Barwis. Still Love?
What do we think about Barwis these days? I was as in love as the rest of us early on, and still see no real reason not to continue the man-love. However, I want to ask: do we see any results of the change? I don't see a difference in injuries. Can't really see a difference in 4th quarter conditioning, although to be fair we haven't really had the chance to put teams away this year. Do we have evidence of what we all believed, which was that this would be a dramatic improvement?
November 20th, 2008 at 1:24 PM ^
to see a difference in play look no further than brandon minor, he's faster this year and IMO runs harder in traffic.
November 20th, 2008 at 1:39 PM ^
His influence was exaggerated from the beginning, but im sure he's doing a good job. You can train to avoid some injuries, but not concussions, separated shoulders, freak finger accidents etc. He will be good at getting players bigger and faster, but injuries are more about being unlucky.
As for conditioning late in the game? I think our lack of skill has hurt us more than anything. I haven't seen our D get tired, we just can't tackle.
November 20th, 2008 at 2:15 PM ^
What about the Wisconsin comeback? I feel like there have been a couple games when we have played better in the second half (we have also fell apart, occasionally), but then again that could just be attributed to inconsistency.
Given the struggles this year, I'm not sure we can make any definite conclusions, but I still feel Barwis is definitely doing better than our previous S&C and will live up to expectations if he hasn't already. Just looking at our defensive line should be proof enough.
November 20th, 2008 at 2:16 PM ^
to think that after just one year a S&C coach can get everything done he wants. I can't wait to see these guys after 3 years of working with him. One year is just too short of time to make the impact that Barwis wants. He will get the job doen, patience.
Also recruits love what he is doing and how intense he is. All of them say they haven't met another guy at the other colleges doing what he is doin. He will get the job done along with RR.
GO BLUE!
November 20th, 2008 at 2:39 PM ^
Patience is a great word to discribe this year as a whole. RR can't change Michigan in one season and Barwis can't completely change the players S&C in one year. Let both Barwis and RR get settled in and their philosophies bought into and then we should be seeing some real results.
November 20th, 2008 at 2:54 PM ^
In the same vein that expectations for the 2008 Wolverines performance on the field had to be tempered because of youth and inexperience, so too should the results of S&C. The equation is going to be 4 years(RR + S&C) = EEEEEEE!
November 20th, 2008 at 2:53 PM ^
My buddy and his family own a few car dealerships and they give 10-12 cars annually to athletic department for the coaches to use. They said they wouldn't give anymore cars unless the next on went to Barwis. So Barwis is no driving around in a fully loaded Chevy Tahoe. So yeah, I think there's still love there.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:04 PM ^
thought the Barwis hype was really tongue in cheek. I mean, he may be a wonderful strength and conditioning coach, but I cannot attribute any difference in performace this year to his work.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:14 PM ^
My faith is with Barwis. I like Barwis. Plenty of recruits have said he is great! I saw an article full of compliments to Barwis from our players.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:27 PM ^
Look - I'm sure Barwis does a great job - all these NFL dudes wouldn't be showing up to train if he didn't.
BUT, if you read these boards before the season, it was as if we expected Barwis to turn all our players into giants fluttering butterflies of death. Well, that didn't happen. The fact that the vast majority of people who heard of him were seduced by his gravelly voice and MMA pedigree, and thus built asinine expectations doesn't have anything to do with whether he has, actually, done a good job.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:58 PM ^
the players how much bigger they look. Minor is exhibit A, as obes said. But Carlos Brown, he looks much bigger and able to handle contact than he did last season. If a player has little skill, Barwis isn't going to be able to make him catch a ball, tackle, block better. His conditioning program not only strengthens the players bodies, but also their minds, pushing them to their limits. i definitely attribute the Wisconsin victory to the players conditioning. one season is also way to early to tell, I can't wait to see this freshman class as jrs and srs. That will be the true telling of our S&C program.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:59 PM ^
I see players who are faster and stronger. It hasn't necessarily translated to wins, but Minor is stronger in faster (as someone else said). Mathews looks faster; I don't really picture him breaking that tackle against Minnesota if it happened in 2007. Brandon Graham almost caught Javon Ringer from behind on that 64-yarder. Our offensive linemen move much better, in my opinion.
Those are a few examples. Honestly, though, it's kind of difficult to tell. So few of these players actually saw the field last year that it's hard to tell if they've improved much. Lots of them are freshmen (McGuffie, Odoms, etc.) and lots of them are first-time starters (Ortmann, Molk, Thompson, Mouton, etc.).
But in a foot race, I'd take our secondary guys against almost anyone, especially Trent and Harrson. They've all been beaten by bad positioning and blown assignments, but nobody really pulls away from them in an all-out sprint.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:03 AM ^
"Brandon Graham almost caught Javon Ringer from behind on that 64-yarder."
Thanks Magnus for remembering the specifics. I just remembered watching a game and saying out loud "holy ****, Graham almost ran down a running back with no angle!"
The D-Line in particular has looked entirely different. Some of that may be due to substitution patterns, but they've been much stronger than in the past late in the game.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:17 AM ^
Glad I could help.
November 20th, 2008 at 4:03 PM ^
Although, I wish could condition Nick Sheridan's arm to be (a) more potent than a limp dick and (b) unwilling to wildly throw the ball into coverage. That seems to be the conditioning we need right now.
November 20th, 2008 at 4:25 PM ^
Who ever said that Barwis would work miracles, especially in 10 months? Who ever said that Barwis' training would cut down on injuries? Who ever said that Barwis would make these kids better ballers? It wasn't Barwis. People just heard what they wanted to hear instead of hearing what really was said. Barwis isn't a miracle maker. His plan of action takes time. What we do know is, and this is from the word of the players, that they are better conditioned and stronger than they were under the old regime. In time the coaching and S&C will all come together and we'll see a much better product on the field. Just gotta give RR and his staff more than 10 months. Try 3 seasons.
November 20th, 2008 at 5:14 PM ^
Actually Barwis said in one of the preseason videos on MGoBlue that many of his workouts were designed to reduce injuries. I agree that he isn't going to eliminate them altogether, but he did say that himself.
November 20th, 2008 at 4:36 PM ^
Long term, I still think that Barwis will have a postitive effect upon injuries as during the Carr years we had an insane amount of serious injuries in practice that weren't even caused by a hard hit or an ankle getting twisted.
This year, our defense has been pretty much injury-free, BTW. All things considered, 2008 hasn't been a bad year in that department. I can think of many worse.
November 20th, 2008 at 6:37 PM ^
I thought our players were under-conditioned. Out of position, terrible tacklers, butterfingers, noodle-armed and stone-hands; yes. Under-conditioned, no.
Previous years, quite the opposite (well, except for the terrible tackling - that has been a Michigan staple for a while).
November 21st, 2008 at 11:05 AM ^
The end of the story is this: Barwis is a good S&C coach. His impact was over-stated, and, due to screaming videos, wolf ownership, and an MMA pedigree, he was over-hyped.
November 21st, 2008 at 7:04 PM ^
As for conditioning late in the game? I think our lack of skill has hurt us more than anything. I haven't seen our D get tired, we just can't tackle.
Not to be negative, but in the PSU and Illinois games, our D went from being respectable for 3 quarters to a total sieve in the fourth. Against MSU, too, we went from repeatedly stopping them in the red zone in the first three quarters to giving up two killer TDs in the fourth. That's not really to blame it on Barwis; I think it's pretty normal for a D to get tired late in a game. I just don't know how you could say that our D in the fourth quarter of PSU/Illinois/MSU looked as fresh as it did earlier. Heck, even against Wisconsin (a game regularly cited as proof of Barwis's conditioning magic), we allowed UW to go on two 80-yard drives at the very end of the game, and needed a forced fumble and a 2-point conversion miscue to escape with the win.
November 21st, 2008 at 8:56 PM ^
I don't think you can necessarily blame poor play late in the game on conditioning. I mean, Michigan has allowed big plays and long drives in the first half as well, when we can probably all agree that the defense wasn't tired.
I think our team is better conditioned this year. Does that mean they never get tired? Probably not.
November 21st, 2008 at 10:00 PM ^
I don't know that our conditioning is specifically to blame for our second-half failures, but I certainly don't see much evidence that it has been a bright spot. This season we have played our opponents almost exactly even in the first half of games (152-150), but we've gotten killed in second halves (153-86). Aren't well-conditioned teams supposed to play better as the game goes on?
Really, what evidence is there that our team is better-conditioned than it was last year? In all four of our losses last year, the game was basically lost in the first half or very early in the second. We never lost due to a fourth-quarter collapse.
To be clear, I do think Barwis's weightlifting philosophy is superior to Gittleson's archaic one. But lifting and conditioning are two separate issues.
November 21st, 2008 at 10:15 PM ^
The issue with Barwis is that he was NEVER going to live up to the hype he came into.
And with so many things that have changed this season, it is hard to point to anything that is discernible evidence that our condition is better. (I do happen to believe it is better, but I have no data.)
But fundamentally, we wnet from one of the two worst S&C programs among the major BCS teams, PSU being the other. To at least being on par with everyone else. I would point to the number of NFL players that spend their summers on campus as an indication of what real experts think of Barwis.
November 21st, 2008 at 10:28 PM ^
The lack of bellies on our offensive and defensive linemen is at least an indicator of better conditioning.
Also, being outscored in the second half has very little to do with conditioning this year, in my opinion. Jmblue, your evidence that we have played teams evenly in the first half is indicative; in the second halves, we've allowed almost the same number of points (153-152), but we've scored far fewer points (150-86). That sounds like lack of execution and lack of offensive adjustments. When you talk about teams getting tired, that usually has to do with the defense. Offenses tend not to get tired so easily because they know where they're going, the QB doesn't run much at all, sometimes receivers don't run hard, etc. On the other hand, every defensive player is supposed to be playing fast and violent from whistle to whistle.
November 21st, 2008 at 10:35 PM ^
I agree with Magnus that our players LOOK to be in better physical condition. And we have had so many issues with our offense this season. And the difference in first half to second half scoring has a lot to do with games that threet came out after the first half. Games where we ran out of things to throw at a defense in the first half.
There just isn't conclusive quantifiable evidence, but I THINK that we are better conditioned.
November 21st, 2008 at 11:57 PM ^
Aside from looking better, I think the players saying they are in the best shape of their lives is the most conclusive evidence we can get. They would know better than anyone else.
November 22nd, 2008 at 4:51 PM ^
OK, but seriously now, what would you expect a player to say? "I'm in bad shape now. This new guy sucks?"
Our guys may have looked better in their uniforms, but when you end up getting outscored by a 2-1 margin in the second halves of games (which is how the season stats ended up after today), I don't think you can boast about conditioning. After Wisconsin, people were predicting that we'd be a team that wins games in the 4th quarter because of superior conditioning. Not quite. (And again, even against Wisconsin our D gave up two very long drives at the very end and dodged a couple of bullets.)
November 22nd, 2008 at 6:08 PM ^
My response was only with respect to whether or not there was any evidence of better conditioning. No, I don't expect a player to say they are in bad shape, but I don't expect a player to say he is in the best shape of his life without reason. More than one player made similar comments and boasted better strength, flexibility, stamina, etc. Couple that with the players looking better, and I'd say it shows a better conditioned team.
As for being outscored in the second half, there's a lot of other variables that can be attributed to that statistic beyond conditioning. Blown assignments and being on the field too long are two that come to mind before conditioning.
That said, the conditioning program has been in place less than a year. Like the coaches, give Barwis more time, and we'll see more evidence of the conditioning on the field.
November 22nd, 2008 at 4:24 PM ^
If the Barwis guy was such a significant factor, why did the Maize & Blue finish with a 3-9 record? If they were supposedly "in the best shape ever" as some have said, shoudn't they have performed better? (read: for one, Penn State game where they were outscored big-time as the game went on).
It's all about having players, coaching, strategy, and mental prep.
These conditioning coaches need to stay in the background and do their job with whatever talent they have and quit boasting. Former conditioning coach Gittelson NEVER had a team finish 3-9, and you never heard him pounding his chest.
November 22nd, 2008 at 4:55 PM ^
Ugh. Point to a time when Barwis beat his own chest. Oh, you can't? Okay. Bye.
November 22nd, 2008 at 4:56 PM ^
Barwis can't teach players how to tackle, how to hang onto footballs, not trying to arm tackle probable 1st round NFL draft picks and to wrap them up instead, how to get rid of the football when the pocket collapses instead of looking like a deer in headlights, etc. Conditioning has zilch to do with this season; it was not having talent. Period. End of story.