Baumgardner Doubles Down
As I read him, a certain critical edge has been creeping into Nick Baumgardner's reporting on Michigan, particularly on Jim Harbaugh's unexciting play-calling. This tends to confirm what a relatively unsophisticated watcher like me THINKS he's seeing, but I am really more interested in what other, more knowledgeable fans think.
The thing about Baumgardner is that he really seems to know his stuff; he breaking down last Saturday's play-making here with a sophistication that puts many other football writers to shame.
The bottom line is interesting--not wildly critical, certainly, but more measured:
"This offense puts a lot of pressure on everyone on the field to do their job perfectly on every play. That's why it's called pro-style — professionals run it.
Whether or not Michigan can accomplish that will determine how this season ends."
The piece seems important to me, for two reasons:
1) It tends to confirm the lessons and wisdom I have observed from some of the better posters here. But
2) if correct it really suggests that what Harbaugh's trying is something of a gamble. He's going to need bright and talented players, a little luck and continuity to succeed. (Learning his big-a** playbook takes a while.)
Does Baumgardner have it right? Are the risks Harbaugh's taking worth it? Or is the NFL style he's trying to roll out just too damn boring, with too many variables to ensure success?
I can see quite a lot of potential upside (long-term powerhouse in the making?). I can also see how all these things tend to suggest it might take Harbaugh longer than, say, an Urban Meyer, to start rolling up wins. . . But how do others see it?
October 2nd, 2018 at 6:32 PM ^
We're probably picking nits about something meaningless. Obviously, "boring" does have a definitional meaning. That meaning simply has nothing to do with the success of the football team.
October 2nd, 2018 at 7:32 PM ^
If you actually look at the play chart, runs on 1st down towards the beginning of the game were pretty successful. It wasn't until the later half of the 3rd quarter that we saw those 1 yard runs by Higdon.
October 3rd, 2018 at 11:55 AM ^
Maybe Urban Meyer and Dabo Sweeney are just way better coaches than JH and Saban is just way more talented? The problem is JH and our coaches were successful other places. What is so unique about UM that makes it harder to be successful if the talent is there?
October 2nd, 2018 at 6:00 PM ^
I don't think the system matters nearly as much as stuff like McKeon dropping a ball that was served on a platter. The system is only as good as execution. You could have a simpler system, sure, but if you don't have ballers you execute then it wouldn't matter much, IMO.
TL;DR: it's the Jimmy's and Joe's--not the Xs and Os.
October 2nd, 2018 at 7:10 PM ^
Disagree to a large extent. My evidence: M00N. NFL talent everywhere, played like butt because the gameplan was butt.
Ballers can rescue a mediocre coaching job. A fucking amazing coach can rescue mediocre players.
But you think Urban Meyer doesn't invest a great deal of time scheming for his athletes??
RichRod spent years inventing new ways to fuck with opposing safties so that QB runs would go a long way.
Hoke had Devins Gardner and Funchess, and the best plan he could come up with was "let's get them both killed lol".
The Eagles had, at best, an above average team, and RPO'd their way past the Patriots.
The Falcons had much better athletes than the Patriots, and then coaching caught up.
You cannot have one without the other. Respect will be paid! ;)
October 2nd, 2018 at 6:04 PM ^
This tired ass meme of "spreads are easier to run …" because they don't require perfect execution of all 11 players is complete and utter horseshit! What's worse, is that those that propagate this myth -- along with those who consume it in here -- believe it to the point where any time Michigan has a bad running play they cry about our offense being a dinosaur. Complete, ignorant bullshit!
Go back and listen to the Northwestern game broadcast, Klatt (who most people respect, and who respects the heck out of Harbaugh) said that Michigan added the wrinkle of "going big to pass, and going small/wide to run." Further, we've heard this similar idea before -- Harbaugh's offense is based upon lulling defenses into BELIEVING it's the old "3 Yards and Cloud of Dust" then throwing out something different. It's not "overly complex" just like a basketball on grass isn't more simple. It's football, and no matter the style you play it ALWAYS comes down to execution.
Again, if we've payed attention we've come to see that Harbaugh's offense actually utilizes many of the same concepts as the spread, but in reverse (see above). As Ron Utah aptly pointed out above, Michigan is using "modern" running concepts, but they've not gone away from the old school either. The offense is a mix, and that mix can be very difficult to defend properly -- IF (like any offense) it's executed properly.
You guys get that Baumgarter reads this blog, sees what everyone is bitching about, then writes a piece on it knowing he's going to get clicks, right? The problem, and why his article was written, what the collective freak out about the Northwestern game play calling. It's very simple to understand and has NOTHING to do with some short coming on the part of the coaching staff. They're SUPPOSED to demand high levels of execution, and no, Urban Meyer's offense doesn't enable players to fuck up and still work. The QB issue has been solved. The OL, IMO, is WAY better, but still not elite. An elite OL is the cornerstone of any elite offense. Simple.
October 2nd, 2018 at 6:27 PM ^
This was an interesting discussion to read. I do think some schemes are more effective than others. However, those concepts often get snapped up and schemed against within a year or two. The truly great offensive coaches have to stay one step ahead or have elite talent, preferably both.
I tend to believe that the proof is in the pudding. Michigan has consistently had an offense around 27-30 during the harbaugh era, s and p. I do think that’s a bit disappointing. Now, the argument as to why is interesting, and I don’t think it can be pinned on one thing. However, it has been a bit disappointing.
October 2nd, 2018 at 7:11 PM ^
Two points.
First, when we're looking at offensive ranking we're comparing ALL offenses on a continuum -- from the GT and Army triple option all the way to the Air Raid/Basketball on Grass offenses who routinely gain 300 yards in the first half -- even against the "quality opponents" on their schedule. Perhaps a stat exists where we can see which teams play offense, defense, AND special teams, not just offense. If that stat exists, I'd bet we'd find Michigan near the top in the nation. Harbaugh wants Michigan to be a complete football team, with the ability to score, defend, but also to play proper situational football.
As someone pointed out above, Oregon's offenses under Kelly were lethal. But, in Championship scenarios, when playing elite defenses, they actually became lethal to their own offense because they ONLY go at warp speed. What we saw against Northwestern was well executed "situational football." As Stephen King aptly stated above, "Boring is meaningless." Harbaugh isn't putting on a show to thrill and excite us fans. He's playing the game to give his team the best chance to win. Sometimes, that means hunkering down and slogging it out, take no chances, and squeeze the life out of the opponent. Other times, it means throwing it all over the lot. But, with an elite defense, most teams in most games aren't going to need to throw it 50 times a game.
One of the things that I point out to naysayers as often as possible is that, with only two exceptions, in every loss under Harbaugh Michigan has had the ball with a chance to win or force OT. That, my maize and blue brethren, is "giving your team a chance to win" at it's finest. Obviously, they've not won or tied up all those games. But, if that's "boring" football, so be it.
Second point: why? Obviously, there is no hard and fast reason. But, why does everyone just discount defense and point to the offense? Is it because Harbaugh was a QB, and somewhere people starting calling him a QB Whisperer? Did he say that? Did he say, "we're going to have the best offense in the nation"? Michigan's defense has been elite, and looks like it will REMAIN elite in the near future. Why is that overlooked?
The success of the defense and struggles of the offense are a mirror image of the same issue: the roster. The defensive roster was stocked full of great players, thankfully, recruited by Hoke & Co. Now, flip that same equation around and ask whether the offensive side of the roster (while paying specific attention to the most important positions of OL and QB) is the same. Give credit where credit is due, and point fingers where fingers need to be pointed. The defensive roster has been elite, the offensive roster has been less than elite. Imagine that could have been had Shea (oer a guy like him) transferred in 2015 rather than 2018. Now imagine further what could have been had Harbaugh inherited an OL like Chryst inherited at Wisconsin.
I get it, Harbaugh is an offense guy, he's the OC effectively. So yeah, point the finger at him. But, at the same time, try to understand and appreciate from whence the Michigan offense has come. We're 5 games in the FIRST season where Michigan has had anything even bordering on "elite" QB play like we saw at the end of 2015. People were ready to give up on Rudock and the team in '15 too. I'd say we're WAY ahead of where we were in the beginning of 2015 and the ceiling is SIGNIFICANTLY higher.
October 2nd, 2018 at 8:50 PM ^
Amen and thank you. I usually resort to simply calling people fools and idiots after the first sentence...congrats on making it all the way through. But let me just add: There are too many fools and idiots who have no concept of what you just stated so clearly.
October 3rd, 2018 at 12:08 AM ^
Though, Rudock did not play well in the last and most important game of the season. It is never good to have OSU come to your house and beat you easily.
October 2nd, 2018 at 6:30 PM ^
Without a qb that can run it, you are hurting. With one that can...
October 2nd, 2018 at 7:02 PM ^
Baumgardner can get bent, if Harbaugh wins he’ll say “see told ya so”, if Harbaugh losses he’ll say “see told ya so”...
October 2nd, 2018 at 8:06 PM ^
Compare the first few games of 2015 to the first few games of this year, it is the EXACT same offensive strategy being employed. Lean on the run game early in the season to fill defensive coordinators video sessions with minutiae, than add the next level to it after the midway point so you're peaking in the last few games, without giving OSU too much data to counteract it.
Rudock's last few games:
PCT YDS Y/A TD/int
72% 337 13.5 2/0
72% 440 9.6 6/1
65% 256 6.7 2/1
59% 263 8.2 0/1
64% 278 9.0 3/1
If the same trajectory holds for the end of this year the offense should be dynamic right when they need it most and hopefully timed so OSU won't know what hit'em up.
Plus we have a better defense, better run game, more depth, more angry Ohioans that dislike Urban Decay.
On the other hand, those "two games of extra emphasis" are road games and we'll have to "upset" OSU if we're gonna make them upset.
October 2nd, 2018 at 8:10 PM ^
My impression of Harbaugh teams is that defense and special teams play a big role in strategy and how aggressive a game is called. What seems missing from late 2015/2016 are the chunk plays where Michigan would start inside it's 20 and two plays later be at mid field. The McKeon drop would be kind of an example.
In all honesty I really only care about limiting turnovers at this point. You have to score points, yes, and yet I feel these coaches come up with creative ways to do that each week, even if they are not unveiling some novel offense. What killed Michigan football for years was turnovers, often at the worst times, and too regularly in droves. If they can just stop that and play great defense and ten wins is the floor.
Oh, and with the playoff, matchups and multiple formations and schemes are essential. What Harbaugh is trying to do here is special and could get even crazier as these receivers and tight ends mature.
October 2nd, 2018 at 8:23 PM ^
Help me understand: what system doesn't require every single player to do its job correctly?
If you say spread, explain to me how.
Triple option? lol
As I understand it, a dual threat QB (regardless of system) is frequently the difference maker because he can salvage a bad play with his feet by scrambling to extend plays or taking off. Some systems (like a pistol) can combine different things and enhance them (i.e. zone read with 4 wide) but ultimately everything comes down to players doing their damn jobs.
October 3rd, 2018 at 2:28 AM ^
Any system that is centered around getting the ball quickly to dynamic playmakers in space can often survive several players not doing their job on many plays. If a play asks a superior athlete playing WR to beat his man off the line, and a QB to get the ball to him in rhythm on a 3 step drop, you can have half the line blocking poorly, the TEs tripping over themselves, and the WRs on teh other side of the field drinking lemonade and still get a chunk play. The QB makes all his reads pre-snap, so doesn't need to read coverage and be in sync with a WR who is running a different route based on how the safety is playing, the line doesn't need to block well enough to give the QB time to go through his progressions, etc.
Every system has pros and cons, but I think it's entirely fair to say that some systems are easier to execute than others, and some systems are more tolerant of poor play at certain positions than others. That doesn't automatically make those systems better, because they have their own set weaknesses.
October 3rd, 2018 at 3:47 AM ^
Sure. Let's focus on the play you gave as an example:
"asks a superior athlete playing WR to beat his man off the line, and a QB to get the ball to him in rhythm on a 3 step drop"
This is true but...
...every system has a version of the play. It's why there is no longer a clear distinction between "pro-style" and "spread" in the NFL anymore. It used to be that fans could tell what system a QB was running in the late 2000s/early 2010s by looking at whether a QB was under center or in shotgun. That's no longer the case. The system have been combined and there is now a hybrid system in the NFL. That's because NFL coaches, for all their faults, are great at quickly adding and subtracting plays in a "copy cat" league. Look at the proliferation of "college plays" that is suddenly the rage in the NFL. Example: The Chiefs used a play against the Patriots to great effect in week 1 (of the 2017 season) to shred New England's usually stout defense. In week 2, the Patriots used that same play (after film review) against the Saints in week 2. Brady confirmed it when asked about it.
Also, it's true the spread is simpler because the QB acts more on pre-snap reads and makes fewer post-snap reads. There is inherently a trade-off as with all things. Against elite, more experienced or talented elite defenses, an offense will need wrinkles. Otherwise, a defense will show something pre-snap, quickly shift to something else post-snap, and then the QB is left with bad-to-poor options.
I absolutely agree with your post especially the last paragraph. The spread allows a QB to be more plug-n-play in college but the simplicity of running it can be limiting against quality defenses who are dialed in and well-coached on what to expect on every play. It's why the NFL adjusted to Chip Kelly's offenses after a few years of seeing it.
October 2nd, 2018 at 8:40 PM ^
"Jim Harbaugh's unexciting play-calling"
It's funny how the offense looked after Jedd Fisch left and Pep Hamilton took his place. Jedd Fisch is in the pros now. Pep Hamilton did not do well in the pros. How clear does the handwriting on the wall have to be?!
I think if Pep Hamilton was let go and Jim McElwain took his place, all the complaints about Jim Harbaugh's offense would suddenly disappear.
October 2nd, 2018 at 10:00 PM ^
This is a very disingenuous post.
"Jedd Fisch is in the pros now. Pep Hamilton did not do well in the pros."
Jedd Fisch was fired as Jacksonville Jaguars OC. You either don't know this or conveniently left this out.
And Fisch is now an offensive analyst for the LA Rams. He's not a full-time assistant coach on Sean McVay's staff.
October 2nd, 2018 at 10:55 PM ^
Simmer down dude. Save the melodrama.
If you want anything approaching your dramatic "disingenuous", it's you. Why didn't you talk about Pep Hamilton's resume? There's nothing impressive anywhere on it. Everything he has touched begins to decline. 9 passing TDs last year, and the 106th ranked passing offense---and you didn't even say a peep about it.
October 3rd, 2018 at 3:51 AM ^
Because I'm responding to your decidedly biased post. I wasn't taking a stand for Pep. I didn't like the hire and I'm not a fan of Pep. I thought Harbaugh could have taken a risk by hiring someone from lower levels (FCS) rather than take someone familiar.
But I won't let anyone prop up Fisch as if he's some offensive genius like Lincoln Riley who has the resume of a real offensive guru.
October 2nd, 2018 at 8:46 PM ^
He's a Spartan alumn. I know he and other people say he's unbiased but in my own opinion you can take the Dale name plate off the front of the shirt but you can't take the Dale out of the man.
October 2nd, 2018 at 8:57 PM ^
Nick B. has a article not too flattering of UM football (right or wrong) and it's no well received around here.
ABSOLUTELY SHOCKING!
Does he not know it's all rainbows and unicorns here.
The good Dr. MT says UM rolling into CBus 10-1 and possible rematch with the Domers.
So take that little Nicky.
October 2nd, 2018 at 8:57 PM ^
Or, we could do things the Willie Taggart way and simplify everything to the point it doesn't win games.
October 2nd, 2018 at 9:13 PM ^
Wille Taggart, who chose Greg Frey for his O Line coach---just sayin.
October 2nd, 2018 at 8:57 PM ^
This will be short and not at all a long rant from a usually optimistic fan:
I think he's mostly correct. The system does ask too much of everyone and it says a lot when the OL talked of "everything being simplified". I cannot see this team for the last few years and think that over-complication doesn't run across the entire offense. You can't watch guys look lost for 3Qs against any team with a pulse and think "we just need MORE 5 stars". Sure, we'd like more but that's not the problem. We're asking 18-22yo students to run NFL systems/schemes. That's a problem. A team of Stanford enrollees may grab it quickly but UM isn't Stanford, like that or not.
You can avoid being 2012 Oregon and still get kids ready for the pro game. Further, you can't run a job like this as if you're trying to re-live your glory days. UM can't ground and pound anyone but the weakest teams right now. Ok, fine! You have a bunch of really good athletes at WR and a damn good, mobile QB. The level of stubbornness and ineptitude needed to not take advantage of that is astonishing.
Last week saw us throw a poorly executed rub-fade (used a ton in the pros) to Grant Perry...all while 6-5 Nico Collins was singled on the other side with a 5-10 CB, no help. How does your system not have the ability to see that and take advantage? The issue not being QB, btw! Nico ran a fake route. He knew he wasn't getting the ball. The rub-fade was the design, go there. So, it's complicated but not enough to check into basic slants, fades, curls when they single DPJ with a garbage CB...because he's not able to plant his foot and outrun a fn nobody CB for 5 yards?!
It makes zero sense and to this day we get "it's coach's offense" or other runaround answers when we ask who calls the plays. Well, duh. Who's calling plays? We don't get "Jim does". We get "ehh, it's a bit of input from everyone" stuff. A real "we all know but don't know and The Fort so we'll never know but we all know so who cares" - type deal. It's unnecessary to be that misleading about job duties.
It's just borderline criminal to have never paired a Brown defense with an offense worth half a shit. We're likely losing half our defense this year to the draft and they'll have never had a single offense they can rely on should they have a mediocre day.
I'm a big Fitzgerald fan. Very good coach but it's Northwestern. To have a hard time scoring 20 on NW is insane come year 4. They have a good defense but it's NW. The defense could only give up 19 to NW or we lose?! That's crazy. Sorry. The OL is improving but this offense won't get us by anyone left but Maryland and Rutgers. Not what we've seen so far from the only two teams worth half a shit.
It's this constant cycle of blowing out bad teams and everyone talks positively (rightfully). Hang 50+ on Nebraska? We're gonna be ok! Hang 70 on Rutgers? We're clicking now, baby! No, you just played garbage teams but nobody sees it that way. We're on a roll!
Then come the mediocre teams that take us to halftime (at least) in a dogfight and we start to admit what we are again...but we barely pulled it out so it can get better, right? Right? Next week will be different. MSU is bad this year so...
...loss. Well, the rain! It was the rain. We'll get PSU because when they had no OL or QB or defense we blew them out.
...embarrassing loss. Well, Barkley and McSorley's 50/50 balls. Can't stop that or keep up with it. Impossible schematically. Also, why put McCray on Barkley but whatever. Moving on. OSU, this is the year because it's only been literally almost 20 years of incompetence.
...loss. But the refs so don't lose all optimism and I'm sure it'll be different doing the same shit next year.
Repeat. For...11 years now? If we're being kind to the late-Carr years, 11 years of bewildering "let's make this so much harder than it has to be" bs? 11 years? I don't know.
So, I agree with Baumgardner (lmao).
October 4th, 2018 at 12:12 AM ^
You don't sound like you're having very much fun.
October 2nd, 2018 at 9:00 PM ^
I don't disagree with the general sentiment, but a lot of this article just restates the obvious or creates arguments with little relevance just to knock them down. Michigan wasn't going to radically alter their offensive system because I don't know what "radical" would even mean. They aren't going to roll out the Air Raid or anything. But there are wrinkles (Down G, some read-option, etc.) and there are probably a couple more in the bag. That's true for every team in America, and to somehow act like this offense is wrong or bad because it doesn't meet the expectations put forth by internet denizens is silly.
October 2nd, 2018 at 9:13 PM ^
Certainly feels like he's right. Offense feels like it has been trending towards lloydball more and more each season, where it has less and less imagination, and relies almost completely on out-executing opponents.
October 3rd, 2018 at 10:15 AM ^
This polarized argument of “boring, archaic out executing-style offense vs. creative (or what fans think is creative)” needs to die right now! It’s such a spurious argument that many in here take as gospel and parrot over and over that you’ve convinced yourselves of its verisimilitude.
Harbaugh, as we’ve heard since day one, has a spread mindset but it’s housed inside a more “smash mouth” style. Meaning, he understands with the concepts that a spread offense embraces — making the defense defend sideline to sideline, but he goes about implementing in a unique way.
For example, watch pre-scandal Baylor offenses — up tempo spread, but more of an outside-in method. They’re a run-first spread that went super wide, then hit it up inside when they sucked fhe LB’s and Safeties our wide. Harbaugh, by contrast, likes to suck the LB’s and Safeties INSIDE with “smash mouth” concepts characterized by heavy tight sets with a FB, multiple TE’s, H backs etc — i.e., inside-out.
This is where ignorant fans don’t get it. They see “up the middle” runs for 2-4 yards as abject failures, but at the same time they praise the same 2-4 yard quick outs and WR screens as innovative and modern. The problem is they’re both seeking to accomplish the same thing, just on the opposite end of them spectrum — they both seek to force the opposition to shift their defense so the offense can exploit the area they just shifted away from.
What I saw vs. Northwestern was a scripted offensive game plan set to break tendency in that they came out passing more than expected. The problem was, the QB and WR/TE’s weren’t executing for whatever reason. Three series in a row Harbaugh stuck to the plan but Shea was off and the WR weren’t getting separation Thankfully, Shea was smart and well-coached enough to not force balls into coverage and give up an INT.
There were two field position errors on the kick returns, a penalty (IIRC) and Michigan’s averagestarting field position was very bad. Again, this so-called stubborn, archaic play-caller stuck to the plan of NOT coming out playing man-ball right away, for three series. Unfortunately, at the same time, Fitz’s offense (that had two weeks to prepare) out-schemed and out executes our defense. Boom ... 17-0!
This moment in time in the game is when Harbaugh’s excellence should really become apparent. You’re down 17-0 on the road, flags are flying every play (seemingly, and they’re almost all against you) and the temptation is to panic and go full on air-raid to “get back into the game” probably something that Fitz was expecting. Instead, he did the opposite by working hard to establish the running game, but he did it from spread sets.
He, brilliantly, used Fitz’s “adjustment to his adjustment” against him, and it worked, except for flags and drops — both of which fall under the “execution” heading (assuming all the flags were legit, which they weren’t). The plays were there to be made due to the scheme — players got to make plays and coaches put them in position to do so. Michigan got wide to run, and big to pass, and but for the refs the game isn’t close at all.
Further, as I’ve said elsewhere, the continued and sustained “up the middle” conservative play calling later in game and was “Situational Football 101” at its finest. You’re already getting the shaft on flags, the absolute LAST thing that your team can afford is a turnover. Rely on defense, special teams, and field position to squeeze the life out of Northwestern. It might not be what YOU want to see, but it’s smart football and it worked.
Now, let’s suppose that the scripted first few series worked perfectly but the defense still gave up three scores — then we’d likely have seen a 17-17 or 14-17 game at the half. Or, if the defense played better early on it might have been 14-3 or 17-0. Maybe then, we’d have seen that “creativity” you so desire. Remember, Coach did call several “creative” plays that were either flagged (the Phantom hold) or dropped. If those two plays came out differently, the game has a very different feel.
It didn’t work out that way, so Coach did what he does best and worked out a way to win. Again, it might not be what you want to see, or what makes Sports Center, but it’s the percentaget play and will likely go a long way toward building the character and identity of the team as the tougher schedule approaches.
October 3rd, 2018 at 3:07 PM ^
Good post. Has depth, uses nuance, and relative comparisons. Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter...
Also, upvoted for the use of "verisimilitude", which is the perfect word in this case.
October 2nd, 2018 at 9:25 PM ^
If you want to bitch about the offense, fine, but you're absolutely crazy if you think they aren't MUCH better than last year and improving in many areas. Northwestern had a solid defense and pooped rainbows for three drives. From that point on they were dominated and it would have shown more were it not for Michigan shooting itself in the foot and refereeing malfeasance. The play calling was peculiar at times, but even a lot of the plays being complained about featured plays to be made that players didn't execute. WTF more do you want?
This team will prove themselves this year in bigger games, but until then the tired takes are just stupid, even by those who seem more nuanced in their takes. I can't wait for the articles that somehow maintain self righteousness while also kayfabing the narrative. Just win.
October 2nd, 2018 at 9:56 PM ^
Not here to argue but a few things (can't copy/paste on Chrome mobile).
The first paragraph has a few points so I'll go to each (generally):
1. Improvements.
Are there improvements? Sure. I honestly think the OL is improving. Some don't see it and it's mostly pass-pro but it is improving, IMO. No difference in opinion there.
Backs seem about the same as last year, IMO. Mason is terrific but that's more an addition really. Depth is a bit better as I was never a big fan of Walker's game (best to him, of course). Wilson has been a great emergence, for sure. Otherwise I'd call it about the same.
WR/TEs are better in the sense that they're a year older...which is good for Sophmore WRs! So, ok.
QB is just an upgrade but a definite upgrade. That said, I'm still on record saying Patterson isn't the 1st round pick everyone still makes him out to be but he's easily the most physically gifted QB Harbaugh has had. So, yeah.
In all, would I say the OFFENSE is improved? Sure. In the respect that we have a QB and everyone is a year older. They still fail at a discouraging degree at the same places. That's the problem and a problem that's leaving people to finally assume that it's the system. QB isn't an excuse anymore. It CAN get better during the year but can you blame anyone for assuming it probably won't after the last decade?
2. Northwestern
A good defense and they pooped rainbows for a quarter? Ok. I generally agree. That said, that one quarter or rainbow pooping still put them at midfield for a final heave to win. That one rainbow pooping quarter and NOTHING else after damn near won the game. The defense has to be allowed to let up 21 points and not lose against anyone and especially NW. Doesn't that seem like a fair statement that also seems far too common a thing to happen?
3. Refs, play calling and execution
Won't defend these refs. I was on the "this isn't normal" train 4 years ago. No guff here.
Yes, play calling was peculiar at times. If by "at times" you meant "kind of a lot". It was most of the game.
Yes, players have to execute. However, isn't it possible that the constant lack of execution against any decent defense is odd? Like, the consistency with which UM players don't execute in all road games and most home games vs a decent team? At what point is it ok to ask if the plan they've been given to execute isn't ideal?
What more do we want? I'd settle for consistent competence (even in failure) and a clear, no-BS understanding of who does what on staff. Players that look to appear to know what they're doing, why they're doing and doing it. It happens all across the country! It's possible! It happens. Most of the time it's due to running a basic, common sense system that a 19yo can understand.
As for the 2nd paragraph, I hope so. I truly do. I don't care about comeuppance and outing critics after the team does whatever. I want to see the team I've supported my entire life live up to what we all know they can and should be. 2 decades of OSU domination, a decade of MSU domination and a bunch of wtfuckery can make people question. That's a long time.
Go Blue.
October 2nd, 2018 at 10:13 PM ^
I have definitive proof that like Judge Kavanaugh the Baumster was naked with three nurses and there is absolute truth behind both his and the Judges nakedness. In each case it happened a few minutes after birth, they both should be banished to a mountain top in Nepal to contemplate such sinful behavior.
October 3rd, 2018 at 12:15 AM ^
all this downerism after a road win. Ok
October 3rd, 2018 at 1:16 AM ^
Nick B: "Oh no, I'm running out of content to write. I'll criticize Harbaugh again. That will always get clicks and M fans will surely link it on blogs etc."
Editor approves.
October 3rd, 2018 at 6:34 AM ^
"This offense puts a lot of pressure on everyone on the field to do their job perfectly on every play. "
As opposed to Hoke's style of offense, where people could screw up half the time and everything would work just fine.... oh wait, uh... yeah, I'll take Harbaugh, still, thanks.
October 3rd, 2018 at 10:02 AM ^
I haven't thought about Baumgardner since he left M Live and didn't realize he was still covering Michigan football, but I was happy to see him go when he did. He's a biased MSU alum who roots for Michigan to lose. On top of it he has a low football-IQ, which OP alluded to. I wouldn't spend much time trying to dissect his amateur "analysis." He adds no value to Michigan football or its fans in my opinion.
October 3rd, 2018 at 1:02 PM ^
My analysis has noticed some similar things. In some ways I agree - and you can, if you read between the lines, get the same message from Jim in his press conferences "if they just do what we teach them to do, and at the best of their abilities then...." I have no doubt that they teach them fundamentals of football at the same level of any coaching staff in America. But, they are students, amateurs, but also high profile football recruits - so make your argument as you will.
I've noticed that Harbaugh put a lot of interesting formations on the field combo'd with interesting play calls - mostly against WMU and SMU. For example, several times there were some spread formations with power running plays, single back ISOs etc... Also saw a LOT of jet options being - none of them really went anywhere. This team will probably not be a good power spread team. Also, the jet options I feel are just a desire to get talent on the field that can't "catch" like a WR but has the WR mold. It's not ideal...
To me, as an overly optimistic UofM fan, I think they're putting things out there/ on film that they don't intend to actually use in the future to make teams practice against it. Now that they have shown power spread options, you at least have to account for it. The 20 variations of jet sweep options you have to account for. The 20 variations of trap/counter trap plays, you now have to account for.