Could Bill Martin Have Been Partially Right?
Before anybody rips my throat out I want to elaborate a bit more on the question I've just posed.
To start let me say that I have been and still am a Brady Hoke supporter. Still, what happened last night was completely unacceptable. In a game of this magnitude to have your team come out this flat after all we've been through over the past 12 months raises serious questions about the direction of the program. We really laid an egg and I'm sure many of you have had your foundations shaken to the core. With that being said I want to discuss the head coach, the offensive philosophy and what it is that we need to turn the program around...
1. Bill Martin may have been on to something when he hired Rich Rodriguez. Rrod, imho, did a horrible job recruiting along the offensive and defensive lines. But there's no arguing with the fact that we could move the ball at will and put up tons of points. I'm not saying Rodriguez was the right man for the job, but in today's age of college football you have to be able to put up points. And against quality defenses Michigan has struggled mightily to put up points. And please don't tell me Ohio had a quality defense last year...
2. By all accounts Hoke is a believer in "man-ball" football philosophy. In a nut shell we want line-up in front of you and blow you off the ball. We're a team that likes to run first in order to establish the pass. If you want to call that a "Pro-style" offense then so be it. But we should all keep in mind that offenses in the NFL are constantly evolving and many these days have incorporated spread concepts. The NFL is a passing league and the numbers support this. Thus the 2 yards and a cloud of dust mentality in my view is no longer valid.
3. To win with a pro-style offense in the college ranks these days , a program has to have elite talent. Alabama and USC both come to mind here. Now keep in mind that both of those programs are running their systems with our nation's elite high school talent. Hoke has recruited well while at Michigan but he has not out-recruited USC or Alabama. This is particularly true on the defensive side of the ball. Alabama and USC are winning games with dominant defenses. USC won a game yesterday in which they suited up 60 schollarship athletes. How did they do it? By suiting up elite (best of the best) talent. The same is true of Alabama. Dominant defenses make up for any short comings both of those programs may have putting up points with their prostyle offenses.
4. Doug Nussmeier obviously did very well at Alabama. But again, I have to question if he can replicate the same success at Michigan when he has to run his offensive sets with less dominant offensive linemen and less overall talent at the skill positions. Or for that matter without an elite defense bailing out the offensive unit. It's an open question and only time will tell. But if last night was any indication, we're in for a very long season.
Bill Martin took allot of flack from the press and on this board for his selection of Rich Rodriguez. But last night's result has left me wondering whether or not Martin had it partially right. Given that Michigan cannot out recruit the southern school elites or the west coast powerhouses in order to run its pro-style offense, I'm wondering if we do have to change with the times and implement an offensive philosophy that utilizes spread concepts as a fundamental premise (w/ strong O-Lines of course!). That's what Notre Dame is doing these days and it seems to be working perfectly fine for them. They've went as far as to change the natural turf on their field in order to run their track meet system of football. And it's gotten them to the point where they've even managed to play for a national championship as recently as 2012-13.
September 7th, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^
Our OL still can't block.
RBs can't run.
DL still can't pressure QB.
DBs still getting burned.
And we can't develop talent.
Ex
Blake Countess was a great freshman . Fizzled out.
JMFR is fizzling out.
DG is no better than last year.
How about the excitement for Frank Clark every year? How's that working out for us?
September 7th, 2014 at 10:59 AM ^
I cannot believe that the Rich Rod supporters are coming out of the woodwork again to say "see, we shouldn't have fired him."
This blog painfully discussed that for years. After last night's loss, I don't want to painfully revisit that again. Its in the past. We are where we are.
September 7th, 2014 at 11:06 AM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^
Our incestuous ways have been the demise of our program. Rodriguez never had a chance here, and that's the truth.
September 7th, 2014 at 11:39 AM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 12:17 PM ^
Terrible players on the OL such as Lewan, Schofield, and Omameh? All in the NFL. It's fair to say that RR didn't recruit ENOUGH offensive lineman but considering most Hoke supporters think you can't have a good offensive line without redshirt juniors and seniors on it I doubt it would have made much difference. After all, RR was only around for 3 seasons and really only had 2 1/2 recruiting classes.
This thread is pretty tedious and all the same arguments come out. The bottom line right now is that RR and Hoke both look like terrible hires albeit for different reasons.
Hoke seems to be a good recruiter (helped by the fact that the athletic department and football alumni are supporting him rather than forcing him out the door and saying things like Lloyd Carr's senior class won the Sugar Bowl) but beyond that his tenure is an embarassment. That he and members of his staff are openly and privately contempuous of the spread is disturbing when tempo, option, and spread concepts have infiltrated every level of football. When the Seattle Seahawks are running plays stolen from Gus Malzahn I think it might be time to stop pretending that the spread is somehow beneath Michigan.
That said, the offense Nussmeier runs is very much one back based and incorporates many spread concepts. He's a disciple of John L. Smith and in that coaching tree along with former Lions OC Scott Linehan. These are not "manball" guys. That might be good or bad depending on your point of view.
The biggest issue I see is that our supposed ready made talent such as Kalis and Derrick Green stinks. That Kalis can't get on the field ahead of a true freshman, a walkon, and Jack Miller is very disturbing. Does anyone think Green looks like the #1 back in the country? Recruiting rankings matter but talent identification is a huge issue right now.
September 7th, 2014 at 2:41 PM ^
Nussmeier isn't a "manball guy". Neither was Borges, who might not have incorporated spread concepts (well, actually he did when he got here, but never mind that) but whose offenses have always been about getting the ball down the field, not grinding out drives running the ball.
I think the analysis on this board and blog could be greatly improved if the term "manball" was mothballed permanently. It was an attempt to provoke an emotional response and the effect is more to confuse than to enlighten.
September 7th, 2014 at 11:10 AM ^
I supported RR at Michigan and I like him at Arizona, but we're seriously going over this stuff again?
September 7th, 2014 at 11:15 AM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 11:15 AM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 11:16 AM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 11:23 AM ^
1. Bill Martin may have been on to something when he hired Rich Rodriguez. Rrod, imho, did a horrible job recruiting along the offensive and defensive lines. But there's no arguing with the fact that we could move the ball at will and put up tons of points.Incorrect. Richrod's offenses could not move the ball against anyone with a pulse. I stopped after reading that
September 7th, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^
Remember the Gator Bowl.
September 7th, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^
The richRod hire was a mess in itself. What killed richrod was his hire of greg robinson. with that said Hoke has done a terrible job thus far. IMO Bill martin is the reason we are in this current state. Hiring Richrod was a complete mistake. there was no reason to hire someone outside the current staff. Someone from Lloyd carrs staff should have been his successor. Even if they were not a sexy name at least u would have kept stability in the program. Mallett and others would not have transfered and at worst u could have kept some consistency. Instead u had a coach completley change the system only to have another coach try to go back to what it was.
September 7th, 2014 at 11:33 AM ^
Nope.
September 7th, 2014 at 12:03 PM ^
We were sick of being behind the itmes and always playing "not to lose" a la Ferentz.
September 7th, 2014 at 12:33 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 3:41 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 11:36 AM ^
an outsider was the right approach - the scheme was never the problem; it was how the scheme was being coached and how the players were being prepared
September 7th, 2014 at 11:40 AM ^
If your offense is good, your offense is good. It doesn't matter whether it's the spread, pro-style, option, Air Raid, etc. What Michigan ran last night had a ton of elements of the spread. We used the pistol, three- and four-receiver sets, packaged plays, bubbles, etc. We just didn't execute those plays.
Doug Nussmeier had offensive success at Washington, where he didn't have elite talent. He had successful quarterbacks, running backs, and receivers.
I think you're reaching here.
September 7th, 2014 at 12:11 PM ^
on TTB. I appreciate your insight.
Thinking back to the game, it's like a bad dream. It didn't seem like a 31-0 game.
If anyone else is interested in reading it, here is the link.
September 7th, 2014 at 1:11 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 12:16 PM ^
I do think Nuss is a good coach. Let's see where this goes. I expect improvement. I am continuously troubled by the fact that the defense has not been good against decent opponents the last several years. It seemed like the DBs stopped being physical once the PI penalties were called. I will have to re-watch it and see. Non existent pass rush still is an issue as well.
September 7th, 2014 at 12:24 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 12:24 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 7th, 2014 at 12:27 PM ^
I think you give Martin too much credit. He had no grand strategy. He was just floundering along as Les Miles wasn't working out, and then Lloyd Carr (!) reached out to Rich Rod. Who knows who Martin would have hired otherwise.
September 7th, 2014 at 2:45 PM ^
I'm imagining the reaction to this post if it had been (accurately) titled Could Lloyd Carr Have Been Partially Right?
September 7th, 2014 at 12:29 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 12:39 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 3:39 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 12:32 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 12:50 PM ^
Martin was right. Brandon is wrong. Whether you believe the "bagman" theory or you just take the fact that "Michigan Men" were telling HS coaches not to send their players to Michigan during the Rich Rod era, Rich Rod never got a fair shake at Michigan.
If David Brandon had any integrity, he would have told those who were sabotaging the program that they weren't gong to get their way. Instead, he rewarded them. Brandon is an inept AD with too much power and too much ego. Unfortunately, the school, the team and the fans are paying for it.
If you can't buy players like Bama, you can't play the Bama offense. Yesterday was all the proof anyone should need. It's time for Michigan to join the 21st century again.
The only solution that is going to keep the so-called "Michigan Men" who put the program into this mess in the first place happy is to give Brady Hoke a spread OC.
September 7th, 2014 at 4:03 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 12:52 PM ^
I'm sort of a pass-spread aficionado...Remember when Lloyd went all pass-spread happy on Florida...I wish we would have gone that route. It keeps your QB from taking a pounding and most college teams don't have more than 2 good corners. Man-ball is outdated and relies too much on a good D. Coach Hoke is a nice guy, but not a cerebral coach which is what you need these days if you're going to be a powerhouse. When was the last time someone saw a play we ran and decided to recycle it?
September 7th, 2014 at 12:59 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 1:09 PM ^
Everyone has overreacted to Michigan's win and loss. Good teams still win with good lines, and it takes time to develop them. Rich Rod was getting dominated against any team with a decent line.
Let's face it last year they were lucky to be 7-6, this year improvement would be to 9-4 or 8-5.
2014 - 9-4
2015 - 10-3
2016 - 14-0
I am not saying Hoke will be the coach after this year though.
September 7th, 2014 at 1:26 PM ^
September 7th, 2014 at 3:00 PM ^
You don't need to be an MD. You do need to be much more physically developed than 95% of even elite high school linemen. Having said that, I agree with your last sentence.
September 7th, 2014 at 1:39 PM ^
1. No. RR didn't play D. Also, Denard.
2. Our O was very multiple look yesterday & in the 1st game. It was not Manball by any means. Look at the 1stQ 4th down call. It was 4th and 1.5 yards and the play called was a pass.
3. Yes, but we are recruiting very well. Green was the #1 RB in the country.
4. Agree. Who knows, is it Nuss or the fact that any idiot (e.g. Kiffin) could be successful at Bama, with Saban as te HC.
Assuming a very quality HC would take the job (e.g. like a Franklin type guy), I'd fire Hoke if he's also blown out at MSU (who looked really good yesterday, even with a loss) and OSU (who is Braxton-less).
September 7th, 2014 at 1:52 PM ^
Where he failed at Michigan was that he neglected special teams and defense. You can't win with one third of a team. He seems to have learned the lesson as Arizona has better balance than his Michigan teams while playing at the same level.
By the way, I am tired of hearing about the youth of the offensive line while seeing lines just as young dominating us. There is still a line coaching issue. We got beat in the trenches last night.
September 7th, 2014 at 1:55 PM ^
Havent we averaged more points than RichRod offenses?
Not saying man-ball is awesome, just looking at stats.
September 7th, 2014 at 2:57 PM ^
I have always supported an up tempo spread program philosophy. With that said, after how Michigan as a program treated RichRod, why would any top spread guru come here? I know Rod had defensive problems to say the least, but go look at how long it takes these spread guys to establish a program with a couple exceptions. Rodriguez was transparent about establishing the offense first. As far as the line recruiting, he was kind of undermined in his last year and had some of those recruits go elsewhere with Rod's future up in the air. At this point if Michigan decides to go back to that philosophy they will have to be all in and commit to a coach for at least 5 years. On top of that another transition poses many problems which could lead to more pain.
Hoke has shown no ability to develope talent systematically in his time at Michigan.
Rod went 3-5-7 and we weren't patient enough to see what couold have happened in year 4 because "We Are Michigan," etc.
Hoke piggy backed off of Rod's offensive talent, namely Denard, and they improved the defense to get to 11 wins even though the offensive philosophy cost them both losses.
Since then the curve has gotten progressively worse in terms of record and this year will either end up awful or slightly better because of a shitty strength of schedule.
Hoke: 11-8-7-?
Since Dave Brandon became AD it seems like each "sacred" element of Michigan football has been stomped on and the product on the field is God awful to watch. Unfortunately this is the new normal and I'm very close to checking out which pains me to say.
September 7th, 2014 at 3:37 PM ^
Defensively, why stay in press or man coverage if it would clearly benefit the team to switch to a zone or two deep?
September 7th, 2014 at 4:17 PM ^
To be right about something, doesn't it have to be something you actually set out to do in the first palce? Is it your assertion that Martin planned all along to find a coach like Rodriguez who could modernize Michigan football and that he decided to go after Rich Rodriguez to get that done?
Bill Martin didn't know what the hell he was doing when he hired Rich Rod. He was ready to hire Les Miles, screwed it all up, and eventually someone suggested Rich Rod and that's where we went. I did not ever get the impression that Martin planned anything, much less planned to modernize us to the spread and went and found Rich Rod to do it. My impression was that 'modernize us' came as an explanation after the fact for the f--- up that was the 2008 hiring fiasco.
On another point, though, I do not believe that we /ever/ got to see Rodriguez at his best. Way too much bullshit weighed it down from ever happening.
September 7th, 2014 at 5:04 PM ^
Someone?
It's OK to name names, and I think it's an important part of the narrative.
September 8th, 2014 at 7:38 PM ^
The narrative, but the point is that Martin didn't plan it. He didn't even use the committee he assembled to pick a candidate. I took it more that Rich Rod was an out after he f'd it up. So to say he was right is technically true, but I am not going to give him credit for stumbling into an answer. I expect the guy running Michigan athletics to be able to organize a proper coaching search.
September 7th, 2014 at 4:34 PM ^
Bill Martin was right . . . his strategy of moving to a different model was accurate; he just didn't execute it well in his pick of RR. The Big 10 has been slow, plodding offenses and defenses just doesn't work in today's football. Line up our Big 10 teams against teams from the South and West and we will be spanked all day long. Michigan needs to get a coach from the South or West . . . the Best Coach and pay Alabama money to them to rectify the situation.
September 7th, 2014 at 7:02 PM ^
Here's the most important point he was correct about: Michigan needs to divorce itself from this ludicrous obsession with hiring a "Michigan Man." Simply put, this nepotistic approach limits the amount of new thought in a footbal program, or in any venture. The people in the progam use the same concepts ad infinitum, but the rest of the world adapts. Eventually, a group that does not adapt is less with stale concepts and complacent personnel. That's what happened with UM.
Frankly, if Art Briles were younger, I'd consider him in a heartbeat. I wouldl have loved to see UM hire Charlie Strong, who seems to embody many of the values that both young blues and old blues hold dear to their hearts. I mentioned Bob Stoops in another thread, but I don't realistically think he would come to A2. Gus Malzahn? Maybe Jon Gruden?
And yet, there is something to be said for an old school approach. Part of me would love to see them approach Bill Parcells. Bill would find a way to be successful, and would figure out how to adapt their S&C program to maximize its talent.
September 7th, 2014 at 7:32 PM ^
Most teams, NFL or College, have about the same level of potential through athletes with amazing talent. Talent is everywhere. Also, no offense/defense style is total exclusive either. The actual difference among these programs is the quality of coaching and leadership. Love him or hate him, Nick Saban is an incredible coach and phenominal leader. Dido for Chip Kelly, Fisher, Stoops, etc etc.
I just think most people forget about that important feature of a good football team: quality of the coach.