CC: ESPN post on Stanford's offensive versatility

Submitted by Topher on

I understand concerns that transition would be rough, Denard might transfer (to say nothing of Tate), etc. But to argue that Stanford runs a straight "pro set" that is incompatible with the talent RR has coached up is not based in fact. The question though would be which coaches JH could bring with him if he winds up at Michigan, which will influence how much versatility will be walking through the door.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post?id=17569

"Stanford’s offense has duped plenty of defenses this year with its ever-evolving creativity. The Cardinal might line up with one, two or three tight ends, seven or eight offensive linemen. Two backs or no back. They’ll use the Wildcat formation. They’ll run the option, the single wing. They’re a spread offense. A pistol offense. And they’re constantly trying to come up with the next scheme. 

“We try to hit every decade since about the 1940s,” said associate head coach Greg Roman. 

It’s an encyclopedia of schemes, shifts and formations, and it’s all on quarterback Andrew Luck's wristband -- all 350 plays. "

goblue418

January 2nd, 2011 at 5:45 PM ^

well, rr isnt gone yet..but assuming he is and worst case scenario denard transfers(which i dont think he would but..) i think devin would be fine in a pro style offense.

HartAttack20

January 2nd, 2011 at 8:00 PM ^

I tend to think Denard will stick around regardless of what happens. The more I hear about Harbaugh, and the more I think about the entire situation, the more I lean toward hiring Harbaugh. The one thing I wonder, though, is whether or not Michigan would be the final destination for Harbaugh, or if he would still be ultimately looking at the NFL. That's the biggest thing for me, and it seems like that is something David Brandon might/should be wondering, as well.

foreverbluemaize

January 2nd, 2011 at 9:07 PM ^

I agree with the concern but I think if he wants to go to the NFL, he will have that option tomorrow. SF has already said that he was their #1 target. If he comes to AA he would be turning down his chance and I think that should say where his heart is. Time will tell.

SC Wolverine

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:04 PM ^

I think we can safely assume that if JH is named coach, he will 1) be motivated to keep Denard as QB, and 2) give a strong sell to Denard to stay.  Denard has potential to be more than a running QB -- remember that pass to Tay Odoms yesterday.  And Denard has expressed a lot of loyalty to UM.  Now he gets a chance to show it.  If he does he will win undying loyalty from the alumni and fans.  On the whole, I am not too worried about Denard.

Erik_in_Dayton

January 2nd, 2011 at 10:13 PM ^

I thought that was more a mechanical error than a mental one, though.  It looked like he just didn't quite have the touch to drop it in to Hemingway.  

My memory is fading, but I don't believe that Navarre or Henne were much better as sophomore passers than was Denard.  It was Henne, after all, who brought our attention to Taco Pants. 

NOLA Wolverine

January 2nd, 2011 at 10:21 PM ^

As passers? It's not even close. Denard is still a work in progress, he is not comfortable reading a progression (and stopped getting any chance to), and he doesn't have a great sense of where to place the ball yet. He was about as raw as it gets coming out of high school, and there is still great progress to be made. It's going to be far more exciting with him here over the next two years when his vision and his legs makes holes in the coverage obvious, rather than just his legs. With the progress he showed over his first real off season, the future looks a lot brighter than people think (shocking, I know), regardless of who is coaching. 

profitgoblue

January 2nd, 2011 at 9:33 PM ^

I'm extremely worried about Denard. He's an immediate starter at just about every team that runs the spread option. The downside is that he has to sit a year (right?) and maybe the new school has lesser academics. Unless a new coach runs the spread option I will continue to be very worried about Denard leaving. I would if I were him and I wanted to go to Michigan ever since I can remember (and would go back in a heartbeat).

tenerson

January 2nd, 2011 at 5:58 PM ^

Thank you. The perception that Harbaugh puts the QB under center and runs dives and counters with some play action passing was getting very old.

AnthonyThomas

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:00 PM ^

We've all obsessed over how the success of the spread comes down to the quarterback. Harbaugh's offense is really no different in that aspect, though it comes down to knowledge of the game as much as physical attributes (if not more so).

As for Denard, if he wants a shot at QB in the NFL he 1) Can't afford to sit out one of his last two years of eligibility 2) Would be hard pressed to find a coach who can prepare him better than Harbaugh. I'd be very surprised if he transferred. If he really wants to play the spread and be a return specialist/slot, then I'd advise him to transfer and would root for him to be the next Percy Harvin, but wasn't one of the main reasons that he came to Michigan was that we were willing to play him at QB? He's proven to every school that he can do just that, and people who think a coach with a pro-style offense would have anyone other than Denard starting come September is crazy.

Anyway, let's say Harbaugh does come (the previous paragraph implies such), I'd expect the first couple of seasons to be a lot of pro-style, shotgun sets that utilize our large receiver corps/lack of tight ends (Kevin Koger will be a happy man if this goes through). Harbaugh's offense is so vast that just about anyone can succeed if they find their niche. Maybe no national titles until the "niche" becomes all 350 plays, but success nonetheless. He isn't going to completely overhaul the offense seeing as it has the makings of being a very good spread offense. Either way, I've mentioned before that it's easier converting from spread to pro than vice versa.

As for defense, a new formation, health, more Mike Martin's and James Ross/Terry Richardson/Matt Godin/Dan O'Brien/Royce Jenkins-Stone would be just fine.

Good luck with that, though.

big10football

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:01 PM ^

If Denard thinks that he can play in the NFL (which I agree that he can), then he can play in Harbaugh's offense. If he is going to try to be a QB at the next level, then he can be a QB in Harbaughs offense and if he is going to try to switch positions, than he can do that in Harbaugh's offense also. There is absolutely no reason for him to transfer unless he is only concerned with having college success rather than NFL success.

snoopblue

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:03 PM ^

Thanks for posting. This is exactly what the fools that say "THE TRANSITION PERIOD WILL BE SO BAD FOR ANOTHER 3 OR 4 YEARS!" need to read. The guy we had here for 3 years forced a spread-option system on pro-style talent instead of tailoring a system to what he had. Offensive wizard huh? This article actually shows me that JH's staff makes an actual game plan based on the teams they are facing instead of running the same play on first down all season. They almost use the perceived disadvantage that Stanford can't get the top recruits because of their higher academic standards to their advantage. They have these more intelligent players and run a variety of offenses. Maybe that isn't true, but it sounds pretty cool. I guess I'm saying I don't think there will be a painful transition and that I don't think Denard will transfer. How could you say that you would stay sitting right next to the guy who is going to get fired. It was just a classy move by Denard.

Section 1

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:06 PM ^

He's Jesus Harbaugh.  He turned Toby Gerhardt and Andrew Luck into Hesiman candidates, and he turned water into wine.  He is vast, and omnipotent.  We will bring back Rick Leach and run the wishbone.  We will bring back Bob Chappuis and run the wing-T.  We will utilize everyone and everything.  It will all be paradise.  Thank you Jesus.  Thank you Lord.

Section 1

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:42 PM ^

You find someplace where I've made some grand, exaggerated, claims for Rich Rodriguez.

It probably seems like I am a Rodriguez sycophant, simply for demanding that the Head Coach be treated fairly by the press.  Such is our environment.

As a matter of fact, get on your search-mobile, and try to find one place where I've tried to tell anybody what is good, bad or indifferent about any coach's technique(s).

go16blue

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:08 PM ^

I would also like to comment on the perception that his pro style is "boring." its a very different scheme than lloyd's zone left, zone left, etc. In any event, a pro style offense is almost always more exiting tht a spread that scores 14

snoopblue

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:11 PM ^

Anyone who mentions Bob Chappuis in a post get's a point from me. I think he is the best player to ever play at Michigan. Also has an interesting story from World War II. Look him up.

Section 1

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:41 PM ^

I had to look up the fact that he'll turn 89 this February.  Last I heard, Bob was in good health, as is Bump, although Bump's wife's health prevented Dave Brandon from holding a Bump Eilliot Day this year for the Iowa game, as he wanted to.

AnthonyThomas

January 2nd, 2011 at 6:45 PM ^

The point is is that you develop one. Luck was highly touted out of high school, but he wasn't a once in a decade talent. He went to Stanford, spent his freshman year learning the offense, and capitalized on his knowledge and a year of practice. He didn't appear overnight. It's not like Harbaugh can't develop another QB to be like him. And if he can recruit a guy that good to go to Stanford then he can bring similar talent to Ann Arbor.

I'm not going to act like Harbaugh would save us all and win right away, but excuses like that have no foundation to me. People on the anti-RR campaign mid-season were saying, "well, we wouldn't even make it to a bowl without Denard." Well, we have Denard and no one else does, so what's the point? There are other guys built and developed for the spread and the same goes for Andrew Luck and the pro-style offense.

swamyblue

January 2nd, 2011 at 7:04 PM ^

The grades are still out on Mr. Luck.  (As to your once in a decade response...)

I never said anything more than to suggest that Andrew Luck has a worthy mentioned as to Stanford's success as well as the "~350 plays and versality" they've instrumented.

As to your snarky BS remark  "I know you think you know, but you probably don't know."

I suggest you take your attitude and move it forward a few years...perhaps in that time you'll understand your stupidity on this day of wasting more than 140 characters.

More like A$$Train to me!