Discussion: Offense Going 4-Wide?

Sam Webb has referenced the coaches wanting to be more explosive on offense, going for more big plays.  To me, that means we are going to see Speight do his best Rex Grossman impression.

I think this offense will change every year. Wasn't year one a constand barrage of FB dives? Followed by a sudden love of the WR jet sweep in year two? They're always looking for the next wrinkle that plays to our strengths and opponent weaknesses. We probably won't know what it is until it happens to Florida.

more wr's is more fun to watch and always feels more intense for whatever reason. Probably because it is college football and busted coverage is not a rare occurance. Whenever I throw on a BIG12 or SEC game and see 4 wide it always seem so foreign that I end up watching more than I expected.

Overall I dont care just win.

Not as many TEs, therefore MOAR WRs.

This 2017 season is going to be fun with all that speed in space. Takes pressure off our tackles in pass pro, so makes total sense all around.

but Speight is no Brady.

Also our RBs are better suited to run from the spread shotgun formation than downhill between the tackles

I think it's a combination of the deep WR talent and Pep Hamilton's influence in the passing game. I see the offense as an evolution from getting the pro-style down in the first few years and then adding some spread layers this year and in the years to come. But I don't think UM would get too far away from Pro Style.

Perhaps simpler/more familar routes for young receivers too get them used to the college game, and to allow the younger members of the OLine to get their sea legs, then perhaps adjusting to a more power focused game as you move into the B1G season. 

the basic idea of the offense was to pack it in tight, than run play action to make teams that were cheating down safeties and having LBs immediately fill run lanes.

O.k., that is an over-simplification, but still was the more or less the core idea.

An offense based on a ton of 4 wide sets would be a really big departure.  Maybe too big.  I wonder if it will be basically the same offense, just with a heavier dose of 4 wide sets than we saw last year.  More adjustment than complete conceptual overhaul.

I also wonder if a Patriots style passing game can work well in college.  With limited practice time, can the QB really get the timing down well enough to pull it off?  Can Speight/Peters really consistently and accurately make the quick throws to a two foot window before the receiver has exited his break? 

You wouldn't sign 4 great WR's in one class if you didn't intend on using them. Obviously with the uncertainty on the right side of the OL it is imperative to get the ball out quickly.

The WR's, TE's, and some RB's are total mismatches for most any defense in the nation. The best part of our personnel is that we literally can run any concept. We have tall, athletic, big WR's who can be deadly in the red zone. We have WR's that can beat you deep. We have tactical route runners. We have possession WR's. We also have quick twitch slot ninjas. Then you've got a multitude of TE's who do different things well. We have RB's who can catch which will be huge on 3rd downs.

As a guy who coaches offense, it's pretty easy to see this offense becoming more of a hybrid. We can deceive teams by putting "bigger" personnel in the game. 21 personnel (2RB 1TE 2 WR) could line up in an I formation and then switch at the line to 4WR. If you have Evans, hammering panda, dpj, black, and bunting you could literally line up and run it down their throat or spread out to gain a tactical advantage.

I also charted a lot of throws from speight last season, and he seems to do much better when he's in the shotgun. I am really excited about the potential of this offense. The sky really is the limit. If the right side of our OL gets settled and is productive, this offense could really surprise some people this year

1. There is a reason we brought in 5 WRs in the 2017 class. Initially, the coaches wanted 4 but Oliver Martin was too good to turn away.

The #Harbaughffense is essentially the Joe Gibbs offense (who was known for running the same play out of various looks). But the #Harbaughffense is evolving and looking to more fully integrate and execute concepts/plays out of Walsh's WCO (who disliked the moniker because he molded his offense during his time with the Cincinnati Bengals - a midwest team).

For the longest time, coaches believed in establishing the run to open the passing game. In recent years, coaches (especially from spread schools) believe in establishing the pass to open the running game. In this regard, Sid Gilman and Walsh were far ahead of their times.

The OP gave a PFF article on New England's much admired short passing game but the article doesn't provide the context.

Belichick runs the short passing game (which he borrowed from Walsh's WCO) because it's akin to using run plays but with far greater variety for exploiting match-ups through formations and motions.

Tangent: Walsh's offense was seen as a "finesse" offense in the 80s. While not necessarily false, the criticism was used to suggest that more physical teams could bully the 49ers. Walsh had the last laugh on that.

2. Our blocking scheme will be different going forward. We brought in Greg Frey for more than just his ability to coaching OL. We want to integrate his preferred style of blocking.

It's acutally kind of amusing watching Michigan slowly but surely adopt "communist football" as the Michigan old timers (*cough* Jerry Hanlon *cough*) used to say.

I've always been a fan of diversity in offense, an ability to attack an opposing defense wherever they're weakest.... Run it down their throat if they can't match up physically, spread them out if they don't have the speed, put more receivers out there if they don't have the secondary depth, more tight ends if they don't have the right guys to match up, etc etc. Not to mention, you want to be able to adapt to each situation.... to run the ball when you're ahead, to score quick when you're behind, and so on. Most college teams can't do this because they can't recruit to multiple systems. Only the top recruiting schools get enough talent that they don't have to recruit and develop to one specific system. Also, it takes some great coaching to be able to teach a multi-faceted offense instead of just conditioning guys to execute a small handful of bread and butter plays. Michigan can both draw enough talent to be deep and flexible in game plan, and also pay for one of the best coaching staffs in the nation. This is what I've long believed we should be doing. I don't want to be a smash mouth team, or a pro style, or a spread, an option, or an air raid. I want all of the above. I want to give opposing DCs fits because there is always a plan B and plan C, and there's no way to stop all of it. I believe that we'll continue to play power football part of the time, but I welcome the addition of more spread sets and a more diverse passing offense. There simply aren't many teams that will be able to match up with all of the looks we can give them.

If our receivers meet their potential sooner than expected, it could be a nightmare for teams to try and cover.  And that could open things up tremendously for Evans and company.  
Man, this year could be a lot of fun.

GO BLUE!!

I can totally see this happening as the OP has mentioned.  I would not be suprised.  More running backs will be catching the ball out of the backfield like Evans and eventually Ben Mason the fullback

I agree and will add it doesn't have to be 4 wide WRs, but we have the TEs and RBs and even a solid pass catching FB that can split out wide on one play and then play in the base formation the next.

Oliver welker will shine

If our OLine sustains blocks, I wouldn't even mind seeing an occasional, empty backfield 5-wide Texas Tech formation to spice things up (stressing occasional). We've got the weapons...utilize them.

More versatile = harder to defend

Hopefully we can run or pass (with 4 receivers in the pattern) out of any formation

Big and/or tough WRs that can run/catch/block
Athletic TEs that can run/catch/block
RBs that can run/catch/block

How does a 4 wr set help to compensate for a mediocre OL?

I hope Speight can zip the ball out to the sideline. He didn't seem like he had the cannon necessary before. So if "spreading em out" means including those passes that go perpendicular from opposite hash to sideline, any lateness or slowness and it's 6 points the other way.

Didnt Nico say during his recruitment that the staff told him we are going to 4WRs. That was a reason he picked us.

I think there is a definite possibility you might be crazy, but you probably are not.

Especially with the hire of Greg Frey I'd love to see some power run from the shotgun like they did back at IU.

They probably don't have a choice. The o line isn't quite at manball level yet and they have 100 receiving options. Might as well convert to more of a spread em out pro style passing attack.

As you say, we have lots of talent at WR and a huge question mark on the right side of the line. I doubt we'll go full air raid, but some Patriots-style packages where we run 4WRs or start off 2WR/2TE and then spread one or both TEs wide would be very helpful. Speight won't have the luxury of good pass protection for long developing plays against the better teams on our schedule.

I agree, I think we'll see a lot more 4-wide, spreadier schemes. I think #3 on your list is a huge reason why. And I'll add that there has been behind-the-paywall chatter about Chris Evans being utilized more in the passing attack (as a receiver), which I think supports your position.