1. Reports of the demise of the “Spread” have been greatly exaggerated.
I’m looking at you, Gary Danielson and others revanchists who reveled in Texas and Florida using pro-style passers as evidence that the spread offense was going away. Florida’s offense was a disaster, even when Mike Pouncey wasn’t doing his best Mackey Sasser impression. Texas produced 369 yards and 5.3 yards per play against Rice, a team that allowed 464 yards per game and 6.6 yards per play last year. (Counter: Rice returns nine starters on defense. Counter-counter: they’re Rice.) These two paragons for the return of old fashioned running and play-action looked significantly worse on offense against weak opponent, even when one accounts for the fact that some drop-off is to be expected when they are replacing a pair of iconic quarterbacks.
In contrast, Oregon put forth an offensive performance for the ages: 59 points by halftime against New Mexico. Michigan looked great on offense with Rich Rodriguez finally having found his Pat White/Woody Dantzler facsimile. (Question for Florida fans: you’d rather have Denard Robinson running your offense, wouldn’t you? Even if he doesn’t have that extra star from Rivals like John Brantley does?) Auburn put up 608 yards at 9.4 yards per play against Arkansas State.
What do these three teams have in common? Quarterbacks who present a running threat, which is kinda the whole point of the Spread ‘n’ Shred. This offense remains a really good way to move the football as long as a team has the right personnel, starting with a quarterback with speed whose presence on the field creates panic in the back seven, running lanes for the backs, and empty spaces for the receivers. Brian Cook, illustrate what I'm saying:
I have never seen two guys running wide open in as much space as Stonum and Robinson did on the late Robinson-to-Robinson connection. There was one safety trying to figure out which guy to cover and literally no one else for twenty yards. RPS +3, baby. That's the kind of thing that happens in these offenses when the quarterback is such a threat on the ground. When Pat White threw deep, most of the time he was doing so to wide open guys. It's like when Debord ran a waggle for big yardage, except the base offense's run game picks up like six yards a play.
I’d be an idiot to claim that the Spread ‘n’ Shred is the only way to go. As Brian Kelly and Mike Leach have shown in recent years, a pass-based spread is also effective, but a team has to be very good in the passing game to make it work. What a team can’t do is to try what Florida is looking to do: run the Tebow plays without Tebow under center.
2. Georgia’s trip to Columbia just got a lot bigger.
Even if Florida sorts out their snap issues, they are going to have problems on offense all year. If they adapted their offense to account for the fact that they have a stationary passer, then they would have potential, but I didn’t see that yesterday. Their upside appears to be the Chris Leak offense, which never went over 400 yards per game. The Gators’ defense looks fine (although how much can you really tell from a game at home against Miami of Ohio?), but Florida looks like they are taking a major step back on offense. Steve Addazio isn’t smart enough to modify the offense to emphasize the passing game.
So where does this leave Georgia and South Carolina? They both looked good in their openers against inferior opponents. They’re both dependent on stars who might not be around for the whole season: Stephen Garcia because he is going to get killed if he keeps running full-speed into defenders and A.J. Green because of David Pollack’s pessimistic tweet this morning that Georgia is looking at more than the Miami event with A.J. That said, either team could beat this version of the Gators. The door is open.
3. Les, Gary Crowton is killing you.
Les Miles is a classic CEO Coach, which means that he’ll only go as far as his VPs will take him. Gary Crowton came to Baton Rouge with a reputation formed at BYU and Oregon of a guy whose offenses are excellent in year one and then get progressively worse as each year goes by. Miles is apparently the only person who hasn’t noticed this fact, or the the only guy who thinks that LSU finishing 112th in total offense or 89th in yards per play isn’t a fireable offense.
So there his Tigers were in the Georgia Dome last night, scoring the same touchdowns based solely on the good work of the defense or the outrageous athleticism of some of the players with the ball in their hands. Otherwise, the Tigers didn’t have a clue. 313 yards and 11 first downs against an opponent that resembled the 82nd Airborne after D-Day isn’t going to cut it. If we’re in the business of making snap judgments on the basis of one week, then LSU is looking up at everyone other than Ole Miss in the West. If Mississippi State comes to Baton Rouge in two weeks and wins, then it’s curtains for Miles for two reasons. First, Mississippi State never beats LSU. Second, if the Other Bulldogs win in Death Valley, it will be the result of a smart young coach putting together a capable offense out of average talent. The contrast with what LSU is doing on that side of the ball will be palpable.
4. Michigan is back.
Michigan looked great on Saturday. Denard Robinson was as close to perfect as a quarterback can be. The defense was … better than the extremely low expectations that had been set for it. The Wolverines clobbered a team that won eight games in each of the past three seasons and returned 16 starters from the team that caused Steve Spurrier to apologize profusely for the beating that his team took in Birmingham.
Michigan started strong last year before collapsing, so the inevitable question that follows is “haven’t we seen this movie before?” So why is this year different? A few reasons. First, this Michigan team is deeper. The 4-0 start in 2009 was fueled by Tate Forcier improvisationally pulling rabbits out of his hat. When Forcier got nicked, the team suffered. When center David Molk got hurt, the team collapsed. This year, Michigan looked good with Denard Robinson running the offense. In other words, Michigan looked good by design rather than by improvisation. If Robinson were to get nicked, Michigan has two players behind him who appear quite capable. Elsewhere on the team, the depth is also improved. Michigan lost slot receiver Roy Roundtree on Saturday, so Terrence Robinson stepped in and caught a long pass. Michigan lost safety Carvin Johnson, so Thomas Gordon stepped in and played competently. In short, this team finally appears to have depth.
4a. Michigan is not back.
It’s one game. Michigan depends on Denard Robinson and he can’t take the pounding that he got from UConn for 12 games. Opponents will eventually figure out what he cannot do. They’ll figure out that the running backs are suspect. Rich Rodriguez might be able to scheme around his team’s talent deficiencies when he has a summer to prepare, but once opponents get film on what Michigan is doing, there will be no counterpunch.
10 comments:
It's good to start the season! It's good for football the see UM back on track.
Re:4a
The Big10,11,12 is not the Big East and R-Rod will face much tougher defenses than he ever did in the past.
Back to you point in 4 though, I missed the game but that was one helluva stat line for Denard Robinson.
Also, should Richt be feeling the fire seeing as how there were players still getting arrested just days prior to the first game of the season? Showing the numbers on TV during the game sure doesn't help the perception much.
I love how the smack-talking rival fans have done a complete 180 on UConn, going from talking them up as "too much for Michigan to handle" to calling them just another Big East team.
Yeah, Jesse, the Big Ten isn't the Big East. And you know what? Rodriguez is bringing in more talented recruits than he did at WVa, too. Pat White was fast. Denard Robinson's even faster - and has a stronger arm.
Jesse, are those defenses tougher than the Georgia, Georgia Tech, and Oklahoma defenses his WVU teams torched in bowl games?
If you want to rip WVU's Big East schedule as the reason for the success of the Rodriguez offense in Morgantown, then you must also praise the quality of the defenses they destroyed in bowl games.
I like your 4a and cringe at your 4b. As far as I am concerned, we wont know where Michigan is going until the Notre Dame game Saturday. Go Blue.
Whoa, don't get all overly defensive on me. I'm not attempting to rip anything, just noting that the teams in the Big Ten have typically had much better talent defensively than the majority of the teams in the Big East. I only note that in the vein that Michael suggested that it's one game and we all saw what happened last year when Michigan started off strong. Simply put, and I think this is Michael's point, let's not start the "Michigan is back" parade until R-Rod has gone through the meat of the schedule.
I'm in no way attempting to marginalize Rodriguez's success at WV. He had better talent than the other teams in the Big East and he coached better than others therefore he won the majority of his games. However, for the sake of discussion (and because I honestly want to know the opinions of those who follow these teams more closely than I), did Lloyd Carr not recruit well? Did Michigan have less talent when R-Rod arrived than what he had in WV? And, understanding that he really did not have the QB for his system (and that there may not be much correlation at all, but I'm going to ask it anyway), he did have some passing QB's on the roster when he arrived so why could he not get his system to work much like Paul Johnson at GT?
Again, I'm just asking for opinions and I only ask the last question because I find it intriguing to an extent that Paul Johnson has found success so early with many players that were recruited to play a pro-style system much like those that were recruited by Carr at Michigan when R-Rod took over. Rodriguez's system is/was much more pass oriented than Paul Johnson's so I think that he should have been able to find more success than he has thus far. Even accepting that Big Ten teams have better defenses than ACC teams, 1-7 in the Big Ten in year two seems low to me.
As for the other two questions, here’s what I found from Rivals and Scout. I looked at the available data from those two sites from 2004-2010. From 2004-2007 (if one assumes that all recruits for ’08 are exclusively R-Rod’s) Michigan had a higher average rating and a higher overall national ranking than West Virginia. In fact, Michigan was consistently in the top ten each year whereas WV only cracked the top twenty once. To me that fairly clearly shows that the team was loaded with talent when R-Rod took over AND that R-Rod was able to do a lot with much less talent. I only use Paul Johnson as a comparison because of the jump in talent going from Navy to GT is comparable to the jump in talent of R-Rod going from WV to Michigan. Granted, it’s a bigger jump from Navy to GT, but it’s a jump nonetheless. Navy maintained about an average rating of 2 and an overall national ranking of 109, whereas GT had an average rating of around 2.75 and an overall national ranking of 37. It’s not a one-for-one comparison because of the differences between systems, conferences, talent levels, etc, but I think there are enough similarities to use it as a point of reference.
Getting back to R-Rod and Michigan though, my main point is I thought that he would have been a little more successful than he has and I’m just wondering if that’s the same sentiment from those that are Michigan fans. It seems to me that even with players that were not recruited for his system that he still should have been able to tweak it to fit the players better and make for a smoother transition as he recruits the players he feels best fit his system. 3-9 (2-6 Big Ten) and 5-7 (1-7 Big Ten) would make me temper expectations until proven otherwise.
Thoughts?
Jesse, the explanation for what has happened with Michigan over the past two seasons is a very long one. It involves a number of factors, some of which are Rodriguez's fault and some of which are not:
1. There was not much talent on the offense when Rodriguez arrived and what talent did exist was not a fit for his system. Michigan's offensive line in 2008 was one of the least experienced offensive lines that the Big Ten has seen for the entire decade. After Ryan Mallett transferred (and he might have left even if Carr would have stayed; the team hated him with a passion), Rodriguez had no good options at quarterback. Paul Johnson would have been in trouble if his QB options were Nick Sheridan and Steven Threet. (Michigan was close to signing BJ Daniels, but the rumors were that Michigan had to stop recruiting him because people around him had their hands out.) This is the first season in which Rodriguez has been able to start a QB who had taken a college snap in a previous season.
2. There was talent on the defense when Rodriguez arrived, but he did a poor job of staffing the defense. The defensive coordinator in 2008 was a wash-out because he didn't mesh with the position coaches. The LB coach was a disaster. The DB coach is on the staff mainly for recruiting purposes. (Every staff needs a couple coaches like that.) Rodriguez has fixed these issues to some extent with Greg Robinson, although the jury is still out.
3. Recruiting was weak in certain areas in Carr's last few years. There is a difference between replacing a coach who was fired and had been trying in his last few years (Gailey) and a coach who was gradually phasing himself out for several years (there were rumors about Carr retiring as early as 2004 and he was supposedly close to pulling the trigger after 2006) and didn't have very good coaches under him (Carr). (Carr's offensive coordinator was an especially suspect entity.) The DB situation was a major disaster. In Carr's last several classes, he brought in few DBs and other than Donovan Warren, none of the DBs were blue chippers. Rodriguez brought in two blue chippers in his first full class - JT Turner and Vlad Emelien - and both have washed out. (Who knows if this was Rodriguez's fault.)
4. Rodriguez is culturally very different from Carr, which created some friction with the existing players. Some players bought in (Brandon Graham stands out) and many did not. Again, I don't know that this is anyone's fault. The cultural issues have also led to distractions off the field. The dominant school of thought is that there were Rodriguez opponents in the AD's office who guided Mike Rosenberg and Mark Snyder to the allegations that led to Practicegate. Rosenberg and Snyder aren't smart enough to come up with the story themselves, as evidenced by the fact that they had no idea as to the difference between a countable and non-countable hour. (Alternatively, they do know the difference and intentionally ignored it, which is journalistic malpractice [to use Jonathan Chait's term].)
In sum, Johnson had a better situation in that he didn't come in with unbalanced classes and he had a QB to run his system. Johnson has done a better job of getting the holdovers to buy in. Johnson has not had to face enemies in the AD's office and media who are determined to prevent him from succeeding. After last week, I think that Rodriguez is going to turn the corner, although the DB situation is still a nightmare. If RR gets to 2011, then he'll put a great team on the field, as this year's Michigan team starts only six seniors, several of whom are expected to be supplanted by freshmen as the season progresses. This season is all about getting over the hump.
Jesse, the explanation for what has happened with Michigan over the past two seasons is a very long one. It involves a number of factors, some of which are Rodriguez's fault and some of which are not:
1. There was not much talent on the offense when Rodriguez arrived and what talent did exist was not a fit for his system. Michigan's offensive line in 2008 was one of the least experienced offensive lines that the Big Ten has seen for the entire decade. After Ryan Mallett transferred (and he might have left even if Carr would have stayed; the team hated him with a passion), Rodriguez had no good options at quarterback. Paul Johnson would have been in trouble if his QB options were Nick Sheridan and Steven Threet. (Michigan was close to signing BJ Daniels, but the rumors were that Michigan had to stop recruiting him because people around him had their hands out.) This is the first season in which Rodriguez has been able to start a QB who had taken a college snap in a previous season.
2. There was talent on the defense when Rodriguez arrived, but he did a poor job of staffing the defense. The defensive coordinator in 2008 was a wash-out because he didn't mesh with the position coaches. The LB coach was a disaster. The DB coach is on the staff mainly for recruiting purposes. (Every staff needs a couple coaches like that.) Rodriguez has fixed these issues to some extent with Greg Robinson, although the jury is still out.
3. Recruiting was weak in certain areas in Carr's last few years. There is a difference between replacing a coach who was fired and had been trying in his last few years (Gailey) and a coach who was gradually phasing himself out for several years (there were rumors about Carr retiring as early as 2004 and he was supposedly close to pulling the trigger after 2006) and didn't have very good coaches under him (Carr). (Carr's offensive coordinator was an especially suspect entity.) The DB situation was a major disaster. In Carr's last several classes, he brought in few DBs and other than Donovan Warren, none of the DBs were blue chippers. Rodriguez brought in two blue chippers in his first full class - JT Turner and Vlad Emelien - and both have washed out. (Who knows if this was Rodriguez's fault.)
4. Rodriguez is culturally very different from Carr, which created some friction with the existing players. Some players bought in (Brandon Graham stands out) and many did not. Again, I don't know that this is anyone's fault. The cultural issues have also led to distractions off the field. The dominant school of thought is that there were Rodriguez opponents in the AD's office who guided Mike Rosenberg and Mark Snyder to the allegations that led to Practicegate. Rosenberg and Snyder aren't smart enough to come up with the story themselves, as evidenced by the fact that they had no idea as to the difference between a countable and non-countable hour. (Alternatively, they do know the difference and intentionally ignored it, which is journalistic malpractice [to use Jonathan Chait's term].)
In sum, Johnson had a better situation in that he didn't come in with unbalanced classes and he had a QB to run his system. Johnson has done a better job of getting the holdovers to buy in. Johnson has not had to face enemies in the AD's office and media who are determined to prevent him from succeeding. After last week, I think that Rodriguez is going to turn the corner, although the DB situation is still a nightmare. If RR gets to 2011, then he'll put a great team on the field, as this year's Michigan team starts only six seniors, several of whom are expected to be supplanted by freshmen as the season progresses. This season is all about getting over the hump.
Jesse, the explanation for what has happened with Michigan over the past two seasons is a very long one. It involves a number of factors, some of which are Rodriguez's fault and some of which are not:
1. There was not much talent on the offense when Rodriguez arrived and what talent did exist was not a fit for his system. Michigan's offensive line in 2008 was one of the least experienced offensive lines that the Big Ten has seen for the entire decade. After Ryan Mallett transferred (and he might have left even if Carr would have stayed; the team hated him with a passion), Rodriguez had no good options at quarterback. Paul Johnson would have been in trouble if his QB options were Nick Sheridan and Steven Threet. (Michigan was close to signing BJ Daniels, but the rumors were that Michigan had to stop recruiting him because people around him had their hands out.) This is the first season in which Rodriguez has been able to start a QB who had taken a college snap in a previous season.
2. There was talent on the defense when Rodriguez arrived, but he did a poor job of staffing the defense. The defensive coordinator in 2008 was a wash-out because he didn't mesh with the position coaches. The LB coach was a disaster. The DB coach is on the staff mainly for recruiting purposes. (Every staff needs a couple coaches like that.) Rodriguez has fixed these issues to some extent with Greg Robinson, although the jury is still out.
3. Recruiting was weak in certain areas in Carr's last few years. There is a difference between replacing a coach who was fired and had been trying in his last few years (Gailey) and a coach who was gradually phasing himself out for several years (there were rumors about Carr retiring as early as 2004 and he was supposedly close to pulling the trigger after 2006) and didn't have very good coaches under him (Carr). (Carr's offensive coordinator was an especially suspect entity.) The DB situation was a major disaster. In Carr's last several classes, he brought in few DBs and other than Donovan Warren, none of the DBs were blue chippers. Rodriguez brought in two blue chippers in his first full class - JT Turner and Vlad Emelien - and both have washed out. (Who knows if this was Rodriguez's fault.)
4. Rodriguez is culturally very different from Carr, which created some friction with the existing players. Some players bought in (Brandon Graham stands out) and many did not. Again, I don't know that this is anyone's fault. The cultural issues have also led to distractions off the field. The dominant school of thought is that there were Rodriguez opponents in the AD's office who guided Mike Rosenberg and Mark Snyder to the allegations that led to Practicegate. Rosenberg and Snyder aren't smart enough to come up with the story themselves, as evidenced by the fact that they had no idea as to the difference between a countable and non-countable hour. (Alternatively, they do know the difference and intentionally ignored it, which is journalistic malpractice [to use Jonathan Chait's term].)
In sum, Johnson had a better situation in that he didn't come in with unbalanced classes and he had a QB to run his system. Johnson has done a better job of getting the holdovers to buy in. Johnson has not had to face enemies in the AD's office and media who are determined to prevent him from succeeding. After last week, I think that Rodriguez is going to turn the corner, although the DB situation is still a nightmare. If RR gets to 2011, then he'll put a great team on the field, as this year's Michigan team starts only six seniors, several of whom are expected to be supplanted by freshmen as the season progresses. This season is all about getting over the hump.
Yep, the situation are definitely different. I brought up Paul Johnson and GT because we have had the R-Rod/CPJ discussion in the past regarding systems and putting them in place. All of what you have stated (three times, haha) makes sense to me and that's exactly what I was looking for, something to correlate what I found in the recruiting to what we are seeing on the field the last two years. My thoughts were along the lines of is there a way to predict a successful coach's move from Team A to Team B? Currently, I don't think there is and especially not so with R-Rod and Michigan because of the circumstances you mentioned.
Post a Comment