Although I greatly appreciate the research you put into it, my comment was more along the lines of what Nubbz was saying. It wasn’t that Michigan was actually going run run pass, it was a description of the vanilla playcalling and lack of creativity.
Ahhh, good. We're now saying, that while we're describing things a certain way, we're kind of looking for the right words to describe a feeling of sorts.
So let me posit this. The Michigan play-calling is not vanilla, nor does it lack creativity. It's just that the offense is bad/underwhelming. That might be player quality, not necessarily talent but development. Maybe, MAYBE it's about scheme fit and such. But creativity, probably not.
Because they're not vanilla. If anything, they're chunky monkey topped with funfetti, pickles and egg rolls. Michigan ran no fewer than 6 or 7 distinct offensive looks. They did all sorts of things with a hot and cold QB, not great RBs and a lint that gets blown through.
We have this belief that complexity equates to success. And it often doesn't (this is a great lesson of high school football and a lot carries over). Just because you're good doesn't mean you're outsmarting someone. Out executing, having better technique, winning battles, this is far, far more important than the calls.
