Evolving Coaching Techniques

Evolving Coaching Techniques

Submitted by Ziff72 on November 15th, 2012 at 10:04 AM

I just read Chris Brown's article on Chip Kelly.   Kelly has been covered pretty extensively so most of the stuff is not new to the readers of this blog, but I did find one thing in the article interesting as it pertains to Michigan.   The last few days the RR regime has been brought up again as his 1st full senior class comes to an end. 

Brian sighed as he was reminded that we didn't use blocking sleds when RR was here and Mattison's comments about the state of the defensive players always puzzled me as I think most coachces are more similar then they are different.   This quote from the article I think can help explain what was going on here.

 

For all of the hype surrounding Oregon games, Oregon practices might be even better. Oregon practices are filled with blaring music and players sprinting from drill to drill. Coaches interact with players primarily through whistles, air horns, and semi-communicative grunts. Operating under the constraint of NCAA-imposed practice time limits, Kelly's sessions are designed around one thing: maximizing time. Kelly's solution is simple: The practice field is for repetitions. Traditional "coaching" — correcting mistakes, showing a player how to step one way or another, or lecturing on this or that football topic — is better served in the film room.  ThiThe=

This sounds like what was going on in our practices and can maybe help explain why maybe our defensive fundamentals were lacking.   With so many young guys on defense maybe they had not been drilled enough in the fundamentals because it takes longer to learn it from film and doing it by yourself than repping it in practice.  Not saying one is wrong or right or better but it does appear to be a 180 in philosophy.  Obviously both coaches have had great success doing both.    Hoke and Mattison are big on teaching on the field and doing fundamentals where RR must have been relying on the players to pick it up from the film room. 

Maybe one is better for offense vs defense?   Not sure.   You guys can discuss that but for me it helps explain the differences more logically than believing are previous coaches had no idea on how to coach certain position groups.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8631595/the-success-chip-kelly-oregon-ducks-offense-more-familiar-seems 

 

 

Smart Football on Oregon's Offense

Smart Football on Oregon's Offense

Submitted by JeepinBen on November 15th, 2012 at 9:44 AM

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8631595/the-success-chip-kelly-oregon-ducks-offense-more-familiar-seems

Chris Brown (@smartfootball) has an excellent read up on Grantland about Chip Kelley's philosopy regarding offense. 2 things that really stuck out to me (besides the great scheme and play breakdowns) is that Kelly was actually an O-Line coach to get his start, and he really only had 4 blocking schemes for his OL in 2008. Thing 2 was that his absolute goal is to run the ball up the middle on you. Give it a read.

While the coach-player interaction may be limited during Kelly's practices, it's significant before and after them, mostly in the teaching of scheme. At its most fundamental, Kelly's system is a carefully organized, carefully practiced method for forcing defenses to defend the whole field, and then exploiting those areas left exposed. And the first tool Kelly uses is a surprising one: math.

"If there are two high safeties [i.e., players responsible for deep pass defense], mathematically there can only be five defenders in the box. With one high safety, there can be six in the box. If there is no high safety, there can be seven in the box," Kelly explained at the 2011 spring Nike Coach of the Year Clinic. The easiest case is if the defense plays with two deep defenders: "With two high safeties, we should run the ball most of the time. We have five blockers and they have five defenders."

Oregon
Courtesy of Chris Brown

As Vanderbilt's excellent offensive line coach, Herb Hand, recently told me, "I tell my offensive line that if the defense plays two safeties deep, it's like spitting in your face — it's a lack of respect for your run game." Oregon's run game doesn't suffer from any lack of respect; as a result, they rarely face two-deep defenses except on obvious passing downs.

When a team brings that extra defender into the box, the calculus for the offense changes. "If the defense has one high safety and six defenders in the box, the quarterback has to be involved in the play," Kelly explained. "He has to read one of the defenders, in effect blocking him. We can block five defenders and read the sixth one." Marcus Mariota, Oregon's dynamic freshman quarterback, has been an excellent blocker without hitting anyone at all.

Rodriguez on Denard

Rodriguez on Denard

Submitted by Tagg on November 14th, 2012 at 5:34 PM

A nice little article by Angelique Chengelis (UofM beat writer) about Denard through the perspective Rich Rodriguez. 

Remember, this is about Denard and not Rich Rodriguez so lets all keep the RichRod flaming out this. There are few people who can talk about Denard as a player and as a person so I found it nice to see the love that Rodriguez still has for him even though he is no longer here.

 

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121114/SPORTS0201/211140327/Rich-R…

Is Gardner benefitting from Hoke's Boo Boo stuff?

Is Gardner benefitting from Hoke's Boo Boo stuff?

Submitted by Ziff72 on November 14th, 2012 at 1:58 PM

I don't usually buy into the thought that it hurts the other teams prep to not disclose injuries but considering we are not running our main running play anymore and our #1 weapon is out, I was wondering if that old adage has any merit?

I don't have a strong opinion on this, I'm more curious on what other people thought.   I would guess that Minn and NW had to spend a considerable amount of time preparing to stop Denard running the inverted veer so in theory that would have taken away gameplanning for Gardner  and helped his success.   On the other hand we still can't execute a I-Form running play so maybe it didn't help and it's just a load of crap.

Game-Day Fan Garb Over The Years

Game-Day Fan Garb Over The Years

Submitted by Everyone Murders on November 14th, 2012 at 1:55 PM

LS&A Magazine has a nice slideshow up showing how game-day fashion has evolved over the years.  (Or devolved - you kids get off my lawn!)  Link is here: http://www.lsa.umich.edu/lsa/archives/ci.footballhautecouture_ci.detail .

It's entirely unrealistic on many levels, but I'd love it if we could organize a "throwback fan uniform" day.  I understand raccoons are 100% against this idea, BTW.

A sample shot from the 1930 homecoming game against Illinois.  That blanket is the bee's knees, I tell ya. 

The Game: Red vs. Blue?

The Game: Red vs. Blue?

Submitted by JeepinBen on November 14th, 2012 at 9:39 AM

Something I've often wondered, and it came across my twitter feed today (h/t @Hooverstreet), why don't we play OSU as Red vs. Blue with both teams wearing their home unis?

In the OSU Uniformz thread it often came up that the Home Jersey is the Untouchable, for both us and the OSU guys on the board. While Adidas has tried playing with the away uni piping, and Nike changed things up too, AA Torch and Pitchfork would really go nuts if they tried to do anything to the home blues.

This could add a bit of stabilization. Every year we play the last Saturday of November. Every year it's at noon (most years). And every year it looks like OSU vs. Michigan because we both wear traditional home unis.

That said, the "one team must wear white" rule came about for black-and-white TV, and has since been taken off the books. As I like Michigan's blue home jersey, I'd love to see us wear it more often. We could go color vs. color against OSU, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Indiana in conference, we could have done it against Bama and should do it against Arkansas. UCLA and USC do this every year, I'd love to see us pick it up. What do you think?