Will Michigan's Passing Game Be A Major Strength?

Submitted by bklein09 on

After watching the BTN Michigan preview yesterday, I found myself feeling like we have a really strong receiving core this year that could surprise a lot of people if we can get them the ball.

Regardless of who starts at QB, a lot has been made of the running game and how it must get better if we are going to have success. And given our improved offensive line and stable of running backs I think it will.

But a better line will also allow the QBs to have more time to throw. Add in the experience the QBs have hopefully gained in their decision making, and you could have the recipe for a dominant passing attack.

And I haven't even mentioned the biggest reason that we could be deadly through the air: the receivers. With Stonum/Hemingway/Roundtree on the outside, Odoms/Roundtree/TRob/Grady in the slot, and Koger/Webb at TE, I really feel like we have a deep, talented, and experienced group of guys that have yet to show their full potential. 

The ideal situation IMO would be for an improved running game to really open things up downfield for either Denard, Tate, or both.

Anyway, what do you guys think?

(PS Sorry if this post didn't do anything but state obvious details. I just can't do anything right now except think about Michigan football.)

His Dudeness

August 20th, 2010 at 9:51 PM ^

If we are going to be successful under RR the data proves that we need to be around 65% run and 35% pass. So if our passing attack is our "major strength" it may mean we are unsuccessful.

swarwick33

August 20th, 2010 at 10:02 PM ^

RR has always said that his spread offense can be made into a very effective passing offense, if that is the strength of the team.  When he was in WV and had Pat White it was obvious that the strength of the QB and the team was to run the ball.  This resulted in that 65-35 ratio you saw, but if you look back further to his time at Tulane, he loved throwing the ball in the spread (I think there was a diary about that talked about this).

The strength of this team might very well be the ability to either stretch the field vertically, or get the ball into the hands of a WR quickly in space, and let them do some work. 

A rushing game is essential to any offense, but to say that Michigan will fall if they don't run 65% is a huge stretch since the best position group on this team is the WR corp.

His Dudeness

August 20th, 2010 at 10:10 PM ^

A) The diary is on the front page and proves the 65% Run 35% pass ratio to be a heavy factor in the success of RR teams. We are all fully aware of Shaun King and his throwing ability.

B) The O-line is by far the best position group on the team.

swarwick33

August 20th, 2010 at 11:27 PM ^

1) WVU's running game during the Pat White years included Steve Slaton and Noel Devine to go along with Pat White.  Now I like our team, but we don't have a Slaton or White or Devine this year.  In the furture we might develope players to this caliber, but not this year.  The best reciever they had was Raynaud.  All I am saying is that finding a nice balance and getting your playmakers (Roundtree, Stonum, Hemmingway, and Koger) the ball as much as possible is a good thing.

2) I hope the O-Line is the best position group on the team, but I don't see it this year.  They are IMPROVED, but the skill set and depth of the WR is unmatched on this team.  Like I said though, I hope the OL is the best position group we have this year.

jmblue

August 20th, 2010 at 11:45 PM ^

Keep in mind, though, that the game has changed even since 2007.  The zone read option is more widespread and defenses see it more often (though they don't see a guy like Denard all the time).  The next step in the evolution of this offense may be more of a downfield passing game.  We know that RR and Magee have been having discussions about whether the future of this offense is ground- or air-based.

CalifExile

August 21st, 2010 at 11:41 AM ^

Yes, we are all aware of Shaun King, but we're not all aware of the run/pass ratio while he was winning games for RR. The diary you reference was flawed precisely because it didn't incorporate data on the RR team that featured a winning passing QB.

Help us out here (I'm lazy). Was the run/pass ratio 65%/35% while RR was coaching winning football with Shaun King?

wildbackdunesman

August 20th, 2010 at 9:54 PM ^

I would be shocked if the passing game doesn't improve.

A stronger Oline to give good protection and set up the run for the passing game.

3 viable QBs with a lot more experience than 1 year ago.

We basically return all WRs/TEs except Greg Mathews.

I think our passing game should be better.  I am a bit anxious to see how Denard throws in real games this year.

MaiZedOuT

August 20th, 2010 at 9:57 PM ^

I agree with you. I think our WR's and TE's are solid. We have yet to see their true potential. I'm excited about the positive news about the OL and how they are bigger/stronger/faster.

The running game will be there and I feel if RR sticks by it in short yardage situations we can move the chains. How many times last year were we inside the 5 and in shotgun? Sounds like we'll see at least 3 possibly 4 guys getting carries.

I'm with you though. I'm so ready for the season to start. 2 weeks!

 

GO BLUE!

goody

August 20th, 2010 at 10:01 PM ^

it will be used to open the defense for the run game.  Michigan needs a deep threat to get that 8th man out of the box and with the depth at WR they should be able to do that.  Will Michigan ever have a dominate passing game, i.e. Texas Tech, under Rodriquez?  Probably not but having a respectable passing game with an outstanding run game will win you a lot of games. 

teldar

August 21st, 2010 at 7:04 AM ^

This isn't really grammar, as it's more about an inability to use words properly. Do people on here really NOT understand there is a difference between dominant and dominate? One is an adjective and one is a verb. They are different. It hurts my brains to see well constructed sentences with proper punctuation and capitalization but improper words.

mattbern

August 20th, 2010 at 10:00 PM ^

I think this is going to be the breakout year for Stonum, where he finally lives up to his expectations.  He showed some glimpses of strong play last season and I think he does so more consistently this season.

Braylon1

August 20th, 2010 at 10:18 PM ^

i feel like if the offense was catered to Forcier's skills then we would have a surprisingly strong passing game.

to me, the question is which is stronger, the Forcier offense or the DRob offense?

i feel like we can run the ball on most teams we play, but im unsure when it comes to PSU, OSU, and other top defenses. it will be interesting to see the direction of the offense vs OSU this year after the running game didnt work vs them last season.

personally im torn. i like our WR corps, and the fact that Forcier is proven despite a torn labrum in his throwing arm for most of the season last year. on the other hand, ive heard a load of people rave about Drob in the off season. i guess its a good problem to have.

now, if only we can shore up the secondary and beat ND.

Tater

August 21st, 2010 at 12:10 AM ^

Both: substituted liberally.  If both QB's play and the offense is tailored to their respective styles when they are in (which will, of course, happen), opponents have to prepare for both, and defenses will have to adjust to the pace in the middle of the game, maybe back and forth many times.

It would be great if RR played both and had no substitution pattern to which opponents can tailor their game plan.  It would be sorta like alternating a 100 mph fastball pitcher with a vile knuckleballer, and being able to bring each in whenever you want. 

pullin4blue

August 20th, 2010 at 10:21 PM ^

In any balanced offense you need to have a legitimate running game to keep the passing game open and keep the defense honest. When defenses know that you are a one dimensional team they can pin their ears back and play a defense that can't be beat. When D-Rob was under center last season everyone knew he was going to run the ball or it would most likely be an incompletion. If his completion percentage improves he can open the run up even more.

I also think that we are going to be seeing more of a running game for a couple of reasons. Yes, the O-line is greatly improved and we will be seeing holes that even I could run through, but I also think there will be some emphasis on the run to help in recruiting running backs. Think back...tight ends had no interest in Michigan initially until Koger started getting the ball. When RR started utilizing the T.E. more, we could recruit tight ends much more easily.

Sorry if this doesn't make much sense. Lots of wine tonight. Getting ready for tomorrow's scrimmage. I can't wait!!!!

brandanomano

August 20th, 2010 at 10:28 PM ^

I would say so. Denard (assuming he's the starting qb) can throw, and I expect that he is better at reading the defense. Tate is most likely also going to improve. Our Wr's are more experienced. It;s going to be fun to watch us on offense, no doubt. I'm excited to see it.

Enjoy Life

August 20th, 2010 at 10:47 PM ^

In 2009, M ranked #25 in rushing yards per game and #89 in passing yards per game -- #59 in overall offense.

Everything MUST get better this year. It is hard to believe that just the running game getting better will be enough!

maizenbluenc

August 21st, 2010 at 7:56 AM ^

So I was watching the big Ten preview and thinking baout this myself. My impressions are as follow:

1) Tate is a better passer than Devon, who is better than Denard. Granted we need to see in Devin and Denard in a real game, but still.

2) Denard is a better runner, than Devon and Tate. Again, need to see Devin in a game.

3) Tate has the most game experience, and should be able to take on the most of a new playbook, followed by Denard and then Devon.

We have a stable of running backs, and a few possible standouts (Fitz, Cox, Smith - though Smith seems at his best when passed to).

We have a stable of receivers with one standout (Roy), and several other potentials.

We have an experienced O Line, with some talented depth.

What's not to like  :-)

Anyway, Rich and Calvin's personnel give them a ton of options. Why not use what gives the opponent the most fits? If that means passing: Tate, Roy, Smith and crew. If that means running (less likely against the meat of the Big Ten: say Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio State): Denard, Fitz, and crew.

Here's something to think about: Juice Williams was really good at the read option. It only worked in the Big Ten for one year. The read option is so 2007 ...

teldar

August 21st, 2010 at 8:27 AM ^

I thought it looked like Tate did a much better job of putting the ball where the receiver could catch it in stride. Denard got the ball to them but not quite with the same placement.

dearbornpeds

August 21st, 2010 at 1:47 PM ^

i don't understand the blind faith many of the posters show when describing the abilities of dr.  his "outstanding" spring game was against the SECOND unit of a team expected to have a weak FIRST unit.    i'm not questioning his speed or running ability but i have never seen him show the ability to throw a soft pass precisely where it needs to be.

i believe rr desperately wants tate to emerge as the starter and has been challenging him since the spring.  tate has shown the ability to improvise, hit secondary receivers, and throw a "touch pass".  i don't mean to denigrate dr but i think people should temper their expectations.

Captain Obvious

August 22nd, 2010 at 12:57 AM ^

Find any reports from Spring onward that neglect to mention DR's progress.  Find me any reports discussing Tate's excellent development or great work ethic in the offseason.  None of these reports exist.

RR and some team members have been hard on Tate since Spring.  Both have called him out pretty directly for not putting in the work.  You can try and dress it up as "challenging" him.  Or, you can be realistic and admit that he hasn't been doing everything he needs to do to improve while DR has caught up and by all accounts blown by him.  RR took away his freaking wings for a period of time.  Clearly, there are some issues there.

You are right that he showed a lot of positive qualities and a lot of promise...but he also had a TON he needed to work on.  Just like every other frosh QB.  I'm not sure he is putting in the necessary work to improve.

MTwentySevens

August 21st, 2010 at 3:12 PM ^

Having 2 different offenses to run with two highly athletic quarterbacks is a great problem to have. With forcier its the short passing game with quick release and deadly accuracy. With Drob its zone read, option.. but if his throwing mechanics have improved greatly like many analyists have said then that should give opposing secondarys fits. No sub pattern to adjust and the boys in blue will be putting up 35 a game mark it down.

m1jjb00

August 21st, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^

Coaches have talked him up.  I don't know if it's the contacts, if he just is putting together or whatever.  If Stonum has really improved, a deep threat will really spread the field.  Of course, the QB has to instill enough fear that a deep ball is a threat.

RRRULZ

August 22nd, 2010 at 11:28 PM ^

Denard will make this team a top 5 offense in the B10.  just watch.  I love Tate, but DR is going to be the stud holding the reigns leading us to V-I-C-T-O-R-Y!