The Beav, Tate, and the trip to OU
I'm seeing a trend that I would like to have some feedback on...
The Tebow show didnt unveil any great running this year, I know, I know, Meyer didnt want to get him hurt and with seeing fewer and fewer spread quarterbacks putting up massive numbers on the ground, has RR seen the movement of his creation moving toward the above average mobile QB in the spread that is a much better passer than a runner, Pat White v. Sam Bradford. Could that have a lot to do with the trip to Oklahoma this off season? With the success that OU has had with Bradford, maybe RR sees Threet or Forcier being the next Bradford and Michigan being in the title game in a few years.
December 20th, 2008 at 2:20 PM ^
Tebow is mostly used as a Fullback who runs for short yardage. He scored about the same amount of rushing touchdowns this year as last, so they aren't holding him back. After all, there playing for a national championship. Tate has a wonderful arm but will not put up numbers like Bradford in this offense.
December 21st, 2008 at 3:44 PM ^
Really? About the same number of rushing TDs? I guess that's true if you consider 12 to be about 23. The number of carries, yards, and TDs are not even comparable. They said they were going to cut back on his carries and they have. They definitely ARE holding him back.
December 20th, 2008 at 5:17 PM ^
actually that's wrong. tebow put roughly half as many TD's on the ground as he did last year (12 this year, it was in the 20's last year.)
You can see that they are a better team for it, when there is an additional threat in the backfield like Demps or Rainey. Now when Tebow runs, he'll get more yards cause the opposing defense must cover the additional threat of the RB. Last year they lost 4 games and this year they lost one, and this is a major reason, along with the improved defense and Tebow's passing accuracy.
As for Bradford, he was the QB equivalent of Michael Hart, a lightly touted recruit who ended up playing like a 5 star recruit in his first year.
December 20th, 2008 at 5:27 PM ^
He has no choice, imo. Especially with the Beav not coming here. He's gonna have to go w/the type of offense they're running in the Big 12. Looking at OK, OK St., Texas, Missouri, TTech, et al, that ain't a bad way to go. Forcier could be the one to lead us into that transition.
December 21st, 2008 at 10:15 AM ^
For the last time - that is not the offense Rodriguez runs. You need to get past the fact that just because all those offenses put at least 3 receivers on the field that they have any similarities. Oklahoma and Oklahoma St. were VERY good running teams. Texas and Texas Tech were not. Leach runs a completely different sort of offense than the rest.
December 21st, 2008 at 2:13 PM ^
Rodriguez ran the Air Raid once upon a time, then ran a balanced attack then the read option at WVU. We have no idea what he will run, though I imagine the balanced attack of the Tulane era will be closest.
December 21st, 2008 at 3:47 PM ^
He's never had an offense that has run less than 54% of the time. I wouldn't so much consider that the "air raid". Brodie, you need to come to terms with the fact that while RR's offense has shown the ability to pass more in some years that it is primarily a run first offense.
December 21st, 2008 at 5:07 PM ^
Agreed. I've never understood were people have gotten the idea that Rich Rod will pull a Steve Spurrier and spread the field 4 & 5 wide and sling the ball all over the place. That's NEVER been his offense and he's said as much. The only difference between his offense at Tulane & WVU was the amount of rushes by the QB (Shaun King) at Tulane was considerably less than that of the QBs at WVU. The truth about the spread-option offense is that when RR has his true dual threat QB, it is closer to Nebraska's offense of the mid '90s than anything else.
December 21st, 2008 at 5:58 PM ^
This, I think, is also untrue. If you include the offenses he ran at Tulane, Clemson, and WVU, he ran about 55% of the time in ALL of them, aside from years in which his QB was Pat White. That is running roughly as often as Michigan did throughout Chad Henne's career. I would not charactarize that as "Nebraska in the 90's".
December 21st, 2008 at 6:28 PM ^
Chitown,
The Nebraska comparison came from a member of the coaching staff who was explaining how the offense worked. I can't remember who, though, as it was from an article that I read last year when the hiring took place. Trust me, I didn't just pull that comparison out of my ass. I wouldn't have made the connection on my own.
December 21st, 2008 at 6:35 PM ^
I would personally agree with that regarding the Nebraska comparison, however the number isn't 55%, it's 65%. In the years when it's been relatively more pass oriented it was down near 55%, but in the more run oriented years it's been near (and typically over) 70%, and that includes three years when he had a non-running quarterback (Marshall).
December 21st, 2008 at 7:04 PM ^
Are you talking about Rasheed Marshall at WVU? Because he made it to the NFL as a WR/KR, so he definitely was a running QB.
December 21st, 2008 at 7:41 PM ^
Sorry, I should have been more clear that with respect to Marshall I was comparing him to what is most typically talked about as a running quarterback in an RR offense: Pat White. Marshall was a passer first and had the ability to run. White is a runner first and has the ability pass. Both of them are (were in the case of Marshall) athletic quarterbacks, and both of their offenses under RR ran about the same percentage of plays (about 70%), but White put almost double the rushing yards of Marshall. Marshall could run, but he wasn't utilized as a running quarterback in the sense that I meant (i.e. like White). Frankly, I'd be perfectly happy to have a quarterback like Marshall at Michigan. But yeah, your point is fair, I didn't say what I meant to say correctly. Thanks for pointing that out.
December 21st, 2008 at 6:36 PM ^
Also, here is an interesting article that talks about his offense as it was being installed initially at WVU and what RR himself characterizes the offense as: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/2001/preview/bigeast_…
December 22nd, 2008 at 1:04 AM ^
He ran the Air Raid at Glenville State. This is well documented. I'm not saying "ZOMG NO OPTION NOOO", I'm saying it's short sighted to look at an offense crafted toward a 2 star wide receiver at QB and say "That's the offense he's going to run regardless of the situation".
I have no reason to believe that Rodriguez would force Tate Forcier to run 75% of the time.
December 22nd, 2008 at 11:44 AM ^
No one here has said 75%. The fact is that in 11 seasons in D1/FBS RR offenses have run the ball 65% of the time with a variety of quarterback types.
December 22nd, 2008 at 3:54 PM ^
That's skewered by the dramatic rises with Pat White, though. Running 55-60% of the time is fairly normal. Even 65% in this offense would be balanced considering the number of passes credited as runs.
December 22nd, 2008 at 4:50 PM ^
No it isn't by Pat White. He ran the ball, on average, 70% of the time during his entire tenure at WVU, regardless of the quarterback.
I don't disagree with you on the other point. I would expect between 65%-70% run in this offense at Michigan, and yes, a good part of that is because a lot of the passes are considered runs. That's no different than his offense has been elsewhere.
December 22nd, 2008 at 5:17 PM ^
Rasheed Marshall is most certainly not comparable to, say, Tate Forcier. The personnel will dictate the percentages and Rodriguez, being a self admitted football junkie, will probably always recruit the best available player at every position. I'd imagine we'll see a lot of, as Brian put it, innovation.
December 22nd, 2008 at 5:23 PM ^
I don't get where you're going with the Marshall-Forcier argument. Marshall is the #5 all-time passer at WVU while running an offense that ran the ball 70% of the time. Hell, I'll be happy if Forcier is comparable to Marshall.
December 21st, 2008 at 7:02 PM ^
FYI, it was the run and shoot (The June Jones Hawaii/SMU offense), not the Air Raid (The Mike Leach Texas Tech offense). I can't say I understand the difference, but I'm pretty confident they're not all that similar outside of the fact that they both pass a lot.
December 20th, 2008 at 5:57 PM ^
Why do we suddenly have to go to a passing spread/air raid? At the end of the year we were tearing it up on the ground, imagine us with a accurate passer and at least athletic runner at QB?
I love our offense. Sure, we can add some things to it, but it works, prior to what everyone says.
December 21st, 2008 at 3:55 AM ^
I can't imagine we'll pass more than 45% of the time.
December 21st, 2008 at 6:11 PM ^
so why would we now? 45% would be fine, hell the ideal pct would be 60/40 run/pass from what calvin magee had said. that's about what you want anyways.
December 21st, 2008 at 6:40 PM ^
I can't either since an RR offense has done that just 2 times in the entire time he's been in FBS.
December 22nd, 2008 at 4:37 PM ^
too bad people are using it, the bureaucrats win again. Apart from that, your point is correct
December 22nd, 2008 at 4:51 PM ^
I do too, but unfortunately you tend to get someone who jumps down your throat if you use one or the other, so that's why I use both.
December 21st, 2008 at 1:01 PM ^
Theres diff kinds of spreads... team wise.. u got the WVU spread, the texas tech spread... youll prob see a combo for the "michigan offense" with alot more passing than WVU ever did because forcier will be hellofa lot bettr passer than pat white ever was. RR focuses the offense on what he has.
Ill see forcier being like a mccoy. Or juice williams or troy smith or like nebraska in the 90s.
December 21st, 2008 at 9:28 PM ^
He's never had an offense that has run less than 54% of the time.
54% is not that much. Most good college football teams run more than they pass over the course of the season, for the simple fact that in blowout wins, they usually just run out the clock in the 4th quarter.
December 21st, 2008 at 10:27 PM ^
Try using the entirety of what I said before you just pick and choose sentences. That's a fine sentence that you picked to make your point but what I actually said means something ENTIRELY DIFFERENT when you include the next sentence.
December 21st, 2008 at 11:32 PM ^
Two things:
1) Why are you so mad? You act like I personally insulted you. Calm down.
2) OK, here's the rest of what you posted:
He's never had an offense that has run less than 54% of the time. I wouldn't so much consider that the "air raid". Brodie, you need to come to terms with the fact that while RR's offense has shown the ability to pass more in some years that it is primarily a run first offense.
I don't think it changes your point much. As I said above, it's normal for any successful football team to run more than it passes, because it's going to have some blowout wins where the run-pass ratio is dramatically skewed. A team that runs 55% of the time on the season can be considered to have a balanced offense.
December 22nd, 2008 at 12:10 AM ^
Actually it changes it a lot when you read that in conjunction with the post that I was responding to. My point in posting the 54% number was specifically to say that RR's offense never has been an "air raid" offense and based upon his history there is no reason to think that it would be. In other words, it was being used solely to rebut a claim that RR is going to go all out on the pass. Some people, for whatever reason, think that RR's spread is a passing offense, when all of the data says otherwise. You say that 55% would be considered balanced, and while I don't disagree with that, RR's offenses have averaged 65% run. I was bothered by it because it appeared that you were using my words out of context. If you were not, I apologize.
December 22nd, 2008 at 11:25 AM ^
to my knowledge, rod has never run the air raid nor the run and shoot
all passing offenses are not the same system.