<p>Tend to agree with Novi and PurpleDuck on most of this. The team is getting better but nowhere near the elite U-M teams. If you watch the reruns on BTN you can see the difference. Definitely better without RR especially on defense. With RR, we probably would have lost to Northwester 45-35.</p>
<p>I’m just saying if we still had RRod as like a OC or something, I think our O would be better than it is now.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe against bad teams, but RR’s offense sucked against decent defenses. Last year’s supposedly great offense managed 7 vs. OSU, 14 vs. Ms. State, and 17 vs. MSU. </p>
<p>To score on good defenses, you need to make adjustments in game. That’s something RR could never do. At this point I have more faith in Borges to do that, though it’s still going to be challenging.</p>
<p>^^^^Exactly correct. Look at the great adjustments Michigan has been making in the second half each week. That never happened under Rodriguez.</p>
<p>Before I go defending Rrod, realize I am happy we got Hoke and prefer Hoke (and Mattison) over Rrod.</p>
<p>This offense is full if RRods guys, they are just more experienced now. The offense is essentially the same thing, with a little under center wrinkle. </p>
<p>If we spent the whole offseason advancing the previous spread systemand developing players in that system instead if attempting to switch to a pro style offense while going through a coaching transition our offense would better. </p>
<p>Defensively we are better foe a few reasons. Hoke and Mattison are huge reasons. But you also have to look at the fact our defense is more experienced and we have some guys back from injury that didn’t play last year. With an improved defense supping people and getting turnovers, of course the offense will put up more points. </p>
<p>I’m just saying you can’t look at last years stats, compare them to this years, and then say our offense would not be better with Rrod. The players aren’t the same skill level and the defenses backing the offenses up are not the same.</p>
<p>^^^Nevertheless, Michigan played worse as the season progressed with RR the past three years. It seems so far that the opposite is happening for us this year. We’ll know better after this weekend of course.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re welcome to believe this, but it’s a very non-obvious claim. I don’t really agree with the idea that we spent the summer attempting to switch to a pro-style offense. More likely, we split our time 50-50 with the ultimate goal of providing a more flexible offense. The dividends to that decision haven’t shown yet, but they will as the season concludes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do we? The only person I’m aware of that this applies to is Woolfolk, but he’s been repeatedly injured this year already, has been out a ton, and hasn’t really made a major impact on our defense thus far. </p>
<p>In any case, our defense has had plenty of bad stretches, where they were identical to last year’s D. To me, that says that it’s not so much our players being way better, only that our coaches know how to coach.</p>
<p>I agree with tetrahedron. I think our offense is going to grow increasingly complex and unpredictible as the season progresses, partly because our players will understand the new playbook better and partly because I think Hoke and Co. are saving some of their best for last. As long as the OL and DR stay healthy, we will be strong offensively.</p>