Building the Play Book
Like many of you, my biggest concern with this transition is that we will go backwards on offense for several years while Hoke and Borges get "their guys". I am only slightly reassured when I hear Hoke say Denard can be his quarterback, because Borges has never had a running QB.
Can the coaches out there tell me if this would be a realistic approach? Could Borges sit down with the offensive team and tell them that they would build the play book together? Let Denard and co. put in one play from the current play book and teach Borges how it works and then Borges could put in one of his own and teach them how it works.
It seems to me this approach would have several advantages:
- Smoother the transition for the players
- Shortened learning curve.
- It would limit transfers.
- Contribute new ideas to Borges' playbook.
- Potentially maintain a somewhat explosive offense.
Over the next few seasons, Borges could remove the plays he didn't like, as the current roster graduates, and keep the ones that worked in his system.
Is this realistic?
January 13th, 2011 at 2:16 PM ^
Coaches get a very limited window to work with players and should not be spending that time writing the playbook. Unless Borges is completely incompetent (no signs that he is) he should be able to construct an offense that gives Robinson opportunities to run with the football in addition to throwing it. That is all he really has to do, not attempt to create an exact replica of what Rodriguez would have done.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:53 PM ^
sorry but that is what u have done.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:04 PM ^
Look at the Eagles as your inspiration. West Coast offense with a massively talented running QB that can make plays on his feet when coverage or the rush shuts down his first reads. Bring in some of the well-honed read-option later in the game once the defenses get settled. We have lots of back/receivers who were recruited for their ability to make plays in space and the WCO is premised on the same set of abilities.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:10 PM ^
I just want to see a Coach that shows he can win a game at the end.
I watched the bball game and i wanted to say hoke doesnt really no the words of hail to the victors, who cares. He doesnt know that we have changed since he was here. I'll be back brian tom tim or all you michigan men as u say.........
January 13th, 2011 at 4:29 PM ^
Stop posting plz.
kthnxbai
January 13th, 2011 at 2:18 PM ^
As long as there is a ton of rolling Denard out, I think the offense will be great.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:30 PM ^
Lots of bootlegs with Koger in the flat as a checkdown. There can be many variations of this type of play.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:30 PM ^
Exactly. Just because he's a great runner doesn't mean Denard can only play in a zone-read offense. He can, and should be used, in a similar capacity to Vick. Get him out of the pocket but on a pass first offense. Give him two reads and then let him run with the ball. This year, Vick was the best (sadly for me against the Giants), when his two primary reads were covered and he would tuck and run, usually for 15-30 yards.
As long as Denard maintains the threat of a run, he can still be very effective. They may have to turn him loose on designed runs now and again, to maintain the threat, but it doesn't have to be a zone-read. Hell, I'd like to see one or two options per game. if practiced, it can be a deadly effective play for someone like Denard, esp. if we have a competent RB or even a WR like Hemingway to run it.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:48 PM ^
Where is Vick?
January 13th, 2011 at 2:55 PM ^
Denard wasnt great for MICHIGAN
Nor RR
January 13th, 2011 at 3:13 PM ^
Thank god for mgoblob
January 13th, 2011 at 3:15 PM ^
and since im a mboblogger thank god for brian
January 13th, 2011 at 2:20 PM ^
I hope the Annexation of Puerto Rico is in the play book. That one ALWAYS works.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:21 PM ^
I would look for something similar to the Eagles offense this year.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:21 PM ^
If we are thinking about building some more spread option football into our playbook, I think the best option would be for Borges to meet with somebody like a Chip Kelly, Gus Malzahn, or Urban meyer and learn some of their base plays. They would probably be able to teach it better than our players, and also have more time to sit down and actually meet than our player would have.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:22 PM ^
I’ve never heard of a playbook built by committee, and as another poster noted, the players are limited (by rule) in the amount of time they can spend with the coaches.
By the way, Borges has had running quarterbacks.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:25 PM ^
Borges has had running quarterbacks? I would like to see them listed.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:25 PM ^
Name one. I can't find any. Seriously.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:50 PM ^
Have u forgotten Michigan has/had Drob
January 13th, 2011 at 3:00 PM ^
just got to see sdsu lose to utah, who i think beat us, years ago, and ND lost to bla.........
R U FrickninKiddint me
January 13th, 2011 at 2:28 PM ^
I hope everyone enjoyed seeing a decent offense last year because we will be depending on defense to win from now on. If we improve significantly on defense I might forgive the abortion that will likely become our offense.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:10 PM ^
All right Mr. Negative Pants. We have most of our offense returning, and an OC with lots of experience and the record to show he will probably be at least competent. The case might be made that we won't reach the same vaunted heights of innovation that RR could have brought with time, but the alternative won't likely be an "abortion."
January 13th, 2011 at 2:42 PM ^
to find a RB to take some of the pressure off of denard. i honestly think cox can be a beast if given a chance (and if he does the work).
January 13th, 2011 at 3:11 PM ^
Or, use the slots we already have in abundance to set up a simpler pass-first offense with Denard using his lightning prowness once reads are covered or plays break down.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:48 PM ^
This type of statement still just kills me. I did not even see a decent offense last year. I saw superior athletes that, when matched up against lesser athletes from far lesser programs, could exploit them for big plays.
I just dont know, I watched every play of every game 2X and some of them 3X and other than a "bling hog finding an acorn" now and then against quality opponents it looked predictable and futile.
I've been a fan for a long time and even the "rear back and heave it" plays to anthony carter seemed far more reliable than anything I saw this year.
Different standards I guess. I just look at an offense being "good" when it has some real go-to plays that it can use to maintain the drive and THEN has some real daggers it can pull out once you've got them "where you want them". I say exactly NO go-to plays that we could hang our hat on. I always looked like a crapshoot to me.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:58 PM ^
An NFL Version of this offense...
The bootleg pass
"One additional piece that I only saw briefly touched upon would be the bootleg pass, usually a naked boot. This is generally setup by the running game and is the only way to get the QB enough time for downfield throws. This possibility decreases the tendencies of DE's or LB's to cut to sharply down the line in pursuit of the RB and makes the run more effective by allowing blockers a split second to get in better position to create lanes.. If the DE's and LB's start crashing, the QB can take a leisurely stroll for 8-10 yards if no one is open."
The differences between a Denver offense and a traditional West Coast Offense
"The running game does not in any way resemble Bill Walsh's version of the West Coast Offense. Mike Shanahan and Alex Gibbs completely changed the way the blocking is carried out. All five O-linemen and the tight end must work together seamlessly. Their steps completely in sync with each other. Each of the linemen must be able to block in space to take care of LBs or safeties.
The offense requires different blocking and running techniques than most offenses. The double team at the point of attack is often used and then the lineman on whichever side the LB attacks peels off the block to pick him up. The cut block is essential to minimize backside pursuit and in so doing to create cutback seams in the defense. The back must see and then make one cut to get into one of those seams and then to get upfield as quickly as possible. By doing this the offense will minimize negative yardage that kills the running game and results in consistently keeping the chains moving. Backs that can break arm tackles and with great vision have excelled in the system.
The Qb must be mobile. With the smaller size of the O-line, pocket pass protection becomes more difficult. Escapability by the QB is a huge plus. The QB must be able to run bootlegs and throw on the run. This ability requires that the defense must then assign a DE, LB, or both to to spy on the QB. This further enhances the rushing game in that it leads to cutback lanes for big gains."
January 13th, 2011 at 2:57 PM ^
They averaged more points than Michigan, roughly 30 yards less a game. Scoring consistently regardless of the level of the competion. Hell, they scored 35 on TCU, the same team that held Wisky to 19 points.
Michigans offense on the other hand, racked it up against inferior teams, and did nothing versus top calibur teams.
I think we will be fine.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:05 PM ^
of oversimplification at its finest.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:20 PM ^
SDSU averaged 33.7 PPG. Michigan averaged 32.8 PPG.
SDSU's kicker(s) went 17-22. Michigans kickers were 4-14. SDSU got 39 points more from their kicking game - 3 PPG.
SDSU scored 48 points against Wyoming and UNLV, 47 points against Nicholls State and 41 points each against NM State and Utah State. Is it your contention that those schools (Nicholls State!) are superior teams?
January 13th, 2011 at 4:34 PM ^
If you actually read what I stated, I said that they scored well against all levels of competition, unlike what Michigan did this year.
To answer your question. No, it is not my contention that any of those teams are what I consider superior to the SDSU program.
The teams I was refering to as superior are TCU, Mizzou, BYU, Air Force, and Utah. TCU (number 2 team in the country this year) a superior team. They scored 35 at TCU. They scored 24 on Mizzou on the road, 21 on BYU, as well as scoring 25 on a ranked Air Force team. Along with putting up 34 points on Utah.
SDSU scored 21 points twice, that being the two games in which they scored the least amount of points.They scored every game , against weaker opponents and against stronger ones.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:15 PM ^
So why not a variation of what the 49ers ran with Steve Young? I know Young is more akin to Saint Tebow but we have the wideouts to work the short passing game and Denard can definitely run.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:22 PM ^
Playbook- Give the ball to Denard
Im happy
January 13th, 2011 at 3:26 PM ^
I would like to see the Hybrid Spread Option Shotgun Offense that Meyer ran at BG, Utah, and Florida. The transition would be easy for the offensive linemen and you can run the spread or pro-style out of it. And if we were able to bring Scot Loeffler in, he could show Denard and Devin exactally how it works.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:39 PM ^
Would love for this to work out, but I'd be very surprised if Denard stays. I mean, let's remember Rodriguez's feeble plea to Mallett to say, trying to make the point that he could tailor the offense to his talents. It would ruin the overall glow surrounding Hoke if he publicly gave the impression that Denard couldn't work in his offense. He basically had to come out and say, yeah, Denard can be our QB.
It would make far more sense for DRob to transfer, sit out the year and have 2 seasons as a a starter in a system he handpicks (Oregon, Auburn, etc) than to try to stick it out in an awkward spread/pro hybrid that neither coach nor player really excels at, and THEN decide to transfer and have one solid year at another school. Basically, you have to assume that every team in the country running a spread-option would be beating down the door for a guy that would be a top-3 preseason Heisman favorite. He'll have options.
If he stays, cool, but I would think the chances of him maximizing his ability are not good with coaches unfamiliar to the spread.
It would be interesting to see how this west coast-ish offense would work with Devin Gardner.
I guess I'm fine with what's happening, and hoke, blah blah, but to me, we could have had Hoke after next year if Rodriguez hadn't been able to get the team up to snuff. Now, more than ever, I feel like giving Rich Rod another crack at it with a VERY potent offense and maybe a new defensive staff would have made a lot more sense for next year's favorable schedule. If Harbaugh were the guy, the timing makes sense to make the move now, given his NFL courtship. Once he was out of the picture, why make a late move when the Hoke would just as soon come next year... That, to me, is the only questionable thing about the recent events.
Good luck to Coach Hoke, though, and let's see what he can do.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:51 PM ^
I like the Vick example.
We need to remember Denard isn't known as an accurate passer. Most of his completions were to WRs who were wide open because of the fear of Denard running. Assuming he could be a traditional drop-back passer is misguided.
Additionally, our fans enjoyed a rather explosive offense last season. If the offense seriously stumbles this year with essentially the same players, there will be some backlash.
January 13th, 2011 at 4:35 PM ^
Enjoyed?? Is that really how you'd put it?? For me the offense was more something that I endured.
1st and 10, lets give Smith a shot
2nd and 11, Denards gonna get hot!
3rd and 9, just get 5 and we'll be fine
4th and 8, oh no we aint so great
Rinse & Repeat