First S&C Session
Per Vinopal:
rvinopal20 Props to the strength staff. That shit was tough, as it should be!
I still miss Barwis pack of wolves references tho...
January 19th, 2011 at 6:05 PM ^
As long as we dont have 7 guys on defense under 180 I'll be happy.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:11 PM ^
But it's gonna be the toughest, hardest nosed 180 lbs you've ever seen.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:16 PM ^
accountable for each other too.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:25 PM ^
Are they going to have accountabilibuddies?
/South Park reference
January 19th, 2011 at 8:58 PM ^
And scrappy.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:53 PM ^
Thats sad
January 19th, 2011 at 6:06 PM ^
As bad as it was to let Barwis go, at least Hoke brought in someone who knows what they're doing.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:32 PM ^
Anyone who is hired as S&C coach at a D1 level probably knows what they're doing. Some are probably better than others, but they are all qualified. Will miss Barwis though.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:43 PM ^
Gittleson was a D1 level S&C coach -- qualified maybe, but the techniques and philosophies weren't up to date. If you watched the second half of any Iowa game this year, their S&C may be using the Gittleson approach too -- their players looked consistently winded and flat.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:49 PM ^
Iowa does not follow Gittleson's philosophy. I forget the name of their S&C guy, but he was one of the pioneers of the Olympic-style lifting method, which is now basically standard.
Anyway, the knock on Gittleson was much more about the "strength" side of things than the "conditioning" part. He did pretty much the same conditioning stuff as everyone else.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:05 PM ^
Anyway, the knock on Gittleson was much more about the "strength" side of things than the "conditioning" part. He did pretty much the same conditioning stuff as everyone else.
I think you need to flip that around. Strength was not the issue, it was conditioning. Teams always talked about how Michigan early in the season got winded easily. Additionally, a few players mentioned never running as much under Carr/Gittleson as RR/Barwis (granted spread, etc, but still the point remains the same). Look at the combine times of Manningham. Add in the comments from former players coming back to work out with Barwis saying they felt like they were getting faster as well as stronger. Last but not least, I give you Jake Long, tell him strength was the issue
January 19th, 2011 at 7:13 PM ^
No, the specific criticism of Gittleson was that his lifting regimen was too machine-based, which is thought not to be as good at building core strength as using free weights. The criticism was that this was affecting our ability to control the line of scrimmage, as evidenced by the fact that our rushing output over the second half of Carr's tenure wasn't that great.
Conditioning was brought up as a factor only after the 2005 season. Otherwise it was rarely discussed. There was some discussion about his nutritional philosophy, but as far as actually getting guys in shape, he did pretty much the same stuff as everyone else. We had a separate speed coach who handled most of that, anyway.
As for Jake Long, he is not a normal human being in any physical respect. No workout routine can turn an ordinary man into Jake Long.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:28 PM ^
"So ma'am do any of these men look like the guy who carjacked you at gunpoint?"
"That's him! The first one on the far right."
January 20th, 2011 at 6:51 AM ^
Jake Long doesn't need a gun! He would just pick the car up and trot off! Case dismissed!
January 19th, 2011 at 7:44 PM ^
This is such a bullshit argument and I'm sick of people saying Gittleson was behind times on philosophies. There are a TON of teams in college & NFL that still have HIT training protocols. What do you think Stanford had done this past season? Kevin Tolbert was their football s & c coach. He's the same guy that spent about 9 years under Gittleson at Michigan. Penn State trains HIT. Toledo trains HIT. USF trains HIT. Florida trains HIT. 80% of the NFL does HIT training! The conditioning may have been lacking under Gittleson a bit but those Michigan teams were never man-handled. Different coaches have different philosophies and they all work. It's time to stop talking about Barwis and all his hype from the interview he did where he mentioned words like proprioception, balance, plyometrics, stretch shortening cycle and all that stuff.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:54 PM ^
Gittleson had decided to use more machines than free weights and few/no olympic lifts. That is where he fell behind. The reason why Michigan was "manhandled" is they are one of the youngest teams in D1 ball. No matter who the trainer is it takes time to develop players.
January 19th, 2011 at 8:29 PM ^
Gittleson used machines which HIT training is! Penn State has never done a hang clean and won't with this regime around. Florida does cleans because that's what Urban Meyer wanted to do and they never went over 135 lbs. The Detroit Lions don't do more than 135 lbs. with hang cleans and added them only because Scghwartz wanted them to do them. A lot of you guys speak on something you don't know much about and act like you do. Let's not get crazy on what you think you know because you have lifted weights before.
January 19th, 2011 at 9:03 PM ^
Interesting Gittleson family/ST article...
http://info.rogersathletic.com/get-strong/?Tag=Strength%20&%20Conditioning%20Clinic
January 19th, 2011 at 9:32 PM ^
135 on cleans...that is sad...HIT training does not have to be done on machines. It is just an overload technique that goes to muscle failure. If you ever look at the Barwis Method everything is based on your Max output. Sets, Rep range and percent of max changes daily for 10 weeks to reach a desired result.
January 19th, 2011 at 9:41 PM ^
Why is that sad? Have you ever done 135 on cleans with proper technique? I know exactly what HIT training is and I have been involved in a program that does it. Not everything they did/do is with machines but the majority of it is. "Barwis Method" is periodization and is based off a 1-rep max.
January 19th, 2011 at 8:28 PM ^
You left out pizza, sir. It's in here:
http://mgoblog.com/content/barwis-effect
Sorry -- if that's even 10% true Gittleson was at least 10% dinosaur.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:45 PM ^
Last season's Iowa team did not seem to get winded.
January 19th, 2011 at 11:10 PM ^
to name two, and except for the bowl game, they were out of gas in the 4th quarter in the second half of the season.
January 19th, 2011 at 10:11 PM ^
I know he's a homer for his friends and therefore his opinion is to be discounted slightly, but Jason Whitlock specifically mentioned Wellman as being a very good S&C coach. I'm going to miss Barwis too, but it sounds like Wellman has a rep of his own.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:07 PM ^
As long as the players are happy and getting torn down and built up stronger.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:11 PM ^
Sounds good! I was worried about losing Barwis, but Wellman sounds tremendous as well.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:30 PM ^
Everything about you is Tremendous right now
January 19th, 2011 at 6:16 PM ^
As long as they bust their ass, they'll make improvements.
It's not like they're going back to a Jack LaLane calisthenics regimen.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:32 PM ^
Herschel Walker likes calisthenics.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/10/11/herschel.fitness.martial.arts/inde…
January 19th, 2011 at 8:02 PM ^
I think the team should only do Rock IV workouts:
1. Saw logs
2. Carry logs
3. Pull logs on sled
4. Reverse pullups in an old barn
He beat a bionic Russion, how can this not beat tOSU?
January 20th, 2011 at 1:13 AM ^
Football trip to Siberia? Sounds like a good time.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:29 PM ^
Did Vinopal enroll early or is this his first college offseason workout? I'd be more interested in what some of the seniors have to say.
Not saying things won't be just fine with the new staff, just asking.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:45 PM ^
When freshmen arrive on campus, they work exclusively with S&C for a few weeks. This isn't his first offseason workout.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:29 PM ^
Is Barwis Beach still around?
Or did the pack of wolves take that with them?
January 19th, 2011 at 6:31 PM ^
.......if Mike Martin says the same, I'll be even more pleased.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:35 PM ^
All S&C programs produce results. What will yeild the highest results is when the player carries it into the off season. JT Turner approves this message.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:36 PM ^
I am not sure we saw the great advantage we expected out of Barwis. His stories are legendary and the guys looked great and in shape, but outside of the NC games did we see any games that we can say conditioning won the game? I cannot remember any (but then again we did not win that many games :( ), Perhaps Barwis advantage was offset by the fundamental problems of having 180 lb guys trying to shed blocks of guys over 300 lbs.
Hoke is big on physicality and if he thinks the new S&C guy will create this, I am all for it.
Personally, I give Hoke a lot more benefit of the doubt with his major coup of Mattison.
Go Blue.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:40 PM ^
Exhibit A: This year's Illinois game.
January 19th, 2011 at 6:51 PM ^
How so? Illinois went toe-for-toe with us for four quarters and three overtimes. I thought the two teams were about equally well-conditioned.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:14 PM ^
His point is that M was well-conditioned to the point that they could perform through all those quarters and OTs.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:27 PM ^
M's offense*
January 19th, 2011 at 9:01 PM ^
But can't the exact same thing be said of Illinois?
January 19th, 2011 at 9:12 PM ^
How anyone can point to the Illinois game as an example of anyhting other than a clusterfuck is beyond me. Even the offense--wasn't tate the guy who directed the last 29 points of scoring drives, which culminated with Hemmingway catching a pass that bounced off an illinois defender's head or something?
January 20th, 2011 at 2:31 PM ^
Their being in good condition doesn't detract from our guys being in good condition. It was impressive that both teams were able to go so strong through the entire game.
January 19th, 2011 at 8:08 PM ^
No, I didn't see that. What I did see is our lines being pushed around way, way too often. No doubt Barwis brought much needed updated approaches but there just isn't any way around the need for some of the old fashioned straight-line power.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:04 PM ^
In 2007 I made a point of trying to gauge how tired the team (especially the defense) looked during the fourth quarter. Even though we lost most of those games, I remember at least some difference from the winded-looking Carr teams. Opponents went through us in 07 because we had poor schemes and a talent drop-off, not because we didn't look fresh in the fourth quarter.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:32 PM ^
that is so subjective its ridiculous.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:56 PM ^
Subjective? Oh yeah, definitely. Such things as watching guys with hands on hips, or hands on knees. But mostly you can judge it by the pass rush. I remember those guys coming like banshees, even Terrance Taylor, especially in that one great game against Wisconsin. They just looked fresher to me.
Sincerely,
Admitted Purveyor of Ridiculousness
January 19th, 2011 at 9:06 PM ^
Citing the Wisconsin game as evidence is like citing Mike Hart to argue that recruiting rankings are meaningless. That game was a total outlier - completely different than just about every other game we played.
Where was that vaunted pass rush against Illinois, PSU and OSU? All three games were close at halftime (we actually led PSU, in fact) and turned into humiliations in the second half. Purdue would have been as well, except that our offense actually showed up for that one.
January 19th, 2011 at 7:06 PM ^
how people say they miss someone they didn't even know, and speak as though they really knew the ins-outs of a strength & conditioning program and the one who ran it, when they themselves were never a part of it.....human beings - go figure.