Losing Denard Robinson and finding an offensive identity
I see so, so many people complaining about the lack of a steady offensive concept, and an effective one, and I'm trying to understand the complaints as they relate to this year. I want to know what other people think as far as how the loss of a record setter affects a team going forward.
The past four years, Denard Robinson has been the face of Michigan Football. When the offense was working, he was amazing. When the offense wasn't working, he was still amazing. How many times did a play or an entire game almost fall apart entirely only to become "DO SOMETHING DENARD! Oh, wow... did you see what he did? DID YA!?!"
What I want to know is, what do fans think is a reasonable amount of time for a program to find its identity going forward following four years of DENARD DO SOMETHING football? Pre season? One game? Four? One Season?
I personally think that once you no longer have, nor expect to have, Denard Robinson\ in your backfield, it makes sense that you would at first try to go the other way, to bring some sense into your game, since so often, plays with Denard made no sense, and that's what made them awesome. I would, in fact, expect somewhere between one half and one full season, the team would start to figure out what works and what doesn't following four years of having a guy that made nothing and everything work.
What's your timeline?
October 27th, 2013 at 1:49 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 1:32 AM ^
what we should be talking about is Hoke's history on the road... fuck offensive identity, defensive mismatches and all that other bullshit. how come our teams under hoke kick so much ass at home and suck so much balls NTTAWWT on the road?
love,
jdon
October 27th, 2013 at 1:34 AM ^
I can't argue with that one.
October 27th, 2013 at 10:50 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 1:47 AM ^
With our offensive line right now, I think you have to set up the run via the pass, not the other way around.
I like the little wrinkles I keep seeing in every new game. Even in the abysmal PSU game, I loved how we were utilizing Funchess. I think that, if we can get past MSU this next week, we're going to give OSU more of a game than they think. I also think that a loss at Sparty could torpedo our season.
October 27th, 2013 at 2:20 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 9:42 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 1:56 AM ^
Not really sure what the griping is all about.
October 27th, 2013 at 2:28 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 5:14 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 12:13 PM ^
I think everyone will agree that turning it over four times, as we did in that game, is a problem. But in every game in which we haven't turned it over that many times (UConn and Akron), we've scored 40+.
October 27th, 2013 at 10:50 AM ^
You can take your statistics about ppg and toss them out the window for 3 out of the next 5 games.
I guarantee Most of the MSU d couldn't pass a basic stats class let alone do they care how many points we've avg'd against mediocre to crappy D's.
October 27th, 2013 at 2:16 AM ^
is a lot more like Uncle Fester than just appearance only. He's a mad scientist who adds ingredients that seem like they are compatible, but all too often cause uncontollable explosions that do much more damage than good. But unfortunately "Uncle Al-Fester" then repeats the same experiments inexplicitly expecting better results.
Like Uncle Fester but less lovable. That's our Uncle Al!
October 27th, 2013 at 3:05 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 3:03 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 4:46 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 11:47 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 7:09 AM ^
"What I want to know is, what do fans think is a reasonable amount of time for a program to find its identity going forward following four years of DENARD DO SOMETHING football? Pre season? One game? Four? One Season?"
I would think that depends on a lot of things. In the case of Denard, you have a situation where - over the course of his time here - he was literally (and the numbers bear it out) about half of the team's entire offensive production, which is significant to put it mildly. In the Nebraska game last year, I think we saw how off-guard were at the time for the post-Denard era, but we managed to get ourselves together enough to compete for the remaining games in no small part thanks to Devin Gardner's ability to step in and be the leader of the offense.
To accomplish that, it seems like we literally had to shift the playcalling and character of our play overnight, and if a team is still trying to piece itself together for the future and get the personnel it wants in certain positions, there are times where you'll struggle in the "new scheme". I think this is what we're seeing, particularly in the ground game. Actually, if you track rushing and passing production, the 2012 Nebraska game actually is where the graph flips.
It's hard to say how much time is enough - in Michigan's case, I think next year might be a telling year, however, at least from a player development standpoint for this offense, but not in the sense perhaps that it should determine coaching changes or legacies. I wouldn't put a cutoff date on it necessarily.
I really like what they are trying to accomplish with this offense, but there are definitely things to be polished, if you will. I think folks simply need to look at it three-dimensionally.
October 27th, 2013 at 11:52 AM ^
You actually answered my question! Thanks!
So one year for player development, and no specific cut off date for that development to take off, so long as the development is evident SOMEWHERE in production.
October 27th, 2013 at 7:14 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 8:34 AM ^
Personally, I think the current offense is awesome because it is good from the shotgun and 1 back sets and working to improve the big and i-form stuff. Multiple sets and tempo give a team more options to find holes in defenses, and if they have a dual-threat QB then third downs are much harder to defend.
I am probably in the minority in thinking many of the big sets UM ran so far have been a good idea. Did anyone see Minnesota rush for over 270 yards vs. Nebraska? A lot of their stuff was similar to what Michigan ran against PSU and Minnesota. Yes, that is Minny's identity, but we have known for a long time that this offense was coming and at some point it had to be used extensively in games, not just practice and camp.
October 27th, 2013 at 9:05 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 9:41 AM ^
The one-man show is fine when it works ... but it doesn't always work. Witness OSU and Mississippi State in 2010, or ND in 2012.
I think this offense is shaping up to have some really nice balance and potential. Manage the offensive turnovers and settle the line and we're in the top of the B1G.
October 27th, 2013 at 12:37 PM ^
Absolutely...even our (shouldn't have been) close games and (shouldn't have lost it) loss were the type of games that we win easily once those matters are corrected.
October 27th, 2013 at 9:15 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 9:29 AM ^
Just look at our o-line situation and that tells the tale. People need to relax and see this year as what it is... another step on the road back.
October 27th, 2013 at 10:09 AM ^
We obviously still have a guy playing QB that can use his feet, is not really a pocket passer, and a young offensive line. We can't do the power running game. My question is why have we spent all offseason and fall camp attempting to install the pro style offense when it clearly doesn't fit our personnel other than that's what we eventually want to do?. Devin may be a better thrower than Denard, but he is not a pro style QB and that's not a bad thing. He is an amazing talent and offensive weapon. But, it blows my mind why we haven't been practicing ways to utilize those skills versus spending all offseason trying to install a pro style offense. It may not be what the coaches want, but I hope we don't make the same mistake this coming offseason and continue to try and force next year's squad to be pro style because news flash...we will still have a young offensive line that can't power run block and we will still have the same QB that is more effective under shotgun. We need to wait until Devin is gone and the '13 o-line recruits are in year 3, hence 2015 is the first year we should be attempting that.
October 27th, 2013 at 10:51 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 10:12 AM ^
There is no offensive philosophy independent from defensive philosophy or whole game philosophy for Brady Hoke. It seems pretty clear what he wants to have: a ball control offense that sucks the life out of the opposing team by chewing up clock, then depending on a stout defense to win the game. That's not exactly working this year, and as Hoke said in the interview posted yesterday (and boy was there a lot of lunacy and hysteria in that thread--I'm glad to see the board back to some semblance of rationality in this thread), against Illinois he realized his offense had to win the game, so he gave the green light to score as many points as quickly as possible.
In other words, Hoke will adjust the offense to give the whole team the best chance of winning. For some fans, the conservative, run the ball up the middle with an occasional pass, drain the clock style is killing the team, but that seems to be the style that Hoke prefers in games with a tough opponent in a hostile environment: risk aversion, play for field position, and let the defense win the game. That seems to be Dantonio's approach as well, so I expect a low scoring game on Saturday. I hope Hoke turns the offense loose, though, because I think a grinding, low scoring game that depends upon defense to win plays to MSU's strengths.
October 27th, 2013 at 11:17 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 10:32 AM ^
Let's blame Rich Rod for burning his red shirt!
/sarcasm
October 27th, 2013 at 10:48 AM ^
So how long does it take? Depends on the coach and what exactly your measure of success is.
I expected Michigan to win the B1G this year.
October 27th, 2013 at 12:01 PM ^
some success?
if being undefeated for 20 straight games = some success then either you are delusional or Hoke must be fired immediately.
October 27th, 2013 at 3:15 PM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 11:00 AM ^
I think you should start finding your identity as soon as he isn't a viable option; I atually think Borges started doing so after the Nebraska game last year when, it sounds like, people figured Denard wasn't going to be able to return to his pre-injury position before the end of the year.
But I also think that trying to forge an offensive identity needs to be reined in by the realities of the players available. So while establishing a non-Denard-style offensive system makes sense in theory, if the guys you have left over are still best equipped for that type of system, you might as well keep it going.
October 27th, 2013 at 11:21 AM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 11:32 AM ^
As best I can tell, the OP was rhetorical.
October 27th, 2013 at 11:49 AM ^
That his diagnosis is that the team has been inconsistent on offense, and that includes the QB and O-line. The turnovers, the great plays and boneheaded plays, seems to describe this year's edition pretty well. The offensive showing against Indiana coupled with a fumbled snap at the 2 yard line and an errant pitch that gave them the ball inside the 10 yd line.
We seem to get Good Devin and Bad Devin in each game. If he can reign in the Bad Devin, he can be great, but maybe we are just going to have to live with both for the balance of this year because that is who he is as a 2nd year starter (just now has basically started a full year's worth of games).
October 27th, 2013 at 12:36 PM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 7:36 PM ^
October 27th, 2013 at 11:56 PM ^
second half OSU last year?
October 28th, 2013 at 12:03 AM ^
aggressive defenses even with Robinson. I think Gardner can be just as good of a QB. He has a better arm but Robinson had the better leggs. It will be interesting how Gardner holds up against MSU. I have a feeling that they will blitz a lot and Gardner will have little time to throw. Hopefully Borges will have a game plan of some quick slats and throws to the RB to counter act the blitzes. Otherwise, it could ge rather ugly.