The Perfect Pass

Submitted by greg788 on November 25th, 2018 at 8:18 PM

The Klingsbury as O-coordinator post made me think of the book, "The Perfect Pass" by S.C. Gwynne. The bottom line in college football coaching is adaptation. Will Harbaugh adapt after this fiasco? The spread and its various incarnations is the current trend and I predict it'll stay for various reasons. It provides optimal advantage to the offense and is adaptable to personnel. If you want some interesting reading on the dangers of non-adaptation and what we're seeing on the field, read this book. If nothing else it'll open your eyes to how entrenched and ultra-conservative (even backwards) much of current coaching philosophy is ...  I personally believe Harbaugh needs to adapt. You have to be able to whip out a gun (preferably a big one) when you get into a gunfight, aka an offensive shootout. Instead we whipped out a knife. Oh it was a nice, shiny, big, sharp one but A KNIFE NONETHELESS. 

Reggie Dunlop

November 26th, 2018 at 8:02 AM ^

Exactly. This 2018 offense looks nothing like the offense he ran in year 1 with Rudock. He adapts to personnel and incorporates staff philosophies which turn over every year. 

Regardless, I still cant understand how or why Harbaugh's offense is suddenly the topic of frustration. They scored 40 points which wouldve won every other game on the schedule by 2 TDs and had us 11-0.

They allowed 62 and that could've easily hit 70 if OSU didnt slow down and if we didnt get some friendly calls. That would've left us 0-11.

Why is everybody bitching about offense? The offense had a bad day and still did exactly what everyone hoped and predicted - put up a bunch of points on a sketchy OSU defense.

LickReach

November 26th, 2018 at 9:03 AM ^

It was the perception of the offense imo.  We could tell they were playing as hard as they could but the play calls did not set up success (or at least success against a suddenly inspired, world beater defense).  It really didn't help when we saw the other guys get to the goal line about every 44 seconds of play clock (sometimes even less).  The will breaker was the turn from going for it on 4th to the punt block.  We needed big plays and never got them.  First drive 3 and out portended doom.  Big plays are what got us through the crucible imo.  It didn't happen.  I love Shea's attitude of winning a good bowl game (which we will get to watch on New Year's in our jammies).  It seems like after the initial sting folks on here are keep a little perspective.  The biggest frustration for me is seeing 2016 and 2017 be so close in The Game and everything setting up for the good guys this year.  We collectively wished for a universe correction from evil this year.  So much of how we are raised depends on believing in good.  I still believe in this coach (always will).  Keep him until retirement frankly.  We cannot undervalue the type of men JH is grooming.  That part of the program hopefully will never change.  As to new assistants - great!  So much of JH's persona is Bo though I wonder if the formula of running the offense can change.  He's lived and modeled himself on Bo's persona from childhood.  Winning in that model seems almost as important as the win itself.  Ok brain vomit complete.  Onward and forward.  I am ready for a bowl win for a change.    

Reggie Dunlop

November 26th, 2018 at 10:12 AM ^

Maybe brain vomit, but good post. This is the problem and what has been driving me crazy as I scan this board the last two days trying to get over the loss:

"It really didn't help when we saw the other guys get to the goal line about every 44 seconds of play clock (sometimes even less)."

The people here see OSU put up more points against Michigan than ever before in the history of the program, and somehow come away with it thinking we needed to score 63 to win the game. That's insane. It's idiotic.

Michigan won the last 10 games by choking out opponents. They didn't fly up and down the field. They controlled the ball, ground out first downs, ate the clock, and then Brown's defense went out smacked them in the mouth with a 3-and-out and we hammered them some more. By the 2nd half, we owned every opponent and marched to easy victories against really good opponents. That was the recipe for 2018. That's how we played football because we didn't have pass blocking tackles and that's how we had to play. We rode our defense and running game and everybody here loved everything about it for 3 months.

And then Brown blows it (I love him, he blew it) against OSU and suddenly our model doesn't work anymore?  No, if we hold them to the 27 they scored against PSU, we win by double digits. If we hold them to the 26 they put up against MSU, we win by double digits. If our defense plays like our defense, we win that game easy. Brown put all his money on his corners running with OSU receivers, and either that talent gap or the no-show by our D-line made that gameplan a disaster.

That's it. The end. Like you said, if they're still running a JT Barrett offense, we DO hold them to 26 and we win. The universe hates us. The stars did not align. Their 2018 offense is the kryptonite to our nation-leading #1 pass defense. And that is such a kick in the junk. But nothing here is broken. It's a lot closer to fixed than it is broken.

Thus completes my own brain vomit. Thanks for the reply. I needed a level-headed interaction this morning.

greg788

November 25th, 2018 at 8:28 PM ^

My point is, regardless of what happens to Kingsbury (i.e., his coming here or not, which is HIGHLY unlikely), there's a lot of offensive potential that can be tapped with our personnel. Reading this book makes you understand just how tilted the rulebook is in the offenses favor. After the beatdown we just endured, will we do it, or is Harbaugh insistent that "what's old can be new again" ? 

RedPandaCmmanda

November 25th, 2018 at 8:39 PM ^

I know there have been quite a few threads on Kingsbury, but don't quite understand why the moms take them down. Is it because they don't want to start a trend of having every name out there get a thread made about them? Or is it because there's no point in talking about it if there isn't a position open? OR is it because the majority of the conversation centered around the offensive philosophy and that topic was discussed in many of the previous threads?

Just looking for some clarification.

ToledoWolverine

November 25th, 2018 at 8:55 PM ^

Not willing to start a new thread and I think this goes enough in line with the topic so as to avoid a full on thread jack, but am I the only one that feels like the old adage “defense wins championships” was fully stomped out over the past 5 years and yesterday was its death rattle?

take a look at the top teams, playoff results, big time matchups. You just don’t see the 21-17 games anymore. The rules are geared towards more points, for more fun, for more money. We need to strike a balance between Rich Rods offense and Don Browns defense. Just my opinion. But I don’t think doing the same shit next year is gonna work any better. You either evolve or you die.

ToledoWolverine

November 25th, 2018 at 9:07 PM ^

You probably did. That goes to what I’m thinking and maybe did a poor job explaining. I don’t think you can win with an elite D and an average to slightly above average O. Gotta be elite in both, because it’s my thinking that a great offense trumps a great defense, nowadays. Wasn’t always like that. 

TBuck97

November 25th, 2018 at 9:39 PM ^

I think that is still true. The philosophy Harbaugh has played with will beat 80% of the teams we play. The issue is that an ultra-conservative offense (what we saw yesterday) will not beat Ohio State or a good Penn State/Nebraska/top tier big ten team, especially on the road. When those teams are played the offense needs to open up and actually take some risk. We didn’t do that. 

My thoughts on offense wins championships is a team like Oklahoma. Yes they are very good, but every game they play looks like NBA Jam and when you finally run into a good defense or your offense struggles, you won’t be able to rely on your defense for stops. 

We just can’t be so one-dimensional with getting stopped up the middle on first and second down only to setup a QB keeper later in the game.  Need to do more than that to keep a good defense honest 

 

Magnus

November 25th, 2018 at 9:34 PM ^

Rich Rod wasn't good at Michigan. He also basically wasn't good at Arizona.

Also, the noteworthy thing in this discussion is that the teams mentioned (such as Clemson and Alabama) are good with a PASSING spread. They can throw the ball downfield and don't necessarily need bubbles and RPOs to create yardage downfield. Denard Robinson was a great running quarterback, but at some point, you have to be able to throw the ball to win championships. Denard couldn't.

beotchclemons

November 25th, 2018 at 9:08 PM ^

My 12-year-old nephew was watching the game with me - he said, "why doesn't Michigan run those same type of plays that ohio state is running and scoring touchdowns with?"...I didn't have an answer.

Michology 101

November 25th, 2018 at 9:39 PM ^

Yeah, many adults were also wondering why we weren't copying some of those plays.

The OSU defense and secondary was not great this season. Our talented WRs would've most likely had success running those same routes against them. 

I guess the only answer is... our head coach is just determined to do things differently on offense.

greg788

November 25th, 2018 at 10:06 PM ^

"everyone is claiming for clamoring for change, but not noticing how they currently hold 4 APB/slot commitments. 5 if you count quintel kent."

That's fabulous if/when we actually start using slot backs. We have several talented ones on the roster NOW, including a 5th year senior. We sure didn't like throwing to them this year, or last, or the year before that .... stockpiling slot receivers means jack until the proof is seen on the field ...