Yes. When we had 5-6 NBA players, we beat zones. No shocker because that team will look good against any defense.
Our offense against Iowa's zone was passing the ball around the perimeter until the shot clock wound down, putting Matthews at the FT line and (only good part) not passing him the ball, then finally having a guy make a desperate drive or take a long 3.
Iowa has a BAD defense.
We looked my elementary school team.
And we actually have a few NBA prospects though Matthews has regressed. He should have taken his chances with the draft last year. I'm hoping he ascends to the mean and that he actually isn't a worse shooter.
Great on defense. And very valuable on defense. Good rebounder...but....
Consistently bad on offense this year. When he has to shoot the ball (not dunk, not layup), he has been terrible. And he makes unforced TOs as much as anyone (Poole is close).
Anyone who said he'd need another year to improve his draft stock was wrong. He's worse on the offensive end.
Beilein hates fouling out more that Earthquakes and brain-eating zombies.
I'm cool with trying to get players thinking that fouling will put them on the bench during the regular season, but come tournament time, Teske better not sit in the same situation.
Also, as beautiful the UM offense is to see against man defense, they are painful to watch against a zone. Really painful. Like let's-get-some-information-out-of-that-terrorist-so-make-him-watch-the-UM-offense-against-a-zone-defense painful.
And, sorry, but it's been that way since JB has been here. He hasn't figured out a zone. Even the 3 point shots we took were long ones. The guy we have popping at the FT line has been one of the worst mid-range shooters (Matthews). If he isn't shooting a lay up or dunk this year, he has had one of the worst shooting years I can recall. I think he's learned to stop taking as many shots (or shoot when absolutely necessary; read end of the game). At least put Ziggy there.
To be honest, if you can have players that are not likely going to contribute, leave the program, you WILL get better. It's not a coaching thing, but it has huge value.
Look at the best programs in the country: They either recruit the bejesus out of everyone and likely have a relatively low APR.
The best Michigan coach IMO is one that wins and can retain a high APR.
Put together a national championship caliber team in four years after the preceeding coach had won about 40% of the games.
And did so without many decommits, Juco's, 5th year senior transfers or a hint of rubbing recruits/coaches/parents the wrong way.
In some future iteration, this will be appreciated for what it was. The guy's last years were characterized by heavy talent in underclass years (his recruits that he somehow convinced to come run a pro style offense and actually play defense; amazing given the previous coach) and a dearth of talent in the upperclasses, especially in trenches, double-especially on the OL (mostly Rich recruits and some scramble Hoke recruits from his first season).
The defense was never a significant issue and was generally one year ahead of the offense in experience. The makings for 2015 was in the works. The OL played quite well against a stacked Ohio State DL, and they were all coming back not only for 2015, but 2016! (That's how young they were).
Better OL, helps qb, rb, and wr. The D was already one of the better ones in the country. Throw in a couple all-americans that missed significant time in 2014 (Jabrill Peppers and Jake Butt) and add a deus ex machina 5th year transfer qb who was actually meant to be a qb, and you have success in 2015.
The offense should not have any excuses (ie comments that were stated for the OL last year). Highly recruited, high on game expereince and high # of upperclassmen throughout. I wonder how many teams in the country can match us on those levels.
The OL was disappointing last year, compared to how they finished in 2014. They increassd in expereince and numbers like few other teams in 2015 after pushing the OSU DL as good as some playoff teams in 2014.
Enter 2015 which strated out good, and ended relatively poorly. No one dared say anything lest the hand of God or one of His disciples try to throw Holy Water on you for such blasphemy.
Enter 2016. even MORE expereince and MORE available talent (unprecidented 2nd stratight year of losing essentially no one, sans Glascow). Potentially unprecidented, but at teh very least, very, very rare....
. After seeing us roll on Flordia (finally looking like an OL worthy of theri recruiting level and talent)., I can't see us anything but excelling on the OL.
I saw this in 2012/13 when we were racking up OL talent. It was a matter of time. These past 2 years were the rewarrd for that recruiting. The two previous years revealed the errors in recruiting in 2010/11.
I'd be surprised if JB didn't take at least one of the names mentioned.
What we need is someone that can recruit elite talent, not someone who can pick out a guy that will play like the 80th ranked player when they were ranked 125th.
Michigan is a plum job, so we certainly can get someone good,
I'd consider Harbaugh-ing it and grabbing someone from an elite high school academy to parlay some great recruits.
The NCAA made the wrong decision, but this is not banning homosexual marriage. I.e. this is not an injustice that we need to protest by making continuous statements that there has been a error against rationale thinking.
The worst thing is people actually "caring" for the "kids" are really crazy. OMG. I've seen posters against paying players and for early signing, for some reason, trying to justify this decision as some sort of injustice against humanity.
...we looked like a bad team that was recently coming off of a Finals and Final 8 team.
We've recruited some talented players, but less than what you should recruit after the seasons we've had.
Even then, I don't think these guys look good on the court. Like Walton. The others, either weren't that great or haven't develeped well.
JB should hire a couple Perry Watson types and get some studs.
Recovered to be all big ten. Your Zone comment really has no bearing. If Charles Woodson played zone, would he be any worse of a player. The chioce to play zone or man is based on coaches decision, not necessarily talent at corner. Josh Norman and Luke Kuechley often drop back in zone coverage and are 2 of the best defensive players in the league... And all-pro.
Countess finished up his career as the defensive player of the year for an SEC team that was ranked #6 in the preseason. Did they underperform? Yes.
Was it because of Blake Countess? N.O.
2011 was Rich/Hoke scramble class. Snagging Clark was a coup. The class certainly does not have much to crow about, but then again, Rich started the year coming off 8-16, no bowl games for 2 seasons, and closed the recruiting period to two of the worst consecutive losses in memory.
Hoke needed a Haz-Mat suit and a pooper scooper before hitting the recruiting trail.
UM sported one of the top defenses in the country last year, and we're talking about a guy with sophomore eligibility last year. An underclassman.
As sophomore's linemen often do, they get better when they get into their upperclass years.
It's like you're saying Hoke tripped over and fell on Heny, he was a mute, then Harbaugh laid hands and he's a star...
I wish Greg Mattison knew how to teach tecnnique of defensive players. It's a shame we had to live through that....[sarc]
Good luck to Henry. He was a great pick up, probably forced into a lineup early that should have had better upperclassmen on his arrival, played beyond his "star" level from early on and was a very good player last year, that looked like he had star capability. All before 2015.
Henry was an under the radar recruit out of Cleveland Glenville who Brady Hoke picked up on late; his raw power wasn't matched by his technique until this year
Harbaugh inhereted a very talented team. The defense was high caliber last year, and returned almost every key player.
The offense is where people make incorrect assesments. UM hasn't had a full cadre of OL since Hoke's first year, due to 2 entire classes being barren. Hoke, to his credt, went into overdrive in recruiting OL. You don't see the fruits of recruiting a HS OL generally untile AT LEAST 3 years from recruitment, but generally 3-5 years. Most of Hoke's OL recruits STILL had underclassmen eligibilty. Think about that...
Here's the key: By the end of 2014, that OL actually started moving around some decent DL's (see OSU 2014). (By the way, the OL this year actually looked worse at the end of the year compared to the beginning of the year.. But that's another discussion)...
There was a 5 star running backs this year (Hoke recruitied) and a Rb that ran for 100 yards against OSU. Hoke threw in another 5 star recruit for Jim.
Peppers made several key plays on offense and was probably our best offensive and defensive player. Recruited by Hoke but injured last year.
Butt is probably the best TE in the conference and was injured for much of the yerar.
Qb was the biggest question mark, and to Harbaugh's credit, he get a READY-to-go player, who honestly, looked worse in his first 5 games at UM than he did at Iowa.
With the entire OL returning PLUS another class of players to compete for jobs, adding a 5th year senior qb who was 4th in accuracy in the B10, adding Peppers and adding Butt, this offense was prepared to go.
When Ruddock agreed to transfer here, I moved us from 7-9 wins to 9-10 wins.
Rich inherited a team most felt would be "bad". Like an awful team. But if you recall, in the pre-RichRod days, "bad" and "awful" was 8-4, maybe 7-5. No one expected the bomb Rich ignited.
And while Rich was praised for the doing well at WVU (after V Tech, Miami left) for having done it will recruiting classes not ranked highly (that's fine, "he develops talent well" was the thought), the same criteria was thrown out the door when assessing him at UM. He came to UM with highly rated classes preceding him. From a coach that had been there for over a decade (so, no reason to expect significant changes in his recruiting).
No one doubted that he had a great defense to work with, but most doubted he would lead UM to some of the worst 3 defenses in Michigan history.
Then there is his record. That little thing: 15-22, and if you include teams that had a semblence of a pulse, it gets pretty ugly.
He oversaw the biggest negative turnaround in modern college football history (winning % of coach before, and his winning %).
But wait, there's more!
His recruiting! While defenses after him thrived, and the offense was good for one year, slowly, we were depleted of OL. Hoke's last 2 years, how many upperclassmen OL did we have? I don't know of any offense that had as few total AND upperclassmen on OL as Michigan. Thankfully, his recruits have been rinsed out of the program (bless their souls) and you see now what Hoke has left Jim (much better in the trenches and elsewhere).
He's not a "bad" guy. But the "oh, he just wasn't given a chance" only goes so far. Happy he's in Arizona. Had some great nail-biters last year that ended well and gave him some props. He won at Arizona with big WR's, and accurate qb's. Wish he would have learned that less at UM. This year... not so good. You'll get to see soon.
...is we're out of the bottom, bottom, mid tier range we had dropped to with Rich. But even better, it is recruiting that by far drives your position more than coaching (sans RR). We're now getting Brady's first class into it's RS soph and Jr years. The bad news is where we needed the help the most (have for some many years) has been in the trenches, the very positions that take the longest time to develop talent, esp offensive line. The good news is the talent is there due to some phenomenal recruiting under the circumstances. I take a more optimistic view at UM's future. The challenge (not for the coaches) for the fans is to take a breath and wait for Hoke's recruits to mature and develop. Good times ahead...Good times...
...Good times. The ol' "but we had a former walk on" has long since been debunked as we started a couple on defense in 2011. The 1997 game could arguably be considered the best UM performance in modern football history. Beating the #2 team in the nation on the road, with what was at stak, by a dominating performance that actually was more impressive than the final score of almost 30 points.
...You can cherry pick Carr... Camp recruits... Camp recruits after 2005... Make sure not to include Jake Long, etc... What you should do is take a look at all the recruits Rich Rod had at UM. Greater sample size, greater power. You can even analyze the HIS camp recruits over his entire career at UM compared to Carr's camp recruits over his entire career at UM. That'd be an interesting analysis.
...it'd be interesting b/c we'd suck and face a team from the Suck (Big) East... To assume Edsell would have taken UConn to a new level would be the same as Rich Rod taking UM to a new level.... Wait, Rich Rod did take UM to a new level. My bad.
You conclude Hoke is making a mistake by not going to the spread punt, and you don't give stats comparing the spread punt vesus non-spread punt?
Really?
This isn't a correlation versus causation flaw. This is a "where is the data we need to make a judgment" flaw.
Even if teams are moving to the spread more, there are teams that do and teams that don't spread the ball. How do these teams compare? That's the 1st, 2nd and 3rd questions to ask.
Then there are the correlation/causation questions you can ask as well...
Love the stats and the discussion, but I might frame the discussion as "Is the spread punt responsible for these changes" rather than "The one thing Hoke is doing wrong..."
While we're a young team, we're older than where we were when we were ranked #1 in the country a couple weeks ago.
GRIII and Nick Stauskas came into AA with great skills and have not really played that great in the big ten. They are great talents. No doubt about it.
If TB is shut down, I see surprisingly little offensive inginuity. Hardaway canning 5 straight 3's in the 2nd half was not any coaching inovation. That was THJr being THJr.
That being said, we stunk, but it's college basketball. The most forgiving of all sports for the regular season.
This game had no impact on our chances of winning the NC.
Take it for what it's worth: We stunk. Our players and our coaches. And it had no impact on our NC chances.
"Downfield" is a term with a specific definition... Throwing downfield.
Scrambles don't have anything to do with that except to say, "I really like qb's who scramble".
1. Probably the most important thing a coach can do is maximize the talent out of the players you have. Kudos to Borges for recognizing how Robinson should be used and ending up with 11 wins and more points scored/game than the previous 3 seasons. In sum, Borges wasn't an idiot.
2. We tend to go under center more in short yardage situations, so there is some bias in the numbers. I like Drob in the gun, but in short yardage, we'll likely see less gun than in non-short yardage situations.
You need to read Brian's posts more. Relax, it's his opinion and it's on the record.
Rich is a great X and O guy who is a tragic hero. A victim of circumstances. I have rarely read Brian putting much responsibility of the worst 3 years in UM football history on Rich. It's this or that that led to UM's poor performance and Rich happened to be here when it happened. Like I said, it's opinion and it's a free country. Which is why I can post this (and you are free to respond). Brian is a great writer IMO which is why I'm on this site.
Hoke is a "manager" (without much comment on his coaching).
I don't have any opinion on Brian's opinions on DB except that he didn't like the Hoke hire and how the process went. A lot of people felt that way, so no biggie.
I won't attempt to figure out why—kickers are weird—but the stark contrast in reactions between Hoke and Rodriguez when the kicking game went to hell isn't a bad place to start.
Careful, you almost implied Hoke did something better than Rich, rather benefitting from luck.
...Offensive line, where we are leaping from, and SOS.
Regression to the mean is always the easier path. UM improved on their scoring from 2010 to 2011. They worked their way into the top quarter. When you start at/near the top, you actually can't make a leap. UM could theoretically get into the top 5 (that would be a leap), but they'd rather hang onto the ball than score as quickly as possible. A change in philosophy, but one that led to actual wins. I'll take wins over RichRod points any day.
Finally, strength of schedule has to be factored in. We aren't playing in a vacuum. I believe the first team we're playing has a pretty good defense, for example. Ala-something....It's generally accepted we'll have a harder schedule than last year.
The offense COULD get better, but (Borges year #2 talkity talk aside) it would take a lot for a leap to occur.
...but for all the guy crush you put on RR's offense, AB managed to do two things this year:
1. Average more points than last year.
2. Score points against teams with a pulse on defense when the game mattered.
3. Win games.
Rich had a great offense, but was overrated. Hey, I said it was great... Easy....
You like X/O's. I like wins.
You like shot gun read option. I like wins.
You like total yards. i do too, but value red zone yards and points against good teams when it matters (read: not losing 21-0 at halftime, or against crappy teams).
Get on board.
Al ain't perfect, but he came through. The former was also true of Rich, but not the latter.
"The book seemed reasonably two-sided once things got to Michigan. The WV stuff is more one-sided -- just Rich's POV. Did JUB see anything that supported WV's position in those 'negotiations'/lawsuits?"
Given that neither Bill Martin or Lloyd Carr's point of view are presented in the book, this is not a 2-sided (or even 3-sided) version of events at UM. Those are probably the 2 other biggest parties from UM's story.
Reading through the book, it is almost entirely from Rich Rodriguez' point of view. And that's not a surprise. Mr. Bacon was given access to Rich and his program. It SHOULD be a description of Rich's perspective on the situation.
It should NOT be considered a balanced view of the situation. It is what it is.
...Probably underutilized but, But, BUT there's a big difference b/n going for it up 14 against SD State and doing it in a much more meaningful game.
I love stats, but for University of Michigan football, sans the last 3 years of horror when any coach/team could realistically beat us, the games and stats that matter are the ones against the best teams we play.
It would be nice to see direct quotes about Rich's support rather than the site saying "100% support". Really?
I think he worked hard at UM, but he was just bad. I don't think he was bad. He was bad. 6-18 in the big ten is about as bad as it gets. NW wouldn't like that record. But he tried. He tried his best. I don't think Rich tanked it while he was here.
One comment. You mentioned how 1984 could be considered a fluke given Harbaugh's injury, but 2005 had more injuries than any other UM team I can recall. 2006 was essentially 2005 healthy.
If we ever go to mountain west or big sky conference, I think talking about their recruiting ranks would be relevant.
If you believe Utah will have as good a record in the next 6 years after joining the pac 10 compared to the prior 6 years with the same level of recruits, I would disagree.
It's nice to win an impressive bowl game (not saying otherwise) after 4-6 weeks of prep, but if you want to be a major conference and win week-in and week-out, you need the talent.
If you really want to see how much Michigan fans should be concerned about recruit rank, you should:
1. Only look at major conferences (SEC, Big 12, Big 10, Pac 10...)
2. Look at teams' records versus top 50 teams. I really don't care if UW beat 4 super weak non-con teams. And quite honestly, when UM is playing like a UM should, they would rarely lose to a team outside the top 50.
3. Average the prior 5 classes recruit ranks
4. See if there is a correlation b/n rank and record. And probably, more relevant to our fans, see if there's a correlation at the top end. I wouldn't care if there is no correlation for the 5th-11th rank teams. Not relevant to where UM wants to be.
...but there's always some degree of tension when a new regime arrives, whether it's Rich at UM, Tressel at OSU, or Carrol at USC.
As long as folks aren't taking his headset off while he's trying to get the play in, it will have little REAL effect on what's going on.
Having spoke with a couple OSU fans, they were not thrilled at all (less thrilled than the average UM fan with Rich) with "settling on Tressel". And USC fans didn't think a so-so/mediocre NFL coach would be THE answer for turning around their program.
The bottom line is the guy who has the most to do with success is the head coach himself. It ain't mommy, the mole or some disenchanted alum.
UM 2008 offense was historically awful. No matter what is said about attrition and talent level, there was enough there NOT to lead the nation in 3 and outs. Choosing Sheridan and McGuffie to lead the offense and putting the square peg Threet into the round hold offense was...uh...stupid. But that's over.
Now, in 2009, we did improve. If you look a little closer, against teams we played that had a pulse (ie big ten conference), we actually scored about the same number of PPG. Thank Delaware HS for beefing up the stats.
In 2010, I expect a "real" improvement on offense. We've consistently outrecruited every team in the big ten (sans OSU, and it's close) and have plenty of returning players. This will be an exciting team to watch for sure.
...If you're saying, 'well, we're not a great program, so we're not going to get someone who will make an impact', well, i'm not sure you are correct.
I'd say give him some time before judging him: good, neutral or otherwise.
Because, time will tell.
As with most, I think "connections" in Detroit is nice. I've read that he's a "good recruiter", but c'mon, he was at Western Michigan; i'm not saying he's NOT a good recruiter... It's a different game now.
Will it translate into landing stars that otherwise go elsewhere?
Time will tell.
Is this going to be an Oklahoma-spread offense or a WVU-spread offense.
I think the answer is getting more clear.
I just want to see some passes completed more than 15 yards from the LOS and outside WR's being something more the thin offensive linemen.
DRob is a special player, whether in a run-dominated qb offense or split out. If he can manage to, yeah know, pass the ball to maize and blue players consistently, I'm certainly on board with him at qb.
If....
...to 3rd team big ten.
Whether or not he'll be drafted this year, he has to decide if spending another year at UM will affect his draft status.
He has had plenty of time to think about it.
Recent Comments
Yes. When we had 5-6 NBA players, we beat zones. No shocker because that team will look good against any defense.
Our offense against Iowa's zone was passing the ball around the perimeter until the shot clock wound down, putting Matthews at the FT line and (only good part) not passing him the ball, then finally having a guy make a desperate drive or take a long 3.
Iowa has a BAD defense.
We looked my elementary school team.
And we actually have a few NBA prospects though Matthews has regressed. He should have taken his chances with the draft last year. I'm hoping he ascends to the mean and that he actually isn't a worse shooter.
Great on defense. And very valuable on defense. Good rebounder...but....
Consistently bad on offense this year. When he has to shoot the ball (not dunk, not layup), he has been terrible. And he makes unforced TOs as much as anyone (Poole is close).
Anyone who said he'd need another year to improve his draft stock was wrong. He's worse on the offensive end.
Beilein hates fouling out more that Earthquakes and brain-eating zombies.
I'm cool with trying to get players thinking that fouling will put them on the bench during the regular season, but come tournament time, Teske better not sit in the same situation.
Also, as beautiful the UM offense is to see against man defense, they are painful to watch against a zone. Really painful. Like let's-get-some-information-out-of-that-terrorist-so-make-him-watch-the-UM-offense-against-a-zone-defense painful.
And, sorry, but it's been that way since JB has been here. He hasn't figured out a zone. Even the 3 point shots we took were long ones. The guy we have popping at the FT line has been one of the worst mid-range shooters (Matthews). If he isn't shooting a lay up or dunk this year, he has had one of the worst shooting years I can recall. I think he's learned to stop taking as many shots (or shoot when absolutely necessary; read end of the game). At least put Ziggy there.
1/3 of a qb played at Texas :-)
I have a…
That's it? :-)
I have a Cornhusker friend who's been asked to remove his shoelaces and be in place sight at all times.
Rough go for the big ten, but at least our path to a great record appears easier than first thought
Johnson was going nowhere (switching positions this early generally is a predictive of a non-productive career on the field).
Harbaugh will clear more 'ships than Irma and Katrina.
He is the best at recruiting and maintaining the talent level on the field. For this reason, he will win a NC at Michigan
To be honest, if you can have players that are not likely going to contribute, leave the program, you WILL get better. It's not a coaching thing, but it has huge value.
Look at the best programs in the country: They either recruit the bejesus out of everyone and likely have a relatively low APR.
The best Michigan coach IMO is one that wins and can retain a high APR.
http://web1.ncaa.org/maps/aprRelease.jsp
Put together a national championship caliber team in four years after the preceeding coach had won about 40% of the games.
And did so without many decommits, Juco's, 5th year senior transfers or a hint of rubbing recruits/coaches/parents the wrong way.
In some future iteration, this will be appreciated for what it was. The guy's last years were characterized by heavy talent in underclass years (his recruits that he somehow convinced to come run a pro style offense and actually play defense; amazing given the previous coach) and a dearth of talent in the upperclasses, especially in trenches, double-especially on the OL (mostly Rich recruits and some scramble Hoke recruits from his first season).
The defense was never a significant issue and was generally one year ahead of the offense in experience. The makings for 2015 was in the works. The OL played quite well against a stacked Ohio State DL, and they were all coming back not only for 2015, but 2016! (That's how young they were).
Better OL, helps qb, rb, and wr. The D was already one of the better ones in the country. Throw in a couple all-americans that missed significant time in 2014 (Jabrill Peppers and Jake Butt) and add a deus ex machina 5th year transfer qb who was actually meant to be a qb, and you have success in 2015.
The offense should not have any excuses (ie comments that were stated for the OL last year). Highly recruited, high on game expereince and high # of upperclassmen throughout. I wonder how many teams in the country can match us on those levels.
The OL was disappointing last year, compared to how they finished in 2014. They increassd in expereince and numbers like few other teams in 2015 after pushing the OSU DL as good as some playoff teams in 2014.
Enter 2015 which strated out good, and ended relatively poorly. No one dared say anything lest the hand of God or one of His disciples try to throw Holy Water on you for such blasphemy.
Enter 2016. even MORE expereince and MORE available talent (unprecidented 2nd stratight year of losing essentially no one, sans Glascow). Potentially unprecidented, but at teh very least, very, very rare....
. After seeing us roll on Flordia (finally looking like an OL worthy of theri recruiting level and talent)., I can't see us anything but excelling on the OL.
I saw this in 2012/13 when we were racking up OL talent. It was a matter of time. These past 2 years were the rewarrd for that recruiting. The two previous years revealed the errors in recruiting in 2010/11.
Stand back defenses. Plow coming through.
I'd be surprised if JB didn't take at least one of the names mentioned.
What we need is someone that can recruit elite talent, not someone who can pick out a guy that will play like the 80th ranked player when they were ranked 125th.
Michigan is a plum job, so we certainly can get someone good,
I'd consider Harbaugh-ing it and grabbing someone from an elite high school academy to parlay some great recruits.
The NCAA made the wrong decision, but this is not banning homosexual marriage. I.e. this is not an injustice that we need to protest by making continuous statements that there has been a error against rationale thinking.
The worst thing is people actually "caring" for the "kids" are really crazy. OMG. I've seen posters against paying players and for early signing, for some reason, trying to justify this decision as some sort of injustice against humanity.
Give me a break.
...we looked like a bad team that was recently coming off of a Finals and Final 8 team.
We've recruited some talented players, but less than what you should recruit after the seasons we've had.
Even then, I don't think these guys look good on the court. Like Walton. The others, either weren't that great or haven't develeped well.
JB should hire a couple Perry Watson types and get some studs.
Made all-freshmen team for Big Ten and by ESPN.
Injury gods plucked our best secondary prospect.
Recovered to be all big ten. Your Zone comment really has no bearing. If Charles Woodson played zone, would he be any worse of a player. The chioce to play zone or man is based on coaches decision, not necessarily talent at corner. Josh Norman and Luke Kuechley often drop back in zone coverage and are 2 of the best defensive players in the league... And all-pro.
Countess finished up his career as the defensive player of the year for an SEC team that was ranked #6 in the preseason. Did they underperform? Yes.
Was it because of Blake Countess? N.O.
2011 was Rich/Hoke scramble class. Snagging Clark was a coup. The class certainly does not have much to crow about, but then again, Rich started the year coming off 8-16, no bowl games for 2 seasons, and closed the recruiting period to two of the worst consecutive losses in memory.
Hoke needed a Haz-Mat suit and a pooper scooper before hitting the recruiting trail.
You really can't help yourself.
UM sported one of the top defenses in the country last year, and we're talking about a guy with sophomore eligibility last year. An underclassman.
As sophomore's linemen often do, they get better when they get into their upperclass years.
It's like you're saying Hoke tripped over and fell on Heny, he was a mute, then Harbaugh laid hands and he's a star...
I wish Greg Mattison knew how to teach tecnnique of defensive players. It's a shame we had to live through that....[sarc]
Good luck to Henry. He was a great pick up, probably forced into a lineup early that should have had better upperclassmen on his arrival, played beyond his "star" level from early on and was a very good player last year, that looked like he had star capability. All before 2015.
Henry was an under the radar recruit out of Cleveland Glenville who Brady Hoke picked up on late; his raw power wasn't matched by his technique until this year
Harbaugh inhereted a very talented team. The defense was high caliber last year, and returned almost every key player.
The offense is where people make incorrect assesments. UM hasn't had a full cadre of OL since Hoke's first year, due to 2 entire classes being barren. Hoke, to his credt, went into overdrive in recruiting OL. You don't see the fruits of recruiting a HS OL generally untile AT LEAST 3 years from recruitment, but generally 3-5 years. Most of Hoke's OL recruits STILL had underclassmen eligibilty. Think about that...
Here's the key: By the end of 2014, that OL actually started moving around some decent DL's (see OSU 2014). (By the way, the OL this year actually looked worse at the end of the year compared to the beginning of the year.. But that's another discussion)...
There was a 5 star running backs this year (Hoke recruitied) and a Rb that ran for 100 yards against OSU. Hoke threw in another 5 star recruit for Jim.
Peppers made several key plays on offense and was probably our best offensive and defensive player. Recruited by Hoke but injured last year.
Butt is probably the best TE in the conference and was injured for much of the yerar.
Qb was the biggest question mark, and to Harbaugh's credit, he get a READY-to-go player, who honestly, looked worse in his first 5 games at UM than he did at Iowa.
With the entire OL returning PLUS another class of players to compete for jobs, adding a 5th year senior qb who was 4th in accuracy in the B10, adding Peppers and adding Butt, this offense was prepared to go.
When Ruddock agreed to transfer here, I moved us from 7-9 wins to 9-10 wins.
Old record still plays well here.
Rich inherited a team most felt would be "bad". Like an awful team. But if you recall, in the pre-RichRod days, "bad" and "awful" was 8-4, maybe 7-5. No one expected the bomb Rich ignited.
And while Rich was praised for the doing well at WVU (after V Tech, Miami left) for having done it will recruiting classes not ranked highly (that's fine, "he develops talent well" was the thought), the same criteria was thrown out the door when assessing him at UM. He came to UM with highly rated classes preceding him. From a coach that had been there for over a decade (so, no reason to expect significant changes in his recruiting).
No one doubted that he had a great defense to work with, but most doubted he would lead UM to some of the worst 3 defenses in Michigan history.
Then there is his record. That little thing: 15-22, and if you include teams that had a semblence of a pulse, it gets pretty ugly.
He oversaw the biggest negative turnaround in modern college football history (winning % of coach before, and his winning %).
But wait, there's more!
His recruiting! While defenses after him thrived, and the offense was good for one year, slowly, we were depleted of OL. Hoke's last 2 years, how many upperclassmen OL did we have? I don't know of any offense that had as few total AND upperclassmen on OL as Michigan. Thankfully, his recruits have been rinsed out of the program (bless their souls) and you see now what Hoke has left Jim (much better in the trenches and elsewhere).
He's not a "bad" guy. But the "oh, he just wasn't given a chance" only goes so far. Happy he's in Arizona. Had some great nail-biters last year that ended well and gave him some props. He won at Arizona with big WR's, and accurate qb's. Wish he would have learned that less at UM. This year... not so good. You'll get to see soon.
...is we're out of the bottom, bottom, mid tier range we had dropped to with Rich. But even better, it is recruiting that by far drives your position more than coaching (sans RR). We're now getting Brady's first class into it's RS soph and Jr years. The bad news is where we needed the help the most (have for some many years) has been in the trenches, the very positions that take the longest time to develop talent, esp offensive line. The good news is the talent is there due to some phenomenal recruiting under the circumstances. I take a more optimistic view at UM's future. The challenge (not for the coaches) for the fans is to take a breath and wait for Hoke's recruits to mature and develop. Good times ahead...Good times...
...Good times. The ol' "but we had a former walk on" has long since been debunked as we started a couple on defense in 2011. The 1997 game could arguably be considered the best UM performance in modern football history. Beating the #2 team in the nation on the road, with what was at stak, by a dominating performance that actually was more impressive than the final score of almost 30 points.
d
...You can cherry pick Carr... Camp recruits... Camp recruits after 2005... Make sure not to include Jake Long, etc... What you should do is take a look at all the recruits Rich Rod had at UM. Greater sample size, greater power. You can even analyze the HIS camp recruits over his entire career at UM compared to Carr's camp recruits over his entire career at UM. That'd be an interesting analysis.
...white, black and other.
You only mentioned it for the Indiana dude.
...it'd be interesting b/c we'd suck and face a team from the Suck (Big) East... To assume Edsell would have taken UConn to a new level would be the same as Rich Rod taking UM to a new level.... Wait, Rich Rod did take UM to a new level. My bad.
You conclude Hoke is making a mistake by not going to the spread punt, and you don't give stats comparing the spread punt vesus non-spread punt?
Really?
This isn't a correlation versus causation flaw. This is a "where is the data we need to make a judgment" flaw.
Even if teams are moving to the spread more, there are teams that do and teams that don't spread the ball. How do these teams compare? That's the 1st, 2nd and 3rd questions to ask.
Then there are the correlation/causation questions you can ask as well...
Love the stats and the discussion, but I might frame the discussion as "Is the spread punt responsible for these changes" rather than "The one thing Hoke is doing wrong..."
...The most important thing is that the low end of the graph is BY FAR, the least meaningful part of the graph.
If you are interested in winning Championships (Michigan pre-2008, post-2010), you have to have quality 4 and 5 star players.
EVERY great team will "fill out" (not insult intended) with 3 star players for half the team.
It's the upper half of the recruits that should be focused on. Dramatically.
While we're a young team, we're older than where we were when we were ranked #1 in the country a couple weeks ago.
GRIII and Nick Stauskas came into AA with great skills and have not really played that great in the big ten. They are great talents. No doubt about it.
If TB is shut down, I see surprisingly little offensive inginuity. Hardaway canning 5 straight 3's in the 2nd half was not any coaching inovation. That was THJr being THJr.
That being said, we stunk, but it's college basketball. The most forgiving of all sports for the regular season.
This game had no impact on our chances of winning the NC.
Take it for what it's worth: We stunk. Our players and our coaches. And it had no impact on our NC chances.
Next!
...Good to know his "genius" is based on cheating...
Track record of the "offensive genius"...
http://www.garnetandblackattack.com/2011/10/24/2510551/offensive-genius…
....I see you stayed away from, "Devin at qb and Denard in slot may not have been such a bad idea"...
If not now, guess we'll never see that :^)
(ND's great defense is especially good against the run. The only suspect part of their D is their secondary)...
"Downfield" is a term with a specific definition... Throwing downfield.
Scrambles don't have anything to do with that except to say, "I really like qb's who scramble".
1. Probably the most important thing a coach can do is maximize the talent out of the players you have. Kudos to Borges for recognizing how Robinson should be used and ending up with 11 wins and more points scored/game than the previous 3 seasons. In sum, Borges wasn't an idiot.
2. We tend to go under center more in short yardage situations, so there is some bias in the numbers. I like Drob in the gun, but in short yardage, we'll likely see less gun than in non-short yardage situations.
You need to read Brian's posts more. Relax, it's his opinion and it's on the record.
Rich is a great X and O guy who is a tragic hero. A victim of circumstances. I have rarely read Brian putting much responsibility of the worst 3 years in UM football history on Rich. It's this or that that led to UM's poor performance and Rich happened to be here when it happened. Like I said, it's opinion and it's a free country. Which is why I can post this (and you are free to respond). Brian is a great writer IMO which is why I'm on this site.
Hoke is a "manager" (without much comment on his coaching).
I don't have any opinion on Brian's opinions on DB except that he didn't like the Hoke hire and how the process went. A lot of people felt that way, so no biggie.
I won't attempt to figure out why—kickers are weird—but the stark contrast in reactions between Hoke and Rodriguez when the kicking game went to hell isn't a bad place to start.
Careful, you almost implied Hoke did something better than Rich, rather benefitting from luck.
...Offensive line, where we are leaping from, and SOS.
Regression to the mean is always the easier path. UM improved on their scoring from 2010 to 2011. They worked their way into the top quarter. When you start at/near the top, you actually can't make a leap. UM could theoretically get into the top 5 (that would be a leap), but they'd rather hang onto the ball than score as quickly as possible. A change in philosophy, but one that led to actual wins. I'll take wins over RichRod points any day.
Finally, strength of schedule has to be factored in. We aren't playing in a vacuum. I believe the first team we're playing has a pretty good defense, for example. Ala-something....It's generally accepted we'll have a harder schedule than last year.
The offense COULD get better, but (Borges year #2 talkity talk aside) it would take a lot for a leap to occur.
...but for all the guy crush you put on RR's offense, AB managed to do two things this year:
1. Average more points than last year.
2. Score points against teams with a pulse on defense when the game mattered.
3. Win games.
Rich had a great offense, but was overrated. Hey, I said it was great... Easy....
You like X/O's. I like wins.
You like shot gun read option. I like wins.
You like total yards. i do too, but value red zone yards and points against good teams when it matters (read: not losing 21-0 at halftime, or against crappy teams).
Get on board.
Al ain't perfect, but he came through. The former was also true of Rich, but not the latter.
"The book seemed reasonably two-sided once things got to Michigan. The WV stuff is more one-sided -- just Rich's POV. Did JUB see anything that supported WV's position in those 'negotiations'/lawsuits?"
Given that neither Bill Martin or Lloyd Carr's point of view are presented in the book, this is not a 2-sided (or even 3-sided) version of events at UM. Those are probably the 2 other biggest parties from UM's story.
Reading through the book, it is almost entirely from Rich Rodriguez' point of view. And that's not a surprise. Mr. Bacon was given access to Rich and his program. It SHOULD be a description of Rich's perspective on the situation.
It should NOT be considered a balanced view of the situation. It is what it is.
...but aren't we averaging more points this year with completely new coaches?
That has to count for something... And, ya know, the wins and everything.
...When the qb is a passing threat, LB's can't break on running plays for fear of play-action.
...MSU's LB's, DC's, fans, and the MSU popcorn vendor were all hoping Denard would go play-action.
2 dimensions is a good thing.
...Probably underutilized but, But, BUT there's a big difference b/n going for it up 14 against SD State and doing it in a much more meaningful game.
I love stats, but for University of Michigan football, sans the last 3 years of horror when any coach/team could realistically beat us, the games and stats that matter are the ones against the best teams we play.
FTR, that does not include San Diego State.
...obviously there are factors to consider.
How much it is emphasized by coaching is a key consideration.
Why doesn't Lloyd have to qb's throw over the middle?
What does LC have THAT guy returning kicks? He's slow!
There was a method to the "madness"....
Contrasted with...
...Why is Gallon still back there returning kicks?
...Or putting in DRob in 2009 (which is fine, but probably was more TO prone than Tate)..
Experience is the obvious player factor (experience at qb with regards to INT's).
I'm guess Hoke will emphasize ball control more the Rich, but we'll have to see. Just speculation at this point.
...Lindley was 6th! in the nation in YPA. Guys above him: Newton, Moore, McElroy, Mallet, and Tolzien.
You can't be a 3/5 with numbers like that. His INT's dropped him all the way down to 21st in the nation in passer rating...21st out of...116.
3 is a bit harsh.
Of returning qb's, he is 2nd in the country in YPA.
It would be nice to see direct quotes about Rich's support rather than the site saying "100% support". Really?
I think he worked hard at UM, but he was just bad. I don't think he was bad. He was bad. 6-18 in the big ten is about as bad as it gets. NW wouldn't like that record. But he tried. He tried his best. I don't think Rich tanked it while he was here.
One comment. You mentioned how 1984 could be considered a fluke given Harbaugh's injury, but 2005 had more injuries than any other UM team I can recall. 2006 was essentially 2005 healthy.
If we ever go to mountain west or big sky conference, I think talking about their recruiting ranks would be relevant.
If you believe Utah will have as good a record in the next 6 years after joining the pac 10 compared to the prior 6 years with the same level of recruits, I would disagree.
It's nice to win an impressive bowl game (not saying otherwise) after 4-6 weeks of prep, but if you want to be a major conference and win week-in and week-out, you need the talent.
If you really want to see how much Michigan fans should be concerned about recruit rank, you should:
1. Only look at major conferences (SEC, Big 12, Big 10, Pac 10...)
2. Look at teams' records versus top 50 teams. I really don't care if UW beat 4 super weak non-con teams. And quite honestly, when UM is playing like a UM should, they would rarely lose to a team outside the top 50.
3. Average the prior 5 classes recruit ranks
4. See if there is a correlation b/n rank and record. And probably, more relevant to our fans, see if there's a correlation at the top end. I wouldn't care if there is no correlation for the 5th-11th rank teams. Not relevant to where UM wants to be.
...but there's always some degree of tension when a new regime arrives, whether it's Rich at UM, Tressel at OSU, or Carrol at USC.
As long as folks aren't taking his headset off while he's trying to get the play in, it will have little REAL effect on what's going on.
Having spoke with a couple OSU fans, they were not thrilled at all (less thrilled than the average UM fan with Rich) with "settling on Tressel". And USC fans didn't think a so-so/mediocre NFL coach would be THE answer for turning around their program.
The bottom line is the guy who has the most to do with success is the head coach himself. It ain't mommy, the mole or some disenchanted alum.
Some comments.
UM 2008 offense was historically awful. No matter what is said about attrition and talent level, there was enough there NOT to lead the nation in 3 and outs. Choosing Sheridan and McGuffie to lead the offense and putting the square peg Threet into the round hold offense was...uh...stupid. But that's over.
Now, in 2009, we did improve. If you look a little closer, against teams we played that had a pulse (ie big ten conference), we actually scored about the same number of PPG. Thank Delaware HS for beefing up the stats.
In 2010, I expect a "real" improvement on offense. We've consistently outrecruited every team in the big ten (sans OSU, and it's close) and have plenty of returning players. This will be an exciting team to watch for sure.