Mailbag: Ojemudia Redshirt, Triple Option, Rodriguez At Alabama Alternate Universe
![MARIOOJEMUDIA10MP150[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/a16c2cceb5dd_BC43/MARIOOJEMUDIA10MP1501.jpg "MARIOOJEMUDIA10MP150[1]")
![t1_johnson[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/a16c2cceb5dd_BC43/t1_johnson1.jpg "t1_johnson[1]")
1: pew pew pew 2: a man Al Borges isn't 3: an alternate universe
Ojemudia redshirt?
I think there is no way Mario O plays. A ton of guys could be put on field before him. Several combos could fill the WDE spot better, eg Ryan-Cam Gordon combo puts our best, or at least most experienced, backup on the field, Ryan-Avery is similar, or how about flip back Roh for a Roh-Brink/Heitzman/Wormley/Black(?) replacement. Given how important a redshirt could be to Mario, I would think coaches will be creative.
-Dirk
I agree with you philosophically. Ojemudia should get a redshirt. I get frustrated when certain players have theirs burned for what seems like no reason. I'm with you, man. But… I don't see how he doesn't get on the field if Clark's issues are severe.
The problem with the above scenarios is that they reduce Michigan's specialization by flipping guys around and they still leave Michigan an injury from putting Ojemudia on the field. Is that injury reasonably likely? Yeah. So it seems to make more sense to leave Ryan at SLB full time, where he is still getting a grasp on all the particulars, and Roh at SDE, where he needs every snap he can get to figure out how to deal with his size limitations. The immediate payoff here seems real, and given the way Michigan is recruiting they figure they will be able to insert a Taco Charlton or 2014 kid into the lineup when Ojemudia graduates without losing too much. Of course, Mattison just told everyone that he was comfortable with the idea of Ryan at WDE in practice and proclaimed his faith in Cam Gordon's ability, so what do I know?
But even with that move, you're still juggling just three players between two positions. That's not tenable. If the coaches know Clark is going to be back relatively promptly, then I can see holding Ojemudia out the first couple games and getting him the redshirt. If Clark's out until Notre Dame or later, I think you have to blood Ojemudia and worry about the consequences in the distant future.
Triple option?
Brian,
This may be a non feasible idea, but why not kill two birds with one stone by creating a triple option package for Denard and company? Everyone says its really hard to prepare for Air Force, and we could prepare our defense while surprising the crap out of Alabama. Think about it, our RB, FB, QB combo are familiar with zone reads and are a lot better than any combo air force will ever have. We surprised Ohio with the inverted veer last year, and Bama's young defense won't know what hit 'em.
In addition, I can't help but think kicking and coverage teams, plus Denard's (hopefully) reduction in interceptions will make up for the fortunate 80% fumble recovery rate. The special teams will likely improve with the influx of talent and depth we are getting, or negated by rule changes. Either way its a net gain for Michigan in special teams.
Jim
Unfortunately I think we have to file that under "not feasible." Triple option is not something you can go into halfway. Hell, Michigan's speed option last year was mostly a Denard run off-tackle that had little if any chance of getting to the tailback. The one time Denard pitched it was a fumble caused when a blitzing linebacker met him after he'd taken one step playside. While it had the excellent benefit of keeping defenses honest and shooting Denard into secondaries, calling it an "option" is being generous.
Adding a true triple option and trying to get him to better understand Borges's West Coast passing attack is way too much to bite off in one fall camp. Since Borges is what he is, he's going to do what he does, and that's get Denard to throw more accurate balls that are less frequently intercepted.
The inverted veer is a different business because it's a handoff. The worst thing that happens there is you make the wrong decision and you eat some yardage. We almost saw the worst thing with the option last year, and that's the last thing an offense trying to cut down on turnovers needs.
IN RE: making up for fewer fumbles recovered. I'm not sure the special teams will be much better than last year except in the realm of punting. Gibbons is still Gibbons, kick returns just got nerfed, and it's damn hard to have an impact punt return game these days what with everyone spread-punting their way to seven gunners. Punting should be better because Hagerup will either get his foot on straight or a quick hook for the steady Wile, but we're talking a few yards a game.
The interceptions, sure. Denard's interception rate dropped over the tougher second half of the year and he should improve somewhere between noticeably and spectacularly in year two with Borges. That still leaves Michigan treading water even in the most optimistic turnover scenario, and the schedule has taken a turn for the bear-like.
brian,
pre-bama thought experiment. in december of 2006, alabama offers rich rodriguez their head coaching job. he accepts. what happens to both alabama and michigan from then on?
trippwelborneID
![images[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/a16c2cceb5dd_BC43/images1.jpg "images[1]")
Well, let's start with Alabama. They struggle through an RR-at-WVU transition year probably a little bit worse than their initial 6-6 Saban year, with Star Jackson taking over for the Bama bangs QBs midseason. Jackson doesn't end up transferring to nowheresville and becomes something like Pat White but probably not as good. No one gives six hundredths of a crap about the academics of RR's incoming recruits or Rita's jaguar pants, but RR probably still makes his fatal "I don't need Casteel that badly" error. With a somewhat more secure powerbase and money-providing demons, he does not hire GERG on try #2 and cycles through one of the then-available proven SEC DCs (Jon Chavis, for example).
This plus the better fit with his recruiting makes his defense not the worst ever assembled at the school he's coaching. He gets his QB a year earlier and has considerably better talent than he inherited at Michigan. He's replacing a total loser, one of many such since Bear. He does at least okay, probably pulls off an SEC title game or two, maybe wins it once, and sees a BCS bid or two.
He's probably still at Alabama in a Pelini-esque state: decent success, the fanbase is relatively happy with him, but they'll start to sour after a subpar year and two means you're out, buddy.
Meanwhile, Michigan finds itself adrift in the middle of the Les Miles/Bill Martin boat thing without a seemingly A-list candidate willing to jump. At that point I have no idea what they do. At the time I was muttering about how Jim Grobe mutterings were just the worst. Ferentz was out, Schiano was out, Miles was out, and Tedford was seemingly uninterested. Michigan clearly had no idea where to go, whereupon Rodriguez fell into their lap.
![large_826umqbs[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/a16c2cceb5dd_BC43/large_826umqbs1.jpg "large_826umqbs[1]")
If Rodriguez is not there… does it matter? I'm not sure it matters. Lloyd was not Bo but he did have an impressive winning percentage, a national title, and the continuation of a record bowl streak. Would a pro-style coach have been able to turn Threet/Sheridan/no OL/nobody at all into a bowl appearance? I don't think so. At that point you're working from behind the eight ball and you have to be really fantastic to pull yourself out of that tailspin. Would Hoke have survived that? I doubt it; at that point his resume was a bunch of .500 seasons at Ball State. Would any outsider Michigan could have acquired have managed to hang on? Maybe by another year or two.
Even if we have no clue about who takes the reins in RR's absence in 2008, we can hazard a guess at their fate: similar hammering by OSU, flameout in 3-5 years, replacement. That's the way of things whenever you replace a legend, and if Carr wasn't a legend (debatable) he was definitely the continuation of Bo. It would have taken a truly A-level coach to not bomb out with no quarterbacks and no safeties and no offensive line, and it didn't look like any were available.
In the end, both programs are probably happy with the way things turned out. Alabama's case: duh. Michigan's: Rodriguez was such a terrible fit that Michigan rejected it in three years, at which point Hoke was just plausible enough to show up and shock everyone by doing everything right for going on 18 months.
but Nevin Shapiro might have.
I reject the arguments stating we would've been just as bad under many other coaches because of thin talent levels.
I'll give 3 reasons why other coaches might have done better:
1: I don't think key players like Boren and Mallet would've left under other coaches being mentioned.
2: Emphasis on defense... it was more than just coordinators.
3: RR placed installing his offense ahead of winning. For the first two years, that meant square pegs in round holes, and that message probably contributed to the transfer of Mallet. Contrast that to Hoke's mentality: do whatever it takes to win. He's kept Denard and used an unfamilar offense to make it work and get wins.
Can people give up on this square pegs round holes argument about installing the spread at Michigan? RR had no pegs on offense. I doubt Michigan would have gotten more than 1-2 wins out of sticking with the old offense, and it probably would have cost them at least 1-2 wins down the road when they eventually did switch over.
Similarly, I would like people to give up on the bare cupboard argument. Admittedly, this whole sort of speculation isn't worth much, but that's what the article is indulging in, so I'm joining in.
You doubt UM gets 1-2 more wins?
With a 2nd year Mallet, All-America Boren and an offense that the rest of the players are familiar with, I see at least 4 more wins: Utah, Toledo, Purdue, Northwestern, a bowl birth and very little cost down the road, as the 2010 team was almost entirely turned over from the 2008 squad.
Likewise, a Pro-style stubborn Borges would've resulted in many more MSU and Iowa like performances (and possibly a Denard transfer if the coaches had telegraphed the move as Rodriguez did to Mallet). The offense should conform to the personnel, not vice-versa.
You should conform the offense to your personnel, but what people like you are forgetting is that we had no personnel on offense. We had 1 returning starting (Schilling), and like 11 upperclassmen. There was absolutely no reason to run a pro-style attack in 2008, since either way we were going to suck on offense
To me, that sounds like we did have pro style personnel. 11 upperclassmen (even if they didn't start) is 11 guys who spent at least two years in Carr's scheme. Simply due to the virtue of practice and being on the 2-Deep they'll know close to the full playbook of the DeBoring offense and be able to run a much more completed pro style offense.
I'd argue at the very least this last year showed that it is better to ease into the conversion. You can see how we did some Borge things like more usage of the tight ends and fullback, but Denard also was a thousand yard rusher. If we'd went in for the Borges offense, we'd have had a lot of trash tornado style games.
August 8th, 2012 at 10:20 PM ^
Borges had a bit more to work with. 11 returning starters and a quarterback that broke NCAA records is much, much better than 1 returning sophomore offensive lineman starter, no matter what offense you run. I have a feeling Borges wouldn't have looked so good if he was working with Threet/Sheridan and 1 returning starter considering Threet wasn't a good quarterback 2 years later in a pro style offense
RR as coach WAS his offense. You don't hire RR to come run a pro style...that would have been worse for everyone involved in the long run. That said, he passed WAY more often here than he did at WV, which WAS him fitting his offense around his personnel.
That said, it was a particularly difficult transition given the personnel, and Michigan is not a patient place. And it would have helped if he cared one iota about defense. Which will always baffle me because he played safety.
Rodriguez's staff were pretty positive about his play in camp, IIRC. He left because he had been told or assumed that Coach Carr was going to give his brother a scholarship offer. Rodriguez didn't offer the younger Boren and that is when the "Family Values" nonsense all started.
Afterwards he also acted like a dickbag, so I guess the shoe isn't an awful fit.
If that is true, Mary Sue should be shot out of a cannon.
Jim Harbaugh is an alum, a former NFL great and a ONE PERCENTILE QUALITY FOOTBALL COACH. You don't treat someone like him that way.
August 8th, 2012 at 10:52 PM ^
I stopped reading at the claim that FDR ended the Great Depression.
Hey, no politics. Wendall Willkie had his chance in 1940.
/s
I don't think you ever want to be a team that tries to run a little triple option. If you don't run it all the time the mistakes outweigh the trickery gains.
That being said, incorporating a third back into the read game along with Denard/Fitz would offer some of the benefits without the risk. If Hopkins or Rawls can play that role (Owen Schmitt but faster and made of lasers, to quote Coach Jackson) that could take the running game to an even crazier level than having the best rushing QB of all time and multiple 1,000+ yard rushers in the same backfield. I'd be okay with that.
The whole hiring process in 2007 seemed to be botched. If Carr wanted to retire as early as '05 why didn't Bill Martin have people lined up to be the coach? Brady Hoke would have walked to Ann Arbor from S.D., I'm sure there were at least a couple of coaches might have wanted the MICHIGAN job from '05 to '07.
RR is probably a decent coach, but he was a carpet bagger. You don't want a coach who would leave his alma mater, which was on the verge of a national championship, for a bigger paycheck. You want a coach who loves Michigan. (Yes, Bo came to UofM from Miami, but he got what Michigan and the Game were about.) I was glad to see the article where Mattison said he wants to retire from Michigan and Borges said that he has no plans on looking and doesn't see how he could be in a better place than Ann Arbor.
that Michigan needs a coach that understands Michigan tradition is going to handicap us when the time comes when we need to go through another coaching change when hiring from within isn't all that attractive of an option.
It's an issue for any established program. I don't know that we are really unique in that regard. Ohio never really embraced John Cooper in part because he was from Tennessee. Florida fans didn't like that Zook was from Ohio. Texas fans didn't like that Mackovic was from Ohio. And so on.
Miles is not from LSU. Meyer was not from Florida.
To my knowledge, Mack Brown and Bob Stoopes have no prior connections to their current programs.
Maybe these programs aren't established enough?
Actually, many people in Louisiana do dislike Miles for the fact that he's a "Yankee."
But usually, if you win off the bat, the issue goes away. None of the guys I mentioned did, nor did Rodriguez.
August 8th, 2012 at 10:18 PM ^
by a portion of the fan base and not being supported by boosters and higher ups within the program are not exactly the same thing.
That's not really the original point I was trying to convey though. Top programs have proven time and time again that they can succeed when hiring someone unfamiliar to the program, especially when that person is supported by people that matter. Those programs found "their guy" and will be able to do so in the future. Top coaching candidates will give these programs serious looks when they are in need of a new face to lead the football team.
For Michigan? I think it's going to be some time before a coach with no ties to Michigan would dare leave a stable position to come to Michigan.
You're a flaming idiot
you are all welcome!
August 9th, 2012 at 10:28 AM ^
That was the closest post I have ever seen to Brian admitting that RR would never work at Michigan.
While hindsight is 20-20, and it's now clear how great a fit Hoke is, I remember Brian berating the RR firing-Hoke hiring. I was very skeptical of Hoke as well, but even as a once staunch supporter of RR, I was in agreement that his time had run its course.
Props to you Brian, as while only a moron could deny the Hoke turn around (from horrid RR defense to something resembling an organized unit), you have done what is often very difficult for all of us to do. You have come full circle and recognized you were wrong about RR and Hoke.
I too had to go through this process, and it was difficult after constantly defending him to all the fellow fans. That being said, RR will always have a spot in my heart for bringing to Michigan one of the greatest student athletes and all-around great kids I could remember, one Denard Robinson.
...you've def missed some of Brian's posts. This was not the first time.
was not a good fit at Michigan, as do most people that supported RR.
That does not mean that these people necessarily think RR couldn't have succeeded at Michigan under different circumstances or that they think Brandon handled the process of firing RR the right way.
I have to ask, why does everyone bag on Threet so much? 2010 Threet (at ASU) left with a rating of 133 and 18 TD to 16 INT. Now clearly 2010 Threet is an older and wiser Threet, but the point is at least a couple of the physical tools were there to not totally suck. In 2008 we had a very solid defense, until the 7th time we went 3 and Out and the defense had to run back out on the field. The D did manage to win us the Wisconsin game, but they got gassed in a lot of other games. If we keep one of Manningham/Arrington and Boren we should squeak into a bowl. One experienced target for Threet. Two returning lineman. A good stable of running backs. Depth at the TE spot. A good defense. We are run first and basically lean on Threet for 10 to 15 good throws per game.
I'm not saying we even come close to winning the Big 10, but I don't see 6 wins over FBS opponents as impossible in that setup. Utah could be a win. Toledo becomes a win. Northwestern becomes a win. The roster wasn't loaded, but you have less attrition and suddenly 6 or 7 wins is on the table.
The defense should have been a strength that year. It was RR and his buddy Toni Gibson that undermined Shafer (who has done well in Syracuse btw) and lost most of the seniors especially after the Purdue game.
DE: Graham
DT: Taylor
DT: Johnson (with Martin making early contributions)
DE: Jamison (with Van Bergen making contributions)
WILL: Mouton
MIKE: Ezeh
SAM: Thompson
CB: Warren
CB: Trent
FS: Brown
SS: Harrison
This defense was a solid unit. Not hollow in the least! The DL should have been the Big Ten's best that year, or at least close to it. You had a senior Thompson at SAM, a returning starter in Ezeh at MIKE, and Jonas Mouton ready at WILL - and he played some good football in '08. Warren and Trent were a solid duo at corner. Harrison was a senior at safety, and Brown was a junior. Give this roster to Hoke, or even English (RR should have kept him as DC if he could not land Casteel) and there is absolutely no way we don't win at least 6 games. 6-6 might not be a great record but it would have kept our bowl streak alive and given the team much needed bowl practice time.
Maybe I am mistaken, but we seemed to have freshman McGruff, two guys made of glass, and a DUI suspension in the backfield. This is why Sam was played so early: AIRBHG was camping in Ann Arbor that season.
We also had freshman Shaw, junior Milano, and two redshirt freshman (a 3* and a NR). Milano of course is gone post 28 Oct throwdown with the hockey team, but we normally had one of Minor, Brown, or Shaw healthy. Not our most stacked RB roster ever, but it should have reached the level of 3.5 yards per carry average.
August 8th, 2012 at 11:18 PM ^
He was rumored to be pretty unhappy under the Carr Regime and already in hot water due to rumors of weed usage. Supposedly the moment Mustain went to USC, Mallett decided to go home. I'm not going to say we couldn't have kept him, but I'd say even if Carr stayed you have decent odds that Threet starts in 2008.
How will Rich Rod do at Arizona? We botched his hiring & tenure and there's nothing to do but admit it now, but it looks like he has what he wants and the school behind him down in the desert... and basically no expectations, relatively speaking. He's going to the equivalent of State, at best, not a "power" program - they will be (or "should" be, historically) happy with a consistent 8 or 9 wins and fairly regular bowl wins.
Whether or not that's his upside - his WVU days make me guess it's not but the PAC12 is a better conference than the Big East (this is where WVU was then, yes?) - I think even if things had worked here we'd be at "only" 9 wins far too often for us to accept in the long run. On the other hand, I have a sneaking suspicion that RR's offense is/was conceptually better than what we have now, though he didn't really get a chance to prove it. I'm not knocking Borges by any means, but that's what I think.
August 9th, 2012 at 12:50 AM ^
"...he has what he wants and the school behind him down in the desert... and basically no expectations, relatively speaking."
I live in Tucson and I can say from personal observation that the level of enthusiasm for UofA football is astonishingly low. Absolutely no buzz around town on game day.
The UofA fans -- such as they are -- will be very happy with 8 or 9 wins and the occasional upset of USC or Oregon.
Personally I think the likely win rate will be more like 7 ... maybe 8 ... occasional 9.
There is no doubt in my mind, or can there be in any other fans that Mattison is a lot better DC than he was his first go around here and coaches that stay in the game normally become better, especially when they find the perfect fit. Saban, using what he had garnered from college and the pros but still of the same mindset is twice the coach he was in E.L. because of increased experience and deep pocket fans, along with modest entrance requirements.
RR has proven he's no dummy and he's done that with just what he's done with the spread. He really revolutionized it. Put him at a school where expectactions are almost non-existent and the more likely outcome will be that of an Oregon, under Chip. Belloti had already built him a nice speed filled roster and he might eventually grab the big one. RR won't repeat his mistakes of defense be damned and will probably give top priority to finding a proven commodity on that side of the ball. ASU isn't known as an academic powerhouse so he should be able to get some good Fl and CA speed there in a hurry. His roster probably resembles pretty much what he inherited at UM, but the fans and media won't expect immediate results becausee they are aware they've hired someone who can actually get the job done when given the time, and he will get the time.
Think original poster was a little harsh on Hoke, stating his resume consisted of his Ball State accomplishments. We all know he was a sub .500 coach prior to taking over, but if you know anything about the man, you know he was hired away to start over each time he turned a program around, and he did that twice. In about four more seasons, his overall win/loss record will look far different than what it did at the time of his hire due to having much better talent, inheriting a group that was finally experienced and making a great DC hire. He's a proven commodity, and he's a perfect fit for UM. Alumni, media and former players all love him. This is a must for success.
Actually his task, as OP stated in a backward manner, was far greater than that of Carr, who never had to rebuild anything, but was wise enough to stay with proven methods, although he did get away from Moeller's more aggressive play calling which would have served him better if he'd released his h.a. AA wideouts and qbs in the first quarter, rather than waiting until the fourth to come back and win a game that could have been won early, much like the FL bowl game. Our dominance was apparent early, and take away Mike's almost inexplicable fumbels, game is not even close.
Hope the best for Brady and RR. They both gave their best no matter where they were and it paid off handsomely for both. However, only one had a real chance to become M's hc for awhile, and the way the media treaed RR, it makes me wonder if they would have rushed BH out of town too early as well, even though he had already proven he knew what is necessary to build programs. Taking over at a place like Michigan is not made for everyone, and you either better have a damn deep, talented roster or the ability to fit your inherited players into your system at break neck speed. Mattison did it and Borges, having something he never had before in Denard, did a damn good job, one that would have been even better if he would have had time to talk Denard through certain unwise throws. Well he's had that time now, so look for vast improvement in this area.
I see good on the horizon here, even if it appear we're taking a step or two backward after last season's unexpected w/l record.
And go with the first one. Redshirting is nice for QBs and Offensive linemen, or in a position where you're absolutely loaded, but overrated otherwise. I call it EA College Football Syndrome. Players want to play. If they work hard enough to earn it AND are better than who you'd be sitting them for, whether it be in the depth chart or special teams, you do it, because it's right for the player, and right for team morale. And it's been awhile, so everyone is shell shocked, but in a healthy program you're recruiting someone to replace them and have bodies to put right in. If you're doing well you're only going to get 2 instead of 3 years out of them on the field if you redshirt them, because they're going pro anyway.
Edit: Big redshirt fans? Or are people actually mad that I didn't jump into the Rich Rod quagmire? (At least use something more accurate than "off-topic")
Why didn't LC groom coaches later in his coaching career who would be viable candidates to succeed him. IF you look at Bo's coaching staffs through the 70s and 80s, he had several assistants that would make great HC. Mo would have turned out to be a great coach at Michigan if not for his public drinking incident. LC made a great coach, Less Miles and many others went on to be good to great coaches. Of course LC had Brady Hoke and Greg on his staff early in his coaching career.
LC coaching staff in '07: Erik Campbell, Mike DeBord, Ron English, Fred Jackson, Ron Lee, Scot Loeffler, Andy Moeller, Steve Stripling, Steve Szabo.
Bo's coaching staff in '89: Tirrel Burton, Cam Cameron, Lloyd Carr, Jerry Hanlon, Bill Harris, Jim Herrmann, Les Miles, Gary Moeller, Bobby Morrison, Tom Reed.
Mike Debord was probably the closes to HC material but I don't think he would have succeeded.
So far Brady Hoke looks like the real deal! If the recruiting remains at the current level the next couple years, coach Hoke will have many 10 or more winning seasons. This season may be a slight set back...if you consider an 8-4 record a set back...but I see this team really taking off in 2014 and 2015 seasons and beyond!
In part, blame the ADs. As an example consider Mattison's lateral move to Notre Dame to be their DC. In his four years here (first stint) we led the conference in rushing defense every year and total defense two of the four years. Yet when Notre Dame backed a truckload of money up to Mattison's doorstep we failed to counter off and off he went. That as a fairly common theme really, Carr had to do a lot of reloading or recycling failed talent when it came back home (Sup DeBord?). Mattison of course was here during the Moeller tenure, but look at the general history of Moeller and Carr assistants.
In the end Lloyd did leave us Ron English who based on what he's done with Eastern might not actually be a terrible coach. Plus he managed to help brainwash Hoke while Hoke was in town, so that helps.
August 8th, 2012 at 11:55 PM ^
Greg has stated in the past that his decission to leave Michigan after the '96 season was due to the fact that his daughter recieved a softball scollarship to ND and would be going to school there for the next four years. But may be some extra money would have helped!
Even if RR would have kept English, he would have had just as tough of time as every other DC dealing with the defensive coaches RR brought over. I think Ron English will be a great coach one day!
I'm pretty sure it was only a partial scholarship, however, ND picks up the tuition for children of its employees that attend the school, something that Michigan doesn't do. It's a reason that you see a lot of faculty with college age kids moving from Michigan to other institutions.
I'm a young HS football coach. And I can tell you this. The read-based option is completely different than the triple option. The read-option is much simplier. And based on veer-concepts. The tripe is much more complicated with completely different reads. The only real similarty is that they are both option-based plays. But, that is where the similarity ends. The blocking schemes, reads, points of attack, strategy, and concepts are all different. Besides the fact they are both option offenses its like apples an oranges. It would be like comparing Mike Leach's spread to Urban Meyers spread. The only similiarity between the two is that they are both spread offenses. If you tried to put a triple-option in like 3-4 weeks before a game, and you had never ran it before...it would be an unmitagated disaster even with Denard at QB. But, that isn't to say Denard could not flourish in that type of offense. It's just to say that it's not feasible to just "throw it in" like just some kind of package. Teaching it to get your team ready to execute it properly takes a very long time. However, it does make it vert difficult during the season. I coach at Freeland H.S. a very succesful division 5 (there are 8 classifications in MHSAA) team. And the opening week we play Clare who is another very succesful small-medium size school team. They run the veer and we spend all summer trying to prepare for it. It is very difficult to stop. So I do like that idea. It's just too late. P.S. if anyone likes smaller school football and is around the Clare area August 24...Come check it out. Its always a great game. Fun atmosphere. Nothing like Friday night lights.
August 8th, 2012 at 10:14 PM ^
First off, Mind Blown indeed.
Second, I don't think RR has success at Bama right away. I do agree that he becomes a Bo Pelini-type winner because he's not dealing with stringent academics and ends up going to a string of Citrus Bowl-type venues.
But wherever Rodriguez goes he wants things done HIS WAY. If Bama can accept that after the mediocrity following post-Bear coaches, then maybe there isn't as much of a struggle. With Rodriguez's obsession on offense and poor decision making on defense, the defense-heavy SEC kicks his butt from time to time and Rodriguez struggles to win consistently against Les Miles. RR gets to Atlanta maybe once by his fourth year but doesn't win and suddenly Bama has a Mark Richt situation. Which, given the mediocrity beforehand, is moderately acceptable.
Now for Michigan. Brian, you completely forgot to mention anything about MALLETT! I can definitely still see Boren transferring to Ohio State because this seemed destined to happen, but there's no way Mallett transfers if Michigan brings in a pro-style guy at the helm.
Les Miles is considered the number one candidate, although people still pine for a spread guy like RR and think he can be pried away from Bama, but neither he nor Miles materializes. Even though this blog throws a fit when it happens, Michigan hires Hoke who has a decent but not impressive record at Ball State. Hoke wins over the fan base (this blog excluded) and retains Ron English as DC. David Shaw is hired as OC from Stanford.
Michigan lands Mark Ingram as a RB and beats both MSU and OSU in 2008 and plays in the Rose Bowl. Setting up a national title run in 2009 (against Georgia?). Mallett doesn't stay for his senior year (2010).
Denard Robinson is playing defensive back for Florida.
August 8th, 2012 at 10:47 PM ^
I think there are other factors that could have influenced the performance. 1.) Who did we lose that we would have kept (keeping Mallet would have been a very different offense under pro-style coach so not fair to assume that the coach would have had Sheridan and Threet. 2) Who coaches the D-fense? This would have had an impact, especially in the first year when the defense was still good, just not being helped out at all from the offense.
And, then there is recruiting and coaching up of players over three years. Could have been a very different outcome as well.
I know that it is a cliche to say that, but the flip side to the story is how the offense plays into that factor.
In 2011, Alabama dominated time of possession. Every single game Bama had won the T.O.P. battle at least through 3 quarters. The factors that came into play are obviously turn-over ratio and how quickly the offense scores or punts.
Alabama is not a high risk team when it comes to offense. The main philosophy is to drive it out, keep the opponent's defense on the field, and minimize turn-overs to a maximum (a little Sabanism for you).
This, in-turn, allows for a well rested defense as well as a balance offensive attack. Rich Rod was a high pace, high risk coach that ran a lot of no huddles and gave the ball back to the other offense extremely fast (even if Michigan scored). The downfall is that the defense suffered.
I feel that because of his philosophy, Rich Rod would not have been successful at Alabama.
Comments