Why the snark? This counts as news. The offense may be ordinary, it could even suck, but the fact that it is different now joins accumulating evidence that it will also be different in the fall. And ever since the Gattis hire that's remained an open question.
Chipping away at enduring questions doesn't do it for you?
It's hitting a small hobby horse of mine. Namely this:
Offenses can be judged on several sorts of axis I'll call them. Pro-style to spread, run-heavy to pass heavy, good to bad. There's predictable to unpredictable, but when push comes to shove, the people doing the predicting (defensive coaches) operate on a different level than most of us.
And we, when push comes to shove care about one axis. Good to bad. But we often substitute any of the other axises for that one. The offense would be good if only it were more spread/wide-open/unpredictable. And we mix those words up. A bad offense must be predictable, or rely too much on two-back or whatnot. All the fanebases of all the bad offenses ask for the same thing (unless you root for a bad team Mike Leach actually coaches)
Difference in scheme doesn't equal difference in quality.
Last year's Michigan offense was stupid diverse. It ran all sorts of 3-WR stuff. Ran a good amount of empty with a mobile QB. And split out TEs a good bit. It was pretty whizzy-gig in an era when most everyone runs similar stuff. BUT that QB was only so-so with accuracy, the WRs were pretty good but not loaded with killers, the tailback wasn't THAT great and the line wasn't that good.
And because that offense was good not great and ran some I-form/singleback (even if singleback was hugely for play-action), it's treated like Lloyd Carr's 1998 offense. Running less two-back and more 3-WR, this doesn't matter unless you actually play football better. And you could play good football with a power playbook. (Last year, the offense might've been a bit too diverse, which is another story)
Technique, talent, execution and little things matter worlds more than the broad strokes of scheme. It's news, yes, but it doesn't say that much about the good to bad axis. It's a stand-in for hope. It just is. The "we're opening up the offense" is the counterpart to "the more aggressive defense."
The offense might well be better, but it won't be because their offense looks more like half of the MAC. It'll be because Patterson is better and the ground game is blocked and run better. Maybe it'll be all sorts of cooler, but if its cooler and unsuccessful, we'll be talking about Harbaugh and conservatism, and if it's the same scheme as this year and kills, Gattis will have opened it up.