Peppers at 10, which seems low.
The OL is in a bad Funk
Yeah, nobody has talked about this at all...
What percentage of your posts are criticisms of other peoples posts? 80%? 90%?
In the past 24 hours, your posts have included such insights as "What is the OP smoking?" and "Fuck Al Borges."
So pardon me if I dismiss your criticism. But you can feel free to click on my avatar and figure out the answer to your own question.
Oh I don't claim to have the most insightful posts when not sober, but at least I'm not a cranky old man. Lighten up a little.
over the last 24 hours, Yost. Do you really have nothing else to do?
Sure I have. A loss to OSU does that. I would submit that it has not been the finest 24 hours for many of our fellow members. All I'm saying is the constant contradiction gets old. I can provide a hug if needed...
Do me a favor and change your avatar to a horses' ass. Please do it for just one day, it will at least let me appreciate you for being a good sport and having a sense of humor, despite your sorry ass posts. Thanx in advance
I am starting to hate the picture of Yost in your avatar, because it has become synonymous to me with your ludicrous posts on this blog. You Sir, are giving Fielding H. Yost a bad name.
That's the spirit! You and Magnus should be great friends. In all honesty though, I am very disappointed you don't like my posts. I've spent so much time trying to please you...
How about you just walk away from the internet for a few days instead?
Wow and I thought Magnus was bad. Looking back at your posts, you're like the Simon Cowell of Mgoblog!
treading a rather thin line there talking about asses!
The point of my comment was that there are people on here who seem to have an agenda of criticizing other posters. You know, the ones who complain about "OT" in the title, constantly criticize threads, act like everyone on here has to be a football coach in order to comment. Can I be an ass? Absolutely. I've gotten into a good number of ridiuclous arguments with people here (the hunting one was admittedly ridiculous). A good percentage of my posts are downright terrible. I'll work on that. But I don't actively seek out opinions to bash all the time. Here are just some from Magnus and David from Wyoming over the last 10 DAYS:
"Has anyone told you are cool you are today yet?"
"I could do without bullshit like this being posted."
"This post is bullshit."
"This is THE DUMBEST IDEA IN EXISTENCE."
"This is an extremely stupid statement."
"Well, you clearly seem smarter than Brandon, so maybe you should apply for the job."
"Watch a Colorado game moran."
"Nice strawn man. Because I totally said Denard Robinson didn't create excitement. didn't I?"
"you are an awful person."
"Neat, you said 'Go Blue to Justin Boren. We are all in awe of your intestinal fortitude."
"I feel bad for you, but you are 14. Your life will go on."
"You just regurgitated our all-time record against teams when you could have brought up some interesting points in this post."
"Do you have any evidence at all to support this post, or is it just your introduction to the self-published thesis...."
"This OP is the defintion of redundant."
"This post brought to you by the year 2010."
"I have always liked the idea of more banhammering"
"No no, please, I would love to hear you try to clarify this."
"That is an absurd charge."
"Results-based charting is dumb in certain cases, and this is one of them."
"Nice work replying to that post without a huge amount of snark."
"If you would have changed the title like everyone else does...we wouldn't be here"
"Poor grammar, rehashed opinion that isn't backed up by anything other than a gut feeling...yup this really needs to be a brand new thread"
Go ahead and rip my bad posts, but the fact is the board is less fun with the MGoCommentNazis.
I just think it's funny that you're engaged in criticizing other people's posts about criticizing other people's posts.
I don't make a habit of it.
Are you joking?
You have 200+ posts consisting of nothing but content free ad hominem attacks and bitching in the past 24 hours. You are the worst thing on the Internet this weekend.
Content-free attacks? Like these?
"And fuck if, when shit doesnt go our way, we don't act like aching, whining bitches."
"Fucking grow up. All of you. You are what you claim Sparty is."
"It's amazing that we attended a school that like to pretend it's a paragon of class and virtue, we sneer at classlessness from MSU and OSU."
"Jamie Morris is a jealous little troll and an outted inveterate liar."
"I wish I could neg MGoBlog authors."
"Maybe you shouldn't post your businesses website in your signature - people don't want to hire a fucking idiot to train them."
"Everyone needs to grow the fuck up."
"How will me going back to that stop a 180 comment thread half full of assholes whining because a kid may not play for their favorite team? Please elaborate."
"Whiner sore loser shit. We lost. deal."
"I ran your post through google translate in all the romance languages, and got nothing. Finally, I tried "bitter illiterate" and it returned "I'm butthurt."
"Not really a cohesive viewpoint."
"Rarely do I see someone kneecap their one argument so effectively."
"#3 is the most reflexive, post hoc criticism."
"Because nobody other than yourself would have spent tonight thinking about whether 3rd grade sportsmanship was observed in the midst of a field rush."
"This thread is an embarassment."
"A few retorts, because I think you're burning a ton of straw men here."
"If I never hear a word from Braylon or Stan Edwards again, that would be peachy."
And here's the crown jewel: "Making personal attacks off the bat makes you sound like an asshole."
That's a sample of 6 days worth. Honestly, are you even a Michigan fan?
Getting a little defensive are we?
No, not really. Chitown has illustrated my point perfectly, and I think it's time to put this fiasco to rest. Go Blue.
How is claiming something is post hoc criticism a personal attack?
How is saying Jamie Morris is a liar attacking the poster?
Howmis accusing someone of burning a straw man personal?
How is saying someone lacks a cohesive viewpoint personal?
How is saying that SHANE MORRIS shouldn't be engaging in the "haha you're not going to a bowl" attacking anyone?
Just because I use the word "asshole" doesn't make it an attack on anyone.
It seems like you've just looked for swearing?
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and cross all of those off the list. You still managed to call dozens of posters "assholes" and "whining bitches" with one comment, and I hardly think ripping on Shane Morris, Jamie Morris, and Stan Edwards is the kind of content that contributes in a meaningful way to this board. Read that list and tell me which one of those comments add anything to the discussion.
Nevermind, it ain't worth it.
Cool story bro. Why are you dragging me into this? All I suggested was that you take some time off.
Based on your comments, I'd say you've been plenty cranky...
Ghost of Yost is also probably a bit cranky due to it being deer season right now and as I'm sure many of us remember, he's not exactly "pro-hunting".
BTW.....I got an 8 point buck on opening day just west of Alpena!
Not every day I agree with Magnus but...
hit the nail on the head there.
They might be confused because the offense itself is a confused jumble of mixed up plays
I think we'll see a smoother year next season even with a younger group. There's a reason Oregon doesn't line up in the I with multiple tight ends and try to run power and there's a reason Stanford doesn't run read-option out of a wide open spread look. This team unsuccessfully tried to run a little bit of read-option with a little bit of traditional ISO/power football and had issues with both.
If Kyle Kalis is running power all day in practice and doesn't know who to block then it may be time to worry. As it is our too-big playbook caused more problems than it solved the last two years. We never had a comfort zone or an identity outside of one play (inverted veer) and were never able to develop counters or wrinkles to anything we did in the running game. I think all we've learned is that with limited practice time you can't learn two offenses in college football. Going forward that shouldn't be an issue.
Oregon doesn't often line up in the I, but they can (and do) run power, so it is possible for an OL to do both. And it's especially effective when power is run out of the same formation as a zone play (like Oregon does). Maybe Michigan's OL wasn't physically capable of running power (can't coach size), but at least the Ducks' OL doesn't look confused when doing either power or zone. Have to put OL mental lapses on the coaches.
From tackle to tackle, every OL in college football runs zone and gap schemes. Not to mention that inverted veer is power except there's no FB kicking out the DE, the DE is influenced outside by the sweep action and it's a read. From tackle to tackle, inverted veer is power.
The main difference b/w this year and last year is we had the Rimington Award winning All-American at center, Schofield at guard, and Huyge at RT. That takes out an All-American and a reliable run blocker and replaces them with Mealer and Barnum.
Running Vincent Smith out of the I in obvious short yardage situations didn't work when David Molk was here either.
Why would it matter whether it's an option or ISO in terms of blocking? I've always thought run blocking was run blocking.
Also, I don't see how a tweak in scheme is such a big deal. We have seen other programs switch with better results.
You're probably going to take heat for the tone of that, but I think your concern is well placed. Frey got Lewan playing at a high level as a freshman with only one year of HS Oline experience, Molk obviously developed into a Rimington winner, Omameh had a very promising sophomore campaign, Dorrestein and Huyge turned into serviceable players after not being very highly regarded. Since then Lewan took a step forward and then a step back, Omameh turned from an asset to a liability and Barnum and Mealer as 5th year seniors didn't cut it. Even if Lewan comes back next year we'll have a very young line with little depth. If the line is serviceable Frunk will have proven his chops, if it isn't Funk hasn't earned the benefit of the doubt.
Kalis and Magnuson, both will be RS Frshman, may be starting next year at LT and RG. If Lewan comes back, then Magnuson will be his backup, but Kalis will still be starting, which is fine, since he will probably be ready to take on the burden.
If it's Lewan/Kalis/Miller/Bryant/Schofield, it won't be too bad. However, it puts us in a similar situation of USC this season, where any injury along the line could be very bad.
i don't think Schofield would be an automatic starter next season... tho he should given that he'll be a 5th year player. Unlike this where our back up O linemen where either true freshman or walk ons , next year we'll at least have red shirt freshman back up and true freshman
Spread OL in a Pro-Style offense. Jumping from Rodriguez to Hoke wasn't as rough as the transition from Carr to Rodriguez was, but the costs are there.
Our O-line personnel in 2008 was more to blame than a change in scheme. That group was so poor RR was forced to convert a D-lineman into an O-line starter.
Our starting guard, Bryant got hurt before the season even started. Mealer wasn't supposed to start, let alone at center, the most important position on the line. But, he had to, since Miller was still probably undersized for the position. The backups at both guard positions was a walk-on sophomore, and behind him a true freshman. At RT it's the same thing. A walk-on backup and a true freshman behind him.
If this happens in the next couple years, then you can start talking about Funk. Until then, no. Not happening. He did a heckuva job I'd say given the personnel.
I don't think Bryant was listed as first string in the spring or fall before his injury.
It was a tire fire because he was dealing with some pretty mediocre players. Let's see what he does in the next three years.
I mean the guys might not be undersized or weak but that doesn't make them talented. Lewan had a bad game but I didn't see anyone saying he took a step back before this game and the play calling put the weakness of our o-line up against the strength of the osu defense. I'm not willing to get worked up about funk until 2 years when the talented linemen have a year of starting.
He wasn't as good as last year, but all the way leading up to The Game, the scouts had Lewan pegged as a top 15 pick. I still think that remains true, but it'll be up to Taylor if he wants to stay or not. I wouldn't fault him for going pro, but he does seem like the kind of guy that would stick it out to the end of eligibility.
Hoke knows that to win football games it all starts up front on both sides of the ball. He's a lineman kind of guy. If there needs to be changes made, he'll make them. But I think this is a bit of an overreaction.
I think losing Molk hurt us a lot more than we thought it would, and we're feeling the effects of that right now. He was the glue that held our line together last year. What else would you expect from a Rimington award winner?
Keep in mind also that guys like Barnum and Mealer didn't play much the last few years, and were thrown in as starters this year. You're dealing with a lot of guys who are generally inexperienced at their position outside of Lewan and Schofield. And as much as it sucks to hear this, we may very well have line issues next year, especially if Lewan declares for the draft. We will be extremely talented,yet extremely young on the line next year.
Run blocking is typically easier for young linemen to learn. Because of this I think UM's run game will be better than people think. The issue will come in the passing game. This is where Devin's mobiiity and Borges playcalling are going to be key.
Would you say that run blocking is more strength/skill based whereas pass blocking requiring more recognition/strategy? If so, that may say something about how we were passable through most of the year in pass blocking and terrible in run blocking this year.
Between barnum/Mealer, one of them wouldn't have seen the field if Chris Bryant didn't get hurt. What perplexes me though is that I thought Barnum was supposed to be the Center, but then they trot Mealer out there on opening day.
The center position thing was odd, especially as Borges was raving about what a great fit Barnum was for that spot up until the opening game. Since most of the issues in the run game had to do with not knowing who to block or when, that whole situation may have foreshadowed some non-physical issues on the interior that hurt the team all year.
I think that for whatever reason, Barnum didn't pan out at center. We had guys who had been around for a long time, but not ones who were ideal starters, then they got shuffled around as well. Maybe it is just wishful thinking, but damn, I sure hope they're more consistant as a unit next year.
Supposedly Mealer's snaps were better than Barnum's. And I do have to say that I don't remember a single bad snap from Mealer all year long. His blocking was suspect, but his snaps were as reliable as they come.
Why didn't they give Miller a shot? Still too undersized at that point?
Undersized and inexperienced. Mealer's significantly larger and, obviously, a fifth year senior.
I just looked at the depth chat specs, yeah, Miller was underweight, but he should be alright next season. Kalis though, he could've gone immediately if needed.
Miller undersized and inexperienced? I'm sick of the negativity you've been slinging around here. Nothing but critcisms with 80 to 90% of your posts.
What I never understood was the deal with Rocko Khoury. Wasn't he supposed to be Molk's replacement? Why did he leave?
I'm not entirely sure. From what I understand, the coaches told him that he still probably wouldn't play, so he got upset, took his degree, and headed into the real world. Obviously, I don't know if that's true or not because I wasn't there in the room, but that's the word on the street.
That seems so odd. He goes from starting the Sugar Bowl (though admittedly quickly pulled) to being told he won't play? Strange.
Yeah, I guess they thought Barnum was the answer at center...
I always thought Khoury was a capable player, and I thought he was a better blocker than Mealer. At the very least, we could have used him for depth at guard, because he had played both center and guard.
There were some premium rumblings that the coaches regretted not bringing Khoury back during fall camp.
most blaring of all was Lewan getting pwned by Freshman defensive ends. I don't care how good A Washington is, that should never happen.
The LT can play an excellent game on every play but one or two, and that's what will be remembered. It still sucks that it happened, but it happens.
I suspect Lewan has been playing hurt all year, FWIW.
when the O Line is that good at pass blocking, and that piss poor at run blocking, some of the blame has to go on the running backs
Or defenses were just playing contain when Robinson was in and the O Line proved to not be really that good at pass protection when a more traditional pocket passer like Gardner came in.
I think you're nuts. What Funk and this team accomplished with Barnum, Mealer,and Omameh in the starting lineup is remarkable.
I think it's fair to question their talent, but they had fairly substantial technique problems, no? If anything's fixable, that should be.
I think our O-Line was made up of mostly average to below average big ten linemen. Take out Lewan and the rest of them just are not that good.
I really don't feel great about the OL next year either. OL is the hardest position group to build depth in and I think it will take a a few more years. Next year we will have to rely on DG's ability to scramble out of the pocket.
Barnum was a 4-star guy with offers from Florida and South Carolina (both pretty good right now). Mealer was a top-250 recruit with multiple Big Ten offers (MSU, Northwestern, Purdue) who may have had more if he hadn't committed to us super early. Schofield was a top-250 recruit with offers from ND (pretty good right now) and Iowa (if they know one thing it is o-linemen). Lewan we all know about. And Omameh has played better earlier in his career in a system he was more comfortable in. All have been on campus at least 4 years.
Acting like this is some group of scrubs is just silly.
Amazing how at the beginning of the season, we are incredibly worried about the lack of talent on defense, yet the coaching from Mattison and Hoke always seems to turn underperforming players into overperforming players.
When the opposite happens on the OL -- highly ranked upperclassmen regress -- we start blaming the lack of talent, and say that Borges and Funk will need four years to get their players and system in place. Of course, Borges and Funk have never had success in year four anywhere, but let's not let facts and history get in the way of blind hope.
I don't completely disagree, but...
1. Using the job that Mattison (& Hoke) & co. have done with the defense as a benchmark for what's reasonable to expect is unfair. It's absolutely crazy how quickly they turned around that unit. You almost never see that kind of turnaround even from outstanding coaches.
2. Keeping bad coaches isn't good, but constant turnover isn't good either. I'd like to get a little more data on whether Borges and Funk can do this, and I'd like for some of the data to come from an offense with players they've recruited. I think the jury is still out. The day after an OSU loss, everything seems horrible, but remember that the offense far exceeded expectations in 2011 (considering the gaps between the types of players we had and the types of players we believe the coaches would prefer).
3. In another thread, you made Borges's lack of recruiting a central part of your case for why we don't want him. Well, to the extent that Funk has been involved in offensive line recruiting, it's hard to find someone on staff who has done a better job of attracting talent to his position.
The old "doing less with more" adage applies here. Most of our linemen as bad and talentless as they supposedly are, would be starting for any other b10 team not named OSU. Hmmmmmm....
What is your basis for saying that? You honestly think we have the second-best OL in the conference?
OL recruiting is not an exact science. Most OL recruits are men among boys going up against their HS competition, so it can be tricky to evaluate them, and on top of that, they often need to add some additional bulk before they can play in college. Omameh was better in the spread, and Schofield will look better when he returns to guard, but Barnum and Mealer frankly look like guys who just were overrated as recruits. The fact that Mealer never played before this year was a pretty big red flag.
How the accident set Mealer back physically, mentally, and development wise.
recruits, it's a major causation fail to use recruiting ratings as an indication these guys are good linemen.
Where is the hardware from these players; All Conference selections, award watch lists, etc.?
Just didn't function all year.. They all looked lost most of the time. Even Lewan. I'll give him a lot of credit for putting an end to all the dumb stuff he did. The 4th down play where Denard got stuffed there were two lineman just standing there. The guys were big and they were athlectic. i want to put some of the blame on the coaching. They didn't get the line to jell, ever. You know you are in trouble when you have to roll out a guy that's been there 5 years and couldn't make the lineup but then he is thrown into the starting lineup because of injuries.
We didn't really have a choice in who played OL this year. It was them, or true freshmen, or walk-ons. We had 3 solid starters last year, one great one, and one dominant one. Now we have one good one, one solid one, and 3 questionable starters all lined up next to each other. It's not surprising they aren't playing well. It feels like Omameh has taken a step back from last year, or maybe being lined up between a dominant Center and a solid Tackle made his job easier last year. They are being asked to do alot, though, maybe even more than last years line was.
If Kalis or any of the young guys was as good as advertised and the guys starting actually weren't capable of playing the position I don't think you see redshirts across the board. When 5th year guys don't know what's going on, a young guy probably doesn't have a shot. It is also probably a sign that you are trying to do too much.
Mentioned, but not discussed, is the fullback play. Two plays stood out. One time Hopkins ran to the hole and stopped. The running back ran into his back, then the pursuit tackled him for no gain. If Hopkins runs through the hole, even if he doesn't put a hat on anyone, the running back makes positive yardage, probably 5-6 yards. The other play was a sweep with Denard. With two pulling lineman in front of Denard, Hopkins fails to peel off and take the linebacker who made the tackle for about an 8 yard gain. The two linemen obliterated two OSU DBs. If Hopkins puts a hat on the linebacker that play was going for 15, 20, maybe a TD.
I thought Hopkins played horrible, really did not look like he was "in the game." He played uninspired IMO.
Play RT, I know schofield has a year under is belt, but he seemed so much better at guard last year. I really don't think Bryant was ever "penciled" in as the starter at guard, in fact, I remember more posts wondering why hoke never brought up Chris Bryant in any presses during the spring/fall. We just need to cross our fingers that between now and Feb. we have no lineman leave the program.
The depth chart for the game on Saturday, at least at right tackle, was listed as Schofield, then Gunderson, then Braden - this is actually unchanged across a fair portion of the season, as I recall. It is something of an illustration of the relative lack of experienced options here - after Schofield, you have a redshirt junior with limited action in nine games, and a freshman that hasn't seen the field to date. After Bryant was injured in August, the discussion may have ended for practical reasons, although I will say that at 6'4" and 340-ish pounds, I can see him being a pretty good OG (he was contending to be a primary backup at OG anyway, according to some reports) in a power blocking scheme.
Just look at this guy. LOOK AT HIM. I will doubt our viking OL coach after the guys he and his staff recriuted don't pan out.
If Lewan stays I think we should then move Schofield back to left guard, maybe it would make for a better combination.
Even though I don't know much I think this line-up would look good for next year.
Lewan..Schofield..Miller..Bryant..Kalis or Lewan..Schofield..Miller..Kalis..Braden
Does anyone think Bosch, Kugler, or Fox could play some right guard next year? I wouldn't think so since Hoke redshirted all the lineman this year, but I'm just hoping one of these guys can get some playing time.
Our OL looked better running spread option type plays and that's because that is what they were recruited for. Obviously, the Big Ten sucks so we got by running pro style sets against the garbage competition. But every game against a top tier defense we struggled.
I agree, these olineman were brought in to run a specific scheme which it turned out they didn't too much. They are not guys who are going to run the power, if anything, the blame should be on the coaches for not applying more spread like schemes. I know an oline makes the runner, but I'm not sure we have a legit running threat regardless of who is blocking. Granted, I have not seen enough of drake Johnson, Hayes, and Deveon smith, I feel like Rawls is a fullback, just doesn't seem to have that extra gear needed to hit the hole. Also, I am no scout, it would seem as if lewan could use another year, this mostly come from my maize glasses probably but I believe he could improve even more if he stayed. It's hard to tell how well he run blocks, I think the scouts like him because of his athleticism, to me, he could use another year.
We were very very poor at running IZ, which was one of the things these guys were recruited to run. We had to pretty much drop OZ from the playbook we were so bad at running it. There were serious problems regardless of what they were supposed to run.
when they're suffering a spiritual and existential funk...."
"Go to the zoo? Flip off the monkeys?"
"No....BUY NEW SUITS!"
for all of our OMG shirtless O-line recruits? I'm pretty sure getting rid of him now is a bad idea. And he's been here for two fucking seasons. This blog went from the last blog of defense on Rodriguez hill to the HOLY SHIT FIRE EVERYONE ON OFFENSE, i.e. RCMB, blog in a matter of two seasons. I don't get it.
What happened was we became ND fans.
OP wrote: "Our guys aren't undersized anymore, and are "Wellman-ized," so they aren't weak."
I probably shouldn't, but I'll bite: When were they weak?
While I think that the offensive line has been the biggest single problem for us this year, that doesn't lead me to equate it as being a problem with Funk. As others have pointed out, we ended up in a shakey situation at the beginning of the year, including - echo other comments here - the departure of Molk being a major issue.
I think people are over analyzing this. Beyond Lewan, no one on that line is exceptionally talented. OSU's line, including their freshman, were almost all highly recruited, highly rated. They were better, and that makes a difference as much as some people won't admit it. Coaching only goes so far.
I agree that people may be over reacting about O-Line coaching, but OL was supposed to be one of our strengths this year. I think our line does have talent besides Lewan, what has been missing is not the ability to block people once engaged. While OSU's DL is very good and probably the best we have seen all year blocking has been a consistant problem. I think that the key problem facing this unit is lack of leadership and experience. Molk was an invaluable part of our offense in his role at center. Not only was he an exceptional blocker but more importantly he was extremely intellegent and was good at recognizing pressure and communicating blocking assignments. This year the problem has been the OL knowing who to block. The most common problems have been strait up misses by the OL. Center is one of the most difficult positions to replace because if its demands regarding communication and blocking calls. We will see how our line comes together in the next few years, much of how that turns out will be on coach Funk.
I don't think the OL was supposed to be one of our strengths this year. There were several question marks, including LG and C, along with how Schofield would do at RT.
but on the other hand we also have several returning starters including an estimated first round draft pick in Lewan at LT. In addition to that we have a 4 year veteran in Omameh, Scholfield who preformed at a fairly high level at LG last year and looks the part of a tackle and Barnum who was started several games throughout his time here at Michigan despite constant nagging injuries. Our Lack of experience concerned me at the begining of the year but honestly I was more worried about our depth and not the ability of our starters. I was only really worried about center and the absense of Molk initially.
Question marks asside many people projected our OL to be one of our strengths before the beginning of the season, including a great many people on this blog. Although I was not quite so optomistic the point I was trying to make is that the potential was there. I am of the opinion that the potential seen at the beginning of the season never really went away but rather this unit has continiously had trouble with the mental aspect of OL play.
I really just think they had more talent. Urban inherited a full stable of talent. The D line was stacked, the lbs young, but talented. Not to make excuses, but Hoke never had that luxury. We do not have a true FB dressed. Our line may have bulked up but is still a spread line. We will be fine. It just goes to show everything we lost when we went to the spread. Other than are true freshman and a walk-on we hardly had a tight end. I think for the most part we have over achieved for what we have done in this two year span.
It is pointed out by some that perhaps our Oline are overrated or not suited to the offense. I just looked at Northwestern's offense and they somehow generated a running attack. Now who is going to have more highly regarded recruits? Certainly not Northwestern. Venric Mark averaged 6.2 ypc. Take out the preconference schedule and he probably hits 6.5 ypc. Kain Colter is a very good spread QB. But he is no DR when it comes to pure athletic talent. I also would say he is just as inconsistant a passer. Yet Northwestern with Oline recruits that we would laugh at and skill players that are barely servicable for the MAC generated a credible running attack. So these excuses that our coaching staff can't come up with something in two years is laughable. Were paying a Ocoordinator 650K and he can't adjust to what he has? I do not accept that there was nothing to work with or the talent was too missmatched. No one was expecting Mattison magic. But certainly not the worse RB production ever?
You'll also note that Northwestern has been running the same offensive system for years and years. Their linemen were recruited for the plays they're running, and they've been running those plays since their first day on campus. Michigan...not so much.
What about Indiana? They have a brand new coach and still managed over 5 ypc vs that same OSU defense....
Sometimes strange things happen.
Sometimes Greg Frey.
Indiana also has a credible passing threat, something Michigan hasn't really developed this year.
poor o-line play because it's been bad all season. It's not surprising.
"Our guys aren't undersized anymore, and are "Wellman-ized," so they aren't weak. So those memes no longer hold true."
That meme was never true, just something old farts would call into local radio and bitch about.
I remember noting that our OL was actually heavier (with Perry Dorrestein at RT ) than Iowa's by an average 1-2 pounds back in '09 or '10, whichever it was.
Size isn't everything at OL, David Molk should have made people realize that.