A Lot of Milk

December 21st, 2020 at 10:21 PM ^

Would've been a star in 15 and 16 if he were around

Those offenses had an identity and ran logical plays. 4th and inches? I formation fullback up the gut and it was unstoppable. Now we insist on lining up five yards behind the line of scrimmage and force Milton to make a read he can't/doesn't want to make while everyone in the stadium knows what's coming

What was the point of this? Oh right, good luck Ben and I'm sorry your abilities were largely wasted here

Joined: 02/17/2013

MGoPoints: 48609

blahblahblahh

December 21st, 2020 at 11:00 PM ^

Back then most fans said the offense was primitive and pointed to the usage of fullbacks as evidence. Everyone wanted to incorporate spread concepts. And the coaching staff definitely did some puzzling wildcat stuff with Jabrill that didn't look "logical" or seem to fit into the offensive "identity". Those offenses in '15 and '16 scored 13 and 17 (before OT) points against OSU.

Joined: 03/29/2014

MGoPoints: 2947

MGoBlue96

December 22nd, 2020 at 12:57 AM ^

Correction, weren't happy because those offenses were mediocre at best. Honestly UM would have overcame the officials in 2016 against OSU with a better offense. Implenting the spread incorrectly and only sporadically using the speed in space concepts that we thought we were getting when the shift was made does not invalidate that the notion that offense had to become more modern. Piss poor execution of said implementation is the problem.

Joined: 12/26/2010

MGoPoints: 26099

G. Gulo of the Dale

December 22nd, 2020 at 11:27 AM ^

I think that this is half true, but by way of a slightly dissenting opinion... 

We frequently point to the 17 points we scored in regulation against OSU as evidence that even the Fisch offense was mediocre against good competition.  I just think that there are too many mitigating circumstances that make this game an unhelpful data point.  At the time, we were told that Speight's injury in the Iowa game prevented him from making throws of more than 15 yds., and so the offense had to be tailored accordingly.  During the game, we had a promising early drive stall because OSU's DB literally tackled our receiver on a slant while the ball was in the air; there was another egregious and costly no-call on pass interference in the second half.  Speight fumbled the ball on the goal line, which cost us seven points (and the game--despite his otherwise gritty performance).  I'm pretty sure, at the time, that everyone thought Harbaugh and staff called a brilliant game, given the cards that they were dealt.

In the Wisconsin game that year, we left nine points on the board because Kenny Allen lost his mojo, but we dominated a strong Badger team in the box score.  Now, admittedly, the IU wasn't great and the Iowa game was a real travesty... though I can't entirely blame a team for having one clunker of a game (and on the road at Kinnick is at least an understandable time for this to happen).  

Finally, even though I think that the '16 team left wins on the field and should have made it to the CFP, that team was always going to rely primarily on its defense.  That team lacked elite RBs, WRs, an elite OL, and an elite QB.  Were we really going to "scheme our way" into having a top-ten offense?  Certainly, speed in space is off the table when Speight, D. Smith, and A. Darboh are the main cogs in your offense.

Joined: 04/01/2013

MGoPoints: 6800

Mich04-08

December 22nd, 2020 at 3:01 AM ^

Offenses held the team back from getting over the hump and that's why Michigan could beat garbage teams to some good teams but not elite teams. You can't beat elite teams with a great defense and trash offense in the NCAA, and not even in the NFL anymore like the Ravens did with Trent Dilfer 20 years ago.

Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, and Drew Brees changed the NFL and even NCAA by showing how big of an impact a top-tier QB could be for offensive (and team) success. So the mentality is now, "The best defense is a good offense" and no longer "Defense wins the games," which is where Michigan still seems to be stuck in not being able to adapt to the modern era.

Michigan Total Defense vs Total Offense under Harbaugh before 2020

2019 - 11 v. 68
2018 - 2 v. 50
2017 - 3 v. 105
2016 - T1 v. 58
2015 - 4 v. 69

Average: 4 v. 70

Joined: 12/06/2020

MGoPoints: 1711

The Fugitive

December 21st, 2020 at 10:24 PM ^

DT depth takes another hit. 

Joking aside, I enjoyed watching Ben truck and hurdle dudes when given the opportunity. I'm confident he'll be on an NFL roster for a few years. 

Joined: 01/26/2016

MGoPoints: 77448

mGrowOld

December 21st, 2020 at 10:33 PM ^

Would've loved to be a fly on the wall the day they came to Ben and said "hey, what would you think about putting on about....oh...i dunno.....about 75 pounds or so and playing defensive tackle?

You see Ben we really meant to recruit some tackles and somehow we completely forgot.  I mean it's our bad, we absolutely should've recruited some, but you know how things are right?  You're busy with the kids, your wife is yelling at you and then BAM.  You realize, oh snap, I forgot to recruit any tackles.

So how about Ben?  You wanna play tackle?"

Joined: 10/04/2010

MGoPoints: 212943

ex dx dy

December 21st, 2020 at 10:35 PM ^

I understand the team's ceiling might be higher if his scholarship is spent on a different player, but I'm going to miss that guy. The team needs someone with his attitude and energy.

Joined: 10/30/2018

MGoPoints: 4410

JacquesStrappe

December 21st, 2020 at 11:14 PM ^

Good luck Bench!

And to all those who constantly criticize NE recruits, Mason is another example (e.g. McKeon, Paye, Hurst) of them outperforming their stars and accolades coming out of high school and a refutation of the narrative that it is a waste of time to recruit this region, especially in light of all of the busts that we have gotten recently from some of the supposed “talent hotbed” regions.

Joined: 04/19/2019

MGoPoints: 4994