Offense Transition Timeline

Submitted by WestQuad on June 13th, 2019 at 7:08 AM

Recruits keep saying that Michigan is transitioning to a spread and that Gattis has the keys. #speedinspace.    After having lived through (barely) RR and Hoke's offensive transitions and even JH's transition to a competent linemen lacking underwhelming offense I'm a bit skittish. 

Our offense is loaded with talent that should be able to play in a spread, but am I going to hear that Tarik, Nico and DPJ are too tall and slow to really play in a spread the first time we play anyone?   

What will the offensive transition look like?  Lower my expectations of total dominance so that I am emotionally prepared.  Will our defense suck because we're no longer playing ball control?   Will our line be able to block? I want to know the speed bumps now.

1VaBlue1

June 13th, 2019 at 9:41 AM ^

This is very true.  In the opposite, Hoke continuing to run RR's spread with DR was smart - to a point.  It came, over time, to be too slow a transition to 'pro set' (poor damn Devin Gardner).  RichRod went whole hog in forcing players to do things they couldn't physically do.  Hoke, in year 1, used the personnel he inherited in the way they were best suited.  He slowly changed (well, tried to change) that over the years, to piss poor results. 

DoubleB

June 13th, 2019 at 10:00 AM ^

This is a huge coaching conundrum and I actually think RichRod went about it the right way. If you have a system and are going to run THAT system, then do it right away even if you don't have all the players for it. You have some of the players that will play in the system when the rest of the parts start coming in and teaching them now gives them good experience.

RichRod's offense went from 90th to 32nd to 11th in S&P his 3 years at Michigan. I'm not sure if the offense is as good in 2010 without some of the growing pains of 2008.

Watching From Afar

June 13th, 2019 at 11:23 AM ^

I'm not sure if the offense is as good in 2010 without some of the growing pains of 2008. 

They got Denard and that had nothing to do with the growing pains of 2008.

RichRod's offense went from 90th to 32nd to 11th in S&P his 3 years at Michigan.

The argument is the offense didn't need to start out at 90th to get to 32nd and subsequently 11th. Year one, shoehorning Threat/Sheridan in that type of offense didn't help them get to 11th in 3 years. What helped them get to 11th in 3 years was getting a QB who could run the system and some more mobile OL.

A majority of the 2010 offensive skill position players were underclassmen. It wasn't seniors who had learned through the struggles of 2008 to be significantly better in 2010. It was recruiting the guys RR needed to run his offense (which generally wasn't very good against the best of the Big Ten).

DoubleB

June 13th, 2019 at 12:19 PM ^

Do you truly believe there is 0 transition cost to installing a completely new offense? This isn't like adding some RPOs to what you already do. This was a complete change from top to bottom--scheme, techniques, how to practice, etc. That takes time, more time than most people fully realize. That cost was paid in 2008 as opposed to 2009.

Watching From Afar

June 13th, 2019 at 2:39 PM ^

Do you truly believe there is 0 transition cost to installing a completely new offense?

Not at all. I also don't subscribe to the idea that you must immediately go all in on the new offense day 1.

That cost was paid in 2008 as opposed to 2009.

If they don't get Denard and have Threat as a Senior playing QB, their offense is an unmitigated disaster because the transition costs in 2008 doesn't make poor fits better. Steven Threat was never going to be a dual threat, 4.5 40 QB. The players he eventually got drove the offense more than changing the scheme and techniques of upperclassmen did.

Harbaugh gets to the 49ers and doesn't run what he did at Stanford because Alex Smith isn't an under center, drop back passer like Luck. They put in a bunch of shotgun sets and give him some easy west coast concepts. Smith gets hurt and they start running read option stuff with Kaep because he's a superior athlete who can't drop back and dissect a defense. That's good coaching.

lostwages

June 13th, 2019 at 4:35 PM ^

Problem is... I think he ran it in the wrong conference, at the wrong time. It was an all out fluster cluck because it wasn't done in an efficient manner.

See Urban Meyer OSU, and zone-read option... this is how Michigan should have morphed it's O.

BlueMarrow

June 13th, 2019 at 11:43 AM ^

It was worse than just that. We had a 5 star QB in Mallett who went on to start in the SEC for two years, and then had a 7 year run in the NFL. Rather than use him as the nucleus of the rebuild, RR slashed, burned, and attempted a Phoenician transition. If he would have tried to use existing personnel, he would have been able to keep his defense off the field longer, and in better positions to defend. Had he not attempted such a drastic transition, he would have won some games and kept the hounds off his heels long enough to get at least one more year, when Hoke won with his guys. With that being written, I love where we are right now. I would not change anything, because everything that happened led us to where we are going: A dynasty in the making.

1VaBlue1

June 13th, 2019 at 12:37 PM ^

Mallet never gave RR a chance!  He transferred out before RR even got to campus, Carr signed his paperwork.  I think it was one phone call from RR before Mallet was gone...

That said, the first thing that turned me off to RR was season 1, after hearing all summer about how he can adapt to personnel.  He didn't even try!  That's when I knew it was going in the wrong direction, but I had no idea it would that wrong...

Mr Miggle

June 13th, 2019 at 2:35 PM ^

That offense was going to be brutal no matter what RR tried to run. I'd even say that was the best offense for Sheridan. He couldn't throw downfield, but he could run a little. Threet missed wide open receivers with regularity and there were few weapons to throw to.He was a bad fit for RR's offense, but he was also just plain bad.

befuggled

June 13th, 2019 at 11:12 AM ^

Had RR survived another year, I'd argue that his offense would been just as likely to put up 40 against Ohio State in 2011. 

Or are you saying that Denard and crew needed the genius of Al Borges and Darrell Funk to start scoring points? Most likely another year of experience would have fixed a lot of the issues they had in 2010, and RR might have avoided some of the mistakes Borges made (like the 2011 Iowa game plan with Denard under center).

Now the defense is another story...

Watching From Afar

June 13th, 2019 at 11:29 AM ^

Had RR survived another year, I'd argue that his offense would been just as likely to put up 40 against Ohio State in 2011. 

You're probably correct. But they would have had to score 60+ to win that game.

The point remains that RR's offenses generally beat up on their OOC opponents and lower level Big Ten teams. Against MSU, Wisconsin, PSU, OSU, and even Iowa, the offense was significantly worse and coupled with shit defense led to losses against all of them.

RR was never going to consistently compete for a Big Ten title with an offense that couldn't win a shootout with the top Big Ten teams. In 2010, that team gave up an average of 39.6 PPG against those 5 opponents. They averaged 22.2 PPG on offense. That's crap.

outsidethebox

June 13th, 2019 at 7:42 AM ^

Those (too) tall receivers can and will take the top off the defense and Sainristil, Jackson and Bell are going to create havoc underneath. And when Charbonnet blows by the LBs and is running free into the secondary look at the fear in those DBs eyes as he comes barreling their direction with a full head of steam-this kid is going to be a terror. 

DrMantisToboggan

June 13th, 2019 at 7:43 AM ^

Well, the transition to a “spread” offense from more West Coast and formerly pro style looks started last year, and really back in 2017. For at least a plurality of 2018, if not a majority, we were in spread formations. The transition that is going on right now is moreso terminology, personnel (which isn’t really burdensome you’re either on the field or not), and specific plays, the latter being the most difficult to grasp.

 

I don’t think it will take much time, but I don’t think Gattis will have everything in his arsenal installed by week one. We will have enough mastered by the opener to the point where the offense seems to run differently and I don’t think there will be many hiccups. The run game will not change much at all. We will have a few different formations and a few different option plays. Really, every group should be very comfortable, save for maybe the TEs. They will have the biggest adjustment to make.

NeverPunt

June 13th, 2019 at 10:07 AM ^

somehow I missed that he's also 6'5" - for some reason I remembered him as smaller. Makes his speed more impressive to me. Hope he gets a healthy dose of game action both because of his talent and because he's the heir apparent here for next year. Shea will do well this year but the next couple years could well be the McCaffrey show ft. special guest Joe Milton's cannon arm. Would like him to get a couple drives against weaker opponents and special package action against the rest to get him experience. As good as he's looked in limited action, the one thing we haven't seen is enough live game reps to know if he can do it all, consistently. Backup QBs and all that.

Dopamine

June 13th, 2019 at 8:11 AM ^

I wouldn't be surprised if our offensive transition looks similar to PSU in 2016; they weren't world beaters at the start of the season but at some point everything sort of clicked for them from what I remember (post-OSU game?).