How Long Until Manball?
How long should it take to develop a team into a Manball team?
To understand this question better, I scraped some data about Stanford from their first three year's under Harbaugh; recall that before that, Stanford was a bit of a train wreck. Thus, you'd think that if our goal was to be like that, perhaps we'd be able to develop to Stanford's level of manballishness in a similar time period.
Here is a graph of Stanford's run game over the first three years under Harbaugh:
Click here for the full-sized image.
The left y-axis (in darkred) shows the average yards per carry; the right y-axis (gray) shows total rush yards. I've just selected a subset of games (those in the Pac10... er... 12?) to get a consistent snapshot against a certain level of competition.
As you can see, the first year was a train wreck: only one game with a decent total number of yards rushing (Oregon), and most games with a low average (only two around 4 per rush).
However, by year two, Manball was in effect: many games with hundreds of rush yards, and many with high yards per attempt. Wow! Year 2 and already rolling. Year three, a better year record-wise, was similar (perhaps a bit better).
Now, the contrast: Michigan in the first three Hoke/Borges years.
Again, click here for the full-sized image. Similarly, just showing Big 10 competition.
First year was all over the map, but some big games. Next year, the first few games were great. Then, Denard got hurt. And after that, a much less robust rushing attack, hovering around 4 YPC, and few games with substantial rushing yardage. And now, 2013, with another step backwards: not many total yards, and an even lower YPC.
Of course, the jury is still out on this year, and there is a lot of football left. But if the rushing game looks like it has for the beginning of this year...
October 15th, 2013 at 7:41 PM ^
Sadly,I don't think Borges and Funk are the right guys for manball at Mihcigan. With the level of talent on the OL, Lewan and Schofield in particular, there is no reason the averages and total yardages should be this low, let alone steadily decrease. With Toussaint in his third year starting, and a solid back up in Derrick Green, another reason is shown as to why there is no excuse for numbers these low. I think if Borges mixed it up, and didn't try and run up the middle every single first down, and tried to incorporate more passes, and God forbid, option plays for Devin Gardner, then we'd be seeing much more pleasing results. In conclusion; when can the Cam Cameron/Scot Loeffler plane arrive in Ann Arbor?
October 15th, 2013 at 7:49 PM ^
My question is what sort of offense was Stanford running prior to Harbaugh's hire? Because if they were not running the spread then this analysis is not that indicitive of what we can expect. We need a team that transitioned from a spread to manball. A better analysis may be how long will it take first year players to be effective run blockers? Personally I don't believe we can be effective at manball until the 2013 offensive line class is in year three, which is 2015. Because I would be highly surprised if we are any better by having another year under our belt at those positions which already blow (guard, center, guard) and lose the two guys that are effective (tackles). I don't see a line of Braden, Bryant/Glasgow/Bosch, Miller/Glasgow/Kugler, Kalis, and Magnuson being any better. The young guys are still young, we have no seniors, and the un-talented guys are still un-talented. Until the talented guys are older we will struggle.
October 15th, 2013 at 7:53 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 8:02 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 8:30 PM ^
5-6 years to put in an offense? If it's going to take that long to have your pieces in place, you damn well better have something in the interim that works. I personally think that, while far from necessarily being perfect, a team should be able to competently run a coaches scheme by year 3.
October 15th, 2013 at 8:15 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 8:30 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 8:30 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 9:15 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 9:20 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 9:21 PM ^
It's good info but there is a lot of it. Might be more usful to add the season before the coaching change, then summarize it by season and then put stanford and Michigan side by side.
I would also echo an earlier comment that suggested QB carries & yards might be excised for the sake of true manballiness.
October 15th, 2013 at 9:35 PM ^
October 15th, 2013 at 9:59 PM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 9:19 AM ^
Quite frankly, I hope it never really fully matures as our base offense. Personally, I would rather see a more up tempo pro style and spread hybrid.
October 16th, 2013 at 10:26 AM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 11:25 AM ^
It won't REALLY be effective until 2015.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:30 AM ^
2015 at the earliest. There is a real chance 2014's OL will be worse - and potentially significantly than 2013's. Unless you tell me the experience of Kalis and Glasgow being in their 2nd year outweighs the difference between senriors Lewan+Schofield over Braden+Magnuson as 1st year starters.
2014 OL will be bringing 2 min, 3 most likely 1st year starters and 2 "veterans" who will have all of 1 year of experience each (I am assuming Glasgow retains a starter position). If Glasgow gets the boot, you have the potential for 4 new starters.