Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Rumor: Mike Hart Offered RB Coach Position

Give up hope on this. Harbaugh loves sloth paced football. He's like the Dick Bennett of football.

One huge problem with this is that the D knows exactly when the Michigan O is going to snap the football every single play, because they have to...

I don't this is really by design, though. The O is just that discombobulated.
 
Last edited:
One huge problem with this is that the D knows exactly when the Michigan O is going to snap the football every single play, because they have to...

I don't this is really by design, though. The O is just that discombobulated.

It's by design. Since Harbaugh has been the coach, here are the plays per game and our rank out of the 130 FBS teams:

2020 - 65.5, 112th
2019 - 71.2, 65th
2018 - 70.8, 74th
2017 - 70, 88th
2016 - 74.3, 52nd
2015 - 71.1, 80th

Managed to be in the top half of FBS teams twice (2019, 2016).
10042663_0.jpg
 
Last edited:
running lots of plays is less important than winning football games
 
My generic and unsophisticated understanding is that since flukes happen, an outgunned but explosive team wants few total plays to increase the odds of a little bit of luck swinging the game to the underdog. But dominant teams want to get in as many plays as possible to 'revert to the mean'.


Obviously all that goes out the window if you think you can gain an advantage by going fast and changing things faster than they can adjust. But either way, I don't know why'd you'd go slow if you think your team is good.
 
My generic and unsophisticated understanding is that since flukes happen, an outgunned but explosive team wants few total plays to increase the odds of a little bit of luck swinging the game to the underdog. But dominant teams want to get in as many plays as possible to 'revert to the mean'.


Obviously all that goes out the window if you think you can gain an advantage by going fast and changing things faster than they can adjust. But either way, I don't know why'd you'd go slow if you think your team is good.


359026jpg.jpg



???



Bo can't believe you'd say this, and neither can I.


To hold the ball, wear the opponent down, and limit the risk of injuries to your team, because you're playing for CHAMPIONSHIPS not finesse points.
 
359026jpg.jpg



???



Bo can't believe you'd say this, and neither can I.


To hold the ball, wear the opponent down, and limit the risk of injuries to your team, because you're playing for CHAMPIONSHIPS not finesse points.
Lloyd too. That is the new math that showed up with RR.


The idea that you can play as few plays as possible AND ensure you win them required a level of dominance that we haven't seen in some time. Arguably before Lloyd when people complained of how lesser teams could claw back when we sat on small leads.


Man, I miss that being a primary compliant.
 
Last edited:
Lloyd too. That is the new math that showed up with RR.


The idea that you can play as few plays as possible AND ensure you win them required a level of dominance that we haven't seen in some time. Arguably before Lloyd when people complained of how lesser teams could claw back when we sat on small leads.


Man, I miss that being a primary compliant.

back in those days, ANYONE could win 9 games with the talent Michigan had, a maxim that ceased to be true sometime after January 2, 2007, for reasons unknown to man.
 
Name one team that plays grind it out football and competes for championships now.
 
It's by design. Since Harbaugh has been the coach, here are the plays per game and our rank out of the 130 FBS teams:

2020 - 65.5, 112th
2019 - 71.2, 65th
2018 - 70.8, 74th
2017 - 70, 88th
2016 - 74.3, 52nd
2015 - 71.1, 80th

Managed to be in the top half of FBS teams twice (2019, 2016).
10042663_0.jpg

I wish "speed in space" meant an up tempo offense. Ideally, they should be ready to go with like 15 seconds left on the playclock. This does not mean that they always snap it with 15 seconds to go on the playclock. This is where the mystery can be an advantage. The current O isn't even ready to go until the very last second.
 
359026jpg.jpg



???



Bo can't believe you'd say this, and neither can I.


To hold the ball, wear the opponent down, and limit the risk of injuries to your team, because you're playing for CHAMPIONSHIPS not finesse points.

LOL! He is talking about the 70's and 80's. Times have changed.
 
I have no problem with the team getting a 2 td lead and slowing it down. This program loves to be behind by 2 or 3 scores and they still play a slow-it-down methodology. That is not ideal.
 
Yes. like in the past, such as when Michigan was good. They aren't anymore.

When were they any good outside of 1997? They dominated OSU in the 90s but outside of beating their rival they were irrelevant in the national conversation after week 2.

Don't get me wrong, I think that the expectation for a blueblood like Michigan should be national championships, but outside of 1 season in the past 70 years they haven't been elite.

It is frustrating watching Texas, whose situation is nearly identical to Michigan. They just fired a coach with a similar winning percentage, who has played in a conference championship ge, who has beaten their main rival and who is 4-0 in bowl games. Michigan just extended a coach who doesn't measure up in any of those categories. May as well get used to the disappointment.
 
When were they any good outside of 1997? They dominated OSU in the 90s but outside of beating their rival they were irrelevant in the national conversation after week 2.

Don't get me wrong, I think that the expectation for a blueblood like Michigan should be national championships, but outside of 1 season in the past 70 years they haven't been elite.

It is frustrating watching Texas, whose situation is nearly identical to Michigan. They just fired a coach with a similar winning percentage, who has played in a conference championship ge, who has beaten their main rival and who is 4-0 in bowl games. Michigan just extended a coach who doesn't measure up in any of those categories. May as well get used to the disappointment.

Finished the top 10 of the AP poll 5 times in the 90s. 3 times in the top 5 with one of those being #1. We never finished unranked in the 90s.

In the 20 years since? 4 top 10 finishes and zero top 5. Finished unranked 8 times.
 
When were they any good outside of 1997? They dominated OSU in the 90s but outside of beating their rival they were irrelevant in the national conversation after week 2.

Don't get me wrong, I think that the expectation for a blueblood like Michigan should be national championships, but outside of 1 season in the past 70 years they haven't been elite.

It is frustrating watching Texas, whose situation is nearly identical to Michigan. They just fired a coach with a similar winning percentage, who has played in a conference championship ge, who has beaten their main rival and who is 4-0 in bowl games. Michigan just extended a coach who doesn't measure up in any of those categories. May as well get used to the disappointment.

Back in the 70's and 80's, they had several 1 or 2 loss seasons. The focus was not on national championships back then. Michigan dominated the conference in the 70's and 80's. They are not doing that now.

I agree with you, they should not have extended Harbaugh. I doubt Texas is required to follow the, "He's a Texas man!" philosophy.
 
Finished the top 10 of the AP poll 5 times in the 90s. 3 times in the top 5 with one of those being #1. We never finished unranked in the 90s.

In the 20 years since? 4 top 10 finishes and zero top 5. Finished unranked 8 times.

Yep. They were routinely top 10 in the 70's, 80's, and 90's. I'd take that now.
 
Yep. They were routinely top 10 in the 70's, 80's, and 90's. I'd take that now.

Same here. Top 10 and win the damn conference here and there. This 16 year B1G drought has grown far beyond tiresome.
 
Back
Top