Harbaugh with no Luck

Submitted by Magga Saraivah on

This is an honest question for those who know Stanford football better than me. Would Jim Harbaugh be able to replicate his Stanford success at Michigan with no Andrew Luck ?

I am as big of a Harbaugh fan as anyone but I wonder how much of his Stanford success was due to Andrew Luck. I know it took a few years for him to dig Stanford out of its hole when he got there, but things got exponentially better after Luck arrived.

Who would be his Luck here ?  No disrespect to the current QBs but: Shane Morris? Messiah De Weaver ?

I think he would have to recruit an elite QB after he got here to really get things going.

 

Wolverine Devotee

November 4th, 2014 at 8:36 PM ^

Let's cross that bridge when we get to it.

Andrew Luck was not the only reason that Stanford became an actual football program again. 

Wolverine Devotee

November 4th, 2014 at 8:53 PM ^

Don't you mean the J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach? 

Hopefully the new AD doensn't have to say that out loud. He may be out of breath by the time he adds "Jim Harbaugh" at the end of the sentence.

Sauce Castillo

November 5th, 2014 at 8:11 AM ^

he got to an NFC championship his first year with Alex Smith, when Alex Smith was still regarded as garbage and was a muffed punt away from the super bowl.  I believe they still had a winning record the 2nd season before Kap replaced Smith.  Moral of the story at all his stops, I think he makes these QB's into what they are today.

buckeyekiller1

November 4th, 2014 at 11:11 PM ^

What put Stanford football, and Harbaugh, on the map was beating #1 USC in their house when they were a 41 point dog. That was with a back-up QB that had never started a game (Pritchard). Luck had nothing to do with that. That is the definition of coachin em up.

GoBLUinTX

November 4th, 2014 at 11:53 PM ^

Took over a team that had just one victory the previous year and by the end of his fourth year as Head Coach that team, the team he coached up, went 12-1 with their only loss being to one of the BCS championship teams and you're saying that....what are you saying, that Elmer Fudd could have coached that team to the same success because Andrew Luck was the QB?  

Well hot damn, fire all the HCs and replace them with recruiters.  Send the players onto the field and have them scratch out plays in the dirt.  If nothing else you'd save a boatload of money by not wasting it on dunderheads in sweatshirts and whistles.

slimj091

November 4th, 2014 at 11:24 PM ^

You have to realize who you are talking to man. Most of these people are expecting the next coach to come in and consume the entire schedule with fireballs from his eye's, and bolts of lightning from his "arse".

tolmichfan

November 5th, 2014 at 12:09 AM ^

I know who I'm talking to and I hope to change some minds. I doubt I will but the toxicity of this board has gotten out of hand and it has brought me out to comment after years of just reading. I just wish people would come down to earth on the realization of where this program has been the past 10 years. If we change coaches the expectations need to come down about 8 notches. If the new AD goes a spread route coach it's gonna take another 3 to 4 plus years to be relevant again. If we go Hargbaugh and he switches our run game back to power it will take less time then a spread guy but it won't be pretty in year one. If we stay course with Hoke I see the fastest road back to the top of the big ten.. By the way "I'm the most wanted man in my island, but I'm not on my island."

UMxWolverines

November 5th, 2014 at 12:56 AM ^

I really think you're making it sound a little worse than it is. There's no reason with the talent we have that the next coach can't adapt. That would be just stupid if they didn't. I literally cannot think of a single big name program that hired a new coach and took 3-4 years to get going. It's usually year 2 where there is a big jump because great coaches do that. Meyer at Florida, Saban at Alabama, Tressel at OSU, Stoops at Oklahoma, Carroll at USC, all had meh first years and in year two they were top ten teams or national champs in Stoops and Tressel's cases. 

tolmichfan

November 5th, 2014 at 8:30 AM ^

I think Harbaugh in year two would have a good shot at winning 10 plus games, but the schedule in year 2 we will have to play Wis go to MSU, Iowa, and OSU. Plus they need to add a major game to the non conference. If the team goes .500 in those games in year two of a new coaching staff I will be very impressed. Let's say we go the Spread run coaching style like a Dan Mullen/Urban route. In his first recruiting class he would have to hit a home run with a QB. Like what RR was trying to do with Pryor. If he lands that recruit and plays him right away he will be a sophomore in year two and I don't see any way they go .500 in the major games and we are more likely to have a 6 to 8 win type season. I would hope the fans would be excited by this number of wins but we aren't happy now with a coach with this type of success. RR was a blue chip hire at the time at a blue chip program and in year three he only got us to 7 wins because his QB was only in his second year. Now if we go outside of the Box and hire a Big 12 type spread air raid coach I think he could be successful because Morris will be a senior or Speight will be a red shirt sophomore, and I think those options at QB are better than a true sophomore run first spread QB. If we keep Hoke I think 10 plus wins next year should be floor of the team and if we don't get their then we should start looking for another coach. Next year we would return everyone on O but Gardner and if Funch stays. They will be in the second year of a Nuss O instead of learning thier 3 or 4 O depending in how many offenses they learned under Al. (I think Funch stays if hoke stays I think he is gone if we change coaches, hoke is loved by the players and he has gotten guys that should have left and played somewhere else or NFL like Denard Gardner and Lewan to stay). Also the oline has been improving every week this year and vs Indiana they didn't have the mental errors they were haveing at the beginning of the year. On defense again we would have players that understand thier responsibilities instead of haveing to learn a whole new scheme and have the mental errors that come along with that.

tolmichfan

November 5th, 2014 at 8:55 AM ^

Urban walked into a loaded Florida team. He also has walk into an OSU program that from day one has had a QB that fits his style. Saban did a really good job at Alabama and I don't really know the specifics of their roster when he was hired. Tressel walked into a loaded Ohio State team, people forget how good of a recruiter Cooper was. Then he got Maurice Clarret in his second year who was a stud for that year. Look up how many players from that Miami vs OSU national champ game made the pros it is rediculous and all those guys were cooper recruits. I don't know enough about the state of Oklahomas roster at the time of Stoops hire to comment on that. RR walked into a bad roster for the style of play he wanted at Michigan without a QB that fit him and a fan base that isn't patient. Hoke walked into a roster that had a good senior class an alright junior class and a awful sophomore and freshman class that got even worse as guys washed out of the program.

davidhm

November 4th, 2014 at 8:36 PM ^

There are 115 players on a collegiate team. Yes, Luck was really good. However, so was their Oline, running backs, defense, etc. He's proven he can both recruit talent and develop it. Something we've not seen here in years.


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

dothepose

November 4th, 2014 at 8:36 PM ^

He did take a mediocre 49ers team and got them to a NFC championship game three years in a row. Let's not forget he had Toby Gehrhart whom I still think should have won the Heisman.

StoneRoses

November 4th, 2014 at 8:37 PM ^

You're forgetting that Alex Smith, considered to be a massive bust unanimously, suddenly became a decent if not good quarterback after Jimmy took over in San Fran. Harbaugh is a proven winner and while things are shaky for the Niner's right now, I do believe that Harbaugh's track record with QB's and winning speak for themselves.

BlueLikeJazz

November 4th, 2014 at 8:39 PM ^

without any big time recruits. 

And between Luck and Kaepernick, it's reasonable to think that part of his QB's success is attributable to him.  It's possible he could do really good things with Morris/Malzone.