Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

JMO, but the weakness of pro style offenses is the mental load it puts on the players and coaches. Simplistic perhaps, but as a Nebraska fan I’ve been through two iterations of the transition between pro style and spread-type offenses over the past ten years, and I believe it to be true.

The players are processing more information than their spread-offense peers due to the robust playbooks, and the coaches have less time to install and rep those expansive playbooks as well, compared to 20 years ago. The end result is that execution suffers compared to peers in spread systems with reduced playbooks;  half-field passing games in particular. Pro style players are thinking about assignments, spread offense players are thinking about how to play the man across from them.

There’s really no need for all that Bill Walsh-legacy stuff. Mumme and Leach figured how to compress the code for the WCO passing game years ago, and contemporary officiating allows you to throw with impunity, so you don’t need to run Power in order to prop up your pass pro. For better or worse, that’s where we are IMO.

And he won what 10 WS rings

And Lawrence Phillips won because of quick thinking?

I was in the 'Shoe for the game and watched the first half on DVR last night.  Three things struck me that I haven't seen discussed much here:

First, TOP:
All through the first half I was very concerned about the massive gap in time of possession.  While Ohio State was jumping out to the 21-6 lead the Buckeyes had:

• Three TD drives totaling only about 8:30.  
• Two three-and-outs of less than one minute each.  

Meanwhile the Wolverines had:

• Two LONG FG drives of over 5 minutes each totaling 10:48.  
• Two three-and-outs and a "four-and-out" each longer than Ohio State's unsuccessful drives and totaling about 5:30.  

All through the first half and into the second, I was worried about this because tired and worn out defenses tend to make mistakes that give up big plays and Ohio State's Defense has been bad about giving up big plays anyway.  

Second, dominating an opponent but only barely leading:
After the Ohio State/Penn State game this year we had a discussion about how often we have seen a team dominate the first half statistically but fail to get enough points out of that domination and end up losing like Penn State did.  In that game PSU had two FG's and a missed FG plus a fumble deep in their own territory which meant that their absolute statistical domination only led to a 13-7 Halftime lead.  

I was thinking about that in this game, especially after the disaster on the kickoff after Michigan's TD made it just a two point game.  I was VERY concerned that only achieving a two point lead after dominating most of the first half statistically would come back to bite the Buckeyes.  Even the end-of-half FG did not do much to alleviate my concerns.  The Buckeyes had a HUGE advantage in yards and a five point lead at halftime.  That sounded frighteningly like Penn State's situation at halftime of the tOSU/PSU game.  

Third, Harbaugh's decision to go for two:
What was he thinking?  In the Stadium I was explaining to my wife that most teams do not start going for two until the fourth quarter because if you fail to get it you can wind up chasing it all game long.  The rest of the game ended up being a perfect illustration of my football lesson for my wife.  

• Harbaugh went for two down by 2 in the second quarter.  
• Harbaugh went for two again down by 16 in the fourth quarter.   It would have been 15 if they had kicked the PAT.  
• When Harbaugh finally went back to kicking PAT's his team was down 17 and he needed the PAT to make it a possibly two possession game.  It would have been 15 if they had kicked the two PAT's.  

He's certainly passionate, but at times it's best to just shut up

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/university-michigan/wolverines/2018/12/11/michigan-football-chase-winovich-mirage-ohio-state/2278378002/