To this point, Harbaugh is this era's Tom Osborne of the 70's

Good post.

I always enjoy your takes. +1

The big difference between the current Michigan offense and the stereotypical Big 12 offenses is Michigan's lack of explosiveness. I don't know what the reason for (maybe they were just unlucky) or solution to that is, but if Michigan wants to take the next step offensively, they need to engineer more long-yardage plays. 

I'm not disagreeing with everything you posted. Though If what Harbaugh is running offensively is so modern, why aren't more big time coaches using a similar offense?

I mean, pretty much all the other great college football coaches are using high powered offensive schemes. 

I believe the fact that we hardly ever use up tempo, keeps our offense from being extremely modern. 

Harbaugh doesn't seem to embrace how simply going up tempo can wreck havoc on a defense and that's one of the changes we need in our offense.

I also feel the passing game should be used more.

Dr, I have been on the same page with you since Sunday. The only difference is, I believe we have the Jimmies and Joe's, but they didn't play to their potential. Don't get me wrong, Watson was abused, but we had a competent replacement (The fastest man on the team) on the sideline. Our Dline was a little dinged up (No Soloman, and hurt DE's) and our TE forgot how to catch. I also believe JBB not playing hurt more than anyone will admit, and Jim was a little over confident. 

While I respect, don’t agree Dr.

First, numbers can be swayed, as our O and Oklahoma are nothing a like. But that’s here nor there.

My main point though is that our O game plan doesn’t attack the opposing teams weaknesses. Everyone can agree, MSU has a good rush D and below average pass D. You know our pass to run play calling in that game? 50 runs to 25 pass. Yes, finally in the last 6 Minutes we wore them down and walked away with the W. But a lot of that was simply MSU D being on the field a ton due to their O putting up 94 total yards. If their O did anything, and gave their D some rest, possibly different outcome. This is one example of how we are stubborn in our ways and simply dare the opponent to stop us vs. out smarting them and attacking their weakness. We simply do our thing, and if it doesn’t work, we say they were better. Maybe next time. 

Second point is running and passing plays are not all the same. Back to the Oklahoma & ND argument. Both those teams run much more wide, attack down field with the pass, mis directions, crossing routes, WR pick plays, etc. they run stuff where the D is put on an island to stop you (one guy vs. one guy) vs. our style of in a box where 3-4 people need to block and finish the play to get great results. Maybe I am wrong, who are the x’s and o’s guys around here? Can you honestly say we run offensive plays that are tough to defend and from this century?

So while I agree with you in being perhaps better than previous Harbaugh years, we still have a LONG way to go. I personally think it’s less talent and more coaching. 

I'm not saying the offense specifically is the problem, because you're right they did all of those things you mentioned.  But its still the offensive approach that needs to change.  They are still very conservative with their approach, don't really try and put their athletes in space, and don't have a very explosive offense.  That's the problem.

In the S&P+ rankings, Michigan's IsoPPP+ rank -- which deals with explosiveness -- is 57th.  Your four likely playoff teams are 1st (Oklahoma), 3rd (Alabama), 35th (Clemson), and 34th (Notre Dame).  Georgia is 9th.  Ohio State is 60th, but outside of that game against Michigan I don't think anyone was super excited about their offense.

I mean, there are plenty of reporters and analysts saying Michigan doesn't have any explosive athletes.  We all know that's not true.  DPJ and Evans can both be explosive.  But how often is Michigan getting them the ball in space to utilize that?  Almost none.  Which is why its easy to say "Michigan looks slow."

Both the offensive and the defensive approaches are problems, and both need to adapt to the modern game.

Ok, point taken.  The offense they ran at times combined with the type of QB they have been recruiting the past few years would indicate more of a RPO type offense...'modern'...However, you cant argue both ways.  Clearly something is not right, the path to Big Ten Champ/CFP will ALWAYS go through Columbus, and for the foreseeable future they will be an elite team, I mean if a 'down' year is 11-1 and a shot at CFP...Harbaugh needs to recruit more athletic, better players.  He has his Jimmies and Joes, its year 4, 90-95% of this team is Harbaugh recruits, all main contributors are Harbaugh's guys, and if they aren't they've been with him for 4 years of a 5 year career.  Michigan under recruits the top contenders, OSU/Georgia/Bama/Clemson etc, until our proportion of 4/5 to 3 stars flips we wont compete vs the top dogs no matter what offense they run.  In the last two classes Osu had 24 top 100 recruits, that's 1/8th of the very best players in the country playing at Osu...compared to Michigan's 22 top ranked 2/3 stars...Michigan also had 6 top 100 players in the same time frame.

Thank You.  Outstanding.

With how many targets our tight ends get, I emphatically disagree. 

Thank you. One of the best posts I have read this week. My brain was going to explode if I read one more post saying that all of the elite programs, including Georgia, play like Oklahoma.

" We threw the ball a higher percentage of the time than Georgia did this year and comparable percentage of the time to Oklahoma and Notre Dame.  "

Yes.

The problem isn't so much run-pass mix... it's the fact that we are PAINFULLY unexplosive.

Oklahoma averages 14 yards per pass attempt and 7 yards per rush attempt.

Georgia averages 11 and 6.5.

We average 9 and 5.

You have the wrong analogy.  Michigan's problem on offense and defense is more like newspapers avoiding the internet and treating it like a fad.  The ones who said "its not who we are" are gone -- or at the very least left with skeleton staffs.  Sure you can stick to your tried and true thing you've done for years, but the landscape has changed.  You can either adapt, or get left behind.

So if you don't have a plan on defense to deal with athletes in space, and you don't have a plan on offense to put athletes in space, you're behind the times in CFB.  You're a newspaper.  I think the reason most people are harping on the offense is that we all agree Don Brown is a great D-coordinator and will figure that part out.  But the offense has mostly been a shitshow since day 1.  So while Don Brown might figure out how to keep Ohio State to 45 instead of 62, the offense needs to figure out a way to score 50.  That's what both Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, and Oklahoma have all figured out the last 4-5 years, and that's why they are playoff regulars and Michigan is behind.

It’s simple.  Whatever he hits; he dahschtroys.