The CardBoard
Outside Topic Michigan's Run Game - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Outside Topic Michigan's Run Game (/thread-23584.html)


Michigan's Run Game - Maple Leaf - 10-19-2022

The Athletic has an article on the Michigan Football Run Game and Harbaugh.

Some points:



Jim Harbaugh finally has the Michigan rushing attack he’s always wanted - The Athletic

RE: Michigan's Run Game - Brickcity - 10-19-2022

(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  The Athletic has an article on the Michigan Football Run Game and Harbaugh.

Some points:
  • Reason for success at Stanford was Toby, Marecic and bunch of Tight Ends who loved to block and some of the smartest Offense Linemen in College football.
  • Michigan run game has evolved from the Stanford approach but has evolved from that approach, to more like the approach he had with the 49ers and Ravins.
  • Recruits Oline men who are athletic, explosive and lanky and will grow into their frame.
  • Recruits H backs in lieu of traditional fullbacks for more athleticism.
  • Big reliance on Tight Ends.
  • Lots of formations both tight and spread.
  • Went through 3 oline coaches before he found the right one.
  • QB who can run.



Jim Harbaugh finally has the Michigan rushing attack he’s always wanted - The Athletic

Yeah, I won't lie: I'm friggin' jealous!

RE: Michigan's Run Game - Mick - 10-19-2022

Just idly wondering if David Shaw and Tavita Pritchard think the same way.

RE: Michigan's Run Game - gailtate - 10-19-2022

(10-19-2022, 06:33 AM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  The Athletic has an article on the Michigan Football Run Game and Harbaugh.

Some points:
  • Reason for success at Stanford was Toby, Marecic and bunch of Tight Ends who loved to block and some of the smartest Offense Linemen in College football.
  • Michigan run game has evolved from the Stanford approach but has evolved from that approach, to more like the approach he had with the 49ers and Ravins.
  • Recruits Oline men who are athletic, explosive and lanky and will grow into their frame.
  • Recruits H backs in lieu of traditional fullbacks for more athleticism.
  • Big reliance on Tight Ends.
  • Lots of formations both tight and spread.
  • Went through 3 oline coaches before he found the right one.
  • QB who can run.



Jim Harbaugh finally has the Michigan rushing attack he’s always wanted - The Athletic

Yeah, I won't lie: I'm friggin' jealous!

So are A LOT of us.
(10-19-2022, 07:39 AM)Mick Wrote:  Just idly wondering if David Shaw and Tavita Pritchard think the same way.

Would not make a whit of difference if he (they) did. Shaw isn't Harbaugh. Never was, never will be.

RE: Michigan's Run Game - Brickcity - 10-19-2022

(10-19-2022, 08:00 AM)gailtate Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:33 AM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  The Athletic has an article on the Michigan Football Run Game and Harbaugh.

Some points:
  • Reason for success at Stanford was Toby, Marecic and bunch of Tight Ends who loved to block and some of the smartest Offense Linemen in College football.
  • Michigan run game has evolved from the Stanford approach but has evolved from that approach, to more like the approach he had with the 49ers and Ravins.
  • Recruits Oline men who are athletic, explosive and lanky and will grow into their frame.
  • Recruits H backs in lieu of traditional fullbacks for more athleticism.
  • Big reliance on Tight Ends.
  • Lots of formations both tight and spread.
  • Went through 3 oline coaches before he found the right one.
  • QB who can run.



Jim Harbaugh finally has the Michigan rushing attack he’s always wanted - The Athletic

Yeah, I won't lie: I'm friggin' jealous!

So are A LOT of us.
(10-19-2022, 07:39 AM)Mick Wrote:  Just idly wondering if David Shaw and Tavita Pritchard think the same way.

Would not make a whit of difference if he (they) did. Shaw isn't Harbaugh. Never was, never will be.

I don't remember if it was on this board or another, but a Stanford poster paraphrased the post of a frustrated Notre Dame fan on Sunday who had written something to this effect: "Shaw is 50% more smug than Harbaugh but has 10% of his talent...I hate losing to the trees." Of course, Notre Dame losing to Stanford doesn't happen very often these days due to said coaching at Stanford.

RE: Michigan's Run Game - SamuelMcF - 10-19-2022

(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  [*]Recruits Oline men who are athletic, explosive and lanky and will grow into their frame.
Michigan's starting OL: 4* recruit, 4* recruit, 6th year grad transfer starter from UVA, 4* recruit, 4* recruit.

(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  [*]Recruits H backs in lieu of traditional fullbacks for more athleticism.
Michigan's 4 TEs playing in every game, sometimes at H-back: 4* recruit, high 3* recruit, 4* recruit, 4* recruit. They don't recruit fullbacks at all.

(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  [*]Big reliance on Tight Ends.
See above.

(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  [*]Lots of formations both tight and spread.
5 of the 6 WRs in their 2-deep were 4* recruits, and both featured RBs (one just got hurt though) were 4* recruits.

(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  [*]QB who can run.
Who was a 5* recruit.



Gee, really makes you think, huh?

RE: Michigan's Run Game - Goose - 10-19-2022

https://gbmwolverine.com/2022/02/16/speed-space-isnt-michigan-football-needed/

If this is indeed the offense Harbaugh wanted, he certainly fell off the wagon during his first 6 or so years at Michigan. In point of fact he had clearly and publicly decided he needed a new, much higher powered offensive approach to compete with tOSU. His attempts were not successful. Last year, he was forced to rely on a more conservative offense and a stellar defense. It wasn't a choice. Those were the players he had and his OC had left. Harbaugh is now in a very good position to test his original hypothesis. He has a very good defense, maybe not quite as good as last year, but still very good. He has a potentially better QB playing who has a much higher upside. He has a very good OL that can be dominant. It may not be an "ideal" team to test the idea that defense and smash-mouth football is the way forward for Michigan, but it is arguably close.

On 26 November we will find out if his "retro" approach works. If it does, he will almost certainly play in the championship series again against some teams that don't look as good as they did last year. He will have as good a chance as anybody. If it doesn't, JH will merely rack up another loss to tOSU.

RE: Michigan's Run Game - lex24 - 10-20-2022

(10-19-2022, 08:32 PM)Goose Wrote:  https://gbmwolverine.com/2022/02/16/speed-space-isnt-michigan-football-needed/

If this is indeed the offense Harbaugh wanted, he certainly fell off the wagon during his first 6 or so years at Michigan. In point of fact he had clearly and publicly decided he needed a new, much higher powered offensive approach to compete with tOSU. His attempts were not successful. Last year, he was forced to rely on a more conservative offense and a stellar defense. It wasn't a choice. Those were the players he had and his OC had left. Harbaugh is now in a very good position to test his original hypothesis. He has a very good defense, maybe not quite as good as last year, but still very good. He has a potentially better QB playing who has a much higher upside. He has a very good OL that can be dominant. It may not be an "ideal" team to test the idea that defense and smash-mouth football is the way forward for Michigan, but it is arguably close.

On 26 November we will find out if his "retro" approach works. If it does, he will almost certainly play in the championship series again against some teams that don't look as good as they did last year. He will have as good a chance as anybody. If it doesn't, JH will merely rack up another loss to tOSU.

Harbaughs “mistake” was moving away from what he knows and coaches best - tough, physical, smash mouth football.  You can(and he is) still be “creative”.  But it starts with dominating on both sides of the ball up front.  Best way to do that is with a pound away offense.  It makes your defense more physical practicing against it.  Complimentary football at its best. Recruit to it.  Preach it and stick with it.
(10-19-2022, 06:25 PM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 08:00 AM)gailtate Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:33 AM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  The Athletic has an article on the Michigan Football Run Game and Harbaugh.

Some points:
  • Reason for success at Stanford was Toby, Marecic and bunch of Tight Ends who loved to block and some of the smartest Offense Linemen in College football.
  • Michigan run game has evolved from the Stanford approach but has evolved from that approach, to more like the approach he had with the 49ers and Ravins.
  • Recruits Oline men who are athletic, explosive and lanky and will grow into their frame.
  • Recruits H backs in lieu of traditional fullbacks for more athleticism.
  • Big reliance on Tight Ends.
  • Lots of formations both tight and spread.
  • Went through 3 oline coaches before he found the right one.
  • QB who can run.



Jim Harbaugh finally has the Michigan rushing attack he’s always wanted - The Athletic

Yeah, I won't lie: I'm friggin' jealous!

So are A LOT of us.
(10-19-2022, 07:39 AM)Mick Wrote:  Just idly wondering if David Shaw and Tavita Pritchard think the same way.

Would not make a whit of difference if he (they) did. Shaw isn't Harbaugh. Never was, never will be.

I don't remember if it was on this board or another, but a Stanford poster paraphrased the post of a frustrated Notre Dame fan on Sunday who had written something to this effect: "Shaw is 50% more smug than Harbaugh but has 10% of his talent...I hate losing to the trees." Of course, Notre Dame losing to Stanford doesn't happen very often these days due to said coaching at Stanford.

“Smug.” From an ND fan. AYFKM.  Hard to be more “smug” than ND.  I won’t say what I truly think of the fans comment.
(10-19-2022, 08:00 AM)gailtate Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:33 AM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  The Athletic has an article on the Michigan Football Run Game and Harbaugh.

Some points:
  • Reason for success at Stanford was Toby, Marecic and bunch of Tight Ends who loved to block and some of the smartest Offense Linemen in College football.
  • Michigan run game has evolved from the Stanford approach but has evolved from that approach, to more like the approach he had with the 49ers and Ravins.
  • Recruits Oline men who are athletic, explosive and lanky and will grow into their frame.
  • Recruits H backs in lieu of traditional fullbacks for more athleticism.
  • Big reliance on Tight Ends.
  • Lots of formations both tight and spread.
  • Went through 3 oline coaches before he found the right one.
  • QB who can run.



Jim Harbaugh finally has the Michigan rushing attack he’s always wanted - The Athletic

Yeah, I won't lie: I'm friggin' jealous!

So are A LOT of us.
(10-19-2022, 07:39 AM)Mick Wrote:  Just idly wondering if David Shaw and Tavita Pritchard think the same way.

Would not make a whit of difference if he (they) did. Shaw isn't Harbaugh. Never was, never will be.

Except it is exactly what Stanford did under Shaw from ‘11 to ‘16. His biggest failure, imo, was not being able to keep recruiting (and developing) the type of players needed to continue playing smash mouth complimentary football.   I know some folks hated it. I loved it.  And I STILL think it’s how someone wins at Stanford.

RE: Michigan's Run Game - BigJohn043 - 10-20-2022

(10-19-2022, 08:32 PM)Goose Wrote:  https://gbmwolverine.com/2022/02/16/speed-space-isnt-michigan-football-needed/

If this is indeed the offense Harbaugh wanted, he certainly fell off the wagon during his first 6 or so years at Michigan. In point of fact he had clearly and publicly decided he needed a new, much higher powered offensive approach to compete with tOSU. His attempts were not successful. Last year, he was forced to rely on a more conservative offense and a stellar defense. It wasn't a choice. Those were the players he had and his OC had left. Harbaugh is now in a very good position to test his original hypothesis. He has a very good defense, maybe not quite as good as last year, but still very good. He has a potentially better QB playing who has a much higher upside. He has a very good OL that can be dominant. It may not be an "ideal" team to test the idea that defense and smash-mouth football is the way forward for Michigan, but it is arguably close.

On 26 November we will find out if his "retro" approach works. If it does, he will almost certainly play in the championship series again against some teams that don't look as good as they did last year. He will have as good a chance as anybody. If it doesn't, JH will merely rack up another loss to tOSU.

I think it is certainly possible that after 6 years of the new offense not working he went back to what had always worked for him.  Maybe that was driven the players and team he had but I also think it speaks to who JH is....

RE: Michigan's Run Game - Goose - 10-20-2022

(10-20-2022, 03:53 AM)lex24 Wrote:  Harbaughs “mistake” was moving away from what he knows and coaches best - tough, physical, smash mouth football.  You can(and he is) still be “creative”.  But it starts with dominating on both sides of the ball up front.  Best way to do that is with a pound away offense.  It makes your defense more physical practicing against it.  Complimentary football at its best. Recruit to it.  Preach it and stick with it.
(10-20-2022, 06:40 AM)BigJohn043 Wrote:  I think it is certainly possible that after 6 years of the new offense not working he went back to what had always worked for him.  Maybe that was driven the players and team he had but I also think it speaks to who JH is....
It all comes down to 1) whether Michigan can beat tOSU reliably with a team constructed to play "smash mouth" football, and 2) if so, can JH reliably create such a team at Michigan. I believe that JH is a "realist". He does what it takes to win and while he personally probably prefers the type of football he himself played at Michigan, he will do something else if he has to. He thought he had to, so he attempted it. It didn't work and circumstances compelled him to revert to his previous approach. Last year, he won with it. He has personnel this year that look like they at least have a shot with it. We shall see in late November.

For Lex24's consideration, in the first few years at Michigan JH did indeed attempt to play the "traditional" style. It didn't work for him. He couldn't reliably get the athletes. His decision to change styles was compelled by his inability to beat tOSU. The "speed in space" attempt was even less successful. To be fair, lots of the problems were on defense, not offense. Michigan just couldn't contain tOSU and JH decided he had to "win the track meet". Last year, events conspired to deliver a great defense and a great OL to Michigan. It is unknown if JH can reliably replicate that combination. If he wins against tOSU this year, that will become his challenge. Past history says he can't. He couldn't when he first got to Michigan. However, as they say, past history may not indicate future performance. In this case, that would be a good thing :-).

RE: Michigan's Run Game - gailtate - 10-20-2022

(10-20-2022, 03:53 AM)lex24 Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 08:32 PM)Goose Wrote:  https://gbmwolverine.com/2022/02/16/speed-space-isnt-michigan-football-needed/

If this is indeed the offense Harbaugh wanted, he certainly fell off the wagon during his first 6 or so years at Michigan. In point of fact he had clearly and publicly decided he needed a new, much higher powered offensive approach to compete with tOSU. His attempts were not successful. Last year, he was forced to rely on a more conservative offense and a stellar defense. It wasn't a choice. Those were the players he had and his OC had left. Harbaugh is now in a very good position to test his original hypothesis. He has a very good defense, maybe not quite as good as last year, but still very good. He has a potentially better QB playing who has a much higher upside. He has a very good OL that can be dominant. It may not be an "ideal" team to test the idea that defense and smash-mouth football is the way forward for Michigan, but it is arguably close.

On 26 November we will find out if his "retro" approach works. If it does, he will almost certainly play in the championship series again against some teams that don't look as good as they did last year. He will have as good a chance as anybody. If it doesn't, JH will merely rack up another loss to tOSU.

Harbaughs “mistake” was moving away from what he knows and coaches best - tough, physical, smash mouth football.  You can(and he is) still be “creative”.  But it starts with dominating on both sides of the ball up front.  Best way to do that is with a pound away offense.  It makes your defense more physical practicing against it.  Complimentary football at its best. Recruit to it.  Preach it and stick with it.
(10-19-2022, 06:25 PM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 08:00 AM)gailtate Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:33 AM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  The Athletic has an article on the Michigan Football Run Game and Harbaugh.

Some points:
  • Reason for success at Stanford was Toby, Marecic and bunch of Tight Ends who loved to block and some of the smartest Offense Linemen in College football.
  • Michigan run game has evolved from the Stanford approach but has evolved from that approach, to more like the approach he had with the 49ers and Ravins.
  • Recruits Oline men who are athletic, explosive and lanky and will grow into their frame.
  • Recruits H backs in lieu of traditional fullbacks for more athleticism.
  • Big reliance on Tight Ends.
  • Lots of formations both tight and spread.
  • Went through 3 oline coaches before he found the right one.
  • QB who can run.



Jim Harbaugh finally has the Michigan rushing attack he’s always wanted - The Athletic

Yeah, I won't lie: I'm friggin' jealous!

So are A LOT of us.
(10-19-2022, 07:39 AM)Mick Wrote:  Just idly wondering if David Shaw and Tavita Pritchard think the same way.

Would not make a whit of difference if he (they) did. Shaw isn't Harbaugh. Never was, never will be.

I don't remember if it was on this board or another, but a Stanford poster paraphrased the post of a frustrated Notre Dame fan on Sunday who had written something to this effect: "Shaw is 50% more smug than Harbaugh but has 10% of his talent...I hate losing to the trees." Of course, Notre Dame losing to Stanford doesn't happen very often these days due to said coaching at Stanford.

“Smug.” From an ND fan. AYFKM.  Hard to be more “smug” than ND.  I won’t say what I truly think of the fans comment.
(10-19-2022, 08:00 AM)gailtate Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:33 AM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  The Athletic has an article on the Michigan Football Run Game and Harbaugh.

Some points:
  • Reason for success at Stanford was Toby, Marecic and bunch of Tight Ends who loved to block and some of the smartest Offense Linemen in College football.
  • Michigan run game has evolved from the Stanford approach but has evolved from that approach, to more like the approach he had with the 49ers and Ravins.
  • Recruits Oline men who are athletic, explosive and lanky and will grow into their frame.
  • Recruits H backs in lieu of traditional fullbacks for more athleticism.
  • Big reliance on Tight Ends.
  • Lots of formations both tight and spread.
  • Went through 3 oline coaches before he found the right one.
  • QB who can run.



Jim Harbaugh finally has the Michigan rushing attack he’s always wanted - The Athletic

Yeah, I won't lie: I'm friggin' jealous!

So are A LOT of us.
(10-19-2022, 07:39 AM)Mick Wrote:  Just idly wondering if David Shaw and Tavita Pritchard think the same way.

Would not make a whit of difference if he (they) did. Shaw isn't Harbaugh. Never was, never will be.

Except it is exactly what Stanford did under Shaw from ‘11 to ‘16. His biggest failure, imo, was not being able to keep recruiting (and developing) the type of players needed to continue playing smash mouth complimentary football.   I know some folks hated it. I loved it.  And I STILL think it’s how someone wins at Stanford.

I was not clear here. I am in violent agreement with you about smash-mouth being a natural identity for Stanford. My reference to Shaw as a lesser coach than Harbaugh is based on his failure to replenish and adapt over time (recruiting, etc.): exactly what Harbaugh instinctively accomplished and what Shaw failed to achieve. It's  the difference between a great coach and a lesser one. Case in point: Harbaugh's career vs. Shaw's. "You are your record".

RE: Michigan's Run Game - BigJohn043 - 10-20-2022

(10-20-2022, 07:10 AM)Goose Wrote:  
(10-20-2022, 03:53 AM)lex24 Wrote:  Harbaughs “mistake” was moving away from what he knows and coaches best - tough, physical, smash mouth football.  You can(and he is) still be “creative”.  But it starts with dominating on both sides of the ball up front.  Best way to do that is with a pound away offense.  It makes your defense more physical practicing against it.  Complimentary football at its best. Recruit to it.  Preach it and stick with it.
(10-20-2022, 06:40 AM)BigJohn043 Wrote:  I think it is certainly possible that after 6 years of the new offense not working he went back to what had always worked for him.  Maybe that was driven the players and team he had but I also think it speaks to who JH is....
It all comes down to 1) whether Michigan can beat tOSU reliably with a team constructed to play "smash mouth" football, and 2) if so, can JH reliably create such a team at Michigan. I believe that JH is a "realist". He does what it takes to win and while he personally probably prefers the type of football he himself played at Michigan, he will do something else if he has to. He thought he had to, so he attempted it. It didn't work and circumstances compelled him to revert to his previous approach. Last year, he won with it. He has personnel this year that look like they at least have a shot with it. We shall see in late November.

For Lex24's consideration, in the first few years at Michigan JH did indeed attempt to play the "traditional" style. It didn't work for him. He couldn't reliably get the athletes. His decision to change styles was compelled by his inability to beat tOSU. The "speed in space" attempt was even less successful. To be fair, lots of the problems were on defense, not offense. Michigan just couldn't contain tOSU and JH decided he had to "win the track meet". Last year, events conspired to deliver a great defense and a great OL to Michigan. It is unknown if JH can reliably replicate that combination. If he wins against tOSU this year, that will become his challenge. Past history says he can't. He couldn't when he first got to Michigan. However, as they say, past history may not indicate future performance. In this case, that would be a good thing :-).

I am not sure that any strategy at Michigan is going to consistently beat OSU.  It does look like the smashmouth strategy at least is beating everyone else and giving them a chance to be competitive with OSU.  I think JH sticks with it no matter what happens against OSU.....

RE: Michigan's Run Game - Goose - 10-20-2022

(10-20-2022, 09:54 AM)BigJohn043 Wrote:  I am not sure that any strategy at Michigan is going to consistently beat OSU.  It does look like the smashmouth strategy at least is beating everyone else and giving them a chance to be competitive with OSU.  I think JH sticks with it no matter what happens against OSU.....
Indeed winning the Big 10 every year is a big ask. Should he lose to tOSU this year, I agree that JH will probably not change his approach. However, I am pretty sure he really doesn't want another string of 5 straight losses to them. I think it will depend a lot on how sustainable the power football approach turns out to be. If he can continue to have a great defense and OL, he will stick with it, at least for a while. In his early years at Michigan, he was a "good but not great" program. He would lose a few games to teams other than tOSU and then lose to tOSU. If he ends up back there, I think he will indeed change his approach, because Michigan's expectations are higher than that.

RE: Michigan's Run Game - BostonCard - 10-20-2022

Of course, we’d be delighted to be a “good but not great” program in the PAC-12.

BC

RE: Michigan's Run Game - Goose - 10-20-2022

(10-20-2022, 12:22 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Of course, we’d be delighted to be a “good but not great” program in the PAC-12.

BC
Right now, you are correct. Stanford fans don't have a built-in assumption that we should be in the hunt for a Rose Bowl each and every year, unlike Michigan fans that do. However, if we reached the "good but not great" level I am pretty sure that many on this board would quickly adapt to the idea that was not sufficient :-).

RE: Michigan's Run Game - lex24 - 10-20-2022

(10-20-2022, 07:55 AM)gailtate Wrote:  
(10-20-2022, 03:53 AM)lex24 Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 08:32 PM)Goose Wrote:  https://gbmwolverine.com/2022/02/16/speed-space-isnt-michigan-football-needed/

If this is indeed the offense Harbaugh wanted, he certainly fell off the wagon during his first 6 or so years at Michigan. In point of fact he had clearly and publicly decided he needed a new, much higher powered offensive approach to compete with tOSU. His attempts were not successful. Last year, he was forced to rely on a more conservative offense and a stellar defense. It wasn't a choice. Those were the players he had and his OC had left. Harbaugh is now in a very good position to test his original hypothesis. He has a very good defense, maybe not quite as good as last year, but still very good. He has a potentially better QB playing who has a much higher upside. He has a very good OL that can be dominant. It may not be an "ideal" team to test the idea that defense and smash-mouth football is the way forward for Michigan, but it is arguably close.

On 26 November we will find out if his "retro" approach works. If it does, he will almost certainly play in the championship series again against some teams that don't look as good as they did last year. He will have as good a chance as anybody. If it doesn't, JH will merely rack up another loss to tOSU.

Harbaughs “mistake” was moving away from what he knows and coaches best - tough, physical, smash mouth football.  You can(and he is) still be “creative”.  But it starts with dominating on both sides of the ball up front.  Best way to do that is with a pound away offense.  It makes your defense more physical practicing against it.  Complimentary football at its best. Recruit to it.  Preach it and stick with it.
(10-19-2022, 06:25 PM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 08:00 AM)gailtate Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:33 AM)Brickcity Wrote:  Yeah, I won't lie: I'm friggin' jealous!

So are A LOT of us.
(10-19-2022, 07:39 AM)Mick Wrote:  Just idly wondering if David Shaw and Tavita Pritchard think the same way.

Would not make a whit of difference if he (they) did. Shaw isn't Harbaugh. Never was, never will be.

I don't remember if it was on this board or another, but a Stanford poster paraphrased the post of a frustrated Notre Dame fan on Sunday who had written something to this effect: "Shaw is 50% more smug than Harbaugh but has 10% of his talent...I hate losing to the trees." Of course, Notre Dame losing to Stanford doesn't happen very often these days due to said coaching at Stanford.

“Smug.” From an ND fan. AYFKM.  Hard to be more “smug” than ND.  I won’t say what I truly think of the fans comment.
(10-19-2022, 08:00 AM)gailtate Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:33 AM)Brickcity Wrote:  
(10-19-2022, 06:25 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  The Athletic has an article on the Michigan Football Run Game and Harbaugh.

Some points:
  • Reason for success at Stanford was Toby, Marecic and bunch of Tight Ends who loved to block and some of the smartest Offense Linemen in College football.
  • Michigan run game has evolved from the Stanford approach but has evolved from that approach, to more like the approach he had with the 49ers and Ravins.
  • Recruits Oline men who are athletic, explosive and lanky and will grow into their frame.
  • Recruits H backs in lieu of traditional fullbacks for more athleticism.
  • Big reliance on Tight Ends.
  • Lots of formations both tight and spread.
  • Went through 3 oline coaches before he found the right one.
  • QB who can run.



Jim Harbaugh finally has the Michigan rushing attack he’s always wanted - The Athletic

Yeah, I won't lie: I'm friggin' jealous!

So are A LOT of us.
(10-19-2022, 07:39 AM)Mick Wrote:  Just idly wondering if David Shaw and Tavita Pritchard think the same way.

Would not make a whit of difference if he (they) did. Shaw isn't Harbaugh. Never was, never will be.

Except it is exactly what Stanford did under Shaw from ‘11 to ‘16. His biggest failure, imo, was not being able to keep recruiting (and developing) the type of players needed to continue playing smash mouth complimentary football.   I know some folks hated it. I loved it.  And I STILL think it’s how someone wins at Stanford.

I was not clear here. I am in violent agreement with you about smash-mouth being a natural identity for Stanford. My reference to Shaw as a lesser coach than Harbaugh is based on his failure to replenish and adapt over time (recruiting, etc.): exactly what Harbaugh instinctively accomplished and what Shaw failed to achieve. It's  the difference between a great coach and a lesser one. Case in point: Harbaugh's career vs. Shaw's. "You are your record".

Agree.

RE: Michigan's Run Game - BostonCard - 10-20-2022

(10-20-2022, 12:29 PM)Goose Wrote:  
(10-20-2022, 12:22 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Of course, we’d be delighted to be a “good but not great” program in the PAC-12.

BC
Right now, you are correct. Stanford fans don't have a built-in assumption that we should be in the hunt for a Rose Bowl each and every year, unlike Michigan fans that do. However, if we reached the "good but not great" level I am pretty sure that many on this board would quickly adapt to the idea that was not sufficient :-).

For sure, in 2015, more attention was paid to the Northwestern loss than to the Rose Bowl win.

BC

RE: Michigan's Run Game - CompSci87 - 10-20-2022

(10-20-2022, 12:29 PM)Goose Wrote:  
(10-20-2022, 12:22 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Of course, we’d be delighted to be a “good but not great” program in the PAC-12.

BC
Right now, you are correct. Stanford fans don't have a built-in assumption that we should be in the hunt for a Rose Bowl each and every year, unlike Michigan fans that do. However, if we reached the "good but not great" level I am pretty sure that many on this board would quickly adapt to the idea that was not sufficient :-).

That's already been demonstrated. I can think of a few fans for whom it wasn't sufficient even when the team was regularly winning bowl games. The running offense was boring, etc.

RE: Michigan's Run Game - lex24 - 10-23-2022

(10-20-2022, 07:10 AM)Goose Wrote:  
(10-20-2022, 03:53 AM)lex24 Wrote:  Harbaughs “mistake” was moving away from what he knows and coaches best - tough, physical, smash mouth football.  You can(and he is) still be “creative”.  But it starts with dominating on both sides of the ball up front.  Best way to do that is with a pound away offense.  It makes your defense more physical practicing against it.  Complimentary football at its best. Recruit to it.  Preach it and stick with it.
(10-20-2022, 06:40 AM)BigJohn043 Wrote:  I think it is certainly possible that after 6 years of the new offense not working he went back to what had always worked for him.  Maybe that was driven the players and team he had but I also think it speaks to who JH is....
It all comes down to 1) whether Michigan can beat tOSU reliably with a team constructed to play "smash mouth" football, and 2) if so, can JH reliably create such a team at Michigan. I believe that JH is a "realist". He does what it takes to win and while he personally probably prefers the type of football he himself played at Michigan, he will do something else if he has to. He thought he had to, so he attempted it. It didn't work and circumstances compelled him to revert to his previous approach. Last year, he won with it. He has personnel this year that look like they at least have a shot with it. We shall see in late November.

For Lex24's consideration, in the first few years at Michigan JH did indeed attempt to play the "traditional" style. It didn't work for him. He couldn't reliably get the athletes. His decision to change styles was compelled by his inability to beat tOSU. The "speed in space" attempt was even less successful. To be fair, lots of the problems were on defense, not offense. Michigan just couldn't contain tOSU and JH decided he had to "win the track meet". Last year, events conspired to deliver a great defense and a great OL to Michigan. It is unknown if JH can reliably replicate that combination. If he wins against tOSU this year, that will become his challenge. Past history says he can't. He couldn't when he first got to Michigan. However, as they say, past history may not indicate future performance. In this case, that would be a good thing :-).

When you move away from your strength, it’s generally not going to lead to a good result.  JH thrives on tough physical football.  He is now back to playing his strength.  And there’s no reason he can’t beat Ohio State playing that way. If you want some proof  go back to 2012 and 2013 Stanford versus Oregon. Particularly the 2013 game which is one of the most beautifully executed offensive game plans I’ve ever seen. 

Harbaugh is not going to beat Ohio State by trying to play their style of football. They are much better at it.

RE: Michigan's Run Game - Goose - 10-23-2022

(10-23-2022, 12:15 PM)lex24 Wrote:  When you move away from your strength, it’s generally not going to lead to a good result.  JH thrives on tough physical football.  He is now back to playing his strength.
I basically agree with you, but I would add to physical football 1) having a very good defense that can get stops against a dynamic offense, and 2) having enough quick strike capability to handle getting behind and to keep the defense honest. This is the "going over the top" Shaw used to frequently reference (and which we no longer can do). It also helps greatly if your opponent doesn't have a defense that can match up with your OL.
Quote:And there’s no reason he can’t beat Ohio State playing that way. If you want some proof  go back to 2012 and 2013 Stanford versus Oregon. Particularly the 2013 game which is one of the most beautifully executed offensive game plans I’ve ever seen.
I don't think that is a good comparison. Oregon did not have the athletes Ohio State has. They were never in that class. While they did have some exceptional athletes, they had plenty of starters who were "good, not great". Oregon also did not have a defense that could stand up to Stanford's offensive line  all game long. What killed Ohio State last year against Michigan was that their OL couldn't defeat Michigan's DL and it got worse as they got tired. It also didn't help that tOSU got frustrated and simply refused to take what Michigan was giving them. This frequently happens to teams that have not been challenged all year when they run into a peer competitor. They simply refuse to believe that certain plays just aren't going to work that day.
Quote:Harbaugh is not going to beat Ohio State by trying to play their style of football. They are much better at it.
Probably correct. They are much better at it. The question is whether Harbaugh can repeatably put together a defense that is good enough to hold tOSU down and whether Harbaugh can repeatedly put together a team that can play "smash mouth" football and still be able to come back if they fall behind. We don't know about either one this year, but it looks like Michigan's defense is up to the task, at least so far. Year over year, we shall see.