Debord-Everything VN Wanted

#1
Vol8188

Vol8188

revolUTion in the air!
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Messages
43,066
Likes
38,417
#1
Michigan 2006

Rushing Offense: 18th in the nation

Play Distribution: 38% (25.2 per game) pass to 62% (41.2 per game) run

Turnovers: 2nd fewest in the nation at .9 per game

2007 wasn't as great due to injuries to Chad Henne (Ryan Mallet played as a true freshman in his place) and RB Michael Hart. At one point their starting RB was a sophomore, their qb and a freshmen, and they had two starters on the offensive line who were freshmen.

Michigan 2007

Rushing Offense: 53rd

Play Distribution: 44% (32.5 per game) pass 56% (41.5) rush

Turnovers: 78th






College Football Stats - College FB Team Yards per Game on TeamRankings.com

2006 Michigan Wolverines Stats | College Football at Sports-Reference.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2
#2
Why is Debord what VN wanted?

1. Pro style coordinator

2. Runs the football!

3. Low turnover margin!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9
#9
Didn't everyone want an I formation coordinator?

Considering only two teams in the SEC us I formation as a base (Arkansas and Georgia), there's not many of those around anymore.

So CBJ had to find a guy who had been out of coaching for a number of years, because that's all the options he had available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10
#10
With this team, why on earth do I want a pro style coordinator?

Are we planning to start Dormandy this fall?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
volfanbill said:
With this team, why on earth do I want a pro style coordinator?

Are we planning to start Dormandy this fall?
Click to expand...

To a point I was being sarcastic due to VNs love affair with the words "pro style" and "power I", even though none of them truly understand what they are talking about when they say "power I".

But I do think he can bring some good things to the table in terms of establishing a power running game and increasing our formational diversity and number of shifts and motions (two things very common with pro style teams).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#12
#12
Vol8188 said:
To a point I was being sarcastic due to VNs love affair with the words "pro style" and "power I", even though none of them truly understand what they are talking about when they say "power I".
Click to expand...

There's a difference in using this team's strengths versus completely changing back to a pro style offense. Granted, I ignore 90% of the main board threads, but what I do see are posters wanting to utilize the strengths of the offense to help mask weaknesses. I've not seen many really thinking we should transition completely back to a pro style. For one ( and here comes an onslaught against me, not you), Dobbs still can't make the throws to be in an I.

We can successfully utilize ideas from the power I, however, into our offensive scheme to help create room for Hurd (and Kamara next year) or to get receivers open in space better. But Butch has been relunctant to vary off his limited playbook. Hopefully, now that depth and experience issues are going away, we will see some different looks and plays in addition to what we've seen the past couple of years. I am in the camp that this is a set playbook that won't change whether Debord is solo in OC duties or co-OC with Z. What worries me is Debord's ability to call plays.
 
#13
#13
What a bunch of useless posts. We will not run a pro style offense. We will continue to run the spread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#14
#14
volfanbill said:
There's a difference in using this team's strengths versus completely changing back to a pro style offense. Granted, I ignore 90% of the main board threads, but what I do see are posters wanting to utilize the strengths of the offense to help mask weaknesses. I've not seen many really thinking we should transition completely back to a pro style. For one ( and here comes an onslaught against me, not you), Dobbs still can't make the throws to be in an I.

We can successfully utilize ideas from the power I, however, into our offensive scheme to help create room for Hurd (and Kamara next year) or to get receivers open in space better. But Butch has been relunctant to vary off his limited playbook. Hopefully, now that depth and experience issues are going away, we will see some different looks and plays in addition to what we've seen the past couple of years. I am in the camp that this is a set playbook that won't change whether Debord is solo in OC duties or co-OC with Z. What worries me is Debord's ability to call plays.
Click to expand...

This+111111
 
#15
#15
volfanbill said:
There's a difference in using this team's strengths versus completely changing back to a pro style offense. Granted, I ignore 90% of the main board threads, but what I do see are posters wanting to utilize the strengths of the offense to help mask weaknesses. I've not seen many really thinking we should transition completely back to a pro style. For one ( and here comes an onslaught against me, not you), Dobbs still can't make the throws to be in an I.

We can successfully utilize ideas from the power I, however, into our offensive scheme to help create room for Hurd (and Kamara next year) or to get receivers open in space better. But Butch has been relunctant to vary off his limited playbook. Hopefully, now that depth and experience issues are going away, we will see some different looks and plays in addition to what we've seen the past couple of years. I am in the camp that this is a set playbook that won't change whether Debord is solo in OC duties or co-OC with Z. What worries me is Debord's ability to call plays.
Click to expand...

Why do worry about his play calling
 
#16
#16
Vol8188 said:
Why do worry about his play calling
Click to expand...

you can show me one year where he was in a loaded program. You can look at his overall history and start to worry. You can look at the fact that despite "his" success with Michigan in '06, he hasn't held an OC position since '07. He was passed up for the HC job then and couldn't find anything other than position jobs. His HC record is AWFUL. And, he hasn't coached the game in 3 seasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#17
#17
volfanbill said:
you can show me one year where he was in a loaded program. You can look at his overall history and start to worry. You can look at the fact that despite "his" success with Michigan in '06, he hasn't held an OC position since '07. He was passed up for the HC job then and couldn't find anything other than position jobs. His HC record is AWFUL. And, he hasn't coached the game in 3 seasons.
Click to expand...

1. Being a hc is not relevant to the OC job.

2. You're making a lot of assumptions when you claim he couldn't find anything. Didn't our oc just leave us for an NFL position coach position? Let's not act like those are not prestigious positions.

3. He's only been out of coaching for two years. He last coached in 2012.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#18
#18
Vol8188 said:
1. Being a hc is not relevant to the OC job.

2. You're making a lot of assumptions when you claim he couldn't find anything. Didn't our oc just leave us for an NFL position coach position? Let's not act like those are not prestigious positions.

3. He's only been out of coaching for two years. He last coached in 2012.
Click to expand...

I'm making assumptions? You're looking at one year and pretending this guy is Gus Malzahn
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#20
#20
Vol8188 said:
To a point I was being sarcastic due to VNs love affair with the words "pro style" and "power I", even though none of them truly understand what they are talking about when they say "power I".

But I do think he can bring some good things to the table in terms of establishing a power running game and increasing our formational diversity and number of shifts and motions (two things very common with pro style teams).
Click to expand...


If I said it once I've said it a million times. We need more formational diversity it the offense. :crazy:
 
#23
#23
Vol8188 said:
1. Being a hc is not relevant to the OC job.

2. You're making a lot of assumptions when you claim he couldn't find anything. Didn't our oc just leave us for an NFL position coach position? Let's not act like those are not prestigious positions.

3. He's only been out of coaching for two years. He last coached in 2012.
Click to expand...

David Cutcliffe was out of coaching for 2 years when he had his heart surgery. Came back as an excellent coach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#25
#25
Vol8188 said:
Michigan 2006

Rushing Offense: 18th in the nation

Play Distribution: 38% (25.2 per game) pass to 62% (41.2 per game) run

Turnovers: 2nd fewest in the nation at .9 per game

2007 wasn't as great due to injuries to Chad Henne (Ryan Mallet played as a true freshman in his place) and RB Michael Hart. At one point their starting RB was a sophomore, their qb and a freshmen, and they had two starters on the offensive line who were freshmen.

Michigan 2007

Rushing Offense: 53rd

Play Distribution: 44% (32.5 per game) pass 56% (41.5) rush

Turnovers: 78th






College Football Stats - College FB Team Yards per Game on TeamRankings.com

2006 Michigan Wolverines Stats | College Football at Sports-Reference.com
Click to expand...




Personally, I don't like running it 60% of the time. I would rather see a pretty even split between run/pass.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top