Think we'll be spread option next year? I don't.
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.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:26 AM ^
I honestly feel it would be in HIS best interest to transfer to Pitt.
OUR best interests would be to keep him and use him in a spread-n-shred, but we sort of threw that out the window with this hire.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:30 AM ^
...and Hoke officially threw it out the window by bringing in Borges.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:53 PM ^
Please explain to the MGoIdiati the vast success Calvin Magee has had without Rich Rodriguez. Go ahead, find me the examples where a Magee-led offense, sans Rodriguez, tore shit up.
I'll click "Save" and watch.
January 13th, 2011 at 6:36 PM ^
I honestly feel it would be in HIS best interest to transfer to Pitt.
OUR best interests would be to keep him and use him in a spread-n-shred,
Disagree on both counts. If Denard wants to be an NFL QB, the RR system isn't optimal for his development. And given his injury toll last season, I don't think it's optimal for us, either. Give me a healthy Denard who rushes for "only" 800-1,000 yards over a constantly-injured Denard who rushes for 1,700.
January 13th, 2011 at 7:16 PM ^
It's likely that DR would run less if our backs were more productive.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:27 AM ^
Michigan ran exactly 0 zone running plays from 1995-2001.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:28 AM ^
They utilized zone blocking by the offensive line...
January 13th, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^
Im pretty sure they didn't start zone blocking until much later. I could be wrong. (probably am).
Edit, right no true zone scheme until chris perry/Mike hart. But to suggest Michigan was zone crazy while he was coaching at Michigan is also very wrong.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:49 AM ^
Assuming we started with Chris Perry (who was at Michigan 2000 - 2004) Brady Hoke was DL coach until 2001... so going off from your assumption then we did I guess.
I am really not sure about the timing. I could be wrong.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:19 PM ^
We didn't switch to a zone-blocking scheme until 2006.
BTW, Hoke was here through the 2002 season. His last game as an assistant was the 2003 Outback Bowl.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:36 AM ^
Example: the long TD run by Chris Howard at Penn State in 1997 was outside zone.
True that they didn't base the O on outside zone until 2006, though.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:55 AM ^
Your larger point still stands. There is no way Hoke changes his entire offense philosophy to fit Denard. Im sure he knows Denard is a great player, but he also believes in lining up and "blowing" people off the ball is the best way to win games.
He may try to make it work. But no way does he turn his offense into anything people saw at Florida under Meyer, Oregon, or Auburn.
He will change his offense the way RR did for Threet. Adjust the Run/Pass %, but still stick to the basics of his beliefs.
But I dont see it working that great. Its like watching Brantley at Florida but the opposite. The one thing Denard could use to his athletic advantage in an offense like this, is one of his weakest skills, scrambling.
January 13th, 2011 at 3:43 PM ^
Scrambling is running. Denard can run. It's silly to suggest that this is a weakness of his. The fact that he didn't scramble that much doesn't mean he can't do it. It's pretty normal for young QBs to stay too long in the pocket. As he gains experience, and learns to go through his progressions more quickly, I think you'll see him take off more often when things are covered.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:29 PM ^
This is one thing I'm excited about, and I'm hoping Hoke and Denard will take advantage of. With less of a perceived threat of running the ball (due to scheme change) it could leave open large gains off scrambles... whether it's designed or not.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:28 AM ^
If you're suggesting that Denard's skill set is limited to running a spread option offense, then it may be in his "best interest", but I'd be willing to bet that Denard views himself as a lot more than "a guy who can only run the spread option". Just a hunch...
January 13th, 2011 at 11:29 AM ^
Well in all honesty so did Tebow. The pro scouts thought otherwise (McDaniels not withstanding).
January 13th, 2011 at 11:41 AM ^
Jimmy was smart enuff not to take that job. Anyone who would draft Tebow........watch the dominoes fall on Denver.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:36 AM ^
There are alot of kids playing on the playground calling themselves DEEEEENARD, DROB etc. That doesnt mean they can play in an offense that doesnt use the spread. Mallet left for just the opposite reasoning, and for him it was the best move, I'm sure Mallet will be thanking RR some day also.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:41 AM ^
Obviously that's correct, but there is a world of difference between the spread (which we are almost certain to run components of, along with other schemes) and the spread option (which we are almost certain to never see much of again). Since Denard ran almost zero spread option last year, it shouldn't really make much of a difference. If the question is "what's best for Denard" it would be awfully difficult to see how being in an offense that limits him to running pretty much only spread option schemes (i.e. Oregon) is better for his development than playing in an offense that exposes him to multiple schemes which will help to more fully develop his skill set.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:09 PM ^
We are both on the same side with Denard but I just dont see him being as successful in the Hoke style offense. He was over used by RR, but RR had no choice, sadly I cant believe i said that but He HAD to win at all cost. The rest is history.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:38 AM ^
I'm merely saying that's what he's best in. If Coach Hoke really wants to put his players in the best position to be successful, for Denard it's spread option.
I'm sure he could be successful in other offenses, just not as successful.
Watch, the new staff will show him Vick clips from this year.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:46 AM ^
A couple of things:
(1) Why would you suggest that Denard's best place to be successful would be in the spread option when he ran very little of the spread option last year? The offense that Michigan ran last year was not the spread option. It was most certainly not the spread option offense that Rodriguez ran at WVU and tried to implement at Michigan in 2008 and 2009. I've watched a lot of Rich Rodriguez over the years, going all the way back to the time he started at WVU, and I cay say with absolutely no hesitation that the offensive playcalling at that Michigan in 2010 with Denard was fundamentally different than anything he'd run at WVU or Michigan.
(2) It depends on how you define "success". If you're looking at it from a "how great of numbers can he put up at the college level" angle, then you're almost certainly right. If you're looking at it from a "how best can his skill set be developed to give him the best shot of playing in the NFL (at any position)" angle, then you're almost certainly wrong.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:59 AM ^
1. We absolutely were a spread option team. Just b/c we didn't look exactly like WVU 2007 doesn't mean we weren't spread option.
2. Yes, success is based on numbers. He just did something no one else in the history of football did. You have to put up numbers to get NFL scouts to notice you. Do you think Randle-El even gets drafted if he switches to WR and struggles to learn the position at Indy-frickin-ana and doesn't put up big WR numbers at Indy-frickin-ana? Career over, thanks for switching me to WR, coach.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:25 PM ^
No, we were not. There was very little option ran this past season at all. Very little. And I'm not just talking about the zone read. Virtually the only option that Denard ran last year was a pass-run option (i.e. very little running game option). It's not a matter of not "look[ing] exactly like WVU 2007" but a matter of looking nothing like WVU 2007. I seriously don't know what you were watching if you think that we ran a lot of option-oriented plays last year.
Ah, I got it now. Your main point is that Oregon would be a better fit because he'd certainly be switched to WR if he stays at Michigan. Got it. Disagree completely, but got it.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:04 PM ^
The fact that it was different does nothing to change the fact that we ran a spread option last year. The spread option doesn't consist solely of a single play -- the zone read -- just like an I doesn't consist solely of an Iso.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:14 PM ^
Your point would be valid if I were talking solely about the zone read. I wasn't.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:40 PM ^
Can Denard pitch the ball?
January 13th, 2011 at 2:02 PM ^
coaches have been pretty clear about him wanting to play QB ins a spread/option system, I caqn try to find a link, but just recently DR was quoted as saying he wanted to talk to BH about whether or not he planned to un it and his HS coach, who will very likely be consulted in his decision, has said he think DR would not be optimizing his talents in anything but a spread-option.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:36 PM ^
Nope, the coach spoke that denard was pretty clear about playing QB only. Didn't mention system
January 13th, 2011 at 11:28 AM ^
If we are going to back HOKE because he is a Michigan Man and cares about the kids blah blah blah, he needs to best advise Denard. Let Denard enjoy his college playing years. I hated to see RR go and I'm going to really hate to see Denard go, but I think it is in Denards best interest. IMO
January 13th, 2011 at 11:32 AM ^
Degree from Oregon:
Michigan Degree:
January 13th, 2011 at 11:45 AM ^
I appreciate the humor, and a quick scan of Oregon students will show them to be visibly different from (say) the Maize Rage, but what do we really know about Denard's career goals? Is it possible that he aspires to be something where Oregon = Michigan as far as degrees are concerned? I've long believed that the degree is irrelevant if you'll be selling axles or Prozac. If he wants to be President, sure, Michigan would win in a landslide.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:46 AM ^
Degree from Oregon:
Degree from Michigan:
January 13th, 2011 at 11:54 AM ^
Which one of them has a PhD????
January 13th, 2011 at 12:01 PM ^
Maybe some will look at that and say, "So you're telling me that if I go to Michigan I could end up on the cover of Time magazine with the caption 'Mad Genius' under it? Sign me up!"
January 13th, 2011 at 12:12 PM ^
This is a football blog isnt it?
January 13th, 2011 at 11:56 AM ^
I thought this was about a kid making a decision on his College football dreams. Regardless he only has 2 more years, life on the other hand............
January 13th, 2011 at 7:37 PM ^
I had no idea.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:33 AM ^
I didn't really think Michigan ran much zone in the late '90s/early '00s, but maybe I'm wrong. I thought that was still a time when we ran a lot of man blocking, counter treys, etc.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:41 AM ^
I was joking--I guess that didn't come across. However, outside zone was in the package.
Outside zone gurus believe that if you're going to run it, you have to run it all the time, and that you don't need anything else.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:35 AM ^
I'd assume that Coach Hoke also knows that if Denard transfers, he's left with one scholarship QB on the roster who, while incredibly talented, will be a redshirt freshman next year. I think (hope?) that Hoke realizes that making some effort to adapt his offense to Denard's incredible skill set is in the best interests of the team and Hoke's immediate success. (I realize that Denard will never be a classic drop-back passer, but I don't think RR's offense is the ONLY one in which he can be successful.) Hopefully Coach Hoke can convince Denard its in his interests to stay as well.
As for Denard's pro prospects, I always envisioned his career playing out along the lines of Antwan Randle-El. Stud QB in college who converts to WR when he reaches the pros. (This is the Ronald Curry model as well.) I don't know why everyone assumes that playing QB in college precludes Denard from having the opportunity to play a different position in the pros.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^
I agree, I hope he does not leave but if they don't figure a way ti utilize his special skills I'm not hopeful. He may choose to subjugate himself for the greater good of the team but I would prefer for Hoke and team to try to work a portion of the spread.
Steve - is it possible to meld concepts of the RR spread with pro style or is it kind of one or the other? Is it possible to be hybrid? If you are a hybrid do you end up sucking at both pieces? Would retaining any of the current offensive staff help?
January 13th, 2011 at 12:04 PM ^
1. I don't believe it's possible to be both spread option and pro-style. Now, it is possible to be in the gun with 4-wide and be pro-style. See Michigan vs. Florida in 2008 Capital One Bowl.
2. There is no way in hell you'll see anyone outside of Fred Jackson as part of the new staff, nor should you.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:16 PM ^
I don't believe it's possible to be both spread option and pro-style.
Urban Meyer and Nick Saban had some great comments on this in the BCS pregame show. If you missed it, you should try to find it.
January 13th, 2011 at 1:14 PM ^
I was somewhere where the TV was on mute, thinking, "Damn I wish I could hear what they're saying."
January 13th, 2011 at 1:50 PM ^
I couldn't do it justice by paraphrasing it and I don't know where to find it, so I can't help there. The basic gist, though, was that they both believed that the key to running the spread most successfully was to have a major power component and that the lack of a power component would be a major problem for Oregon. In the end, they both turned out to be right.
January 13th, 2011 at 4:27 PM ^
...both suggest that you need to be able to have a downhill component for goal line/short yard situations. Meyer specifically said he liked to gap block in those situations.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:42 PM ^
(Atlanta, Houston, Detroit) because they assumed they could move the ball in those situations as they did in others, except they obviously couldn't.
I remember two games in particular where the inability to run the ball when it was expected cost a spread team the game. (I suppose in part it was also playcalling; I'd guess it's more likely now that a team with a pass-heavy attack would continue to pass if its lead was threatened.)
It seems that one significant difference between those teams and current spread teams is the use of TEs ... back then the theory seemed to be that small, fast receivers were the wave of the future, except they found that replacing even an average TE with a 4th WR downgraded your running game from no to no way.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:53 PM ^
That to me seemed like our base and the play Denard was most effective running. Do you think Hoke will keep that group of plays?
January 13th, 2011 at 9:43 PM ^
i'm no expert but didn't tebow and leak run different packages at UF? and don't a few NFL teams have wildcat packages to take advantage of a running QB?
Comments