Good question left in the comments by Max:

Will the aggregate transition of both new players and a new system make for a "whole is less than the sum of the parts" situation?

That is to say, while I'm sure the compounded issues will make for a more difficult transition than if the Wolverines had to endure only one or the other, perhaps the fact that the players are indeed "new" will help speed up the implementation of the new schemes.

Would you rather have Chad Henne step into the new offense after 4 years of being groomed in the old system, or Steven Threet (I won't use Feagin as an example since it's not really a fair comparison) take the reigns having not played a snap of college football in any other system? Henne is likely still the best bet, but the point is that the playing field is shifted in Threet's favor. Add Feagin into the equation and I think it becomes a dilemma that may even compel one to lean toward him and Threet.

While congruent comparisons are harder to draw with Mario Manningham, Adrian Arrington, and Mike Hart as their respective positions are more grounded in athleticism, they can still nonetheless be made.

I'll start with the easiest part of this question, which also happens to be the least important. In terms of other skill position players, I don't think the transition will have a huge effect. Wide receivers will still have to run routes (and many of the same ones). Players who have spent 2-3 years not having to block (that much) might resent that they now have to do so, and half-ass it, but the new scheme itself is not impeded by the fact that they were taught by other people before. Same thing with running backs, but they will be even better off. They have been learning a zone run scheme for the past two years, so they will be continuing to do that, with the patience, vision, and other skills they have learned over the past couple years. As a bonus, they still have the same position coach.

Moving along, offensive linemen might have to do a little deprogramming before they can learn the new system (meaning that incoming freshmen may be slightly better off because they don't have to unlearn anything - though they'll still be behind in terms of college conditioning programs). An offensive lineman who has, for example, spent three years knowing that his pass-protection first move will be X may take some time to stop doing X instinctually, and remember (through actual memory or muscle memory via repetition) to do Y instead. Same thing with run blocking. However, it can be said that, in general, pass blocking techniques and schemes aren't going to be vastly different from each other, and as far as run blocking, the linemen have been learning a zone scheme for the past two years. The returning guys might need to unlearn a few things, but they will also still start ahead of the incomers (who have to unlearn some of their high school schemes, anyway).

As far as QBs, this may be the area where your idea makes the most sense (and you seem to agree, as that was the primary framework in which you asked it). If we're going to start with all things equal, we would have to be talking about the same quarterback, since Steve Threet and Chad Henne have different natural skill sets and learning ability (not that I'm implying Henne is any smarter than Threet or vice versa, just that it's unlikely they are of the exact same intelligence - football or otherwise). So, we will start with a redshirt freshman Chad Henne who has learned under the tutelage of Scot Loeffler for one year (and, if we're nitpicking, GT's terrible QBs coach for one spring (not that I know anything about GT's QB coach other than that he must be terrible if Reggie Ball was able to start at Tech)), and a veteran Chad Henne, who has learned under Loeffler for four years, and see what we end up with.

I think I would still have the veteran Chad Henne, and have to deprogram him a little bit. First, there are some things that will apply to a quarterback, regardless of system. As long as he is able to memorize plays, he will be able to make the right read. Senior Chad Henne will invariably be better at recognizing coverages, and knowing which receiver to hit in said coverage, than Redshirt Freshman Chad Henne. In the passing game at least, SCH is definitely preferred. Of course, there are other aspects to quarterbacking. Having the confidence to ride out fakes, and being acquainted with the speed of the college game both benefit SCH over RFCH.

However, there is some unlearning to do that will favor RFCH. The footwork in the system is likely to be completely different, and SCH will have to forget all the old stuff if he wants to succeed. This is similar to the situation of the O-linemen. Also, SCH will be unfamiliar with reading the DE on zone-read plays (which we all know are a very important part of the RichRod offense). RFCH might have to adjust to the speed of DEs at the college level, but he won't be trying to wrap his mind (already filled with other information) around something completely new.

In all, I think it is preferable to have veteran players, regardless of whether you are teaching an entirely new system or not. While there is some unlearning to do, they are also more used to the process of learning football things than new players would have. They might make a couple mistakes by accidentally replicating the old system, but is that really any worse than a mistake of completely not knowing what you have to do? Also, there is the conditioning issue. Even if Michigan's old S&C regime was outdated, it was a college training program (and returning players have also had Barwis's winter program as well). Under almost any circumstances (i.e. you are not trying to re-teach a quarterback with the intellect of Anthony Morelli), you'd take the veterans. Alas, Michigan doesn't have that choice at many positions (especially quarterback), and will be starting young(er) guys almost all over the field.

Labels: coaching, personnel

This entry was posted by Tim, on Sunday, May 04, 2008. You can leave your response.

---