- Nussmeier's offense is simpler, more run-friendly
- Higher tempo in practice
Gobluewolverine.com called it "Nussmeier's fast pasted offense". You'd think with all those subscriptions they could pay for an editor.
That's not the way it happened!"
This site ought to have a wiki-type thread with nothing but GBW and GBMW gaffes.
they can be so darned cute sometimes.
Green as saying something along the lines of "hitting the hold hard". Apparently they're already prepping for the msu game.
If they are already prepping for MSU, that is a good thing. I think it's going to be the most important game of the season and not just for BIG standings. Hoke needs a win against MSU, probably desperately.
I think you may have missed it. But I am all for beating MSU.
I did. I just really want to beat Sparty.
We all do, but I wouldn't call it desperation or consider it must-win.
1 win in the past 6 seasons against an in state rival who seems to be turning the tide against you is cause for concern and attention, I think anyway.
Damn straight we need to be State.
I think Dantonio is turning the tide on this rivalry too. Hell, people in Ann Arbor are starting to believe it. Never in a million years would I have thought that. Selling Staee jerseys is a good start.
your feelings, Proprietor of Mgobluewolverine.com.
you missed the point about GBW requiring a subscription
Typos happen everywhere, all the time. They, and all the malaprops and just general illiteracy of those hack sites happen in every article!
Maybe they're referring to how quickly Nussmeirer has been able to paste together an offense out of the cut up broken pieces of one that that Borges left behind. Also have you seen those guys paste? So fast! So amazing!
The man schemes have a bit more variety and are a bit more complex by nature, and mixed in with the zone schemes, Borges's offense simply had more plays. It was also, for what it's worth, in its third year, so by nature there were more plays installed, whereas they are in their first few practices under Nuss. Nuss will eventally get to some man schemes (power and counter come to mind), but I would assume the amount of looks out of them would be more limited and by nature still be a bit simpler.
I wouldn't necessarily say Borges was more pass-first (though he certainly leaned that way at times last year), but was probably more balanced. Nuss seems to favor the run game a bit more in his approach, partially just from the fact that he runs some spread concepts and prefers multiple backs. Borges probably had a goal of 50-50 to 55-45 run-pass ratio, whereas I would assume Nuss is more 60-40 type. On paper and the stat sheet that doesn't seem like a lot, but in actually games and I assume in practices you will feel the difference.
Particularly for the younger backs though, this scheme should benefit them a lot just from the simplicity of it and it should be quicker getting up to speed, allowing younger guys to get involved a bit earlier in the process. I really think it's a trickle down thing: if the OL can become respectable at a simplified scheme, the negative plays go away and you stay even with chains (2nd and 7-8 at worst), that forces the defense to be honest, then the protection improves, the receivers have more space to work, and everything gets much, much easier.
I really don't believe there is a lot that needs to be done to make this offense dangerous, the problem is that the one thing that does need to be done is not an easy fix, and the bodies and experience at that position aren't improving a whole lot. I think overall the offense will be more consistent, but will it be more consistent as in a below average unit (not Michigan-vs-Nebraska-terrible), or will it be above average unit (though probably not Michigan-vs-OSU-level) consistently? That's up to the OL, IMO.
I'm hopeful that the big equalizer in this offense this year will be Devin's legs, when they don't have to be used as the only way to produce rushing yards. If we can grind out something that's below average but more consistent (3.5 ypc, say) and below average but consistent in the passing game (maybe 5.5 ypa), then Devin suddenly doesn't have to carry the offense down after down with both his legs and his arm, and is free to improvise a bit more, something he's done well in the past.
I think you're right that the offense doesn't have to improve much; even if Michigan goes from merely very bad from being absolute worst, we probably finish out a couple of games we lost down the stretch, and this team has a shot at playing for the B1G championship and is winning 9 or 10 games -- exactly where most people expected them to be at the start of last year.
And on top of that, a DG that doesn't have to carry the entire load of the offense remains healthier, meaning when he does run and when he does pass it is more effective. There was clearly something wrong post-MSU for DG and he was feeling quite hurt, as he went from making DEs look like they were in quick sand to struggling to even come close to getting the edge.
It was the worst beating I had ever seen a quarterback take in a game, and I'm not sure he recovered physically or mentally.
The Ohio game suggests that he did recover mentally. That was one of the best performances I've ever seen by a Michigan quarterback.
We saw Michigan have a few good games last year against a couple top 30 defenses - ND, OSU. We've seen what they can do. Nothing we lost on offense is completely unreplaceable. The loss of Gallon can be mitigated with the stable or receivers we now have. Lewan hurts the most. Lewan is going to be hard to find a replacement for, but replacing both tackles is a lot easier than replacing all 3 interior linemen.
"The one thing that needs to be done isn't an easy fix - and the bodies and experience at the position aren't improving a whole lot."
The bodies can improve quite a bit. What makes you say they aren't improving a whole lot?
There is no question we still have a lot of youth on the offensive line. We have no juniors or seniors at tackle or guard. I don't know another NCAA team that can say that. But we have plenty of bodies there, and I think the competition is going to be good for everyone. To me, the starting lineup looks like it has a little experience and a lot of talent. Mags - Bosch - Glasgow/Kugler - Kalis - Braden. (Assuming Mags fully comes back from his shoulder injury)
Mags, Bosch, Glasgow, and Kalis all had meaningful snaps last year. I would make the argument that offensive linemen make their biggest jump from their first year in gametime - as long as they take enough snaps - to their second year. Their position coach really can go through their tape witih them from the previous year, and work on whatever errors they had. The bodies we have there are capable, and hopefully they had enough mistakes on film from last year for Funk to correct with them.
About half a year until they need to play.
As many are aware, I'm a huge advocate of experience. All I was attempting to say there is that the OL isn't going to turn from what they were last year into All-American senior types. I think they can benefit greatly from their experience, I just don't believe they'll be world beaters as soon as next year.
Unless Borges was that bad at calling plays...
or, more importantly, that bad at simplifying the O, especially for the young line. im extremely optimistic about this season because of nuss. the offense wont be great but vastly improved.
on my phone so dont care for formatting
pretty sure theres enough mistakes on tape
While the zone scheme may be a bit more simplistic assignment wise there still needs to be good chemisty and communication between the starting 5 (plus TE and H). I just hope they can determine their best group early on and get them a lot of reps together. And with Mags and LTT out for Spring thats not a good start because now you have guys repping at LT that might not even have been on the depth chart there had everyone been healthy. I'm not saying they are doomed already or anything but if they are still tinkering late into August like the past two years that could be a problem.
You have a far better grasp of the finer points of football than I do so I'd like to ask you something:
Something Nuss mentioned a couple of times in his press conferences is that they were going to make sure to have "hats on hats" in terms of blocking. In his elaboration he said essentially he means he won't run into boxes where the box defenders outnumber his blockers, he'll always have a blocker per defender when he's running the ball or will have his QB audbile to another play that will take advantage of the fact that the defenders have too many in the box.
Last year it seemed like we constantly ran into stacked boxes. Boxes where there were quite regularly more defenders than blockers. That is what I seem to remember and I'm looking to you for clarification. Did we do that quite frequently? If we did, could that have been a far bigger contributor to our poor rushing numbers than the players actual ability? I mean, they could have been blocking very well, but there were too often free guys screaming into the backfield?
I guess what I'm asking is if my analysis above is right, could the simple fact that we aren't going to run into a stacked box and are going to allow our QB to change the play make an even bigger difference than our o-lines maturation? And if it can, couldn't the two combined make this a very good offense just one year removed from the disaster that was 2013?
I mean, obviously this is mostly hypothetical, but I would like to hear your opinion on it nonetheless.
I'm not Space Coyote, but I'll offer my thoughts.
I think that is part of what Nuss was referring to but I think he is also including blown assingments due to miscommunication that allowed 1st level players (dlineman) to come unblocked as well in the run and pass game. And also blown combo blocks that allowed either LB's to run free or dlineman to split double teams.
Running into stacked box is always going to cause some problems, but if you hang your hat on being a running team you will have to do it from time to time. Think 4 minute offense. And to solve those problems he may want to work with Devin in being able to identify the 8th or 9th man and running away from him. Thus leaving the unblocked "hat" out of the play.
I really think, more than anything, he's saying that the OL will properly identify and block guys from the first to second level. Essentially, cut down drastically on the missed assignments that really plagued the OL last year. The simplified scheme should help the blockers better understand their assignments and how/when to pass off and go to the 2nd level, etc.
Now, my opinion on running into stacked boxes isn't always popular around here, but I don't think that's exactly his point. "The box" is really fairly insignificant. If you're in 21 personnel and the defense has 9 in the box, you can still run the ball successfully. Michigan did it against Minnesota with the tackle over. How? Well, Minnesta was misaligned and failed to have numbers-for-numbers on the strong side and Michigan collapsed the playside and blocked hat on hat. They had nine in the box, but two wasted defenders on the backside. The thing the QB is looking for isn't amount of defenders in the box, it's the amount of defenders aligned to make a play on the football and the amount of defenders playside. Backside doesn't matter (as much).
One of the benefits of the zone scheme is that it is easy to flip the run. So one of the primary things that will be taught to the QBs is to split the defense down the center of the ball and count the numbers. If there are 8 men in the box but only 4 playside, the play can be run. If there are 8 in the box but 5 playside, the play can still be run by flipping the run. But if there are 8 in the box and it's split in such a way that you cannot get a hat on a hat, then you need to be able to change to a pass. In that sense, I don't think Michigan ran into stacked boxes as much as people claim they did, though they also weren't immune from doing so. But I also think with defenses knowing they could get pressure, and DG struggling reading underneath coverage, they felt comfortable pressing up and believing that Michigan wouldn't have time to run complex routes to get open behind the defense. Under Borges's philosophy, at that point, he started running to try to keep defenses honest, to try to prevent them in some way of dictating the offense. At least I believe that was his goal.
Sometimes you're going to have to run into a "stacked box". Third and short, normal downs, four minute drill, it has to happen. Otherwise defenses can mock-stack a box and dictate your offense. As soon as a defense dictates and offense, you're screwed. No better example than the Michigan/MSU game last year, where the gameplan seemed appropriate, but as soon as MSU knew Michigan couldn't block their front, they were able to dictate everything. Now, that's not to say you always have to run the play as called regardless if there is a stacked box or not. You can check out of it at times. You can change your offense to get you into a better play. You just can't automatically do it all the time, you need to be able to see the whole defense to understand what makes the offense as a whole more successful.
I'm not familiar enough with Nuss's scheme to know for sure how he'll handle defenses pressing up. I assume there will be some leeway into checking into passes, and he has some methods that aren't all together different from Borges in making defenses pay for cheating. But at the end of the day, I think he's more specifically talking about what MVictors discussed, and that's getting into your assignment. Towards the end of the season last year (Northwestern, OSU), you saw the OL better understand their assignments and not blow as many plays (kills is a missed assignment that instantly kills a play). The results weren't spectacular, but they were respectable. If Nuss's simplified scheme can improve on that consistency, and then work to get them beyond just getting into the correct assignments, then that opens up a lot of other things for the offense. But this all gets back to the "no negative plays" mantra that he is preaching, because the whole staff knows that was a significant issue that really set the offense back last year.
Thank you for that insight. All of the upvotes for this man.
Thanks for taking the time to describe why you believe what you do rather than simply giving the answer. It really helps guys like me who don't know a lot of the finer points of football to read detailed posts like this.
For my part, I'm simply an optimist at heart and every offseason I want to believe that next year we will be contending for a NC. For that reason I like to hear from people who know the game as to what their feelings are and why they come to those conclusions. I just hope that we see some real improvement from the o-line this year.
Anyway, thanks again for your insight.
is that the youngest group of our players does not have to go through multiple changes. At least they are coached by the same person even if it is in a different system.
Who I believe was the OL coach of the Steelers at the time gave Funk his praises. I don't know if he gets a 100% pass for the past year, but I think maybe the problems were beyond Funk.
Simpler schemes for the oline to understand and good rb's running behind them. Sounds like a start.
I literally posted in the thread below.
thinner. Even in the face.
I definitely agree.
Derrick Green doesn't smile much. Seems like he's all business.
Can someone post the link to this so you can actually see it on a mobile device.
There are links posted in the Working Remote thread.
in the original post above
"Did you help him diet?"
"How long did it take for you to be friends?"
Seems slightly touchy-feely to me for a football interview. Maybe I'm overthinking it.
YEAH! WHAT IS THIS, FEELINGSBALL!?
Run first. Pass second.
I believe that was our entire play calling last year. I'm hoping for something a bit more...unpredictable this year.
Nice to have two stud RBs! Just hope our OL can hold up this year.
Why is Deveon Smith wearing a "2013 Buffalo Wild Wings" bowl shirt? I would have burned that sucker by half-time.
I would use it as motivation!
Maybe it's comfortable?
If I have a comfortable shirt that says "KICK ME", I'm not wearing it.
Maybe, despite the game, he still enjoyed the bowl experience?
Bowls are weird - like a vacation and game mixed together. You do little tourist things and get free stuff. Even if you lose, it's probably a cool experience, especially when you're a freshman who's never been on any other trips.
The question they asked Deveon, "How are you outgoing?" God, what a stupid question.
This was going to be my exact post. How is it that a person who asks questions for a living is so bad at it??
"can't you tell from this interview?"
The other one I like was:
"How did you two become good friends?"
"Um, we all just played video games together when we got here."
"Oh, so do you two live together?"
"No... We played video games." (Gives guy weird look.
" oh, oh ok."
What the hell just happened?..
The vast majority of so-called "sports journalists" are more suited to delivering pizzas. The next time one of these knuckleheads asks an intelligent question will be their first.
Deveon does a great job of answering the questions. It seemed to me the reporters smelled blood in the water and thought they could get a juicy quote from the young back to create some fabricated drama. Well done, Mr. Smith. Well done.
Hey we finally have a spring football thread!
Football news that's not negative? This is new!
smith looks like a guy who eats gravel for breakfast. these running backs don't seem to have chips on their shoulders--they may just BE the chips on Michigan's shoulders...
Green is down to 220? This is a good thing.
EDIT: Smith said that Borges was a pass 1st, run 2nd kind of guy. Excuse me while I go laugh.
All weight changes are good.
There was also a good article on this on Mlive: http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2014/03/doug_nussmeiers_running_game_l.html
Sounds like Coach Nuss is all around doing a much better job than Borges, according to the players. He seems to be getting back to the basics with this young offense and it seems like they are liking it.
This is excellent news. Years ago I minced at hearing that Borges turned to the NFL for his schemes. Talent/experience/time all separate the NFL from college players, many of whom are called to duty in year 1 of their college career, so it makes little sense to expect a college team to grasp the same schemes seen in the pros.
Proof? Last year's offense, where all you heard about was "execution," which translated, meant "Borges' schemes are far too complex and require too much from young college minds."
Love hearing the boys now talking about the simplicity of Nuss's system. The system can be simple, and leave it up to him and Devin to throw the surprises at the defense.
Great news. Can't wait to see the improvement on the O line and running game.
I'm just glad Green is down to 220. He looks lean in the face and shoulders and looks like where he needs to be. I am excited for him this year. I hope the line can give him some holes. And both him and Smith do not look like 19 year old kids. They look like grown men.
Seems strange to me that De'Veon is now heavier than Green. Should be fun to see who rises to the top.