Wait, you're talking about Derrick Green, who averaged 5.9 yards per carry before going down with a broken clavicle, right? Sure, he didn't do much against ND, but we also couldn't open any holes. That should start to change this year, our OL should be one of the most improved units on the team.
So, what happens with a freshman running back can be precisely extrapolated for the next 4 years? So the fact that he was 5th string as a freshman means it's impossible for him to ever improve?
Bad at identifying talent on the OL?
Logan Tuley Tillman -4* ND offer
Kyle Kalis - 5* ND offer
Mason Cole - 4* ND offer
Eric Magnuson - 4* ND offer
So is ND bad at identifying talent as well?
I'm not sure how many times I can explain that we're going from one of the worst OL coaches to one of the best. I know you keep bringing up past performances, but those were with another AWFUL OL coach. We have fixed that issue, and he's only had 15 practices to work. To assume we won't improve along the OL with an OL coach who is WORLDS better than our old one, is just stupid. If Drevno can fix the OL, and give the running backs an opportunity to make it to the line of scrimmage without already having 2 guys in their face will make a massive difference.
I already explained the spring game, but you just plug your ears and say what you're going to say. We have a SOLID 2 deep along the DL, and we blitzed LB's all day against a VERY vanilla OL and playcalling scheme. Those things will all change once the scores start to count. Again, we're not setting any records this year and we're going to have to hold the other team to low point totals, but this team is finally trending upward, thanks to a HC and a staff that actually get it.
BTW, you get banned already?
1.) Wow, talk about a meaningless stat...
Green averaged 8+ YPC against Applichian State, Miami (OH) and Rutgers...congrats. He ran flat over TERRIBLE teams
Against Notre Dame, Minnesota, and Utah (the 3 teams with a puls that he played, and none were truly elite):
33 total Carries
90 total Yards
0 total TD
On a per game basis, that breaks down to...
11 Carries per game
30 Yards per game
0 TD per game
2.7 YPC
You can see why I see him as a WELL BELOW AVERAGE runningback, who likely wouldn't be in the 2-Deep on any Top25 teams
2.) No, what he did as a frosh doesn't mean he can never improve. However, it's clear from players like Chubb, Freeman, Pernine, Gurley and even Elliott, Gordon, Connoner, etc....special RBs aren't relagated to 5th string and #2 in their own class...they just aren't.
I think it's likely that Isaac turns out to be a solid, maybe even good RB (eventually), but he was nothing even close to special the last time he took a CFB snap...and he hasn't taken a single one in almost 2 years
Quite simply, you don't have anything at all even resembling "special" at the RB position
3.) On your OL...
Notre Dame didn't actively recruit Magnuson, whether or not he lists an offer. Sorry.
Tuley-Tillman was always a "high risk, high reward" guy, and it doesn't really look like he's made much (if any) progress from high school. He could still be good some day, but it's clear he's still a mile away from that.
Kalis is the classic example of "5* BUST!!"...the reality is that is happens. Everyone wanted Kalis 4 years ago, right now he couldn't get an offer to go to small schools in P5 Conferences. The reality is that he has feet of cement and a brain made of mush...not good qualities for an OL (even on the interior)
Go ahead and try to list your starting OL and explain how that OL is going to be dominant unit that can be the focus for an offense....because that's what it will have to be, as all opponent will be stacking 8+ in the box as Ruddock can't stretch them AT ALL and your WR core will scare ABSOLUTELY NO ONE (including teams like Indiana and Purdue)
You're looking at:
LT -- Cole --(undersized OT, has solid athleticism and technique, but he doesn't have the size or power to be dominant yet)
LG -- Kalis -- (simply not looking good, never has at any point in CFB...but he's best remaining option...sadly)
C -- Glasgow -- (best position is guard, but he's a serviceable center)
RG -- Braden -- (new staff clearly moving him inside, hard to say if it will work, he has the size and it will hide his lack of foot-speed and balance, but can he bend and deal with interior players at his height? Learning curve?)
RT -- Magnuson -- (simply lacks ideal physical traits, he's a solid player but was moved inside last year due to athleticism/foot-speed but then was removed from the lineup due to a lack of size/strenght...just not a high quality OL)
You can keep going with "Our new coaching will magically transform this position" but that's not been the case for them previously in CFB
Drevno took multiple years to get USC's OL working, and the reality is that it's still not in a great place.
Stanford took more than a couple years to fix the Stanford OL
You're not likely to see some magic turn-around on the OL just due to improving your coaching...due to lacking really quality OLs, and the ones you have lacking techniques and habits that take quite a bit of time to develop
4.) You don't have anything special on the DL either...and you certainly don't have 2-Deep worth of special players that makes it so that your mixed OL is really going up against a starting quality DL on both sides of the game. You don't really have any proven DEs at all, and while you have guys that are good at DT, it's not like you're running into a bunch of sure-fire NFL draft picks
Also, watching you spring game...both your O-Scheme and D-Scheme were very vanilla. You weren't doing a lot of interesting blitzes (not sure where you're getting that idea), usually you were just rushing 4-5, and when it was 5 you were mainly bringing a fairly standard blitz from an LB
And you're NOT going to be moving away from a very vanilla, predictable O-Scheme during the 2015 season...sorry:
You have a QB who is learning your scheme for the first time, and he hasn't even started working with the team yet
You have and OL that's got 3-4 players starting in new positions from what they've started at extensively in the past
You have a WR unit that doesn't scare anybody, isn't going to spread a defense, and will result with a lot of safeties in the box
You have coaches who are known for running a conservative scheme, until they have a QB and offense that they REALLY know and trust
You're in for a very vanilla, very conservative, very limited offense...and it's going to run into a lot of 8-9 Man Fronts and even more blitzes
I love how Michigan fans are "We're going to better everywhere, players who have never showen anything are suddenly going to become tough, efficient, and powerful...we're basically going to be the slightly less talented/explosive version of the Glory Day UM offenses"
I'm sorry, but your offense is one of the worst in the Big10, from a talent and production perspective...it's quite simply not good, and will lose you more than a few games