IMO the spread is fun when it's rolling, but when it's dead and you don't have that flow that spread offenses need it fizzles out. I supported RR fully but I do prefer the pro style. I hate being really worried in short yardage situations. Like when it's first and goal from the 1, and I'm thinking we have a 50/50 shot of getting in(in 4 plays, Illinois will do that to you). I get tired of seeing all of our plays from the shotgun too. I also prefer the pro-style in the video game.There's my life story.
What would you like to see change on offense?
Insert Mike Cox into the running game and take some pressure off Denard. Does inserting a decent field goal kicker count? I will gladly take less yards but more points and a more consistent point production from game to game. I hope we turn the ball over less next year.
never punt. TD every possession.
And a kicking game will help that as well.
Many have talked about the PA boot with Denard, and I, for one, would be all for that. What I'm envisioning (2TE 2WR single back set, left hash) is run action weakside, strongside TE block then release into the flat, weakside WR runs a shallow slant right, strongside WR fly route, and the RB, depending on the situation, could have a wheel route or flare to the weak side against the flow of the rest of the pass patterns. If the run game can get going, this kind of play could be deadly.
Everytime I see "wheel route" I can't help but thinking of the Illinois game.
Definitely. I omitted the reference for those who were able to block that memory out. However, no one would have bad feelings about it if Shaw, Touissaint, etc. take one all the way via the wheel route.
We got a clutch 1st down conversion at the start of the 3rd OT using a wheel route vs. Illinois. That was pretty nice.
Play action pass to fullback in the flat. Or Koger. Who I think will have a monster year.
Less basketball on grass!! Only smash mouth footbaw!! More zone left!! Denard under center!! I form!!
Huddles and motion before the snap.
Huddles!! Great idea. Let's make our offense as unlike Oregon and Auburn as possible... Not like they're doing anything right....
(in B10 play) to be more like Stanford in their bowl game this year (mini huddle, 350 plays, multiple formations, motion, shifts, etc) then not huddle like we did last year and run about 25 different plays.
The first time I see the new offense, shift a formation and/or put someone in motion before the snap, I may tear up a little, out of utter joy....
A lot of the victory formation
Is that during the game or at the end when we are winning? Because if you think they should run the victory formation at random I like your style. It's a bold strategy and will keep other teams on their toes
A feature back or two to take attention away from Denard (Toussaint, Shaw, Hopkins, V. Smith, anyone). That being said, I don't want to see Borges let Narddog's 4.3 go to waste. Chances are, of course, Denard won't have the same rushing stats this year, but I would hope Al has a plan to use his feet too (roll-outs, designed snap-runs, QB draws, etc). Even as efficient as Denard was this year passing the ball (top 20 passer rating), we'll probably see a little bit more maturing in his throwing game (get the picks down in the single digits this coming year).
Footballs sailing between the uprights and over the crossbar after having been kicked.
I don't agree with the wobbly and inconsistent statement. I think the fact we had no kicking game and that the defense rarely put the offense in decent field position probably made it seem that way. This was the most exciting offense I've seen at Michigan and I would hope they wouldn't modify it too much. I don't have enough time to comment on the changes needed for the defense and special teams.
The turnovers and 3-and-outs. Plus the fact that our offense rarely played a full four quarters of effective football in conference play. Would field goals have saved us against Wisc, OSU or Miss St.? Don't think so. Maybe against 1 of the other conference losses. Consistent and non-wobbly, low-turnover+more-1st-downs performance could have saved us in all 3.
Being more consistent and less wobbly on offense would have paid tangible benefits. Having more consistent, low risk chains-moving plays (crossing routes, screens, waggles) could help that and turn "promising" into "as promised." And win Denard a Heisman :)
No change on offense. Just more experience (a 2nd year QB for once) and running back as good as Brandon Minor and hope he stays healthy. These 2 things were the only things that were missing.
Smith not being used on short yardage situations.
Bullshit. The offense wasn't overrated; it was under-experienced. They had a true Sophomore QB in his first year as a starter, minimal upperclassmen, and were 9th in the FBS in net total yards. How on earth can anyone without an agenda call that "overrated?"
There were plenty of things to bitch about, but the offense being "overrated" wasn't one of them.
Offense was definitely overrated. Hell it still is with people listing the yardage statistic and ignoring the fact that we wasted hundreds of yards over the course of the season.
Not sure how you can get so mad about that fact. Our offense can both be overrated and under-experienced, those aren't mutually exclusive.
So where should our offense have been with all of our inconsistent underclassmen?
This should be good.....
It should have been putting up more than 7 or 14 points against good teams.
I kept saying, "goddammit! don't run another useless draw play!"
But with Denard, I say run the QB draw all day long.
It worked so well last year, right?
in some form of pro-set, the QB draw may be the only time Denard's number gets called.
play-action QB roll out hitting wide open tight end crossing to the sideline. michigan football.
the double wishbone.
As a true-blue fan of TRULY old-school Michigan football, going back to the Crisler style of attack sounds like a great idea to me. We can throw in some single wing too while we're at it!
I also like the Oklahoma diamond formation.
Some 2 QB plays with Denard and Gardner.
Hold onto the ball.
Less runs to Vincent Smith, more passes to Vincent smith
On the field at the same time. I like it.
There's a play in the old school M playbook - I don't know what it's actually called, and I can't find a video of it. But my dad and I always called it "The Michigan Play." I'm sure you all remember it:
It's a quick play fake to a running back, followed by a weakside rollout, after which the TE is almost invariably wide open for a first down (and more).
If someone can find video of it, I would love to see it again. I love that play.
It's called the Waggle. I agree - it's a great play. It needs to see more use, because Denard and Koger would be great in it.
Especially the one other teams do where the qb lines up as a wr. The defense couldn't afford to ignore Robinson like they do almost every qb that lines up out wide.
I know multiple QBs on the field has been joked about a lot in the last 2 years but in the case of a trick played I'd love to see it.
Denard coming around in motion on a reverse pass would also be fun to watch.
would like to see tons of play action passes!!!
1) Run Game
2) Execution - these kids are young so this is to be expected, but execution of the playbook.
Complain all you want about zone stretch left but we executed it the same way every time. I hope this coaching staff throws in more waggles, more roll outs and naked bootlegs. I think they will still keep the qb iso because with a good secondary running game or vertical passing game iso becomes huge.
3) THROW IT TO THE TIGHT END....FOR THE LOVE OF GOD....HE IS WIDE OPEN....WITH HIS ARMS WAVING....
Fewer fumbles, which I imagine will occur with the impending change in scheme.
... The two things I hated during games.
1. Vincent smith is averaging 2 YPC and still getting the ball.
2. Quarterback draw goes for 20 yards, 10 QB draws and 15 yards later were still trying it.
A little change of pace would be nice.
I'd like to see us run something similar to the Spread HD that Penn State ran with Darryl Clark and Evan Royster. It always seemed to me to be a spread offense developed from por style philosophy. They seemed to be able to keep teams guessing because they could just as easily run up the gut as spread you out and hit quick slants. They'd throw deep enough to keep your safties honest. I think this would be a good mix to match the abilities of our coaching, talent, and conference needs. That being said, I thought RR would mold hisoffense into something similar once he got here. Therefore, I don't expect tosee this next year.
we will see more field goals being made!
Aren't they. Take a look at our disadvantage in ToP. Take a look at our average drive time. Even our average scoring drive time. If we can institute more effective ways of holding on to the ball--better third down performance, more 1st downs, more drives ending in points and, yes, when necessary managing the clock so there's a bigger break for the defense, ie when they are obviously tired and sagging--it's a net win for us.
Pooh-poohing the obvious advantages being able to do these things can bring in the right situation baffles me as much as pooh-poohing hurry-up does when that brings advantages.
It's all about what a given situation demands.
I would like to see us score more points then our opponents.
Ooo, risky answer.