser?
"Your opponents have openly said they know what you are going to run when your offense lines up, do you have any plans to address that issue?
To Hoke, Borges, or both.
Now, Hoke has been very supportive of Borges publicly but I have to think he knows that something isn't right (if he doesn't think or feel that despite whatever he says publicly, then he should probably be looking for employment elsewhere), and almost none of us have enough inside information to know what Hoke is really thinking. He's not going to throw Borges, Funk, or any other coach under the bus in public fashion.
Hoke's likely response, "Well, we had some things we thought we could do. I thought play calling was good. we need to play better."
"I liked the playcalling, we just didn't execute"
"I need to coach better"
You're right, that's what he probably would publicly say, but if Michigan really is his dream coaching job I have to think he's going to do everything in his power -- including delivering bad news to longtime friends and colleagues -- to win games and titles.
Cant you see that we are just holding back all year to beat Ohio at the end? I mean come on guys, it's right there in front of your faces fergodsakes.
I'll just say that this is what a certain cabal wanted. A return to boring, predictable MANBALL. Well, they got it.
for Stanford and Bama.
It's not scheme, but execution by both coaches and players that is the issue.
The thing/problem with Manball Coaches is that they believe it doesn't matter if the other team knows it's coming. ITS MANBALL FERGODSAKES!!!
Once it starts working, we'l call it MANBALL
Are we trying to simplify the blocking schemes since we keep screwing those up? Does that explain why we are so predictable on offense based on formation? Are we trying to zone block or man block or whatever based on formation? Seems to me we are just flat out lost in terms of what we want to do on offense and how we want to block and what we think we can do.