Tennessee is not recruiting well just because they got 18 dudes
Someone's not doing what they're supposed to be doing, ya?
Our OL is just terrible. Don't think it matters who starts at this point
The play calling and offensive concept are basically making their job impossible. Why Borges would not game plan to set his offense up for success is "mind bottling"...
No, the interior linemen are bad. It's not just that defenses are stacking the box; our guys are missing a ton of makeable blocks, just plain whiffing frequently.
You have to start getting off this mantra. Right now the interior O-Line is performing miserably. Borges may have his faults but he is limited by poor line play. When the interior is pushed back like that on every play the answer is not just to fling passes to the outside - that can result in disaster in a close game.
Qwash at guard!
Wormley at tackle!
Gibbons at center!
Dogs and cats blocking together!
When i was a kid i thought dogs were boys and cats were girls...
What next? Lewan at TE, AJ Williams at LT and 10 guys on the field?
Downhill, bitches! I hope Borges ends up on a shirt with a huge smile with this written on it.
I know people are going to say "rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic" but hey, at least they're trying something. They're obviously not any happier with the crappy rushing output than fans are.
Maybe it's not just jimmies and joes, but x's and o's and borgeses.
It's a shirt on the mgostore.
And if you're looking for a new watch, maybe it's time to bespoke yourself a marawatch.
when I leave the house.
"Run Around and Bark!"
She always obeys.
Fuck. Bright side is I assume this means Lewan will be back at LT?
Actually, Magnuson might be an upgrade and like that move. Kinda surprised at Kalis getting benched. He was awful last game, but has shown some flashes too. I'm kinda wondering if he didn't respond very well after getting benched for the personal foul and got himself in the dog house.
At this point it could be Norfleet at LT
Based on Ace's gif here I think he says "come at me bitches" about half way through...LT it is
Thought you were calling me out. Never mind.
No disrespect to the guy, but I for one did not even know Michigan recruited that dude who played Blossom's brother, yet alone that he was in the running for playing time.
Can anyone translate what this guy is trying to say?
Seems to be an allusion to Joey Lawrence, who shares a very common name with Joey Burzynski. It's not funny.
I could be wrong about this, but I believe Lawrence's character accepts (briefly) a baseball scholarship to Arizona State in the final season of the show, so if he is referring to anything, it is the fact that....wait, what?
This is going to be a very interesting game.
Oh man..time to panic methinks
I don't see how the line could play any worse
Isn't that what we said last year? "Our line can't possibly be worse next year.." WELP
When we lose Lewan and Schofield. And our talented young players do not progress. The OL looked much better against ND. Now every DL we play pushes them around. I don't understand this and am quite worried about the future. Next season not only will we not have a running game but Gardner will get sacked more frequently! Worried!!!!
Fitz rushed 22 times for 71 yards, or 3.2 ypc. Take out his 22, 14, 10, and 9 yard rushes and it's 18 carries for 16 yards.
Gardner was magnificent in the face of the ND D-Line beating the Mich O-Line, with either quick decision, accurate throws or scrambles to buy himself time or gain rushing yards himself.
Most QBs would have looked awful under that pressure.
Gardner has played with an extremely high variance. Most of the time he looks awesome, but everyone once in a while he makes pretty agregious (sometimes unforced) errors.
Yes but if take out the passes where the receivers caught the ball, Devin is at 0 YPA, as well. I mean, if you take out the plays that are good, we are really bad.
The play calling and offensive concept are basically making their job impossible.
Why Borges would not game plan to set his offense up for success is "mind bottling"...
offensive line? Or did you just sleep at as Holiday Inn last night?
Did you watch the game? If not, did you at least read the write ups by Brian or Space Coyote?
You don't like the scheme. Fine. But, there isn't a scheme in the world hat will work when your guards and center are (1) testing pushed back three yards, and (2) plain missing blocks. The interior line play has been horrible. If you want to make an intelligent criticism of the coaches, you can accuse them off doing a poor job of developing these players (which would be silly since we re slain about inexperienced underclassmen), but les not pretend that changing he scheme midseason will make this line competent. The players are performing poorly in their individual roles. Hat is why we are making a change.
Then I give major kudos to Hat. Someone had to get it done.
Underclassmen slain by the World Hat? Shit just got real.
The players are not executing, but I have trouble believing that talent is the problem. We are probably on the bottom half of offensive lines in the B1G, but I kida doubt that anyone other than OSU has recruited higher ranked offensive lineman in the past 4 years. So, to me that means it's not just talent. It may be partially talent, but it's also youth, coaching, and scheme does have something to do with. We can run in the pistol. But, talent is not the only reason or even the biggest reason from what I see.
The panic is not iust for this year anymore. Hoke's ability to bring in top OL recruits is going to take a serious hit if the coaches appear to be incapable of coaching them. That Kalis--a blue-chip prospect--has been benched is bad; that nobody on interior is performing is much worse, suggesting a systemic problem rather than just one guy falling short.
But he's being replaced by a blue chip recruit from his same class (Magnuson). So does it looks bad on the coaches when one blue chip kid is replaced by another? Keep in mind they're both RS frosh and probably shouldn't really be ready yet anyway.
I pay more attention to ESPN's rankings more than others. But, by ESPN's rankings Mags is far form blue chip. I think he was ranked like 79 and the #27 OT in the country...not exactly a blue chip guy, whereas Kalis had a top 10 position ranking.
Well after watching the interview on rivals with some of the former players it seems they think the players are just missing simple assignments on the oline blocking. You obviously don't know if the coaches are telling them what do properly in practice or not. Ever thought that the kids playing aren't very good?
Fewer than half have had any starts at all. It's not so much "falling short" as a lack of depth putting him in a situation he probably shouldn't have been in in the first place.
A thousand times, "yes".
During the off season, when people were predicting our line to be a strength, I was warning people that not only could it get worse than last years, but that it would, at least for the first half of the season.
Kalis would not be playing if we had someone of Omameh's caliber, and this isn't really a compliment to Patrick. Alas, no Seniors inside and no Juniors at all. Frshman OL are just, by and large, not good. This is especially true when he doesn't have experience to both sides of him to not only get the calls and assignments right, but to often help him in pass protection and carry the load on double teams. That's just how it is. There are exceptions, but Kalis is the rule.
I would be curious to see a review of offensive lineman and how many years in the system it takes to be effective. We keep calling guys "freshman" who are RS freshman. They are not freshman, they are only that by eligibility. These guys are sophomores and juniors in college that took a RS. And, RS sophomores are juniors in their 3rd danged year. I find it hard to believe that a 3rd year player should not be ready to contribute. Bryant, Miller, and Glasgow are all in year 3 should be serviceable, same with a 5-star guy in year two (Kalis). Maybe we don't expect all-conference type of performances, but we are not even serviceable at this point.
Didn't I just do exactly that?
I'll say it again: of the seven five-star offensive linemen currently in their second year, only two are starting for their teams. The others may or may not be serviceable, but they do not play.
I'm not sure we need to do a study of walk-ons in their third year. Most walk-ons do not ever start at any point in their careers. To get any serious playing time out of Glasgow at any point in his career, let alone in year 3, is a huge plus cmopared to any reasonable expectation when he came to campus.
Bryant has been battling injury.
You may find it "hard to believe" but this is what happens when you don't bother to recruit linemen. You can't turn it around overnight--unless you happen to hit that once-a-decade guy, it takes a couple of years for even the best recruts to be ready to play.
I appreciate you're follow up Yeoman, but I'm interested in a little larger sample size, and some year-end results of thier effectiveness, not just that one class. I would like to know how long it takes a 3-star guy, a 4-star guy, a 5-star guy, etc. Are we still going to be having this conversation next year? I hear what you're saying with a walk-on. But, will Bryant in year 4 still suck next year? Will Mags (4-star) in year 3 suck next year? Will Kalis in year 3 suck (5-star) next year? Will Braden in year 3 suck (3-star) next year? And, if so will they be good in 2015 or will they all the 3-star guys get overtaken by the 2013 class by Dawson, Bosch, Kugler, etc? Then, will they all still suck because they will only be RS sophomores?
I hear what you're saying with recruiting though. The 2010 and 2011 class of no good o-lineman is killing us now. But, I want an expectation of next year and 2015. When can we expect these guys to be good?
I know the sample size is small but it's easy to get current depth charts and it's a lot of work to drag them out of archives for prior years, and I don't have the time now.
But even a small sample size has some information. It's possible that a 50/50 shot would give you 2 out of 7; we can be pretty sure it isn't a 90% proposition. I think even the small sample is a demonstration that it isn't time to be worried about Kalis, or think his current development is a sign of bad coaching. He's not behind the curve' he's just seen the field early.
My guess is that 6 of those 7 guys will be starting this time next year. For what it's worth, both the five-stars from 2011 are quality starters in their third year (2012 must have been a good year for linemen).
But you never know; it's a hard position to project. That's why you need numbers, which we'll have in a couple of years but sure don't now.
I used ESPN rankings and I’m sure I missed some people. But, after looking around at the rest of the conference MSU is starting one underclassman, a RS Freshman (Jack Conklin, NR). Indiana is starting three, a true sophomore (Jason Spriggs, 75), a RS sophomore (Ralston Evans, 74), and another true sophomore (Jake Reed, 77). Illinois is only starting one underclassman, a true sophomore (Ted Karras, 77). Iowa is only starting one underclassman, a true sophomore (Jordan Walsh, 79). Minnesota is starting one true sophomore (Josh Campion, NR) and RS sophomore Jon Christenson, NR). Nebraska is not starting any underclassman. Northwester is only starting one RS sophomore (Geoff Mogus, 75). ND is starting one underclassman, true sophomore (Ronnie Stanely, 79). OSU is only starting one underclassman, a true sophomore (Taylor Decker, 78). Penn State is only starting one true sophomore (Donovan Smith, 79). Wisconsin is only starting one RS sophomore (Tyler Marz, NR). Purdue is only starting one RS sophomore (Robert Kugler, 78).
Not surprisingly the highest ranked guys are from OSU, PSU, and ND. But, only Indiana is starting three underclassman, and Minnesota is the only other team starting two. Everyone else seems to only start one, and they are typically a true sophomore or RS sophomore. But, few of them are highly rated recruits, most are 3-star types. So, UM is typically starting 2-3 underclassman, one of which is a walk-on. I still have to assume with the combined recruiting profiles of Lewan, Schofield, Kalis, and Bryant, that filling in one RS sophomore walk on (Glasgow) should still produce better results than we are currently seeing. Maybe Byant’s injury situation is yet another factor that is hurting us…hard to say. But, scheme and coaching have to be a part of the problem. Does Indiana have great coaches because they are doing it with less? They obviously have a very different philosophy and scheme.
So of the sixty offensive linemen starting in the conference, there are a total of two freshmen and one walk-on.
Two of those three players are starting for Michigan. The other is playing about half-time (he splits the position with Donovan Clark) on an offensive line that I think the board generally agrees is a pretty bad line.
I don't know what to say about Indiana--I guess we'll know a lot more three hours from now. What exactly is it that they're doing that everyone's so envious of? They're scoring 42/game, Michigan's scoring 39. They get more yards, for sure, but I don't know what if anything that says about their line. Some of it's tempo, some of it is that they haven't turned the ball over as much even though they throw it a lot more.
Thanks for staying with the convo because I am enjoying clarifying what we are seeing so thanks. Just to clarify, because the language is killing me. There are no freshman. There are two RS freshman. They are not freshman...they are sophomores with freshman eligibility. Also I did not do any calculation of scholarship vs walk-on. I only know that for Michigan. And, in all fairness a walk-on at Michigan could be a scholarship lineman at Purdue, Indiana, Minnesota, etc....same goes for OSU, ND, PSU, Wisc, etc.
Based on what I'm seeing so far in this game though, scheme and playcalling seems to be a big difference. We are running much better. It could also be Indiana is a bad defense. But, they still stuff us when we run from under center.
One other quick note I will make because I saw it in the UCLA game. UCLA is starting two true freshman, one true sophomore, and a RS sophomore. They are in the top 25 in passing, rushing, and points.
Count me among those happy that the staff is experimenting on the OL. Honestly you guys, it can't get much worse than it's been this season. Indiana can put out a functional line of freshmen and sophomores. There are bodies on our roster that can go out there and not give up -1 yards per rush.
And for some reason IU's 2* Freshman and Sophomores are performing better than our young but talented OL? I wonder if it just boils down to coaching.
The 2007 offensive line seemed somewhat similar in terms of experience.
There's a chance this might be some sort of motivational tactic as well. I wouldn't be too surprised to see Kalis and Bryant play at some point tomorrow.
I was thinking the same thing!
The line will continue to suck.
This is a sign of desperation, which sucks. On the bright side, for those who think are coaches are ostriches, this proves they have their heads far enough out of the sand to notice the obvious.
Isn't the obvious that none of our OL are improving - arguably regressing - and that this is a coaching, not a player, issue? If their heads were out of the sand, Funk would be gone.
Saban has the same issues except he weeds them out. Regression alone is not proof of poor coaching.
The list of guys that haven't worked out is getting rather long though. It's possible we got the longest, most improbably string of busts in a row, but the more likely explanation is there's something funky going on with the coaching.
On the interior OL, we are throwing our JV out there against the other team's varsity. And all the depth is RS or true frosh as well. I just don't know how any coach could overcome that and be steamrolling anybody decent.
When our OL are all grown up and still whiffing on blocks and looking generally confused, then it will be time to talk about how bad the coaching is.
I understand the "but they're not getting better" complaint but it's just not realistic. The Matrix was just a movie, the coaches can't just download knowledge, skills, and experience directly into their brains. Building OL means planting a forest, not a garden. Trees are stronger than flowers, but they take a lot more time to grow.
and when one falls in the forest with no one around, does it still make a sound?
Let's hope they concentrate on doing a few things well instead of running every blocking scheme in the play book. Does this makes the tackle over now a tackle-tackle over?
Brian will steal this if we ever run tackle over to Magnuson's side.
see what sticks amongst the young'uns tire fire, except on offensive line rather than defensive backfield ....
and you know what? Some of those DB's turned out OK. Sure a lot of that was the change in defensive staff, but the point stands - RS frosh and frosh DB's covering jr and sr WR's...there's just no way to make it work.
A good staff can try to do things to "hide" one sub-par player, but you can't "hide" an entire position group.
So it was with RRod's DB's. So it is now with Brady's OL. The difference: Hoke & Co. are successfully addressing the problem through recruiting.
This is what happens when you have 3 different HCs in a fairly short amount of time. There is bound to be some positional chaos.
No. This is what happens when you have terrible coaches who are catastrophically incompetent and they can't develop players, come up with game plans, or figure out where guys fit.
Get out of here.
He's entitled to his opinion. There are things the coaching staff can do in terms of play calling. Like calling plays that do not emphasize run blocking. Brian said in ufr that he thinks the pass pro is pretty good. Let's do more of that, some Gardner running, and some tailback running sprinkled in when the opposing defense isn't stacking the box.
every time you get in the same formation. You know, mix it up and throw a quick out now and then to keep them on their toes.
Of guys like that crying n whining. We had it worse under RR. Yea were all frustrated about a loss, but what's done is done. Time to move on.
Agreed. I'm as disappointed in our line play and coaching staff as anyone but the constant whining and rehashing of the same opinions in every single thread gets old to the point that I'm reading the blog significantly less these days.
The guys blowing their assignments have had only one HC.
Ohio State has also had 3 coaches in 7 years. Their O-line seems okay.
Ok, I'll bite. They didn't change offenses from one polar opposite to another twice. Secondly, they didn't really have a gap in recruiting because Tressel getting fired was pretty sudden and not based on performance issues on the field. Even when Fickle was interim coach and things weren't going that well, Urban was in the background with a de facto second coaching crew recruiting his ass off. I'm naving trouble coming up with an analogous situation as Michigan went through between 2008-2010. That sort of debacle has long shadows.
All the players on Ohio's O-Line are seniors, with one exception (Taylor Decker, a true sophmore), and we just don't have that kind of depth thanks to the RR transition.
It was a bad comparison on my part.
Not sure if it'll make any difference, but at least the coaches are trying something new. The line is a bit of a tire fire right now.
Putting our linebackers as our offensive linemen. When devin throws a pick or fumbles we can at least tackle them for minimal return yardage.
"There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know."
"There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know."
"There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know."
"There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know."
"There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know."
"There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know."
"There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know.""There will be blood on the field and it won't be mine. Quote it. Let them know."
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
Make Homer something something.....
He is probably still right. He might not be on the field.
The line keeps getting shuffled with the same poor performance. At what point will Hoke just look at he coached and do some shuffling. Also if Miller was small at @ a 291lb center how is Mags at 285 legit size at guard?
It really matter their size if their asses play hard?
no it doesnt matter but it seems Miller size was part why he was replaced in favor of Glasglow.
Just couldn't get a push. We'll see tomorrow I guess.
He got benched because he wasn't good. Him being smaller than Glasgow was likely part of the reason he wasn't as good, but it's not like the coaches simply said "Miller is too small, let's put someone bigger there." There are guys at every position who don't have ideal size who are good. When a guy lacks ideal size and he isn't good, people like to point to his size as the reason. Molk lacked elite size but was a badass. Elliott Mealer had great size but really couldn't.
Point is, size is only one part of the equation. Miller's other attributes couldn't overcome his (slight) size deficit. Maybe the coaches feel Magnuson can. He seemed to do pretty well last week.
I know that and I agree with you. But all I'm saying is his lack of size and technique cost him his spot. And Mags technique was so good they would have found a spot for him earlier. yes he couldve gotten better during the year but all his play has been on the outside which is why if u wanna play him it would make since moving schofield back inside and play mags outside
I disgaree that if Mags was good enough he would have started from the beginning. Sometimes 4 weeks of camp isnt enough time to really see who the starters should be. It's possible Magnuson was close to getting a starting spot, was edged out, and now things have changed. And some guys look better in practice but not so in games. We'll see.
As far as moving Schofield instead of Magnuson - either way you're moving a tackle inside. Might as well keep 3 of the 5 spots in place rather than moving more guys around.
I didn't say he shouldve started from the beginning but why wasn't he the one instead of Byrant especially when Bryant was still battling some injuries? Schofield has played guard and at a high level and Mags has only worked in games as a tackle.
He was the first lineman off the bench for our jumbo package.
Yes, it matters. Face it, football is a grown-up man's game. When a smaller guy makes a splash, they make a movie about him, he gets laid by hot Catholic chicks, and he never has to buy another beer.
Is there nothing the SEC can't do?
I can't help myself. Given his recent troubles, I doubt many are buying Rudy beers. And as anyone on campus at the time knows--Rudy wasn't getting any chicks--Catholic, hot or otherwise. But the myths endure. :)
Look, I get that people are restless, but would you rather the coaches just keep the line that couldn't get fitz more than a yard a rush? After PSU, people criticized the coaches for their stubbornness. Now that the coaches have made a hange, we criticize the change. Stupid.
Do you have a better suggestion for TE starting OL? Who eould you start on the OL and why?
I agree with you. The coaches know we suck up front. Its obvious with changes.
yes change is needed but this is not a one year problem this is going on a 3 year problem. A lot of players in and out with the same results.
That's just not true. Molk's Oline was good. That makes it a one and a half year problem.
they were u are correct
u are missing the point. u can change players but if the philosophy is the same, the change means nothing. As much a personnel needs to change, there is also a systematic problem that has not changed which is why we keep getting the same poor oline play.
But then again, maybe not.
Its besides the point, really. We're not changing coaches midseason. We're not bringing out a whole new offense. What this change does is give some other guys a shot, show the team that no ones position is safe, and punishes guys for poor play. All good things. I don't think it will work, really, but it is good coaching nonetheless.
The play calling and offensive concept are basically making their job impossible.
Why Borges would not game plan to set his offense up for success is "mind bottling"...
List your credentials.
We need to show credentials with differing opinions? What are yours to say he wrong? I should hope UM would hire no less that an "expert" as OC - how's that been working out?
We all recognize Mattison's 2011 turnaround of the "same" defense as a testament to his coaching prowess - a textbook example of what good coaching can achieve. And yet it's crazy to think that a different OC could achieve more?
And come up with something new. You've repeated this same comment way too many times.
Size aint the problem. Bowling Green, Louisiana Lafayette, and the Ohio Bobcats' 260-pound linemen didn't have any problems creating space against Akron. Our four-star 300-pounders did.
Magnuson should have been on the field earlier. He is a future star.
If he's really 285 lbs, he hasn't gained a pound since he committed. Just fwiw
And those numbers are also almost never accurate. If an OL recruit is 260, he's not going to say he's 260. At least not usually. This is why so many of our recruits come in shorter and lighter on the roster than they were as recruits.
Chris Wormley was reported anywhere between 6'6" and 6'8" as a recruit, but now he's 6'4". This is not the case with everyone, but it is with most.
Wormley has a case of the shrinks?
He will hold his own. He will be one of the starting tackles next year.
But everyone, perhaps including Mrs. Magnuson, thought Kyle Kalis was a college-ready star-of-the-future.
We don't know a fucking thing until they have to block someone.
Why not try Terry Richardson at Guard...I hear he's up to 170 now. Maybe he can get a push on the line.
At some point you just have to let the guys play through the tough times so they can grow and mature. This constant shuffling does nothing but keep setting us back.
this is true.
There is no reason to be wed to any one guy. We all thought Kalis was a 4 year starter, but if he's beaten out and never plays, I would not lose any sleep over it. Will it harm this the cohesion of this year's line? Probably, but cohesion isn't as big a problem as taking the right step, being fast about it, and being strong enough to move a guy.
There will be 14 or so non-redshirting freshman fighting for 5 jobs next year. Let these guys get a live audition. It can't be much worse than what we've gotten so far. If nothing else, they will have gained some game reps, which might help them for next season.
The expectation is for the position.
It doesn't matter. I'm sure tomorrow we'll run the ball against a bad team. We won't be able to run against staee or Ohio or any other decent defenses. Not with what this staff wants to run. Not with these players.
The line wouldn't look so bad. I'm not trying to say changes aren't needed, but when a monkey could easily guess that Borges is going to run power into a stacked box on first down the Oline is at a distinct disadvantage. Is Al our Charlie W???
I may be wrong here, but I'm wondering if this means Michigan is going to run more of a shotgun/spread type of offense. Burzynski and Magnuson are guys more suited to zone blocking than someone like Chris Bryant or even Kyle Kalis, and Magnuson came out of high school as a solid pass blocker who needed to work on his run blocking. Maybe the coaches are (finally) saying "F*** the power and iso. We're running zone, we're gonna throw the ball, and we'll see what happens."
I sure hope you're right!
I think you're right. If it works early they will stick with the whole game and expand on it in the bye week.
After reading that, I can't decide if Borges is using his brain or if he's lost the last of it having said "F*ck it. Maybe these guys will be able to run block"
Sweet baby Jesus a ray of hope.
And it comes from MAGNUS of all people!
Is that they're going back to that god-forsaken zone stretch.
Please be right Mr. Mangus
I had the same thought. Magnuson is pretty good at pass pro, Bryant is... not very good. We might be buying some more time in the pocket for Gardner at the expense of push on run (theoretically, Bryant was getting pushed, not getting push).
Magnuson = Son of Magnus. I now see the connection. Well played.
Seriously, though, I hope your reasoning is correct. I'll personally pen an ode to Magnus (haiku format) if this strategy comes to fruition and your instincts are correct.
But if we lose, despite the fans getting what they wanted, is Borges an idiot? More importantly, are we?
if we lose and it's the same issuses then yes because it will point to a systemic issue not a only a player issue.
Our 5* guard is being replaced by a walk on? Things could be better in O-Line town
boren on us.
Personal attacks of players will NOT be tolerated.
I hope Kalis stays for the duration of his eligibility, has a great career, and enjoys his time at the UMich art school. Just to get that out of the way ...
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Urban Meyer (a smart guy of interesting character) quietly reached out to Kalis at some point (in a scenario where Mr. K found himself 2nd/3rd-string for an extended period of time). If he could effect a transfer he would, for the price of a single scholarship, win himself some neat PR and possibly a significant contributor.
Low probability, sure, but interesting IMO.
It depends on who you think is replacing whom. If you look at it as Burzinki replacing Bryant, than our 5 star OG is being replaced by a near-5 star OT from his same class. Both were Army All Americans. We are replacing one blue chip RS frosh with another. This is not that weird.
let me ask u this cause I dont remember from his recruitment but was Mags considered a OT only recruit or was he seen as a guy who could play inside as well?
He was pretty much viewed as a pure tackle prospect. That said, none of these guys are "pure" anything coming out of HS. He played OG almost exclusively at the AAA game.
Maybe they played musical chairs in practice and the 5 guys that got the seats get to start.
There were five on the line and Schofield said, "Roll over! Roll over!" They all rolled over and Lewan came out.
There were still five on the line and Magnusson said, "Roll over! Roll over!" They all rolled over and Bryant came out.
There were still five on the line and Burzynski said, "Roll over! Roll over!" They all rolled over and Kalis came out.
one of the best posts I have ever read on this board.
Yes, I have a kid under the age of 1.
I have read a lot of great comments on this board, but this one stands alone as the funniest one. Great post, it caused me to laugh/cry/choke so hard that my wife was worried about me.
Don't know how we haven't found 2 guards out of like 8 options who aren't just terrible. Its not just youth, everything is just bad. Have to assume that goes to Funk
It might be Funk, but what 8 options are you referring to? Assuming true frosh aren't really options, you sure don't have that many guys to choose from. You have Kalis, Bryant, Burzinski, Bars, and then moving tackles over (which is what is happening with Magnuson). Of that group, two are RS frosh, one is always injured and one is a walk on.
I'm not saying none of this is one Funk, but he literally doesn't have a single upperclass OG on the roster, and only a small handful of underclassmen, with Burzinski being the only one who had even seen a snap before this season.
If you count last year (which I think you should) you've got Barnum, Omameh*, Mealer, Kalis, Bryant, Glasgow*, Braden, Burzinyski, Bars, Gunderson. *players are serviceable.
2 serviceable guys in 2 years out of that pool screams bad coaching or extremely bad luck. I think it's becoming clear that it's the former.
I don't know enough (read: anything) about the specifics of O-line coaching, so I'm only making vague inferences here. But at the moment, the only truly successful O-linemen under Hoke have been players who matured under Greg Frey - Lewan, Schofield, and Molk. I understand that part of the issue is a transition in scheme, and some of this may be related to Al flailing about wildly in terms of the running game. Much of it, certainly, relates to the youth at the position.
Still, the results so far have certainly given some cause for concern, and the performance of Kalis raises a red flag for me. A kid with all the plaudits in the world - based not only on upside, but on physical readiness and superior technique for a HS kid - struggling this badly in his second year in the progam is troubling, OL recruiting uncertainty be damned.
Next year, there are certainly enough bullets in the chamber, recruiting wise, that some grouping of five of them should be at least serviceable. If not, we're going to quickly begin to resemble Sparty East, only with about 3x the raw talent on offense.
Kalis might be struggling so far in his first year, but I don't think we can make conclusions about the staff based off one freshman player. Glasgow has been a pleasant suprise and has exceeded everyones expectations thus far so we shouldn't just point at the faults and ignore the positives. This offensive line might just be too young to handle all of the offensive scheme changes this year.
....relative to unreasonable expectations.
Of the seven five-star offensive linemen in that class, five are not starting in their second year of their respective programs. In most cases we don't even know how badly they're struggling, because they don't even see the field until garbage time. That is probably not a sign that the offensive line coaches at Stanford, USC and Georgia are incompetent.
In a functioning program that had bothered to recruit offensive linemen he'd be an understudy to some reasonably competent RG, with the opportunity to compete against him and beat him out, if things worked out surprisingly well, but with the stronger likelihood that he'll simply learn his trade for a couple of years.
There's maybe one Cyrus Kouandijo per year, if that. If you get one of those guys, great. Counting on it is absurd.
Yep. You've got eight to twelve options to fill two spots. All of them were good enough to play for Michigan. Make it work.
This is nothing at all like Ray Vinopal to FS and Josh Furman to shagbacker or w/e it was.
They called that position a lot of things but I believe they settled on "Woah, that's only ten guys? Get out there and play defense!"
SFBlue was obviously referencing Blossom's older brother Tony, and not Joey.
This is the type of bullshit we did with the 2010 defense switching ppl and replacing ppl all the time. Coaches need to look in the mirror
There's only so much you can do as a coach, especially in the season. I'm sure Funk and Borges are looking at their offense and wondering what they can do better. I think looking at your personnel is also important and I'm glad they're at least trying something.
Are you suggesting they quit?
If so, #HALOL.
If not, what does "look in the mirror" mean?
if it ain't working, might as well try something until it does..
The counter point is the way to get something to work may be to have the same 5 guys play together for longer
All these OL came in with high regard but not one has really shown anything so der if its talent or Funk? I seem to think it is on funk and Borges. You can even put some blame on Hoke cause he hand picked these guys. Al has never had good offenses has he? The best he had was in Auburn and it had NFL talent and that offense wasnt considered great. Home needs to quit putting so much trust in fat Albert. Hello he couldn't even get job till Hokeman called so to me that says something right there.
Did you say something?
Doesnt matter who is at guard when the other team has 8-9 people in the box and we only are playing with 10 on offense.
You obviously didn't read the front page post. There were 11.
Really? Did you read the front page? I am pretty sure there are 10 in the photo.
Regardless...it was a joke. MANBALL 27 for 27! They should make an ESPN documentary.
This game was going to be confidence builder. Now I think it's a game. I honestly can't wait to see the product on the field. There's no place to hide on the gridiron.
Kalis has looked fine for his first year IMO. I don't feel good about that move. Bryant was the right fit in my mind as well. He is huge has basically only had two starts, looked OK vs. Minne and got knocked on his duff by a quality D line. That is how you learn. I didn't like this move but I'm looking forward to looking dumb. Make it so Mags and Joey.
that's what this game should have been but now is just another where the line has new members. only three players have started all the games and one of them started at 2 different positions.
I also feel Kalis has played well for his first year starting. Last week was tough for all of the linemen, especially the interior. I still think he will be a starter by the end of the season.
If this is for competition's sake, then I am fine with it. If this is for building depth, then I am fine with it. If it is a scheme change, then I am fine with it. As long as Michigan wins, of course.
But, but, but, but, but...
Wouldn't leaving underachievers in the game be like doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome? Isn't that the very precise, exact definition of insanity?
Wouldn't that be like running the ball 27 times for 27 yards, which is the worst thing that has ever happened? Isn't this an effort to find the right "fit" between scheme and player ability? Isn't this exactly the kind of change that people were calling for (kind, folks, not the exact changes you want)? No? Oh yeah, Borges probably had something to do with it.
I love you guys, but you've gotta control your emotions enough to be able to keep your brain clear.
I will eat my hat if this works. More likely than not it will be a further piece of evidence that Funk sucks.
Wow. That's harsh.
Although the insertion of two brand new Olinemen in the middle of the year is not good, could this signal that Borges will abandon the power run scheme for more spread? Both Bryant and Kalis have not proven up to the task on the stretch plays run so far - and clearly not in the power run game either - so the insertion of lighter, more agile players would make sense if we see more spread looks and runs.
With that said, I reserve the right to change my mind if Borges runs MANBALL to start the game tomorrow.
I'm thinking Jehu Chesson deserves a shot at one of the guard spots. Dude has leveled some people this year. While you're at it, fire Funk and put Hecklinksi in charge of the offensive line. No denying that we've had some kick-ass blocking receivers the past few years.
...to figure how strong, 300-lb Michigan linemen who have the offensive advantage of snap count can't get at least SOME push.
It just baffles.
Just get your best guys on the field be it tackles playing guard, true freshmen, walk-ons whatever. But coaches also need to give them help by keeping the defense honest and not getting in in 2nd and 12s and 3rd and 9s with crappy no win plays.
Great. More zone stretch. The play that never works because other teams can tell when we're going to run it and know that we have no pass plays built off of it. My favorite.
OMFG. I can't believe it's come to this. Please hold me....
Why stop at 3? We should go to a 5 tackle system. Theoretically tackles are the best offensive linemen in pass protection due to their above average athleticism. Take this principle and envision a line with 5 roaming tackles who exist solely to pick people up in pass protection. Slap a #40 on a 6th tackle and put him next to Gardner in the shotgun. At the snap he too becomes a roaming protector. Devin would have all day to pass and the coverage would eventually break down or the defensive linemen would pass out in exhaustion and Devin could gain a nice 10 yards on a scramble.
I feel like this might be a bad sign. Or a good sign. A sign, at any rate.
Here's your sign
The unfortunate thing about all of this is even if this somewhat works tomorrow we're not going to know squat until two weeks from now because Indiana's defense sucks; Sparty will be the true test. If it doesn't work tomorrow, then we're just fugged and not much has changed.
Thomas Edison tried 1600 filaments before he found the right one. How many potential O line combinations do we have with the current roster and how many games remain?
Good God.....hope Borges doesn't see this post!
I mean 27 times is more than enough!
You couldn't be more right! If Borges read this, we know what to expect tomorrow..
Assuming no redshirts are burnt, assuming no walk-ons besides Glasgow and Burzynski are used, and assuming the same players but at different positions count as a different combinations (technically permutations), then there would be n!/(n-r)! where n is the available linemen (10) and r is the number of positions (5), so 10!/5! or 10*9*8*7*6 permutations, or 30240 possibilities. If we figure Lewan and Schofield are going nowhere, then it's 8*7*6, or 336.
If you really meant combinations and not permutations, then it's 10!/(5!*(10-5)!), or 252. Again, keeping the tackles where they are, it's 8!/(3!*(8-3)!) or 56.
So, no matter what you meant, Borges can't go through all the possibilities even if he changes the line every quarter.
This is just further indictment on Funk....just no getting around it at this point. Omameh got worse last year and Barnum never improved either.
I will give credit to Mealer though as he seemed to be a solid pass blocker for the most part.
I would like to trade OL coaches before the game tomorrow if possible....I like Frey and thought he did a solid job.
At this point how a guy like Kalis worked with Bentley and is now losing his spot to a walk on is scary, I don't want to see what happens with Kugler next year either. If he ends up bad then it is clearly on Funk. No way a kid who's dad was a long time NFL OL coach should be bad at any point.
Because first and second year lineman always come in and play well. Oh wait, no they don't. In fact they almost are never on the field anywhere.
that's not what he's getting at. Kalis worked with a NFL linemen everyday and was said to have great technique and same with Kugler. Now it looks like technique is an issue with Kalis (we don't know about Kugler yet). If technique becomes an issue then could it be they are being taught the wrong things now?
Know his technique is bad? Wtf! People around need to chill out. The guy is a freshman for Christ sake! Chill out...just because he worked out with an nfl player and his dad was an nfl player doesn't mean he is ready to be Steve Hutchinson right now, Christ the way people make assumptions and panic around here is sickening. This is a young team that is 5-1. We have a bunch of underclass men, lets wait before we completely melt down, Jesus, we wait months and months for football season and then half us bitch and never enjoy a single fucking moment.
I'm trying to find a positive here but there is none. I probably shouldn't watch the game live.
Magnuson will do fine. Athleticism goes a long way in getting to the right spot on time. Have some faith; there is no reason to doubt him whereas others have struggled and failed.
He's not the one that worries me. Burzinyski looked pretty rough out there. Maybe not much worse than Bryant/Kalis, but long term upside seems to be more limited with him. Hope I'm wrong though.
...NEEDS MOAR TAKKELS!
Seriously, perhaps the coaches took a look at our skill players, the best of whom are the QB, WR, TE/WR, slot WR, and our best OL are pass-pro OTs. Maybe the coaches are like, no matter who we play, we won't be able to run the ball, so let's put the best 5 pass-pro guys out there and give Devin time. Whatever we get in the run game is a bonus.
I wouldn't move to outside zone with an even more inexperienced line, though. It's the hardest blocking scheme in football to master with communication and technique. Iso and power are pretty damned easy.
Funk cannot get any of our highly touted 4 and 5 star guards ready to play......okay. Isnt Joey 6ft1 and like 280? No offense to him but that aint exactly ManBall.
Except that one was in 2010, and instead of reshuffling offensive linemen in a panicky attempt to salvage a looming disaster we all knew was coming despite a 5-1 start, Michigan was reshuffling defensive backs in a panicky attempt to salvage a looming disaster we all knew was coming despite a 5-1 start.
I hate remakes.
Fuck me in the ass. If we're not throwing the ball or running outside zone, we're dead.
You know what will really hurt your ass? If we pass a ton and run a lot of zone and still lose.
He'll find something else to bitch about.
I am uncomfortable with the level of personal criticism directed at the players by name in all of these threads.
They wear the Michigan uniform and play their hearts out for the Michigan team, and for that they have my 100% support for everything that they do on that field, even if they struggle.
They are still very young inside the tackles. Those names getting criticism are going to be excellent linemen in a year or two and we will all be smiling about their performance then, so support them now.
A little change-up right now makes sense, Let's see what happens over the next few weeks,
OL, OC and S&C coaching critical assessment, on the other hand, is fair.
They are also about a thousand times better at playing OL or football than any of us.
Hell, the RS freshman linemen are probably still teenagers.
Or to put it in my own terms, the negativity here sucks and people have lost sight of the big picture. Nice post.
This reminds me of Seinfeld where Kramer would tell Jerry his latest crazy scheme and Jerry would say: "oh yeah this sounds like a great idea".
It appears over the past two years that these lineman have gotten worse, not better. At some point, this has to be on the coaches and their inability to teach proper technique to 4 and 5 star recruits. I know they're young, but there's enough talent now that they should at least be mediocre, and not the mess that they are midseason.
4 and 5 stars are you talking about? Only one who has played in Kali's, he hasn't been horrible, sans last week, he's only a RS freshman. Bryant was a consensus 3 star besides one 4 star. Other guys have walkons. There are a slew of RS and pure freshman who were mostly 4 stars, sometimes olineman take more than a year to develop. Relax
This has to be the most ridiculous post in the thread. Two years ago a lot of them were in high school.
Changes indicate panic, no changes an unwillingness to adapt.
The big picture for me is that, after working hard all week, I'd like to enjoy watching Michigan football on Saturday. For that, I'd like to see a team competitive with the best of the B1G and hopefully one that can sometimes measure up to the best teams in the country. This season, after sitting through Akron, UConn, and Penn State, watching is not much fun. Watching this team on offense, with its OL that is shockingly MAC-level bad and its boring, conservative, redundant, chickensh*t scheme, is excruciating. Watching the team on defense is better, though watching teams march up and down the field on Michigan isn't great, for sure.
Now, many of you are screaming at your monitors, "then don't watch the game!!" Well, that's exactly what will happen. I'll DVR it and enjoy my Saturday. The big picture. As someone said, though, we wait months to watch Michigan football. It makes me sad that I'm doing this, but it's not worth the anxiety and despair. I hope they get better - hell, I hope they improve today. But the issues seem very much to be more systemic than player-related, and that doesn't bode well.
Assuming Kalis is not injured, Brian's video breakdowns have indicated that he hasn't done anything particularly impressive in his starts. The hot headed penalties haven't helped.
For me, the same applies to 5 star Derrick Green, who doesn't seem to have much value add unless there are gaping holes, which isn't going to happen with this core of linemen. I'm sure his role will expand over time, as a 5 star rating implies he should be capable of doing more than being a short yardage back.
Both of these guys are young, but as 5 star recruits, they mave wider halos chalked up to 'potential'.