frank beamer #1
Desmond: Borges third highest paid coordinator (assume refer to OC)
he was taking less money so that he could compensate his staff better. Which seemed revolutionary. I knew Mattison was being paid well, but when you put Borges compensation in that perspective, he is clearly being overpaid.
Just landed in Miami and heard Michigan won. All I want to know is did they outcoach the opposition?
— Desmond Howard (@DesmondHoward) November 17, 2013
No, Desmond, he didn't. But on the bright side, the team can execute personnel change on the fly for game tying FGs!
I'm convinced of it.
Ever since Brian change the banner to read "I have never read MGOBLOG - Chris Perry", the team has gone down the pooper. He needs to find something different to change our Mojo.
The picture of Devin debuting #98 at night vs. ND is sick. Not sure why we won't use that.
This team has been bad. So maybe it's me
he should change the offensive coordinator.
I am Desmond Howard.
I doubt it.
I really wish I didn't know this. His offense is more glaring than RR's defenses. If Hoke doesn't fire him at season's end, he'll be on the hot seat all of next season.
Offense is nowhere near as anemic as RR's defenses or special teams and if you truly believe what you said you haven't watched then or now.
Offensive FEI rankings under Borges/Hoke:
- 2011: 9
- 2012: 25
- 2013; 57
Defensive FEI rankings under Rodriguez:
- 2008: 44
- 2009: 60
- 2010: 109
That's 109th out of 120, adjusted for tempo and strength of schedule etc. Right between #108 1-10 Akron and #110 and winless San Jose State.
we know numbers can lie. this team is averaging like 40 points a game and we know they are not that good of an offense
When you can't make a first down on third and whatever until OT, against a sub-par defense, it tells you all you need to know about average point per game.
I'd say 57 out of 120 isn't really that good of an offense; it's slightly worse than RR's best defense. Those numbers seem about right to me.
As a slight counter, those defensive squads never had the talent that Borges inherited from RR. I mean, Denard Robinson was basically coming off an All-American season as a sophomore, and only now are we seeing the recruiting issues on offense that plagued RR when he showed up. I will say that the offense is holistically better than those defenses, but to say that we shouldn't see a change because the offense is not the worst in the history of UM football (like those defenses were) is foolish.
We definitely should not be content with an offense that has scored one TD in regulation in three games, but still . . . nothing compares to the debacle that was the 2010 defense. That was largely the same group of players that ranked in the top 20 nationally a season later, and yet it was an absolute sieve. It's painful to think that we pretty much wasted the first three seasons of one of our best defensive tackles in school history (Mike Martin). It's mind-boggling in retrospect that a front seven that included Martin, Van Bergen, Mouton and Demens, among others, was totally run over all season.
The offensive ranking is sure to keep dropping over the next 3 games.
We could go without a first down the rest of the season and the ranking wouldn't drop to 109.
I'm not sure how it handles overtime (it says it "filters" certain drives, like clock kills), but my strong guess is we're now in the 60s. Hopefully we do better against Iowa.
And while all that is interesting, it almost doesn't matter, as things can change greatly with in one season. UM's offense was awesome against CMU, ND and Indiana -- but after watching UM's "offense" these past three games, it seems like those earlier games existed in a bizzaro-land universe, even though they were this season.
...are treated like any other drive. They just start with very good field position so the expected result is better than most drives.
Wrong. I said "more glaring." Where did I say better or worse? Quit putting words in people's mouths and then jumping to assumptions about how much Michigan football different posters watch.
It doesn't really matter anyway. The fact that they're comparable means we have a shitty offense.
never had anywhere near the third-best paid DC in D-1 football, either. If you factor for compensation, you get Borgerg.
Come on, man. Complaining about a bad offense is one thing. Saying something stupid like that is ridiculous.
Which element of my post was "stupid" exactly?
I really wish I didn't know this.
If you want him out (it sounds like you do), you should be encouraged by this. It shows that we're willing to pay top dollar for our coordinators. The flip side of that is increased accountability. If we were paying him chump change, he'd probably be safer.
You're right. It is actually a blessing in disguise.
Going to go into work on monday with "You're paid to figure this out" as my new battle cry. Thanks, Des!
Seems like to me we did a little better job yesterday of getting rid of the ball more quickly. The oline play looked spotty for the most part but did seem to have flashes of improved play. However, we got lucky that northwesterns db's dropped 4 or 5 gimme int's.
I am not sure if you can fault al borgess for all of out offensive woe's. Some of the linemans weeknesses have to be blamed on coaching but I'm guessing it's more on funk. Either way, borgess is here to stay for at least another year. It'll be interesting to see how the development of our oline next year affects play calling and the following year how speight or Morris under changes things again.
I feel like we are at the bottom of our development and our ceiling can be really high. The question is, how do we knock a team like Ohio off the top of the mountain. Hopefully Mattison has the answer.
Yeah, I thought the gameplan was solid - better than the Nebraska one. Actually, most of the time I think Borges's gameplans have been decent. Where he's struggled has been more in the area of in-game adjustments. We'll show some promise early on but then when the opposing D adjusts, he struggles to counterpunch.
That, and short-yardage playcalling. Ugh. It's time to try some PA passing on 3rd and short.
I agree. He's been a bit stubborn on trying to run the ball when it's not even remotely close to working.
Really surprised as bad as the line is playing that Desmond is being so outspoken about the coaching. Or maybe it's because he knows from inside sources that the coaching is the problem. Hard to say without having some sort of inside knowledge. Most experts say it's EXTREMELY difficult to come in and play oline as a true or redshirt freshem. So...who do we blame this on? Coaching? Maybe youth? Probably both.
It's definitely curious that Desmond is so outspoken. That's not normal behavior from him or really any ex-Michigan guy (especially now that the head coach is again from "the family"). There may be something at play here.
Desmond has been encouraged to take the Dan Dakich career path? Controversy is good for ratings and they like it when their guys stir the pot on line.
He called Coach Rod Cherry Coke. Desmond speaks his mind. Notice, he didn't call for him to be fired, but he wants to see a better offense. Not unreasonable at all.
I feel like people do not understand that there is more than 1 level of bad. There's the level of bad where you only get 139 yards against a decent run defense (Not against a crappy team like Northwestern though). That level of bad can maybe be explained by youth and inexperience.
Then there's the level of bad where you get -21 yards against one of the worst run defenses in the country... and -48 yards against ANYONE. That level of bad can not be explained by youth. We do not have the youngest line yet teams with younger lines manage to not take that big a dump on the field. The level of ineptitude we have seen is not explainable just by the line, at all.
It is an indictment on Borges inability to function as an OC who doesn't tip the defense to the play call.
-21 yards and -48 yards. -21 yards and -48 yards. And only 139 yards against a 0-6 (B1G) Northwestern team. Youth does not exonerate that paltry perfomance. There is a bigger issue here. Not to mention having your main back go 27 for 27 against Penn State who isn't exactly a powerhouse right now.
There's hundreds of people here that could do the job better for free and I'm sure they'd have no trouble convincing Hoke and Brandon of that fact if they could ever get an interview.
Except it's not public money technically.
It's not public money. Just because Michigan is a public school does not mean that Hoke & Co. are paid by tax payer dollars. The Athletic Department has it's own budget that it builds via ticket sales and donations.
0% of my paycheck is going into the coaches' pockets.
This board is sarcasm-proof.
I can get the team to run for negative yards for half of what they are paying Borges.