why WOULDN'T Hoke/Borges want to utlilize Denard's running ability? powerfootball-c
Hoke & Borges seem determined to install a more power-football-based philosophy at michigan. Let's think about this a bit: The thing that really surprised me about how RR deployed Denard last year was the straight-ahead, between-the-tackles nature of the playcalling, Watching that video of Denard highlights made me think that there's something unique Borges could work in terms of developing a scheme. It's not like Denard was some rogue athlete who runs around before letting plays develop. He's at his best when he can make a single move and accelerate into the secondary. The coaches have to have picked up on this if they've watched any footage of the past season.
So, as we move into spring practice territory, it really seems like it would make sense and not be too difficult to keep some elements of the QB lead-based offense. They've essentially got a great running back who happens to be able to throw for 2500+ yards. I really look forward to seeing how they build the offense this spring.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:10 PM ^
How do you know what they are or are not going to do at this point?
January 20th, 2011 at 1:40 AM ^
1. Hoke won't put a square peg in a round hole...
2. Michael Vick!
If you think about those two, you should simply relax and smile:) Denard will be a pocket-passer with the "option" to run. Thing is, like Vick, when he takes off .. it's for more than 3 or 4 yards, and you have to defend for that as well! It's going to be fun to watch.
January 20th, 2011 at 7:33 AM ^
The only problem is that someone will need to convince Denard to scramble/take off more often. He really doesn't do that all that often. Feels like an easy thing to learn though.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:11 PM ^
January 20th, 2011 at 1:23 AM ^
Yes we do know how thye are going to use him....We just need to watch footage from Lloyd Carr to see that....
OR something like that.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:17 AM ^
Interesting term. Borges has always run the West Coast offense which was termed the "Gulf Coast" offense when he went to Auburn (Jason Campbell rushed for more yards in the NFL this year then he did under Borges). It is a dink and dunk offense with short passes used as runs. Think the 49ers with Montana or Young. It's always been considered a finesse offense in my book while the Cowboys/Giants of that time played power football.
SDSU ran the 3-3-5 while Hoke was their which I also wouldn't consider to be power football. Unless Hoke is thinking that just because you don't use a zone blocking scheme you play "power" football, I'm a little confused by his terminology. Apparently, by Hoke's way of thinking Jake Long didn't play power football. It's a concern of mine because our Oline has never been in anything but a zone blocking scheme. Even those that LC recruited were for zone blocking. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:12 PM ^
AAAARRRGGGHHHH!!!
Coaches gonna coach, okay?
January 19th, 2011 at 11:13 PM ^
They'll run the QB off tackle play plenty. It's a great play for this line and this QB.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:14 PM ^
We have absolutely no idea what they're going to do with this offense, but I'm gonna leave it up to the guys who are getting paid to do this. I have my ideas of what I think our offense should do, but I'd much rather see what they've got up their sleeves.
It should be a great offense that'll be more fun to watch thanks to a much improved defense. I'm fairly certain Denard will still run wild and get his fair share of yards on the ground and through the air, but let's just let the coaches coach.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:17 PM ^
Completely agree. I couldn't have said it better myself.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:32 PM ^
The best part is our first 3 to 4 opponents have no idea either...going to be awful hard to prepare for.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:44 PM ^
The beginning of the season should be fun offensively. The trick will be not collapsing at the end of the B1G stretch a la 2009-2010.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:50 PM ^
I'm just excited to get out there and watch the spring game. That should give us a good clue as to what kind of formations we could expect, but hopefully the opposing defenses won't pay attention. Besides ND, we have a pretty easy beginning of the season, so I'm just hoping we don't perform the RichRod late season collapse
January 19th, 2011 at 11:17 PM ^
I think more "physical" as opposed to "power" is what you're looking for. It's the nature of the beast in the Big Ten.
January 20th, 2011 at 12:32 AM ^
i MISS FOOTBALL
January 19th, 2011 at 11:21 PM ^
Dude, give it up. Of course he is going to utilize his running abilities. He is a D1 offensive coordinator he is no idiot I am sure the guy knows what kind of talent he has in a player like Denard. Enough with these threads already. Go Blue!
January 19th, 2011 at 11:33 PM ^
Yoda has spoken he has.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:46 PM ^
Spoken, Yoda has.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:34 AM ^
Yes and Borges has years of experience doing so? The are several specific examples where he has used a mobile QB, not! You are assuming he has some capability he has never demonstrated, knowing how to use a mobile quarterback. But lets not let facts get in the way of a cool glass of coolaid....
January 19th, 2011 at 11:26 PM ^
that you don't even try to read before going to bed. You aren't messing with my dreams mister poop pants.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:43 PM ^
It'll probably be similar yardage totals for D. Robinson under Borges, but just shifting a few hundred to a thousand of them over to the passing account. Does it really matter? Probably not, except Denard might not have as many nagging knee injuries going forward.
There will be little if any off-tackle stuff anymore from Denard Robinson. 245 carries is f*&%ing ridiculous for a QB anyway in the Big Ten.
Robinson will keep some running plays I'm sure, but the bigger question for Michigan in 2011 and beyond is who can possibly play the role of Ronnie Hillman's - 234 carries and 1,000+ yards? To be honest, my confidence in UM RB health has been severely shaken the last 4 years.
Vincent Smith?
Michael Shaw?
Fitzgerald Toussaint?
Kelvin Grady?
Justice Hayes?
I don't know man.
Michigan is deep at running back, but up to now there are no game breakers (a la Tyrone Wheatley, Chris Perry) at this position from what I see. That was a big missing ingredient the last three years under Rodriguez too. Minor did it on occasion, but he was too often gurneyed. Michigan has not had a 1,000 yard rusher at RB position since Mike Hart in 2007.
An important question considering more emphasis on the pass, the need to balance that out with the run threat and play-action. And of course, there hasn't been a team in division 1a that has met more ridiculous misfortune at the tailback spot over the last 4 years than Michigan.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:47 PM ^
Sorry if this has been asked already. Are we still planning to turn Justice Hayes into a slot receiver now that Dee Hart is out of the picture or will Justice get carries at TB?
January 20th, 2011 at 8:24 AM ^
His senior season was meh until he got hurt and then his junior backup (a better RB IMO) put up over a 1,000 yards.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:54 PM ^
I'm hoping that Hopkins is given a lot of carries. He's not a breakaway back, but he's powerful and could do a lot of damage like a Brandon Jacobs or even John Clay. It should be fun to transition between him and a fast, cutting RB such as Smith or Hayes or whoever steps up.
January 20th, 2011 at 6:57 AM ^
...at RB the past 3 years than normal?
I've always found the Barwis fetish a little weird, given our awful performances on the field. Could it be this strength and conditioning program was more harm than good? Not saying it was, just putting the question out there...
January 20th, 2011 at 6:58 AM ^
I am still hoping Fitz can turn into that game breaking back. He averaged about 112 YPC in high school and had a TD run of about 70 yards on his first UM touch. He was injured last year. Here's hoping he comes back healthy.
As for Denard, the new coaching staff won't utilize his running ability because they are gentlemen and this gives them an unfair advantage.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:38 AM ^
The question is, without the same running threat and questionable passing accuracy will his passing skills make up for the loss in running yards? I think we will struggle with this new offense at first (and maybe all year).
January 19th, 2011 at 11:46 PM ^
What did we all get sick of hearing about the M teams and Big 10 in general... Too slow.
This is a chance for Borgess to build out the power elements of his offense with a number of speed guys on the field at once...
He is like a kid in a candy shop. You don't have to be 220lbs to run in a power offense unless you are going to take 30+ reps... We have several different runners that could drive defenses crazy. Smith, Hopkins, Tousant, all have elements of power and speed, and Shaw is just raw speed. Add to that the RB lead with Denard running and it is a very nice running game.
Play action and you find WR's 'galore' wide open...
Oh, and we WILL have a defense, count on it.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:42 AM ^
Your running backs must be a threat for play action to work. We have yet to demonstrate a great running game without Denard as the featured back. Glad to see your optimism.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:57 PM ^
The two greatest performances I ever saw in college football were both Vince Young--in the Rose Bowl against us, and the next year in the NC game against USC. They ran a conventional offense, his passing was meh, and their best play was the broken pass play Vince takes off. He was almost unstoppable. Why can't Denard duplicate that? Every defense in the country will fear Denard more than just about any player out there.
January 20th, 2011 at 7:03 AM ^
Loads of zone-read option that year. The problem for defenses was that if they crept up, VY could pass well enough to burn them. If they stayed back, he could take off and run. If DROB didn't throw so many INTs we'd be in a similar situation. Hopefully that's us next year.
January 20th, 2011 at 7:55 AM ^
... it wasn't just how many, it was when they were thrown.
I maintain if he doesn't throw the first pick in the end zone vs MSU (yeah that MSU) we likely win that game. We looked unstoppable in that first drive. If memory serves, another pick was in or near the end zone.
Even a minor improvement in the running game saves Denard's platinum legs, and also gives our D a little more time to catch a breather on the bench.
Add to these two improvements even a slight improvement on defense (a few more stops and punts) and I see at least 8 wins next year without too much trouble.
This is why I liked Brady Hoke from the start: running and stopping the run are right in his wheelhouse.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:34 AM ^
a wide open Stonum in the end zone. We had to settle for a FG and a 3-0 lead when it should have been 14-0.
I was expecting 9 wins next year before the cc and won't change that. We have 19 starters back more than anyone else in the Big Ten. Eight home games with the first five at home leading to a 5-0 start. NW, Iowa, Illinois and State on the road should result in at least three wins. That leaves us needing one win out of our other home games, Purdue, OSU, and Nebraska, to get to 9 wins.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:44 AM ^
Brand new offense, brand new defense = better right away? Defense could not get any worse so I'm with you there, but not so much on offense.
January 20th, 2011 at 8:45 AM ^
They will run a single wing.
January 20th, 2011 at 9:23 AM ^
And yes, he is ready to work on Denard if UM keeps running him like there's no tomorrow.
Am I the only one here who remembers Robinson getting injured nearly every game? How on Earth can he be used in a "power" running scheme--at least until there is a dependable running back to take some pressure off?
Whatever UM does with Robinson this year--I suspect it will have to include upgrading his passing skills. I think the Big Ten defenses have seen him for a year now and will scheme toward stopping that (DUH).
But really--Robinson got knocked around pretty badly last year and missed playing time. I'd like NOT to see him running so much.
And if I've missed the point of the OP, well, that's nothing new for me.
January 20th, 2011 at 10:09 AM ^
at this point but fun none the less. I look for Toussaint/ Hopkins to have breakout years. I loved what I seen from both of them last year besides ball security. Shouldnt be a problem next year look at how horrible odums was year before last and hes a pimp now. I think Denard will run a considerable amount less than last year which in turn will make it a lot more effective when he does im guessing he still gets close to a grand on the ground and alot more through the air. Everyone from ESPN to MGO is freaking out about whats going to happen on offense how will Borges use ALL that talent... Seriously recieving core is really strong we're really deep at rb, O line is monsterous and we have two pretty good qbs(passing). I would really like to see more of DG definatly not the runner Shoelace is but i think he has a bigger arm he should be a better fit in an AB system in a couple years. The B1G should fear us maybe they dont it yet but they soon will. GO BLUE!
January 21st, 2011 at 12:47 AM ^
About Hopkins and Toussaint, because the Smith/Shaw thing isn't too promising. Shaw has loads of talent, but can't stay healthy and does too much east-west running. Smith just isn't that good.
I think we need a guy who can get the tough yards (Hopkins) and a guy who can break the big one (Toussaint or Shaw).
I wouldn't mind us recruiting an FB who can block or pass catch, maybe from JUCO, so we could run the big power set from time to time, or use him as a lead blocker for Denard in a wildcat formation. This would enhance our options in both the running and passing game.
Obviously I don't want to see this become the full-time personnel set up (we have better personnel for other things, and have the ability to run more dynamic offensive packages), but it could be useful in many ways (clock management, making us less predictable, giving Denard a more conservative set of options when he's having a bad day mentally, etc.). I've often felt the problem our QBs faced in RR's 3 years was a lack of viable "safe" options. The only screens we ran were bubble screens, and as Brian pointed out, these were taken away. Our RBs couldn't consistently get 4 yards. There were rarely any dumpoff options. Etc. All these things help young QBs with raw, unfinished talents prone to sometimes making poor decisions, like Tate and Denard, or questionable QBs like Threet.