Is the manball running game schematically incompatible with a Gattis/speed-in-space passing attack?
I was reading this interesting "22 Things" post on Reddit. I don't really know much about the person who wrote it, though he says he's a football coach. In relevant part, however, the author suggests that:
(6.) Passing game needs to find its identity... I'm not going to complain about the Washington play-calling: running the ball is still more correlative of winning football in CFB games than passing (see Michigan-Washington, Ohio State-Oregon as examples), but this passing attack doesn't have much identity, especially with Ronnie Bell out. Washington has one of the better defenses that the Wolverines will face this season, especially when they head to Wisconsin who shut down PSU's rushing attack (18 carries, 50 yards). Frankly, I think part of the issue is that, while Josh Gattis certainly has been a disappointment relative to all the hype when he was hired, his passing scheme does not really mesh with the run game. We have no play-action, and the bubble screens are always run out of the same 2-3 looks, making it easy for defenses to identify and key in on it. I think that it'd be best for Michigan and Gattis to part ways this offseason, especially if Harbaugh is committed to the smashmouth brand of football they're running with. Bumping QB coach Matt Weiss, and potentially OL coach Sherrone Moore, to coordinator duties (Moore already holds co-OC, so would just assume keep that title) makes a lot of sense. Still a ways to go however.
I think this is an interesting, fundamental question about scheme. I also lack the knowledge to investigate it, so I was wondering if any experts on the board think the idea has any merit.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:26 AM ^
Step One: Fire Gattis
Step Two: Promote Weiss, move Bellamy to WR, hire Donte Williams
Step Three: ???????
Step Four: Profit
September 14th, 2021 at 11:03 AM ^
I guess that assumes we hire the underpants gnomes as analysts to make this work
September 14th, 2021 at 12:39 PM ^
What about Graham Harrell?
September 14th, 2021 at 10:29 AM ^
Edited: Well presented. I hope it doesn't devolve into a Fire Gattis" post. (See the first comment as exhibit A). To those that might take it that direction, I'll repeat what I said in yesterday's deleted thread:
The perpetuation of the false dichotomy that Harbaugh only wants to run the ball and Gattis wants to pass the ball is tired, lazy, and needs to stop.
ed2: apologies for misconstruing your intent. too many trolls these days.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:33 AM ^
I agree that's getting perpetuated, but I don't see that as the focus, here.
I think Harbaugh, especially as a former QB, has no issues with wanting to throw the ball. But I'm wondering if manball running, especially from an OL personnel/strategy perspective, somehow has incompatibilities with Gattis's passing approach.
Edit: I somehow missed your first paragraph. I want to be clear that this isn't intended as a 'fire Gattis' post. I can see how that's a plausible conclusion, given the last part of the quoted paragraph, but I wanted to keep the author's whole message intact. The real thrust of this thing is about the Xs/Os idea that the author puts forward.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:39 AM ^
But we're not running a "smashmouth" running scheme? There is no I-formation here. I don't see a fullback. There are options to pass out of the same formations as we're running out of, and I think I saw a few RPOs as well. It feels like the only reason people are calling this "smashmouth" is because the run is actually working, whereas it used to die after a yard or so.
I'm not an X's and O's guy, admittedly, so I'll hold out for the UFR and gladly walk this back if we did revert to formations that teleport us back in time to the 70's. But from what I've seen since Gattis came on, the formations last Saturday were similar to what we've typically thrown out of. (Shotgun, single back).
September 14th, 2021 at 10:54 AM ^
They ran a pseudo-I all night long. All was essentially a fullback offset a step to the side so McNamara could take a shotgun snap. But many of the same I-formation concepts apply. Watching the game, I could hear Matt Millen saying, “follow the fullback.”
In addition to that, they often ran with only 1 WR, 2 in-line tight ends and All. For whatever reason, the only adjustment I saw Washington make was to blitz a DB from their nickel. I’m not sure why you’d stay in a nickel against all that beef, but maybe that’s what they repped the most and had their best 11 on the field. Still, it was very odd.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:22 AM ^
You don't need to have a fullback and be under center to run power. The off-ball TE, 2 back sets, pullers, inserting...that's all power. We run multiple TE sets, sometimes with an extra OL as a TE. That's is certainly "smash-mouth" as you call it.
The passing game does look disjointed. Your run game and pass game should synch up. As another poster said, you can run RPO out of any run. Frankly, it should be a part of about every run as it erases the need to block a defender on the 2nd level. We should also have some play action deep shots. Running perimeter screens over and over doesn't mesh with what Michigan does in the run game. I also have a hard time believing that Gattis has much to do with this offense. It's nothing like what he came from.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:38 AM ^
I'm more frustrated with the perpetuation that running all night Saturday is somehow an implication that there's zero trust in McNamara to pass the ball.
Dude was insanely efficient the week before. I can't see how suddenly this past week, people say there's no faith in him.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:49 AM ^
In the entire time Harbaugh has been coach - we've only been in the top 50 in pass attempts per game ONCE.
Harbaugh doesn't trust passing the ball... no matter the QB.
September 14th, 2021 at 2:10 PM ^
Passing attempts are a horrible way to judge if a coach likes to pass the ball. The only games you should be passing a lot are if you are behind by a lot, which is, what, 3 or 4 games in Harbaugh’s 6 years? It isn’t that Harbaugh doesn’t trust the pass, it’s that we haven’t needed it
September 14th, 2021 at 5:15 PM ^
"The only games you should be passing a lot are if you are behind by a lot"
We're not talking about passing a lot. We're talking about passing significantly less than average.
...and I completely disagree with the premise that the only time you should be passing a lot is if you are behind a lot, at least if by "passing a lot" you mean more than 25 attempts per game.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:56 AM ^
I mean Cade was 9-11 the week before with a lot of it coming on the Ronnie Bell post route. Efficient? Sure but then you also need to add the caveat that he's been untested in part to the Thunder+Lightning tag team.
Eventually we're going to play teams that can tackle and close running lanes. The 10 yard runs will become 2 and 3 yard runs and you will need to pass the ball not only efficiently but likely to win some games. There's still two full games to get him ready before Wisc on the road. Find a new safety net with Bell out and test a few guys over top and the balance will come.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:56 AM ^
In 11 days the team plays Rutgers, who in 2 games has allowed 163 yards rushing on 78 attempts, or 2.09 yards/attempt.
September 14th, 2021 at 12:11 PM ^
...vs Temple, an AAC team that went 1-6 last season and Syracuse, who went 1-10 last season and runs an Art Briles syle pass happy offense
September 14th, 2021 at 1:45 PM ^
This!!
September 14th, 2021 at 11:40 AM ^
I mean, McNamara only had 11 attempts against Western, then Bell got hurt and the next week we seemed to pass as little as possible. Of course the running game was cooking, but it sure seemed like we had an aversion to pass Saturday that should be noted as suspicious
I'm gonna guess this Saturday only gets Cade 10-15 attempts again and we won't really know the state of the passing game till Rutgers
September 14th, 2021 at 1:52 PM ^
We had a multiple possession lead against a P5 team with a strong pass defense that could do practically nothing on offense and were running effectively against them. In the 2nd half, the only way we could've lost is by turning the ball, so why not keep running being they couldn't stop us?
September 16th, 2021 at 10:27 AM ^
Well, Devin Gardner basically said that the reason they didn't throw was because they lost confidence in Cade. I don't know why you wouldn't believe him.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:31 AM ^
Someone else brought up a very good point regarding all the concern about this rush-only offense (sorry I can't remember your username), but it was basically that Wisconsin does this same thing every year, but then when they eventually come up against a team that can actually stop the run, they don't know how to pass because they've barely done it all year, and then they lose.
I love barreling over a team like we did against UWash, but I really hope we approach the next few games with more balance, and get Cade and the young receivers some reps once we take a decent lead.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:20 AM ^
Because they haven't done it or because they don't generally have good WRs and QBs?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wisconsin_Badgers_in_the_NFL_Draft
Since 2010 they've had 3 WRs drafted, 1 4th round and 2 5th rounders. Only 1 QB drafted, Russell Wilson, which also was easily one of their best years. They won the Big Ten that year. Wilson and WR Nick Toon got drafted that year. Abbrederis 2 years later. I don't know how much he contributed to that team.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:41 AM ^
Plenty of teams with zero QBs and WRs drafted find lots of ways to pass the ball frequently
September 14th, 2021 at 12:01 PM ^
But that sounds like Michigan's draft results too
September 14th, 2021 at 12:13 PM ^
^This
September 14th, 2021 at 10:32 AM ^
I'm sure we're holding some stuff back. If it ain't broke don't fix it, though; running the ball down WMU and U-Dubs throats in the second half was the right thing to do. Just for practice sake we need to pass the ball more often, to keep defenses honest as well as to give our guys familiarity with what it feels like to have the ball passed. I predict NIU will stick out statistically. In a good way.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:53 AM ^
The "holding stuff back" excuse is the biggest myth in football, especially here.
We weren't holding anything back in 2015 and 2016, and we were pounding the teams at the beginning of the schedule.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:21 AM ^
Rudock passed for 337, 440, 256, 263 (3 quarters), and 278 yards to close out the 2015 season. That is dramatically different from our games against tomato cans.
September 14th, 2021 at 12:12 PM ^
Rudock took a while to gel, but he threw 43, 25, 22, 26, and 32 times up until MSU.
September 14th, 2021 at 1:37 PM ^
He was also a senior that Coach trusted. Else, he probably wouldn't have thrown like that.
September 14th, 2021 at 12:15 PM ^
Sure, but the second biggest myth is that there's a specific way "good teams" win football games and if you don't follow that pattern in every game your win isn't as good as it could be.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:44 AM ^
I'm still waiting for Jabrill to pass out of the Pepcat
Any day now...
September 14th, 2021 at 10:32 AM ^
I'm no expert, but I think it's less about Gattis's types of plays and more about us doing dumb stuff in the passing game. Not running play action, for example, would fall into the dumb stuff bucket. OSU, Clemson, and Oklahoma have all had powerful spread rushing attacks in recent years. There is no reason for a powerful rushing attack to be incompatible with a dynamic spread passing offense. Gattis might just not be good at calling passes. With that said, the end of 2019 intrigues me. Maybe he's fine and something else is holding him back.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:35 AM ^
It's funny, because I've heard the lack of play action attributed to both Gattis and to Harbaugh.
So no one is sure who is actually anti-play action, but everyone is mad about it ;-)
September 14th, 2021 at 10:35 AM ^
This seems to be a good explanation, and I'd lean towards it, but I know so little about the nitty-gritties, that I thought to seek out some skilled eyeballs.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:30 AM ^
"We need to run more/any play action" is a much better take than the "we need to pass so we get reps passing/passing for passing sake" argument, as the research shows play action passes are incredibly effective and virtually can't be used too much.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/can-nfl-coaches-overuse-play-action-they-havent-yet/
Edit: it also looks like you need to use play action to push the ball down the field. The play action into WR/tunnel screens isn't statistically effective.
Those smart NFL teams should also pay attention to exactly how they use the play-action. According to the Sports Info Solutions data, passes thrown 7 yards deep or less are caught less frequently on play-action than on other passes. This could be because defenders have moved toward the line of scrimmage and are in better position to make a play on the ball. Play-action is only more effective than other passes when the ball travels at least 8 yards in the air — over the head of the linebackers who’ve been fooled.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:35 AM ^
The let down is going to be when we play a real defense that stacks the box and dares us to pass. If we go down more then 7-10 points I’m not sure we have the passing attack we need. Who knows tho maybe this team goes full Wisconsin and can run against anyone.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:48 AM ^
Watch on Youtube the Monday Morning Quarterback show with Sam Webb and Devin Gardner about the Washington game. According to Gardner, he thought that Gattis called a great running game. He pointed out that Washington was stacking the box and it may have looked like Michigan was running the same basic plays but he pointed out that part of the reason Haskins and Corrum were gaining yards was that the Michigan line was coming at Washington in a variety of ways.
September 16th, 2021 at 10:32 AM ^
He also said the reason they didn't pass more was because they lost confidence in mcnamara. I just don't think that's good in any way. You can't lose confidence in your quarterback to the point where you stop throwing the ball.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:35 AM ^
No, I do not think a power running scheme is incompatible with a passing game. RPO's can be based off most any play, and there are historically proven pass play that every team can attempt regardless of whatever running scheme they're using. It's an asinine statement.
However. Based on Gattis' resume and experience, there is no chance in hell any of this offense is his. He has no demonstrable experience with a power run game. His experience is coaching WR's, Joe Moorehead, and wide open offenses at Bama with Mike Locksley (currently running an ultra-wide open offense at MD). He needed running help from Warriner for the previous two years.
Conversely, the run plays we've seen so far have 'Property of Jim Harbaugh' tattooed all over them! It's very similar to the offenses we watched in 2015 and 2016, and some parts of 2017. You know, before the arrival of Pep Hamilton and alternate offensive schemes meant to 'modernize' the Michigan offense...
I don't think the two are incompatible, but I do think they are very separate right now. We'll see an improved passing game as Cade gains experience and - importantly - as the WR's gain experience. Right now, the passing game just isn't good enough to pop RPO's all over the place.
I mean, we've expected offense things to improve through the year and haven't seen it before. So I'm no longer expecting 200+ passing ypg; but I do expect >150ypg as it improves.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:42 AM ^
Other than the fact that the running game has actually been successful, what marks the current run scheme as similar to JH from 2015-2017?
September 14th, 2021 at 10:48 AM ^
I've noticed personnel groupings. Multiple TE, extra OL - classic Harbaugh Manball formations - only difference is that it's with "H-Backs" out of the Shotgun and Pistol instead of under center with a fullback in the I formation.
I also feel like there's more of a focus on gap blocking run schemes (Power/Counter etc) vs the Split Zone focused stuff we used with Shea, but that could be confirmation bias.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:17 AM ^
This is what I've seen, as well. All the beef - extra TE's, few 3-WR sets, All lining up as an H-Back, although he's closer to being a FB at times. It just looks and feels more like a typical Harbaugh running game.
I'm okay with whatever offense, I just want it to work. So far, it's working - even if I agree the pass game needs better output than 44 yards. But when the defense just plain refuses to think about stopping your run game, just keep running!
September 14th, 2021 at 2:58 PM ^
I agree the pass game needs better output than 44 yards. But when the defense just plain refuses to think about stopping your run game, just keep running!
No sure i understand. A big contributor to the passing game having only 44 yard was the fact that they just kept running (as you suggested they should). Is your complaint that they should have gotten more yards on the 15 passes? In other words its was really the 2.9 ypa that was troubling?
September 14th, 2021 at 6:16 PM ^
I wasn't complaining about the pass game! As for a better output, yeah, I think we can all agree that we'd rather see more completions than a few bubble screens that went nowhere. But given the newness of the WR group, the really good secondary that Washington has, and the focus they had to stop all passes, I think it's more than fair that they weren't tested.
Step 1) Beat Washington
Step 2) Work on the pass game against NIU
Step 3) Work on the pass game against Rutger
Step 4) Profit
September 14th, 2021 at 11:49 AM ^
One improvement over Pep is, I haven't seen a Play Action pass on 3rd and 15 yet.
Seriously though, the line between RPO and PA isn't that clean or announcers wouldn't have such a hard time describing which is which. I know the definition is clear, but I think practical application must be very unclear.
Also, I'm not surprised you can tell when they are going to run the bubble based on the formation. It was obvious defenses knew it was coming last year and seemed obvious against U Dub too. I just don't watch hours of film myself to figure it out.
September 14th, 2021 at 10:36 AM ^
Keep in mind that Shea '2019 is tied with Tom Brady 1999 for the 6th most completions and 2nd for most passing yards in a season. To say Gattis has been a disappointment isn't really backed up by the statistics.
Joe Milton was just a bad (and injured) QB. When Cade came in for relief in the Rutgers game, he lit them up thru the air.
The existing running attack gives us a great foundation to build upon. Everyone is freaked out because Washington more or less sold out to stop the pass, so we ran on them. That's not a bad thing. It is exactly what we should have done - take what their D gave us. End of story.
September 14th, 2021 at 11:46 AM ^
I sort of agree with the point you're trying to make but you can't compare passing stats between 2019 and 1999. So much offensive inflation in that time. Brady's 2200 yards his senior year are worth 3000 yards+ in today's college game.
September 14th, 2021 at 12:56 PM ^
Here is the thing though, can you imagine how lethal of an offense we could have had with Brady, Terrell, and Anthony Thomas if we ran a hurry up that year and got in more plays?
Another thing we still do 20 years later is we still take forever and a day to get plays off, and it sure seems on purpose.
September 14th, 2021 at 1:01 PM ^
Tom Brady in 1999:
#38 in total yards
#47 in total attempts
#17 in QB rating
Tom Brady has been a great NFL QB - but he was merely a good college QB, and he played in an offense that pass averse even for 1999.
In 2019 - that Tom Brady 1999 season would have qualified for about 80th in the country in terms of yards, with the #56 QB rating.
We're literally talking bottom 1/2-1/3 of college football passing stats.
September 14th, 2021 at 1:26 PM ^
Partially agree. There were times - when the game was still competitive - when it was clearly a passing down and we decided to run. I don't think Cade should have had 30 attempts, but ~20 with the extra 5 being downfield passes would have been ideal.