Michigan @ Purdue, Saturday, 9/23, 4p Eastern, FOX/Stream FSGo

[hack]

For a group that needs to be cohesive, it does seem like having two coaches is odd. then again, TEs are often coached by someone other than the OL coach, so I dunno.

[Jeff Buchanan]

There's a poster at mgoblog with the posting name of SpaceCyote. To be trusted. He made a lengthy post today in response to the original OP who asked how do you fix the missed assignment thing afflicting the OL.

He began his post by saying I get tired of all the silly posts and misunderstood issues/proposed solutions (or words to that effect). He went on:

(1) The solution offered to simplify schemes isn't going to happen because JH is JH.
(2) The worst thing that could be done now is to fire Drevno - it takes years to implement the kinds of schemes JH is going to run. Changing horses mid-stream would be disastrous.
(3) Communication on the OL is the central problem. It can be improved. It does not mean it will improve - as the guys on the OL just might not have the mental maturity to see those things, particularly post-snap. This kind of thing takes years to develop which is why the best CFB OLmen are 5th year seniors and have been in the same system for that long.
(4) There are technique problems; these are hard to fix short term. See above (takes years of practice in the same system).
(5) And yes, some of it is likely on the coaching. But I remember specifically people using USC as an example of what can be done with a young OL in 2014 when they were coached by... Tim Drevno. So yes, some of it falls on players too (who were mostly recruited by these coaches at this point), they do bare some responsibility.
(6) My biggest concern (without being at practice to understand) is how Frey and Drevno are working together, or not working together. The communication seems to be the biggest issue. You can get by with poor technique, because at least that doesn't give free runs at the QB. You can't get away with kill assignments. That could explain why LT/LG and RG/RT aren't always on the same page. Think they really need to look into how they are working as a unit and if techniques/assignments are translating.
(7) At the end of the day though, regardless of your move (fire a coach, don't fire a coach), it's going to take time, it's going to take reps, it's going to take film study. That's just the facts.

Take it for what it's worth. One posters view. I'd say it provides some good insight. The one thing he implies but does not mention directly ...... if there is one position on a football team that needs time to develop and a pipeline to do that with the same schemes and the same coaches, it is that of an offensive lineman.

[drok]

"The one thing he implies but does not mention directly ...... if there is one position on a football team that needs time to develop and a pipeline to do that with the same schemes and the same coaches, it is that of an offensive lineman."

That's what's been a bit frustrating about the OL recruiting. It has needed to be stronger with more bodies, say 1 to 2 more per year. Then we'd have more guys within the same system for longer...more bullets in the chamber. And as for SpaceCoyote's first point, that's a bit problematic if the approach is potentially too difficult for the typical college player to pick up. I'm not sure if that's actually happening or not but it is something in control of the coaches and another thing that they should be judged on.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[hack]

You don't want to hear "takes years". JH has simplified things in the past. Drevno has worked quick turnarounds in the past.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Jeff Buchanan]

Talk of it takes time and need a pipeline and all of that IS frustrating. But the facts aren't reassuring.

The entry point of this so called pipeline has been not good. If you look long term, the so called pipeline needs to go out 5y; that means, best case, a talented 2013 recruit, now a senior, would start on the OL.

Well, none of the 2013 OL recruits are even sniffing a start. Logan Tulley Tillmen is probably the closest. There were two, TWO offensive linemen in the 2014 class and Cole is one of them, JBB is the other. M lost out on 3 quality OTs in 2016 and 17 (held on to C Ruiz). There are bodies (7) but, once again, ???quality OTs and M may lose out on Ekyor, 2018, who is quality but he plays C.

So, M's got a center type (Cole) at LT and a 3 star, RS Freshman (Ulizio) at RT. There's no fill in the pipeline for OTs and no one really knows if Grant Newsome will return. Ulizio had 8 offers, 3 from FBS programs (Michigan, Connecticut, Cincinnati). He's from Ohio ...... not even considered by osu and the other offers were all from FCS programs.

The interior is young - all of them talented 4* with decent offer lists but they are all in the 2016 class. Bredeson and Onwenu are going to be good ..... in 2 more years. Pipeline? There isn't one and a lot of that can be traced back to recruiting. This is not a surprise...... and, we really aren't seeing a light at the end of the tunnel.

[hack]

AT USC, Drevno took chickenshit and made chicken salad, and, here, this. Harbaugh turns one-loss programs into powerhouses in two years; here we're talking about years to build a pipeline. Dunno about all this.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I don't disagree. Given the history of JH and Drevno, it's uncomfortable rationalizing the poor performance of the offensive line in 2017 and more troubling because it's production is so essential to Harbaughffense.

But it is what it is. Dissection of the problem has been thorough. While we know a good deal, the coaching staff knows more than we do. As has been pointed out, the problems may get fixed; as well, they may not because the players at risk may not have the maturity, vision or intellect at this point to produce the results in 2017 the coaching staff is obviously working hard to achieve.

So, I'm not for firing anyone because, IMO and at this point, continuity in coaching the OL is more important than a perceived quick fix achieved by bringing in a new coach.

But given the reality associated with the OL, fans need to understand this isn't a championship team right now.

[iam416]

I don't think there's any reason an OL needs 4-5 years. That's preposterous.

It's not preposterous if you're recruiting 3* projects, I suppose.

But, for an elite program, THAT's preposterous.

[AlabamAlum]

Yeah, that seems a bit much.

You need good linemen and the right linemen for the sets you're running. With coaching and facilities, you can have a serviceable unit well before 5 years.

Now, would you like to have one unit playing together with the same coach for 4 years? Sure. But no one has that. For example, Alabama lost their O-line coach 10 months ago and our oline is looking decent to good right now.

[iam416]

Yes, but Alabama is better able to uncover the hidden gems of the recruiting world than most.

[AlabamAlum]

Heh.

[AlabamAlum]

Bama does have two 3-stars in the starting 5 on the offensive line!

HIDDEN GEMS!

[iam416]

I know. I think from last year's team, Marlon Humphrey, Jonathan Allen, OJ Howard, Reuben Foster and Cam Robinson were also all 3* players....or better.

HIDDEN GEMS!

[AlabamAlum]

I know. I think from last year's team, Marlon Humphrey, Jonathan Allen, OJ Howard, Reuben Foster and Cam Robinson were also all 3* players....or better.

HIDDEN GEMS!

The only o-linemen in that group is Cam. God, he was maddening. Half his plays he was the most dominating o-linemen in the nation. The other half, he was a false start machine who would watch the defender shoot by him to pressure or get a TFL.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I don't think there's any reason an OL needs 4-5 years. That's preposterous.

It's not preposterous if you're recruiting 3* projects, I suppose.

But, for an elite program, THAT's preposterous.

Michigan football is NOT an elite program. It's not going to be an elite program until it fixes the offensive line issues. To fix the offensive line issues M needs to have more bodies and better players coming out of HS in the development pipeline.

I disagree with you if you think that, as a matter of regularity, RS freshmen (2y experience in a system) or sophomores (3y) are going to perform at an elite level; you'd have to name more than one who is - and there may be 5 for all I know. But as a general rule, no.

I also believe it is overly optimistic to think anything less than 4-5 years of development and playing time on top of that for an offensive linemen is going to assure elite performance on a consistent basis. Are there exceptions? Probably but as a general matter, again, no.

These aren't excuses that I'm coming up with to explain why M is not a championship football team; they are objectively supportable facts and identifiable circumstances why M's offensive line is under-performing. If M WANTS to BECOME a championship team, it is going to have to correct these things.