Otish: Durkin looking to run Meyer's offense at MD

Submitted by ak47 on

This is a little off topic but I think speaks to some things.  Durkin has worked on defense under both Harbuagh and Meyer.  The word coming out of MD is that Durkin is looking to run Meyer's offense for MD.  I think its a little telling which he believes is the harder offense to stop (shocker what he thinks given the last game).

We all love Harbaugh but damn if that isn't telling.

funkifyfl

December 4th, 2015 at 3:57 PM ^

Is the Harbaughffense (or is it Harboffense?) really just Bo's offense redux? Brian and others sometimes describe the O as old-timey looking at first glimpse, but very modern with some of the formations, motions, and most importantly, wrinkles used as constraints. I haven't seen many (...really any) Bo games in full, but I'm curious if Harbaugh is really just recycling what he learned here? It seems to me it would be hard for such an innovative and maniacal person like him to not pickup things at every stop and incorporate them as he goes along (personnel permitting of course).

Ghost of Fritz…

December 4th, 2015 at 5:09 PM ^

offense.  The similarity lies in a desire to runthe ball.  But what Harbaugh does is far more complex, and also far more of a chess match than was Bo's offense.  Harbaugh has taken some of the elements of what Bo did, used it as a starting point, and built something more complex and ultiamtely his own.

The Mad Hatter

December 4th, 2015 at 4:03 PM ^

that anything Bo (or Mo or Lloyd) ever ran, but that's where it's roots are.

There was a play he called earlier this year (I don't remember what game) but people were saying that the formation was something not seen in 40 years, but with some modern wrinkles.

Once we're hitting on all cylinders, Michigan is going to be unstoppable.

I dumped the Dope

December 4th, 2015 at 4:19 PM ^

head, and will until proven otherwise, that we are on a trajectory to have an OL like Stanford with 5 guys ready to pound the DL into submission for 4 quarters.  Stanford at their zenith (under Shaw....but recall where the scheme and players came from) ran that old school goalline offense with 6 TEs and no WRs all over the field, it was just a simple pulling guard play where there were two guys (FB and G) blasting anyone sideways who dared to set foot in the hole.  It pitted a G or a FB on a LB and then a RB on a safety.

Dominate the line of scrimmage win = a *lot* of games.  The concept is as old as the game.  We are close on the DL.

bringthewood

December 4th, 2015 at 4:44 PM ^

For many years Bo ran the triple option with very little down field passing. I don't know that I would even call his laters years pro style but he did have fullbacks and tight ends. Much more vanilla than Harbaugh in my rememberance.

I always thought he was better at execution and motivation than strategy.

Lampuki

December 4th, 2015 at 4:26 PM ^

 but do you really need to burn a scholly on a scout team player? I prefer to think that they will be used as a hybrid to char a team that has been preparing all week for the Harbaufense. 

 

Maybe Denard can come back and be a grad asst or consultant  just to  run the read option as a decoy for us.  His presence alone would be wonderful.   

Bodogblog

December 4th, 2015 at 8:34 PM ^

For the purposes of this discussion, lower tier means lower level recruiting. Many on the board are assuming Md won't be able to bring in top level recruits, so they need an advantage in offensive scheme. I think that's silly. But the first part us true, they won't be able to recruit like M, OSU, or PSU. It's possible that they could, by great evaluation and some luck, bring in NFL talent like Sparty and Wiscy.

Bodogblog

December 5th, 2015 at 9:26 AM ^

I said great evaluation and some luck. Jack Conklin was a preferred walk-on, for example, behind a lot of guys they recruited. They obviously developed them. But you seem to be under a false impression: I'm not arguing that pro style is better for lower tier recruits, or better in any way. I'm pointing out an obvious counterargument to those here suggesting the spread provides an advantage to schools which can't obtain top end recruits. Also, calm down. Have a glass of milk.

TrueBlue2003

December 4th, 2015 at 5:22 PM ^

you're living in the 90s reminder.

Iowa is bad at offense almost all the time, so they're not a good example, and when they are decent, it's when several of their plethora of 3 stars turn out to be NFL talent at the same time, which is the best they can hope for running their offense - decent once every 5-10 years. Their last four years in FEI offensive ranks: 2015: 30th; 2014: 71st; 2013: 52nd; 2012: 85th.  Not even going to go back further because they don't do well at all for a P5 school. 

Wisconsin has had as good or better O line talent the past 10-15 years than anyone else in the B1G (save maybe OSU) and for that type of offense, o line is mostly what matters.  The RBs and WRs are essentially plug and play (as every single one of them doesn't end up doing much in the NFL after having steller careers at UW, but even still their RBs and QBs are mostly NFL backups which is better than we can say).

And MSU has had top level talent for the past 8+ years. No one in the conference can boast the level of QBs (Hoyer, Cousins and soon Cook will all be starting in the NFL), RBs (Bell, Langford, etc) and WRs they've had, and the O lines have been very good as well. Their offensive success has been absolutely talent driven.

The assumptions of the past (that UM and OSU will as a given have superior talent) have not held true the past 8-10 years in the conference.

Zok

December 4th, 2015 at 7:04 PM ^

I agree 100% and was going to post basically the same thing.

 

Not sure anyone can convince me that you need A++ talent to be ELITE on O and run a pro-style. Same is not true for Spread game. Examples of the latter are plenty.

 

Luckily at UM we have the potential for A++ talent on O (still ligh years away from that - see OL, RBs).

Bodogblog

December 4th, 2015 at 9:04 PM ^

Here's just a few blindingly obvious ones: Pac12 championship will be USC vs Stanford, pro style vs pro. RichRod's Arizona and crosstown AZ State, the spreadsiest of spreadsies, each went 6-6. SEC championship is Alabama vs Florida, pro vs pro. The next tier of top finishers in that conference conference were Georgia, Ole Miss, Arkansas, and LSU. Pro, spread, pro, pro. Auburn, which had had acess to elite talent forevs, went an ugly 6-6. ACC perennial powers are FSU and Clemson, pro and pro. I'm tired of this silly argument so I'll stop. I don't dislike the spread, love watching it. What I despise is the idea that any system provides an inherent advantage over another. There's no data to support this.

Bodogblog

December 4th, 2015 at 9:24 PM ^

Durkin is not running a spread because it provides a cover for lower level recruits or any other inherent advantage. He's running it because the AD wants him to, because he wants exciting, rootin' tootin' football in his stadium to bring the town folk in. This guy will probably start launching fireworks after touchdowns, and soon have a turtle mascot running around accosting their fans. An old white guy thinks the spread is really cool and wants to wear it on the weekend like an Ed Hardy t-shirt. This is the only reason Durkin is using it, and it is not a good argument its favor.

Mr Miggle

December 4th, 2015 at 8:58 PM ^

Dwayne Haskins, a pro-style QB. I wonder if he sticks around. One position Maryland has recruited really well is WR. That scheme may not be the best fit for the talent available

Wolfman

December 4th, 2015 at 10:49 PM ^

The air raid offenses generally use a quick inside trap as their main rushing threat and use play action off this. Their targeted recruits are burners on the outside that can cause headaches for any defense because they just get on the dbs so damn quick and past them far easier than mos teams. Their RB is usually a 230 to 235 lber that hits the hole quickly and doesn't have to contend with more than 7 in the box.  QBs are recruited with a premium on passing accuracy and just enough speed to pull the ball occasionally. 

Meyer's offenses, as we have seen puts a premium on athletes that even at wideout are great open field runners and carry enough weight to almost always carry out their blocking assignments in a punishing manner. He likes an elite rusher as opposed to one that will pick up decent yardage to pull the defense in. He wants a real threat here and that comes with his recruitment of AA OLmen. As we've seen w/players ranging from Tebow, Miller, Barrett, Smith, he wants a qb whose athleticism makes him a decent passer by default. His qbs, his premier qbs, have all been blessed with superior football intelligence as well. The drop off this season in his rotating door approach to qbing kept OSU from hitting stride much earlier and could have cost him a shot at the Final Four. His offenses, as you wisely point out in grasping the difference are made up of truly great offensive players at every position, not unlike all great offenses and are not designed to mitigate the inefficiencies of his players, but to magnify their strengths. That is why, when clicking, they can make a Bama defense look like most defenses throughout the nation. The MSU game was an aberration and was Urban at his very worst. Anyone who has ever coached know we all have experienced at least one game like that, no matter the level. Our advantage next year, provided we are as productive on offense will be our defense returning almost intact and w/the addition of Mone and a group that was RSed this season, hopefully learning technique. OSU should be a little down in the first half of the season,losing so many players but will have the most important member back in Barrett.

ak47

December 4th, 2015 at 3:55 PM ^

I mean Bama has run a pretty up tempo offense under Kiffin and the teams that have hurt Bama's defense have been spread option teams.  Manzial at A&M, OSU last year, Auburn other than this year.  I think Harbuagh can have his offense be succesful because he is a good coach, there isn't one way to win.  I just found it an interesting point.

I do wish someone would ask why they don't have their unblocked de hit the qb every time.  If he comes at the qb every time it forces a handoff every time. Sure it takes the de out of the play without being officially blocked but it means the rest of your defense and primarily your lbs and safety can treat it like a run play every time, take away the option aspect of play.

Asgardian

December 4th, 2015 at 4:53 PM ^

Lane Kiffin:

Position coach at USC in its prime under Norm Chow, former BYU OC under Lavell Edwards, back in the hey-day w/ Steve Young, they inspired Hal Mumme & Mike Leach to create the air raid.  BYU was influenced heavily by Sid Gillman:

http://smartfootball.com/offense/the-air-raid-offense-history-evolution…

http://smartfootball.blogspot.com/2009/04/sid-gillman-father-of-modern-…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Gillman