In this interview, Borges notes that he coached against Mattison both when he was at Auburn and Mattsion at Florida, and when he was at UCLA and Mattison at Michigan. Their career record against one another comes out at an even 1-1.
They met on September 28, 1996. Mattison's Michigan defense held Borges' UCLA offense to 3 points in a 38-9 Michigan win (with the other 7 UCLA points resulting from an interception returned for a touchdown). A cursory check of the internet didn't turn up a boxscore, but I'm sure you'd rather just watch the highlights anyway.
They also met on September 29, 2007. Borges' Auburn offense put up 20 points on the Florida defense co-coordinated by Mattison in a 20-17 Auburn win. Auburn accumulated 326 yards with 227 coming through the air from the arm of Brandon Cox, with an average of less than 9 yards per pass. The two Auburn touchdowns were on running plays from inside the 10. Mattison's defense held the Auburn rushing attack to only 2.3 yards per carry with a long of 19 yards. The Florida defense, led by Brandon Spikes, also recorded two sacks and recovered one fumble.
Rivals has a nice little interview with Al Borges where he talks about Denard Robinson and Devin Gardner. The article is linked below:
The more I read of Borges talking about our players the more I like him. Just seems to be a smart guy whose got his head on straight.
I hope this is not a re-post.
"To a degree … we're blowing a lot of it up ..."
In today's DetNews, the new coaches discuss their vision for the offense:
Reading between the lines (which I'd invite everyone to do), I think Vincent Smith may have a reason to be nervous:
"It's a different style of run game," Jackson said. "You have to have a back who can go down hill and do it successfully quite a bit. We have a couple guys built for this and a couple guys we'll have to wait and see."
Speaking as a fan of the spread 'n shred, I'm intrigued by what Borges and company might be able to do with the returning players. His remarks about Denard make sense to me. (Aside: I wish they'd go easy on the whole "toughness" / "physical" theme. I'm tired of it already. Do they think the O-line played soft last year? Does anyone else think that?)
Are you still thinking that Al Borges isn't devising an offense to take advantage of Denard's wheels?
PeterCBigelow Michigan off coord. Al Borges doesn't see Denard Robinson running for 1,700 yards in this system. "More like 1,000 maybe 1,200," he said.PeterCBigelow Borges just says the system won't call for Denard to run as often.
This is probably not the best game to get us pumped up about Borges but it's the only torrent from Auburn's 2004 season that I can find still seeded.
There obviously has been a lot of talk about keeping Denard here. Coach Hoke stated in the press conference that he believes in doing what's best for the team, and that means putting your best players in a position to be successful. One could easily infer that means that he will put Denard at QB and run a spread offense. Coach Hoke followed that by saying that usually means doing what's best for the player.
What if, however, he believes that putting Denard in the best position to be successful means he could be most successful at WR or RB? What if Coach thinks what's best for Denard is to play a position other than QB b/c he won't play QB in the NFL?
We can only go by what we know. The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior. Coach Hoke's teams have never run the spread, nor has OC Al Borges ever run it. As a former coach I can tell you that your best chance of success is to coach what you know. Since they a) don't like the spread and b) don't know it, I'm guessing that you won't see us running a spread offense.
The only way you'll see us running spread option is if the entire new offensive staff goes and visits with someone who runs it well. In my opinion, that leaves three options:
- Chip Kelly
- Urban Meyer
- Rich Rodriguez
First, we know that Coach Hoke despises an offense based on the outside zone (aka Stretch). (Boy, he must have hated watching his own offense during his time as DL coach at Michigan.) That would eliminate options 1 and 3. Besides, there's no way the new staff would go to the old staff and say, "Can you teach us your offense, please?" That would leave them with visiting Urban Meyer.
It would be a nice fit. First, he's unemployed, so he could actually come here and be a consultant, if you will. Second, he believes in inside zone and gap schemes like power, counter trey, and iso.
Inside zone is still zone blocking, but it's not about reaching the outside shoulder. It's basically the playside tackle base blocking the DE while the rest of the OL works combo blocks. The objective is to get vertical push on the DL, then come off to LBs working downhill--let them come to you. The RB is a downhill runner and he gets one cut into the hole. The hole isn't pre-determined, but the cut into that hole happens (in theory) at the LOS or on the defense's side of it. In outside zone, that decision (or cut) happens in the offensive backfield.
Regardless, I don't think you'll see Michigan in a spread option offense, and I believe it would be in Denard's best interests to transfer to Oregon.
This is the graph Brian posted on the front page. I take no credit.
To me, I see exactly one time where Borges coached an offense that was ranked higher than 69th (ugh) that also wasn't stacked with highly performing future professional players. Auburn of '04 featured Cadillac Williams, Ronnie Brown, Jason Campbell, and Marcus McNeil - that runs the gamut of "really important offensive players who would do very well in the NFL," as that would be the two running backs, the quarterback, and the left tackle respectively. Auburn of '05 wasn't as stacked, but still featured Kenny Irons (a pro washout allegedly due to attitude issues but a stud in college and a high draft pick), McNeil again, and Ben Obomanu, who is a decent NFL wideout in Seattle.
The "outlier" - that is, the time when a Borges offense was better than average without obvious pro talent, was the most recent SDSU team. While I suppose this might be comforting because of the fact that the great season is in recent memory, it also is complicated because we haven't seen how NFL teams evaluate the talent level of the current SDSU team to provide a rough approximation of "objective player quality," but I have a hard time giving Borges much credit for deciding to hand off to Ronnie Hillman or throw to Vincent Brown a lot - those are two of the most dominating non-AQ skill position stars in college football right now.
This is my point: I hate to be pessimistic this early in Hoke's tenure, but when I see a coordinator whose performance is average to terrible except when he's coaching a stacked team, I think precisely of Robinson. The analogy is deepened when you consider the fact that Borges is going to be pressured to run an offense that isn't truly his own. A straight, dyed-in-the-wool west coast like Borges seems to favor featuring dominant running backs and quick-decision, accurate (albeit mobile!) quarterbacks is pretty much THE system I think we're least suited for at this moment. That leaves him with two options - Borges can run a system that doesn't fit our personell at all, or he can be forced to coach something he doesn't prefer to run. Either way seems bad.
I want to be positive. I'm all in. I didn't like the Hoke hire initially, but I'm coming around to the man himself and I will support him with everything I have. But I can't see it going well if Michigan's offense is going to be run by Borges.
Can you reassure me?
EDITED because Jason Campbell and Carlos Rogers are two different people, evidently.
There are a few San Diego State game torrents available from Ten Yard Torrents. I'm not suggesting that you download and watch them, but I'm not saying that you shouldn't either.
Watching SDSt vs Utah and SDSt vs. Navy, I've seen a lot of 3WR, 1TE Shotgun formations, no-huddle and zone run schemes.
Not exactly the antithesis of basketball on grass- might not be as awful as some anticipate.