Question re: Barwis
I'm still in the "Rich Rod will turn it around camp" and believe/hope that the team's struggles are based mostly upon its freshman QBs and lack of quality defensive players, although the team's lack of improvement from the beginning of the season is a bit disheartening. All that aside, I have a question about Barwis that I thought I'd ask the more knowledgeable football-watchers on this site.
After a season and a half with Barwis, have we seen anything to indicate that the team is stronger, better conditioned, or more explosive than it was under the Carr regime? The thought popped into my head on Saturday when we failed to score after the Roundtree catch. I thought the o-line was going to blow Illinois off the line and allow Brown to walk into the endzone. Obviously, that didn't happen.
I'm just wondering if the "Barwis is god" meme is still one worth subscribing to. Perhaps the improvement in strength and conditioning is being masked by poor decision-making and execution, but whatever the reason, I'm just not seeing it. Again, there are football watchers on this board far more knowledgeable than I. Just wanted to see what everyone else thought.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:22 PM ^
please.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:36 PM ^
Sorry. Let me know of a time more convenient for you and I'll table this thread until then.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:23 PM ^
If you watched the game Saturday, you also saw Brandon Graham, who was near 300 pounds at the end of the Carr regime, almost run down a RB on a long TD run, get an awesome speed sack, and block a punt.
Let these kids develop. The program has been in place for 18 months or so.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:29 PM ^
Brandon Graham is a five-star who would have been awesome under any regime. The line on Barwis was that he would turn less naturally-gifted players into monsters. I don't think we've seen evidence of that yet, which is a bit disheartening. Hopefully that will change.
(No neg-bangs, please - I'm responding honestly to the original poster's question, not trying to start a revolution. It's not like I've said that Barwis's performance has been "UNACCEPTABLE!").
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:32 PM ^
To clarify - Nor was I trying to suggest that Barwis' performace thus far has been "unacceptable" or anything along those lines. Just asking an honest question.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:48 PM ^
to say what you think because the love affair with Barwis.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:38 PM ^
deleted because it's not worth it
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:13 PM ^
"The line on Barwis was that he would turn less naturally-gifted players into monsters"
Nope.
This was the line that people who have been accused of being mouth breathing kool-aid slurpers, like a certain pro-RR blog, tried to DIFFUSE by repeatedly and sometimes harshly saying that BARWIS ISN'T A GOD AND IS ONLY BRINGING S&C UP TO THE CURRENT LEVELS OF ALL OTHER COLLEGE FOOTBALL PROGRAMS.
It's not Barwis' fault that some people chose to believe he was an infallible God capable of turning 2* athletes into 4* with any regularity.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:25 PM ^
BARWIS ISN'T A GOD AND IS ONLY BRINGING S&C UP TO THE CURRENT LEVELS OF ALL OTHER COLLEGE FOOTBALL PROGRAMS.
Has that played out? Is there anything in the team's performance over the past season and a half, in terms of S&C, to suggest that the conditioning program of the prior regime was beneath "the current levels of all other college football programs?"
Perhaps the response, as numerous people have already said, is "give it some more time." That's certainly reasonable. My only point is that I'm not sure we've seen anything thus far to suggest that the current program is any better than the previous one.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:27 PM ^
I would point out that our offensive linemen no longer appear to be pregnant (if anyone has an Alex Mitchell pic to post here it would be greatly appreciated).
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:33 PM ^
This is going to come out harsher than I mean it . . . Our non-pregnant looking offensive line just got destroyed by what had, previously, been considered to be the worst defensive front in the Big 10. I am NOT SAYING BARWIS IS TO BLAME for that, but I also wouldn't point to the O-line as evidence of Barwis's success right now.
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:53 PM ^
Just pointing out that none of them looks like he is about to drop a calf at any moment. Also, I think the o-line's issues are more talent-based than a reflection of their S&C program or work ethic (Ortmann, Huyge, and Dorrestein were middling 3-star recruits who are basically default starters since everyone else is so young).
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:18 PM ^
You're missing the point. The point isn't whether Graham is awesome and would be good under other coaching regimes - he sure could.
But, do you honestly believe that had Graham stayed in the Carr regime until this year, that he would have the strength, speed and explosion to have blocked punts in successive weeks, to have multiple sacks against Iowa's vaunted line, to have had THAT tackle against Winston, and to have the speed he has all over the field?
That is the Barwis difference, the combination of strength and speed. That is what he is developing with Lewan, Molk, Odoms, Emilien, Turner, Campbell and others.
Again, we're 18 months into changing what some of these guys had done for 3 years prior to early 2008. The kids who came here in the class of 2008 are going to fast, strong, and agile as they enter years 3 and 4 of the program. That, is when they are supposed to thrive.
Patience.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:43 PM ^
"But, do you honestly believe that had Graham stayed in the Carr regime until this year, that he would have the strength, speed and explosion to have blocked punts in successive weeks, to have multiple sacks against Iowa's vaunted line, to have had THAT tackle against Winston, and to have the speed he has all over the field?"
I don't know (no one can know), but I'm not sure why it's so unthinkable. It's not like we didn't have some amazingly athletic defensive players, with plenty of strength, speed and explosion, under Carr. (Besides, the blocked punt against Delaware State shouldn't count in your analysis, for obvious reasons).
Just to clarify, because I sense that I'm coming off as anti-Barwis, when that is not the case -- I absolutely think that Barwis has improved our strength and conditioning, and I'm happy to have him. I'm just starting to suspect that excessive consumption of Barwis-porn, like real porn, may lead to unrealistic expectations and adversely affect interpersonal relationships. I suggest no more than two hours of Barwis porn a week.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:53 PM ^
That's the Michigan difference.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:23 PM ^
Kovacs is starting after knee surgery last year. Leach is seeing PT.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:11 PM ^
That a walk-on in his first year in the program, one year after knee surgery, is our starting safety really speaks volumes about our defensive depth. It's staggering.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:47 PM ^
Kevin Leach
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:36 PM ^
This of which you speak is blasphemy!
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:27 PM ^
I know. I was a little nervous about being struck by lightning immediately after posting.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:37 PM ^
you can only get so fast. You cant make every one of our WRs the fastest in the country. There will be kids on other teams that can run down our players. Forcier isnt going to turn into a speedster.
When Brown is running away from people nobody is posting on here giving Barwis cred for making him fast. When Martin and Van Bergen and Graham burst though the line like they are playing a JV team nobody is saying anything.
It has to go both ways.
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:15 PM ^
Brown was pretty damn fast before Barwis got here.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:39 PM ^
I think Barwis has made some strides with this team, though it may be too early to really see the difference. It does seem that the offensive line is more athletic than in years past, in the sense that they seem able to get to the second level quicker than in years past. Graham has looked great, but as others have noted he is a top-notch talent and you figure he would always produce. The one area where I do notice a major difference is that guys seemed less "gassed" at the end of the game versus earlier years. Of course, that might be subjective hope on my part.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:53 PM ^
The O-line isn't "bigger" and thus blowing people off of the line. The O-line is more "in shape" and is more suited to run the hurry-up offense. I'm seeing this more so from Molk :.(, Moosman, Ortmann and Schilling. Huyge and Dorrestein still seem like they're big, slow guys.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:41 PM ^
I think it's a fair question. Gittleson has taken a lot of crap, but at least to this point I don't think Barwis' methods have proven to be a significant improvement. I'm nothing close to a S&C expert, so jg2112 may have a point about the time needed to develop. I guess one way you could look at it though would be to say that if Barwis is getting equivalent results out of freshman and sophomores as Gittleson was getting out of juniors and seniors (basically today's roster vs '06-'07) then maybe there is something to the madness.
November 3rd, 2009 at 5:45 AM ^
I recall that back in 2006, Chad Henne being interviewed and saying something along the lines of everyone on the team dedicating themselves to getting into the best shape possible that season. This was in part a response to an injury filled and many 4th-quarter lead blowing 2005.
All I could think of was, "why don't you do that every year?"
Also consider fact that in 2008 and also this season players were commenting on how they've never been in such good shape. That, and the infamous Gittleson "eat a pizza every night" comment makes me think Gittleson was behind the times.
You won't turn a kid from a 1* into a 5* player with S&C. But you might make him maximize his potential, physically, and that's about all you can ask from S&C.
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:18 AM ^
double post. whoops. ignore.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:42 PM ^
the injuries are a concern. the big thing with barwis (besides the speed) was his ability to reduce injuries. But there doesn't appear to have been much of a change.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:43 PM ^
...Consequently, he can't turn 17-19 year-olds into 21-23 year-olds. But he is doing everything else right, and it will pay dividends down the road. Most of all, he has had to take people who were in the old program for a few years and put them in his.
I would imagine that their bodies didn't always react well to the adjustment. I really don't think you can turn bulky muscles into speedy muscles overnight. I am guessing that many in the jr and sr classes are "tweeners" right now, in a conditioning sense.
Just like with RR, I think we have to wait until we see a Barwisized senior class before we truly see the benefits of his work.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:46 PM ^
I was screaming at the TV just like most of you, telling Roundtree to run faster. It was unbelievable how slow he was running. It's since occurred to me that Roundtree was running into a very strong headwind. And anyone who's run cross country or learned about how geese fly knows that when you run behind someone, you have an easier time because the guy in front is diminishing air resistance. It makes sense that he was running slow, and that the guy chasing him would catch him.
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:13 PM ^
Greg LeMond plays for Illinois? That's gotta be some sort of recruiting violation.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:48 PM ^
in our D line more than anything else. The D line is quicker and more explosive overall than any I've witnessed at Michigan. The problem is the players backing up the D line.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:50 PM ^
personally, i thought way too much of the barwis hype. that said, however, i don't think he's involved in blocking and tackling techniques, reading the DE on the spread option; blowing coverages, etc.
from what i've heard and read, he's working the guys hard, and i'm all for that. he's doing his job.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:51 PM ^
...but I think the players are noticably better conditioned. I don't want to jinx anything by talking about injuries, but short of the Molk disaster, we've been quite healthy this year. Our defense has stunk becuase of the lack of ability at the top of the depth chart, not key losses of top players.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:38 PM ^
minor would like to have a word with you.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:19 PM ^
Forcier, Odoms, and Hemingway, too. Though in fairness, I don't think there's much the S&C coach can do about this.
November 2nd, 2009 at 12:56 PM ^
Is conditioning less important in October and November? Barwis system may reap bigger rewards in the hot and humid weather of the early part of the season.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:03 PM ^
From what I have heard, there are a bunch of guys from the NFL who also work out under Barwis' tutelage. That should tell you something.
Here's a Wiki quote:
In the spring and summer of 2008, over thirty professional athletes trained with Barwis, including Larry Foote, who said he became "more explosive, faster and better-tuned as he heads into his seventh season in the NFL."[6] The workouts, referred to by one newspaper as the "Barwis School of Pukitude," were attended by, among others, Braylon Edwards, Chris Perry, Jamar Adams, Steve Breaston, Victor Hobson, James Hall, Leon Hall, LaMarr Woodley, Mike Hart and Ryan Mundy. [15][16][17][18] Hockey players Kevin Porter, Chad Kolarik and Matt Hunwick also trained with Barwis over the summer.[19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Barwis
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:45 PM ^
My concern is whether the Barwis approach has/is/will work with the OL. This goes back to the WVU/Pitt game where the Pitt defense dominated the WVU OL. Does having smaller, quicker, more athletic O lineman who can "get to the second level" make them more susceptible to being dominated by bigger, more physical defenses? And, does all the extra in-season running and lifting (compared to other teams' S & C programs) wear these guys down as the season progesses? Are they hitting the wall? Does all the "extra" conditioning negatively impact the bigger guys on the line?
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:53 PM ^
Those same offensive lines also destroyed big, talented defenses from Oklahoma and Georgia. As a whole, Barwis/Rodriguez have a great track record developing offensive linemen (and I think we will see a great group at UM once the talented RS and true freshmen classes are ready to contribute).
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:58 PM ^
This won't go down well but my friends who were on the team last year echoed what you mentioned with respect to being worn down as the season progresses. They were more so than previous years. Not sure if that had to do with it being their first year under Barwis but who knows. I
Overall I like the new conditioning program but I do think it should be adjusted for the OL. They don't need to be little twinkle toes out there. The big uglies need their big bodies.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:45 PM ^
I hate the word "meme." I also hate it when people refer to drinking "Kool Aid" to indicate that they are or have been enthusiastic about something.
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:48 PM ^
people could be using Valente's trademark "lathering up in the Barwis butter".
November 2nd, 2009 at 2:08 PM ^
The Barwis meme is overplayed, but he has made a difference with several key players, like Minor and Graham, who were decent to good but were great in 2008 (excluding injuries).
Barwis has been a net positive for the team, and he's also a source of positive publicity for the program, which is useful for recruiting. The Barwis jokes started annoying me after awhile, but that's not because Barwis is useless or anything.
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:17 PM ^
This team does look faster and stronger than they did in the last few years under Carr. I'd say Morgan Trent's combine and Will Johnson's 87 reps on the bench are pretty good indications that Barwis's program is working.
But strength can only do so much. Look at 2007. Michigan had better athletes than Appalachian State, but Michigan had too many fundamental breakdowns.
November 3rd, 2009 at 6:09 AM ^
I'd have to say look at the OL as evidence for the so-called Barwis effect. No big bellies on those guys, at least not anymore. And that is a good thing.
I recall a long time ago watching a Detroit Lions v Atlanta Falcons, and a er, large, Falcon OT get beat on a play, badly. The commentator, a former coach, said " You don't block with your belly."
I even recall Bo Schembechler saying it's not the size of the OL but the quickness that goes with that size that matters more. Slow 300 pounder will lose the the quicker 300 pounder.
As far as the goal line stand by Illinois: read the above line again. Our OL just got beat. Or are people going to start arguing that UM needs to get its OL as fat as possible?
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:25 PM ^
The weight room from the Carr days was insufficient and was not going to produce a championship caliber team. Barwis has made changes, such as adding Olympic lifting, which will allow the team to return to championship caliber. It is far too early to claim that he isn't doing a good enough job because of a few plays that went wrong.