Harbaugh with no Luck

Submitted by Magga Saraivah on

This is an honest question for those who know Stanford football better than me. Would Jim Harbaugh be able to replicate his Stanford success at Michigan with no Andrew Luck ?

I am as big of a Harbaugh fan as anyone but I wonder how much of his Stanford success was due to Andrew Luck. I know it took a few years for him to dig Stanford out of its hole when he got there, but things got exponentially better after Luck arrived.

Who would be his Luck here ?  No disrespect to the current QBs but: Shane Morris? Messiah De Weaver ?

I think he would have to recruit an elite QB after he got here to really get things going.

 

MGoBoard
Football

getsome

November 5th, 2014 at 1:37 PM ^

bottom line, majority in the know describe harbaugh as intense, a winner, absolutely relentless.  the dudes sharp, hes willing to do whatever it takes, hes got the demeanor, and hes got the pedigree / resume to back it up.  

if required, most would describe hoke as nice guy, hard working, father figure, etc - but he does not have the aptitude or killer instinct (or even pedigree) to be winning coach at highest levels - and thats the most important thing, can the guy get the job done even without stacked decks?

you need the ability to adapt and exploit your teams / players advantages on the fly in games, during the week, etc in order to consistently win modern college games - stubborn ideology will get you embarassed.  and i firmly believe in both the spread O concepts (spread to run or spread to pass are both proven, though i favor osu / oregon / auburn / zonas spread to run)  and idea that "jimmy and joes beat x's and o's" though culture is also vital.  

so while id love an energetic and sharp spread guru on cutting edge at um, i also think harbaugh would be cant miss hire.  if someones going to try to win big with old pro style O at a non-bama-lsu program like um, it might as well be harbaugh, considering he and shaw did so successfully at stanford

Joined: 09/07/2013

MGoPoints: 7385

Real Tackles Wear 77

November 4th, 2014 at 8:39 PM ^

Shane Morris was a 5 star recruit that Bama offered. Let's not dismiss him as a bust, especially with better coaching and an experienced line. No matter who the coach is, I expect him to start and turn heads.

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 9686

Sac Fly

November 4th, 2014 at 8:48 PM ^

Harbaugh was only at Stanford for 4 years, Luck was his QB the last two.

He did beat USC as a 41 point underdog with a backup who had thrown 3 career passes.

Joined: 04/03/2010

MGoPoints: 5981

dtones520

November 4th, 2014 at 8:49 PM ^

Do you think that, just maybe, part of Andrew Luck's development into the QB he is today had something to do with the coaching he received at Stanford? I'd say that is probably a good bet.

Joined: 01/31/2012

MGoPoints: 38

UMxWolverines

November 4th, 2014 at 8:53 PM ^

Do you not remember a guy named Toby Gerhert? That dude was a machine. But I'm sure it was all Luck and Gerhert and Harbaugh just sat there quietly while they did their thing. 

Joined: 03/01/2009

MGoPoints: 65354

alum96

November 4th, 2014 at 8:53 PM ^

I wrote a diary on Jim Harbaugh 3-4 days ago, go check it out.  Stanford offense was actually run based - years 2-4 it ranked top 20 in run offense.  Luck came around in year 3-4 but the run offense was consistent and powerful for 3 of his 4 years.  

http://mgoblog.com/diaries/cc-statistical-look-jim-harbaughs-stanford-y…

Also based on Smith and Kapernick I think we can safely say it was more than Luck, (pun intended)

Joined: 04/28/2012

MGoPoints: 82301

alum96

November 4th, 2014 at 8:58 PM ^

2006 was pre Harbaugh and 2011 was post Harbaugh.  See Rush offense from 2008-2010.  This is why I prefer data over lazy memes.

  Rush O Pass O Rush D Pass D
2006 115 95 117 60
2007 102 70 77 84
2008 19 103 77 83
2009 11 70 55 98
2010 17 29 19 16
2011 18 22 3 73

 

Joined: 04/28/2012

MGoPoints: 82301

MonkeyMan

November 4th, 2014 at 9:18 PM ^

I agree with the notion that Jim H. did well with multiple people at QB in his career (college and pro).

One thing that I think is missing though is that a balanced running/passing game doesn't mean the QB wasn't critical to the offense's success in BOTH areas. Without a good passer the D can play the run and shut it down. So a good QB open's the run game- which is why I don't consider great run stats as a proof that a team isn't relying on their QB.

In fact, the opposite has been UM for 7 years- a QB the secondary doesn't fear, so the D keys on, and shuts down the run and the entire offense.

Joined: 10/13/2013

MGoPoints: 1753

Michigan248

November 4th, 2014 at 9:12 PM ^

Im not going to do all the work for you but, you can check out

2002 Rich Gannon stats

Josh Johnson at University of San Diego stats

Andrew Luck at Stanford

Alex Smith's before Harbaugh stats

Colin Kaepernick's stats with 49ers

The stats will speak for themselves

 

 

Joined: 01/25/2011

MGoPoints: -995185

Jeff09

November 4th, 2014 at 8:58 PM ^

QBs don't exist in a vacuum. Luck was influenced heavily by the quality of his coaching. The reason you can't see Morris (or Garnder or Speight or DeWeaver) ever performing well is not because they're inherently bad, it's because they've received poor coaching (most likely, combined with a healthy dose of coordinator instability and a shitty O line). Fix the QB coaching and the O line and there's no reason one of those guys can't be truly great. They were all extremely highly-rated coming out of high school.

Which is all to say, that's kind of the point. Our coaches have talent on the team, they're just pissing it away.

Joined: 06/25/2011

MGoPoints: 8460

Rhino77

November 4th, 2014 at 9:17 PM ^

This stuff is getting comical. Do you remember Harbaugh the player at Michigan? How about Harbaugh the Pro who lead a Colts team to a play away from the Superbowl? SanDiego St? 49ers?

Somehow the few years he spent with Luck define his career?

How old are you, for real? Serious question?

Joined: 05/27/2011

MGoPoints: 14020

Rhino77

November 4th, 2014 at 10:01 PM ^

Why is it "internet tough guy?"

Maybe it's just "tired of hypothetical Michigan situation" guy?

Harbaugh would be Harbaugh without Luck and Luck would be Luck without Harbaugh. Talent is talent, drive is drive.

It's like pondering how many titles Jordan would won without Pippen. Who knows? Probably a lot still.

Joined: 05/27/2011

MGoPoints: 14020

markusr2007

November 4th, 2014 at 9:39 PM ^

We can haz QB coaching and development? Maybe?

I think Harbaugh was a Heisman trophy candidate if I remember correctly....

Yep finished 3rd, and passed for more yards than Vinny Testmypatience.

 

 

Joined: 10/21/2008

MGoPoints: 19372

bronxblue

November 4th, 2014 at 9:39 PM ^

It's a good question, at least in terms of Stanford's immensely-quick turnaround.  Like, with an average QB they might have gone a couple more 8-9 win seasons instead of that crazy 12-1 year.  That said, Harbaugh is a very good recruiter and seems to be able to produce with the talent provided (though people do forget that those San Francisco teams were poorly coached but pretty talented before the showed up; it seemed like they were always a sleeper but never produced under Singletary).

He'll be fine at Michigan.  The bigger question is if people expect Harbaugh to stick around 10+ years or if he'll jump back to the NFL after a couple of seasons, maybe to a team that needs his type of coaching and with a "new" attitude.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 171035

goblue16

November 4th, 2014 at 9:40 PM ^

Um he's won at every level in football and lets recall lucks first year at Stanford wasn't exactly a all star level. He had Toby get hart at rb but only 18 td passing as a RSfr. I'm not saying that's bad all I'm saying is u could credit harbaugh for the emergence of Andrew luck

Joined: 03/28/2010

MGoPoints: 17468