Michigan Madness

Athlete Development
161

By the way, using Iowa and Wisconsin to make your point is for wins going back to the early 80’'s? Hayden Fry had Iowa playing good ball back then but they were hardly a power then to compare wins against over that time. Only under Ferentz in the last few years have they become something resembling a national power. Wisconsin did not turn around their program until Alvarez got there around 1990.

All the teams you mention might, not sure, but might have had inferior overall programs over that entire time frame compared to UM. Who knows? Of course now we are talking about the entirety of the programs and not just s & c.

As I wrote earlier, when the one constant over time is s & c, it’s really not that difficult to make an assessment over one significant variable. It’s really not that difficult to come to the assessment comparing combine numbers(from reputable sources, standardized testing procedures). It’s also not difficult to determine this when one has been a fan for a long time, followed the recruiting process and has a familiarity with many of the basics in the program-including the sHIT methods. When the recruiting classes indicate much better potential performances on the field and the results don’t demonstrate this-not one year of a potentially poorly assessed class but classes averaged out over many years, it’s quite easy to see.

If you were a UM fan(I’m assuming you are not) you would likely see this but not having followed the recruiting closely over the years you don’t know what goes in vs. what comes out. As pointed out earlier, some kids come in with legit, fast track times and then years later cannot crack 4.7 in the fourty. Even if someone can’t or won’t look into the total program you can look at the combine results and clearly see that s & c is not being done properly.

I’m not suggesting that 40’s and verticals are the end-all since SOME players can compensate with other skills but ultimately the numbers, are important or why else would anyone train and try to train better. Should we not try to get faster, jump higher, etc.? No 4.2 or 36" does not necessarily =better players but it does make for a better athlete and it sure can help to be more successful. Again why else would/should anyone train? I would think that improving team-wide athleticism along with footbal specific skills would go a long way to winnning games. You say schools would not mind seeing good combine results. Isn’t that one of the major reason to have s & c-improved speed and jumping power-many other aspects, of course, but those are generally considered a major focus. Yes they win but could things be done better, no question. It’s not just a matter of being pleased when thing are good when aspects could be so much better. No need to accept mediocrity. As far as training to win the s and c guy is there to train their physical capacities and help make them physically and mentally tougher but it is up to the football coaches to coach them to win.
No, the level of recruits that come there is not commensurate with the draft performances, not even close. The kids there have success because of talent, coaching, etc. but nothing is enhanced as far as s & c until this year when guys were told to “watch what they eat and keep their bodyweights down”-real cutting edge stuff.

162

Combine numbers are not the end all be all, if they were there would be a lot more track athletes making an impact in the nfl.

And overall I think in the HIT period Michigan has gotten a respectable amount of people in the draft, but you its not so either way, what does that have to do with Michigan, Michigan makes teams that can win thats their major goal.

Draft status isnt the major concern of Michigan, and all draft status is correlated to is how much money you make for a couple years, not how much of an impact you make in the NFL. There are late rounders that have come up huge and there are top picks that did nothing but get a nice view of games from the bench.

If it was all about the number college and pro teams would just get combine numbers and recruit those kids, something like that does occur at least in some colleges I am aware, but there would be no point of getting game film of kids or going to their games, just get there numbers thats all you would need.

163

Combine numbers do reflect overall proficiency of the S&C program to some degree. I originally started this thread to point out significant deficiencies in the S&C program, not whether or not they have a good football program (which does involve many more variables as all of you have said).

In track sprinting, a poor S&C program will be the end of you. I’d suspect that there is significantly more wiggle room for a football player, where you have to remember plays, read coverages, make judgement calls on the spot, etc.

Having said that, it was also obvious to me that the sprint coach at Michigan had no clue either.

164

#2 having read your initial post i must admit thats its the same all over the world.some coaches are ignorant and are not williong to change…if you don’t go 1 day without learning something new then whats the point in living.

coaches must always be open to new info.no 1 coach is the messiah of sprinting.no 1 athlete is the same so we all as individuals must learn and address each other

165

Re: combine numbers not being and end-all. Yes, I said just that in my previous post. However, results are still important, very important. Why else would the s & c coach strive to improve the numbers? Why should anyone train to try to improve the numbers? Furthermore, why would pro teams invest so much money and time in testing and physically evaluating players if it weren’t very important?

For a strength coach, the results from testing, combine results, pro team workouts go a long way to tell that coach if their training is effective in improving the speed, strength, power of the athletes. To dismisss such results is to dismiss the value of strength and conditioning as a whole. If athletes are tested early on and then at various point during the training, and verticals, slj’s, or 40’s(or all of them at once) become worse over time, the strength coach better take notice and make adjustments to the program or the individual. If not, he’s not worth much. He’s not doing his part in making the program better.

No, improved numbers don’t necessarily= better players but it does translate to improved athleticism and then it’s up to both the players and the football coaches to help turn the improved physical abilities into better play. If performance number were unimportant then college and pro football would not test for them but they recognize the importance. Certainly they look at entire battery of evaluating tests points, game films, senior bowl/hula bowl/shrine bowl peformances and practices, interviews, background checks, character references, etc.

You say you think has Michigan has gotten a “respectable” amount of people to the draft. Not sure what you mean by respectable but as I’ve said many times earlier, the number and placing of their draft picks are NOT commensurate with the level of talent that has been coming into the program. I’ve provided many draft statistics to show just that. Comparing their results, combine and draft numbers and placings to teams with, on average, much lower levels of talent successfully recruited, they fall way behind their competition.

Of course the goal of the overall program is to win games but what is the goal of s & c to do their part in helping to win those games? Is it lower verticals, slower 40’s, high injury rates, fattening up the team(before this year) with ridiculous nutritional advice? I guess that is the goal or at least that what has been accomplished with ineffective, primitive methods of training.

Don’t think that draft status is unimportant in the grand scheme of things. It’s not at the top of their list, without a doubt but it is clearly not unimportant. This is a recruiting tool used by colleges on a regular basis. You don’t think that it’s with great pride that OSU recruiters can tell a prospect about all the guys they have had drafted and beyond that, drafted very high? If they were to negative recruit against UM. For example, they point out how poorly UM players have done in recent years in draft status and in total numbers of players that were drafted at all. That will, with a number of players, have a positive impact for them(OSU) and a negative one for UM. For a talented high school kid thinking nfl beyond college, this could be crucial.

Again, regarding numbers, not they are not the end-all but they are clearly important enough to train for and to test for. It’s seems as though you are suggesting the numbers are
irrelevant. Never once did I indicate previously, that numbers were the only important part in evaluating a player and that the ability to play the game was/is not crucial to potential success. It’s not as if anyone was suggesting that draft picks should be based upon 100m placings at nationals. We are talking about evaluating high level football players who have demonstrated the ability, the skill to play the game. Numbers don’t tell the whole story about a player but pre/post testing sure can tell a great deal about the efficiency/effectiveness or lack thereof of a program.

166

Is all of the above referring to just the football S&C or the track program as well? I ask this because I read an interview a while back in which Braylon Edwards was praising UM’s track coach for his work with him.

167

Braylon’s dad is a track coach himself. The club works out at UofM in the winter 3 days a week.

168

I saw that as well but in the article I saw he was specifically praising Ron Warhurst. Apparently Edwards was quite a high jumper (6’11)

169

Ah ok, didn’t know that.

170

As an aside, what exactly did Stan Edwards do with Braylon when he was at UM? The same thing I read stated that he ran 4.4, 6.8 and 21.x indoors along with a near 7 foot HJ and 31 reps of 225! Unless he worked exclusively with his dad it would seem that the UM S&C didn’t hurt him that bad!

171

my bro played football with a guy at mich tech univ who train with braylon and his dad, i know they didnt do much speed work there workouts were more tempo based. i didnt know braylon did 31 reps.

172

So he worked with his dad- but would the dad still be able to train there if they didn’t give credit to the coach?

173

my bro friend was in college and it was during his summer break and braylon was still in highschool, braylon dad has a pretty good track club. i believe braylon dad played fb for mich and play pro for the lions.

174

He did run track at UM at least through his soph. year and worked with his dad during much of his time at UM. Stan Edwards was at least able to offset some of Gittleson’s b.s. with some good training.

175

while at mich braylon did lil work with his bro most during the summer months.

176

They used to go to Windsor (from Detroit), but switched to UofM recently from what I heard. The club has lots of kids and usually have some of the top sprinters in Michigan.

I played football in Detroit and a teamate worked with Stan in the summer. He said he was big into sleds. My teammate ran a 4.3 on a shitty field in Nov in Michigan for the Chiefs. He made a few practice squads but never made it.

177

I definitely understand what your saying Charlie, you can’t throw the S&C under the bus while your still on the team, but I would think it would be quite hard to workout with the team and do extra workouts with someone else on the side.

178

The players have great respect for Carr and don’t want to alienate themselves from the program so most don’t make their negative comments public.

That said, most do not(that I’m aware of) train even remotely in a way similar to UM’s HIT insanity.

179

How do they go about doing this?

180

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant to say FORMER players don’t want to alienate themselves from the program, etc.