Reasons to be optimistic about OL
We can all agree that the OL did not look good during the spring practice. I may be grasping at straws, but a recent interview with Funk (done by Sam Webb) makes me more optimistic about the OL.
First, it appears that Funk himself had to learn a lot of new stuff (he watched tapes from Alabama). Second, a lot of time was spent on learning the new techniques and terminologies. Both of these are quite disruptive and will take time for the new system to synch in. Third, a lot of time was lost during the year and then spring to injuries. It seems that the entire OL has not really practiced together this spring. Putting all together, I have this guarded optimism that by the start of the BIG, the OL will be holding its own.
#1 I just ate a bunch of mushrooms and nothing in the world is bad.
Seeing halos around our swiss-cheese O-linemen?
April 14th, 2014 at 11:26 PM ^
I just can't lol
April 14th, 2014 at 11:37 PM ^
In 2015 maybe. Not this year.
All I am asking is for them to be better than 2013.
They could literally immediately lie on the ground after the snap and still be better than they were at points last year.
Remember, "THIS IS MICHIGAN." We're build on toughness, and we grow OL on trees, and we're OL University, and blah, blah, blah...
A solid C, maybe a B offensive line. If the OL was an F for the first half of the season by the BWWB it had progressed to a solid D to gentleman C. I think you give them far too little credit if you believe they'll be no better than they were in Tempe.
You think they were a C in the BWWB? Wow.you must have low standards. To me, a C implies average and what I saw in that game (and the entire season) was far from that. The reason things didn't look quite so bad was that Borges finally realised they couldn't block so he came up with a game plan that pretty much revolved around short quick passes and next to no running. Dude, each individual on that lilne may have improved over the course of the year and probably as a unit the improved incrementally as well, but there is no way I would consider them average. I mean look at the stats....we were like dead last in things like run for a loss and sacks and stuff like that. I'm in shock that someone would consider what we saw last year average.
which is why I didn't say it. Take off your Hate Borgess glasses tinted with Hate Hoke lens and read what I wrote, solid D to gentleman C. Where and when I come from gentleman C doesn't imply average, it implies you're being generous with your grading. The take away is the solid D.
Now that we've cooled our jets, would you agree that the OL was better against both OSU and KSU than it was for most of the rest of the season? I think most reasonable people would take an objective look and say yes. If we agree the line was an F for at least the first half of the season, and we agree that it was better at the end, then the line must have improved from F to at least a D. And that with the rumors of group hate in the locker room and certain linemen having physical differences with certain quarterbacks.
I apologize and for the record, don't hate Borges or Hoke, but I do hate the offense of 2013. You can dislike the product on the field without hating the coaches for the record...at least I can.
Now, back to the apology. I honestly have never heard the term "gentleman c" and had no idea it meant you weren't really giving them the c. C is what I would consider average and thus my statement but since that isn't what you meant I take that back.
I would also say though, that I don't really think the better play on offense in the OSU and KSU games were really down to improved line play so much as improved play calling. I thinik Borges finally admitted to himself that the line couldn't block and called plays to mitigate that conclusion.
Again, I'm not saying that individually each one of them didn't improve over the course of the year because honestly, I don't know enough about those things to make a judgement,. But from a viewers perspective, as a unit they didn't seem any better to me from the first game to the game prior to OSU. And OSU and KSU were such a shift in playcalling IMHE, it's hard to say the increase in production was because of better blockiing or better playcalling but for me, it was the latter.
April 15th, 2014 at 10:15 AM ^
Grade inflation is coming to a blog near you.
April 14th, 2014 at 10:12 PM ^
They ran for about 25 yards in the BWW Bowl, plus whatever Shane got on his crazy scramble.
the most optimistic one on this fair blog, and I certainly won't be satisfied with 8 regular season wins.
April 15th, 2014 at 12:16 AM ^
Next year expecting 8-4. don't mean to be pessismistic but have you seen our schedule ? It could be the perfect storm.
I give Hoke a pass on next year . If he gets that 8-4 record he will be doing very well indeed. I look at next year as a year to show some improvement in areas and then 2015 to be the good year. I hope fans give him the benefit of a doubt if things do not go well next year.
Nobody will be happy with 8-4. You're making things up and it makes me want to scream.
I wouldn't be terribly disappointed in 8-4, though happy isn't the right word, either. We could go 8-4 and still be on track, considering the roster rebuild that was required.
I find it kind of interesting that most believe the line can be terrible in 2014 and magically be good in 2015 because the schedule is easier and because there is more experience. Not saying it's wrong, just find the mindset so interesting given how awful the line was last year and looks like it will be this year.
in terms of who we play out of conference but all the games against the big guys are away ( including MSU again). Those are games where we could really use a home advantage and instead we play the lower echelon of the B1G at home.
If this scheduling "blip" continues will we have a year where all the home games are pansies followed by a year where all the top teams come to AA ?
April 15th, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^
Here's why:
Player / Year / Fall Camps / Spring Camps / Bowl Pracitices
Erik Magnuson RS SO 3 2 2
Kyle Bosch SO 2 1 1
Graham Glasgow RS JR 4 3 3
Kyle Kalis RS SO 3 2 2
Ben Braden RS SO 3 2 2
These guys are the most likely starters. They all had playing time last season. Most will have been through 3 summer conditionings and 3 fall camps under Funk and Hoke. Then there is the average 2 extra bowl practices and the spring practices.
If Chad Lindsay arrives - so much the better.
I don't see youth as an excuse in this mix anymore. Last year, yes. This year, they either become effective linemen (with a few stars) or they are under performing their potential for some reason other than youth.
Really? Youth isn't a factor now? We have one upperclassmen starting and he's a walk on. Kind of funny to me how much we've changed as fans since Carr. In 2007, nobody would be saying this OL isn't extremely young.
The one upperclassman argument is a bit flawed considering that several would be if they didn't redshirt. Yes, offensive linemen are supposed to redshirt, just pointing out that the specific argument isn't necessarily the best one.
who really never played.
My point is, in 2014 we will have guys that have been here for 3 fall camps and have played a whole season. They don't have two NFL tackles to lean on. It's all on them. They went through the fire that was last year, and should have enough to prove that their summer is focused and dedicated.
It's misleading to say year 3 for a redshirt sophomore, for example. It implies they've been here for three years, when in fact it's two.
Because a coach had to learn how to do his job, players haven't learned the system, and everyone is hurt...I'm supposed to think we're going to be good?
"Hey, hey, ay-e-ay!"
April 15th, 2014 at 12:44 AM ^
It took me 15-20 seconds to get this. Not sure if it's a sign of maturity or a sign of idiocy...
smoke feet?
I feel like those are all reasons why the o-line WON'T be good.
Those are all the reasons why we sucked...and once the end or get better, we won't suck anymore.
He's reaching.
I`m glad I`m not alone in thinking this. It may explain the lackluster performance but it is not a reason for me to get excited about this OL.
April 15th, 2014 at 11:03 AM ^
I take it as saying that the line is what it is currently (i.e. sub-par), not because a lack of talent, but rather due to a lack of reps in the system. This might mean that the off-season and in-season improvement will be far greater than during the average year. We are not being limited by the ceiling for our players but rather their experience in the system. Frequent repping of a more simplified offense might help them make a major leap sooner rather than later.
To put it another way, Borges wanted them be able to execute the entire complex playbook, which resulted in about a 40% success rate, while Nuss wants them to be able to execute far fewer plays at a 90% success rate before adding in more plays. With the talent that we have in the passing game, the run game just needs to not put the offense in a hole on first and second downs.
I think you're intending to insinuate that the issues are behind the team (?) but we can't know.
-Funk doesn't know the system he is coaching very well -- one offseason won't change that.
-Wasting/losing time compared to teams that are familiar with their offensive system -- we can hope this is in the past.
-Injuries are hindering development on an already young OL -- who knows.
Injuries heal. The new rules allow coaches to work with individual players 2 hours a week, which should help a young team.
I was under the impresson that Funk conducts 3 hr presentations on intricacies of zone blocking, so if he in fact has to watch tapes of Alabama's OL to grasp that concept, it is becoming apparent to me why our OL was crap for the last 2 years and counting.
You said it a lot more diplomatically than me. All I had was WTF.
"First, it appears that Funk himself had to learn a lot of new stuff (he watched tapes from Alabama)."
April 15th, 2014 at 10:59 AM ^
i would bet a thousand fake internet points hes watching tape to see the plays alabama runs to try and get a feel for nuss's offense. hes not watching to learn about zone blocking techniques
April 15th, 2014 at 11:36 AM ^
No college coach is watching game tape to learn the fundamentals of something because:
1) They have the fundamantals down
2) That's an awful way of learning the fundamentals of something
Sure, you can get a big picture view of what is going on (plays, tendencies, offense as a whole) and you then infer some of the important intricacies of the offense (and go over those intricacies with the OC). You can then use that information to better teach your players as you have an understanding of the whole system. Funk knows the fundamentals of zone blocking (foundation), he's getting the big picture of what the offense actually is and teaching the players the finer points of the offense by watching and seeing how it's run. That allows him to better coach his players on the many finer points of blocking.
But Funk isn't watching Alabama tape to learn how an OL should move his feet when uncovered on an inside zone run. He's not looking at all-22 footage to get a feel for proper hand placement when scooping a NT. But these coaches could do just about anything and people could find ways to twist it and turn it into a cause for concern and panic.
Obtuse and shortsighted, yet manly.
Best we can do is hope for progress and health, I doubt we can become a Championship line in 1 year, but servicable with a mobile QB and some weapons on the outside and a screen game, maybe........All we can do is wait and see at this point, lots of work to be done between now and Appalachian State!
For me personally, the thing that probably gives me the most optimism is simply the fact that the offensive line has been given a scheme and direction and a set of base plays to work from. They are young, but the fact that they've mentioned in interviews that they are picking up Nussmeier's scheme relatively quickly does give me a lot of hope that this unit will, given time, gel quite nicely. I don't know if I would expect a complete turnaround this year necessarily, but if it is true that they are learning as quickly as they have mentioned, then it may at least be better than we think now relatively speaking.
April 14th, 2014 at 10:45 PM ^
I think that the exciting things as you stated are simplified scheme and just as important having a coach in Nuss that keeps being mentioned as motivating, instense and high energy, all which seem to have been very lacking with Borges and those charateristics simply play a very big role in the college game.
The only reason I am still optimistic, is because the hoards are so pessimistic. It just seems when everyone is so convinced of something in sports, it goes a different way.
That is what I have been reduced to.
That works really well in the stock market. Not so sure in sports ... i.e. the Detroit Pistons board has been extremely down for years.... and proven accurate.
bring in Jerry Hanlon as a consultant. Please.