Where were you when Brian finally lost it on MGoRoundtable?
It’s been weeks in the making but Brian finally just went in on Sam always quoting Al Borges for offensive analysis. Sam didn’t hold back either throwing some haymakers back. You could cut the tension with a knife. I’m sure it was awkward af for Craig, Ira and Ed.
I was driving back from work when it streamed on my Apple podcast app. Safe to say my jaw dropped since the round table is usually pretty PG in terms of harsh criticisms.
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:05 AM ^
This fall has not been Brian's finest stretch at the helm here. He was always in an interesting, somewhat precarious position in learning on the job and playing the role of self-educating citizen analyst--obviously sometimes he would come up short, but he went at it with a certain candor in the early days.
But none of this was necessarily all that problematic; becoming scornfully dismissive of the team and staff at precisely the moment that things were gelling OTOH. . . not a great look. And burying the walk-back deep in the bowels of a column, where if we're honest only a handful of us probably tread, also hasn't really altered the chemistry, at least yet.
I always thought that the shambolic character of the mgoblog enterprise was three-quarters of its charm, but it's probably time for sharp definitions of roles, a cleanup of the site, rules for posting and people to oversee them. Reasoned criticism from all sides, clever profanity--all of these are fine with me. But some of this sh*t degenerates so quickly, in such a feeble direction. . .
EDIT: Hiring f*cking Al Borges to provide post-game commentary really is a provocation. Can't blame Brian for hating that. And I admire Brian for wanting to maintain some editorial freedom, and not just slavishly worship these teams.
November 22nd, 2019 at 5:39 PM ^
Lets not forget how long ago Brian wrote this team off as well....did he even give us a shot against ND?
November 22nd, 2019 at 5:57 PM ^
He's been a coach for 40 years and yet his current gig is AM radio, after coaching the second worst offense in FBS last year. I think it's fair to question how good his expertise actually is (or at least not take it as gospel the way Sam does).
November 22nd, 2019 at 8:26 PM ^
What does this even mean? I get that this is getting posbanged, but this seems to be the default response to anyone outside of coaching or playing that has the audacity to criticize a coach. All of Borges' massive football knowledge didn't help him be better than a mediocre coordinator, and a stubborn one at that. Sometimes people really don't know more, but they are fortunate to run in certain circles or they have skills in relating to players, etc.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:43 PM ^
Professional football coach.
Professional football blog owner.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:16 AM ^
The beauty of the latter is that there is no accountability for opinions held, and thus it’s that much easier to hold onto opinions no matter the circumstances. In general, I don’t think Brian does this, but the rant this morning was not a high moment.
November 22nd, 2019 at 2:09 AM ^
Brian does tend to hold on to his opinions, no matter the circumstances, in most cases. He did admit on the blog that he fell into the BPONE prematurely, if I recall correctly. However, on the roundtable he does tend to shout down those who disagree with him, with some frequency as another poster pointed out. Last week it was Ed because he dared to say that Minn would not win the west and would likely lose to Iowa last week. Brian was wrong, Ed was right. I didn't catch any mention of that this morning. This seems to follow general discourse these days - if you disagree with me, you are terribly wrong and must be proven an IDIOT! As Ed chimed in this morning, it's possible for them both to be right in some part, which is the most likely case.
November 22nd, 2019 at 5:53 PM ^
That's the worst part about the owner of this blog, if you dont agree with him you are wrong and he will interrupt you multiple times to prove that. Its beyond childish, I have those same type of interactions with my 7 and 3 year old kids. If he were to change his communication style just a smidge, the angst against him would go away quickly...but I dont see that happening.
Do I think Al Borges was a good OC here, no, was he an OC for some good teams, yes, has he been doing this for 30+ years..yes...so I know where I would tend to lean when its time to analyze.
Being an OC vs an analyst are two different things, you cant judge Al solely on his lack of success towards the end of his career as an OC. The speed in which you have to make decisions is insanely fast in game as I am sure everyone here can imagine....if Al is taking 4-5 days to analyze a game and watching it multiple times, then yeah Im buying what he is selling.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:01 AM ^
This is incredibly stupid. There is a zero percent chance Brian knows more about analyzing an offense than al Borges. If Brian could do a better job he’d be making millions of dollars doing it for a d1 team.
November 22nd, 2019 at 6:56 PM ^
To be fair, the reason Al Borges is doing AM radio is because he can't earn millions coaching a D1 team either, having been fired from his last few gigs for poor performance.
November 23rd, 2019 at 11:31 AM ^
I'd quote Charlie Weiss on contract negotiation advice. When he was referring to his schematic advantage, he was talking about his agents, lawyers, and accountants.
November 21st, 2019 at 10:59 PM ^
It was kind of cringe-worthy to listen to but still nothing compares to the Valenti ND rant
November 21st, 2019 at 11:00 PM ^
These round tables are funny because Brian comes off as a dick but is also almost always right lmao.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:02 PM ^
Free Hong Kong
November 21st, 2019 at 11:42 PM ^
Free Beer!!!
/did I do that right???
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:33 AM ^
Free Myles.
November 22nd, 2019 at 5:10 AM ^
Let's deal with autocratic regimes and then beer!
November 21st, 2019 at 11:02 PM ^
Brian wasn't wrong
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:12 AM ^
Nor was he right. Opinions are opinions. It is good to have a hearty disagreement but not necessary to rant. Ranting should be saved for celebrations over rivals.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:03 PM ^
November 21st, 2019 at 11:11 PM ^
Yeah I didn’t think so either. They were just talking circles at each other. Sam is doing his usual job of talking up the program, specifically Gattis and trying to slap down the narrative that Gattis isn’t in charge. That is true, Gattis is in charge. Brian is pointing out that Gattis’ stuff is working now in part because they adapted some of the stuff from last year into the ground game and that has allowed them to deploy speed in space finally. That is also true. Sam seemed to be arguing against a straw man being posed by Twitter/The Internet and Brian’s take didn’t do enough in his mind to shut that argument down.
November 22nd, 2019 at 5:13 AM ^
What Brian has said is that the offense took off when it began to go back to what it previously did last year with respect to the run game. Where Sam takes issue is Brian saying or alluding to Harbaugh or Warriner driving that change. The distinction here is that all the running plays that Brian says are last year's plays are also Bama'a last year's plays.
More importantly, a number of those plays were tried earlier this year without successful execution. However, as Sam and Al indicate these were bread and butter plays for Bama. Consequently, it's no surprise that they're in a Gattis run offense.
Brian is unwilling to accept that Gattis would deploy these concepts with more success as of late without having been instruct to do so by Harbaugh or Warriner. Indeed, for some reason Brian kept saying "that doesn't make me feel better" that Gattis would be using these concepts more frequently without seeking and heeding Harbaugh's advice.
There's the rub. Sam (and the coaches in Schembechler Hall) and Al continue to repeat that these concepts have been in the playbook since installing Gattis's offense as they were used routinely when he was at Bama. Brian, on the other hand, believes that because a number of these concepts were deployed by Harbaugh this must be his imprint.
Lastly, it's curious that in the Army and Wisconsin UFR, Brian suggested that Harbaugh was meddling and had wrested some of the playcalling from Gattis based on outcome of the run game.
November 22nd, 2019 at 6:43 AM ^
I am going to log in to all of my alternate accounts to upvote this.
November 22nd, 2019 at 7:32 AM ^
Good example of how people can listen to the same thing and come away with vastly different impressions.
I heard Brian saying that if Gattis did not seek input from Warriner and Harbaugh in tweaking the offensive approach that would not make him feel better. I.e.”Jim, We are struggling to do X cohesively in the offense. What aspects of (my) offense do you think the OL/team would excel at based on your experience last year?” Harbaugh and Warriner (and others on the staff) have years of experience and purposely NOT asking for opinions would be stubborn and ill advised.
The uncomfortable part for me was they were both right but arguing anyway. Sam is trying to combat idiots online that think Harbaugh is forcing Gattis to run plays that aren’t his - (to denigrate either Gattis or Harbaugh I assume) - hence the “Alabama ran these too” talking point. Brian is saying the coaches probably collaborated and went back toward concepts they ran well last year while integrating them into the framework of the M version of Gattis’ offense. Both are probably correct.
I love Sam Webb and think he is probably one of the best-connected sources into the Football and Basketball programs, BUT he is very Politician/“Baghdad Bob” In terms of coming up with best-case talking points for the week and them repeating them over and over. You could tell over the past few weeks that Brian was growing increasingly frustrated with Sam gushing over his new buddy Al’s extensive football expertise. I am sure Al knows more offense than Brian, but the is a reason why the “those who can’t do......teach” expression exists.
November 22nd, 2019 at 8:26 AM ^
+1 for the Baghdad Bob reference! I miss that guy, the comedy he provided in a shitty situation was fantastic!
(I debated making a political statement here because it would be so relevant, but decided to resist the urge. But gotdamn that was a hard choice!)
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:09 AM ^
We need a transcript of the damn segment. I only listened one time but your version is close to how I heard it, but not what I heard.
I heard Brian saying that if Gattis did not seek input from Warriner and Harbaugh in tweaking the offensive approach that would not make him feel better.
The problem is that Brian was saying if Alabama also ran these plays, as Sam insists, then that means Gattis didn't collaborate and that doesn't make him feel better--which is idiotic on two levels.
1) They still could have collaborated.
2) Who the eff cares. They scored 40+ points vs ND and MSU.
Sam is also guilty of doing the same thing in reverse. Brian pointed out that Michigan ran these same plays last year and Sam would keep interjecting that it's a Gattis run play. Well, okay, but it's also a Warriner run play, so Sam should not object when Brian points out it's a Michigan run play as well.
This is about the fourth post I've said this but every time I comment I feel compelled to say that it only makes sense that they were arguing with each other if they were continuing an argument they had off air, such that they knew what each other was really saying but we didn't have all the information. I didn't hear an actual contradiction in anything they were saying and yet they both kept arguing.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:16 AM ^
This is vibe I got, too. Brian was basically saying, "Why the hell didn't Gattis use the successful run schemes from last year right off the bat?"
November 22nd, 2019 at 7:33 AM ^
"Lastly, it's curious that in the Army and Wisconsin UFR, Brian suggested that Harbaugh was meddling and had wrested some of the playcalling from Gattis based on outcome of the run game."
This is absolutely false. It didn't sound right to me so I went to those UFRs. There's literally no discussion of this. Just try the search function. The word Harbaugh doesn't even appear in the Wisconsin UFR. He barely talks about Gattis and Harbaugh in those posts at all.
Also worth noting for people who think this is simply all Gattis, Ben Mason was playing DT to start the season because the FB position wasn't even supposed to exist in Gattis' offense. Also, IIRC, Michigan never went under center at the goal line early in the season.
November 22nd, 2019 at 8:24 AM ^
The Mason argument was a reason I would have posted within this subthread! If this was all Gattis, without input from Harbaugh/Warriner, Mason would not have played a single down on offense, nor would there be any under center snaps anywhere on the field. There is a very clear influence from JH/EW, and that takes nothing away from Gattis' ability to coach. In fact, I would applaud Gattis for the humility of heeding experience (asked for, or not) and improving his unit immeasurably because of it.
I will always be in the camp of both sides having input in a situation like this. One-sided conversations or one-side dominating the other, just never works.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:18 AM ^
Yes. Why would it be a bad thing for Gattis to consult with those other two? Crazy. Seems like a good idea.
For the arguing on air. Why was Sam so insistent that they are running Alabama's offense if the plays are the same as the ones M ran last year. How is that relevant? They are now running plays that work well for the players they have.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:25 AM ^
Why was Sam so insistent that they are running Alabama's offense if the plays are the same as the ones M ran last year. How is that relevant?
The relevance is to push back on the notion that Harbaugh/Warriner took over the offense. Sometimes Sam correctly brought up Alabama's offense to push back when Brian acted like Harbaugh took the offense back (mostly, Notre Dame). Sometimes Sam incorrectly brought Alabama up when Brian merely stated that these plays worked last year.
November 22nd, 2019 at 8:05 AM ^
See i heard it differently. Brian isn't "unwilling to accept that Gattis would deploy these concepts with more success as of late without having been instruct to do so by Harbaugh or Warriner."
I heard Brian's point more as...if we accept on face that these plays were ALSO a part of the Bama offense and Gattis offense....why did we waste half a season not running them more and doing other things when we already knew from last year that this offense could run them.
To paraphrase Al Borges, part of the battle in being a new offensive coordinator if figuring out what your guys can run. Brian seems to be annoyed that it took Gattis so long to figure out the answer was "the run plays from last year that worked well" while he experimented with other stuff. He's not debating that the plays were also in the Bama playbook. He's wondering how it took so long to get to the idea that THAT part of the playbook should be the base running plays for THIS team.
It's a maddening disconnect that may have cost us some wins early, but as Brian said if this MSU game is what we're gonna look like moving forward, lets just do a lot more of that and move on. Fit the plays to the personnel, take advantage of what the d is giving you, stress the defense horizontally and vertically, and lets kick some Hoosier and Buckeye ass. Just win baby. If we come out with wins in the next two games, nobody will give a shit who called what plays when or why.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:14 AM ^
Brian isn't "unwilling to accept that Gattis would deploy these concepts with more success as of late without having been instruct to do so by Harbaugh or Warriner."
Nothing you wrote after that is evidence to contradict the original post you're responding to.
Brian is frustrated that it took Gattis this long to figure out what works. He might have figured that out with or without help from Harbaugh.
I don't even think Sam was saying Harbaugh wasn't involved. He was saying that Harbaugh didn't take over.
November 23rd, 2019 at 12:51 AM ^
But Brian never said “Harbaugh took over”. He never suggested Gattis wasn’t calling plays. All he said was that the offensive scheme used in the ND game looked familiar to anyone who has been watching Harbaugh offenses. And he did so in the context of saying the MSU game plan looked very different from the typical Harbaughffense! It was supposed to be a positive statement about how the offense was marrying the successful parts of last year with “speed in space”. For some reason Sam felt he needed to jump in and defend Gattis against this.
November 22nd, 2019 at 8:29 AM ^
I think we're missing the main point Brian is making, which is that the offense M was running early in the year was incoherent and obviously sucked, and then became more coherent when they went back to the suite of run plays that were effective as a group last year. The entire offense returned from last year, but the coaches blew it up anyway to start the season.
The fact that pin and pull is used by Alabama is irrelevant. Only the fact that M always knew how to run it but it (and other things) was inexplicably shelved for many games is relevant. Any idiot can put together that it was an obvious mistake to delete the parts of M's pre-existing run game that apparently perfectly align with Gattis' previous team. Sam is strenuously ignoring this point in favor of pushing a very specific narrative that is misleading.
Alas, none of this would matter if M had beaten Penn State. Sam's current point, which is new since losing to Penn State, is that we should have all known this season was a rebuild year and we should give the coaching staff unlimited time to blow up and reinstall the offense. There actually was a real time limit on this, and that was "whatever you scrap and rebuild, finish in time for Penn State". Michigan failed this. Michigan is two TD's better than Penn State and essentially chose to lose by working an incoherent offense for half a season.
I agree Brian does not have the football coaching knowledge of a coach, but he is elite in applying logic. Logic told Harbaugh in the spring, "merge the existing offense with the new offense". Football coaching apparently told them something else and they did that. In the process they killed the season. On the bright side, we do seem to have a high functioning offense now and we can legitimately hope to be in title contention past October every year starting next year.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:18 AM ^
Any idiot can put together that it was an obvious mistake to delete the parts of M's pre-existing run game that apparently perfectly align with Gattis' previous team.
Okay, so if any idiot can figure that out, why does that idiot have to be Harbaugh? Why can't that idiot be Gattis?
Further, I still don't think I heard Sam say Harbaugh doesn't talk to Gattis about the offense. I think Sam's pushback is that Gattis was told to sit in a corner to let Harbaugh and Warriner take over.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:52 AM ^
This is excellent interpretation and evaluation of the discourse for people that don't listen to the podcast. Like me. This is greatly appreciated and gives me a much better idea of how the program actually works in terms of offensive design (gattis). Thanks.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:08 PM ^
Brian is definitely right about Borges. Sam has to defend Borges otherwise Al will never come back on the show. Sam sees some benefit of his analysis and wants to keep him. I laughed during the exchange though, and I thought it made for good radio.
November 22nd, 2019 at 2:11 AM ^
Brian and Sam were both right about Borges. He was not a great DI OC, however he likely does know much more about football than Brian, as Sam was implying. Both can be right.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:09 PM ^
The guy thought it was a good idea to put Denard under center.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:29 PM ^
I feel like that came from Hoke. He was weirdly obsessed with obviously running power as if it were the only manly way to play football.
I don't think Borges is an elite OC, but in his previous jobs he didn't demonstrate the square-peg/round-hole proclivities of the Michigan Hoke era. I'm pretty confident that, had Borges been given a choice, Denard and Gardner would have been in the gun 100% of the time.
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if it came from over Hoke's head. By the end of that brief era Brandon had demonstrated his meddling in the football program. I wouldn't be surprised if Hoke was hired because he agreed to run the program the way Brandon wanted.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:49 PM ^
I only mention it because Brian tried to drop that line like a right bauer while in the barn to secure the winning trick.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:20 AM ^
Should be +100 for euchre.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:22 AM ^
Might be my favorite post on this site.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:12 PM ^
It was great radio! I loved the Brian side and the Sam side. It was like your two best friends arguing and you agree with both. I loved it personally.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:14 PM ^
Yeah, we’re not going back to SOME of what worked on offense last year.
Also, Ben Mason is moving to fullback. Cough cough.
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:09 AM ^
Mason moving to offense may have just as much to do with our defensive needs vs. Any Harbaugh influence.
Mason was ineffective at DT, and our DLine has solidified without him. The only place he can see any productive playing time is on O.
November 21st, 2019 at 11:27 PM ^
I like Sam, but I don’t understand his reluctance to admit that Gattis incorporated last years offense. Why is it a bad thing that the O went back to something that worked?
November 21st, 2019 at 11:36 PM ^
Because Harbaugh came out and emphatically said he “turned the keys over” to Gattis on Offense. Anything that could be perceived as undermining that statement was seen as a negative. This became the basis for a standpoint that was “under attack,” particularly when the offense got off to a slow start to begin the season.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:01 AM ^
Of course Harbaugh is going to say that to the public. I’m sure Sam has to play dumb to kowtow to the company line. Like if the plays are literally the same as last year how the fuck isn’t it true saying they ran the same stuff last year that worked?
Or you know maybe both bama and Michigan ran the same shit at times?