Marcorus Garrett
We're just one week away
from Head Coach Pete Mangurian's Spring Prospectus with his
comments on the returning players.
Kudos to the athletic
department and Mangurian for doing this!
Obviously his evaluations will be more accurate, if more guarded, than what I'm writing about the players these last couple of weeks... that's because he's the coach. And the added information provided, (I believe this is the first ever "prospectus" ever provided before spring practice in CU history), is really appreciated.
But again, it's also important to be cautious. These messages from the coaches and the athletic department are still essentially monologues and they may or may not address the real issues facing the team in 2013.
I'm probably crazy to hope for this, but I would really like a detailed explanation for Mangurian's lighter lineup philosophy. I can tell you that EVERY OTHER COACH IN THE IVIES is just as curious. I've actually had a number of Ivy assistants ask ME about it, as if I could explain it to them. They think the strategy is crazy, for what that's worth.
Let me be clear one more time: I am a fan of counter-intuitive thinking, so I am REALLY hoping this less fat/more muscle plan works. I'm NOT pretending to understand it. What I do know is that the undersized offensive line was pushed around last year and our opponents saw it as a weakness before, during and after each game.
Obviously his evaluations will be more accurate, if more guarded, than what I'm writing about the players these last couple of weeks... that's because he's the coach. And the added information provided, (I believe this is the first ever "prospectus" ever provided before spring practice in CU history), is really appreciated.
But again, it's also important to be cautious. These messages from the coaches and the athletic department are still essentially monologues and they may or may not address the real issues facing the team in 2013.
I'm probably crazy to hope for this, but I would really like a detailed explanation for Mangurian's lighter lineup philosophy. I can tell you that EVERY OTHER COACH IN THE IVIES is just as curious. I've actually had a number of Ivy assistants ask ME about it, as if I could explain it to them. They think the strategy is crazy, for what that's worth.
Let me be clear one more time: I am a fan of counter-intuitive thinking, so I am REALLY hoping this less fat/more muscle plan works. I'm NOT pretending to understand it. What I do know is that the undersized offensive line was pushed around last year and our opponents saw it as a weakness before, during and after each game.
And I continue to be
concerned that perhaps our coaches, and other coaches in the Ivies, partly come
to our conference in order to avoid even the slightest probing or challenging
questions, (or any questions at all), from the outside news media. It's okay to
EXPECT less media scrutiny here, but to demand it is another thing. And I fear
that this insulation from regular outside questions left our last three head
coaches badly unprepared for the rare times when they were challenged in any
way. And I don't want to see any more erratic behavior at postgame press
conferences,
It's certainly okay to
be unhappy after a loss, and an angry response to an inappropriate question is
also okay within reason. But attacking an innocent questioner like Norries
Wilson did to a Spectator reporter in 2006, or acting like you're from
Mars, like Mangurian did after the Dartmouth game last year, is not
acceptable.
And as for shouting at
fans outside the locker room, please. We're all adults... Hell, we're all
Columbia HOMERS! If you can't take the questions we're asking about Lions
football, I'm not sure diving on the West Side Highway is for you either. It's
time for everyone to grow up, stop being so defensive, and act like a Mensch.
Okay, that's done. Now
let's talk about the running backs.
Of course, the headliner
in this group and for the entire team is rising senior Marcorus
Garrett. Garrett put in the third best single season rushing totals in
Columbia history with 957 yards. He also had a strong 4.6 yards per carry
average. Does he need to step it up even more this spring? In reality, he
probably doesn't and I wouldn't be surprised if the coaches look to protect him
from injury by limiting his full contact practice time. But there are indeed
some fundamental things Garrett needs to do better, including being more
consistent with his backfield pass blocking, (although he is sometimes
spectacular at that).
How important is Garrett
to the Lions in 2013? Consider that all the other running backs and full backs
COMBINED carried the ball a total of just 21 times in 2012. So he needs to stay
healthy and strong at all costs.
But the cupboard is not
completely bare after Garrett. I was impressed by rising sophomore Cameron
Molina in limited duty and I think if he steps it up just a bit he'll
have an inside track for the top backup position.
Rising senior Griffin
Lowry remains a very tough player and rising junior Alec
Fisher rising sophomore Trevor Bell can be a
good options in a pinch even if they are primarily a special teams players.
At fullback, Columbia
only has two returning players on the roster in rising junior Steven
Silvio and rising sophomore Mark Cieslak. Silvio did
well enough last year as a classic blocking back, but he'll need to step it up
ahead of a crop of 2-3 decent potential FB's coming in with the freshmen class
this summer. Cieslak is a mystery right now.
All in all, it still
just feels like Garrett and Molina are the two ball carriers to watch this
spring. The #1 goal for Garrett will be to avoid injury, and the #1 goal for
Molina will be to boost his stock a bit and be ready to be an even more
effective backup for Garrett.
TOMORROW: The Quarterbacks
21 comments:
Is the younger brother from Bergen Catholic definitely transferring? Where to and why did he not pan out?
Jake,
I know less about the coach's philosophy than you; but, I really can't believe that he would choose to play a lighter player over a heavier one if HE thought that the heavier one was better. It appears that the lighter players were taller and were Frosh.
Perhaps he was sending a message to the team about "physical fittness". In fairness to him, we were not a great running team the year before with the upperclassmen either.
Garrett would have gotten the 1,000 yards is he had more carries against Brown. But we had to go to the pass in the second half when we fell behind. I thought Garrett was the second best RB in the league last year, behind Varga. I remember being surprised at how fast he was, when he outran the entire Cornell team on his long TD. Varga is much bigger and even stronger than Garrett, or at least he was last year. One comment on the so-called grand experiment. I do not believe that Pete has decided to go with a skinny OL. I think he decided to go with the best five OLs he had, recognizing that we had a lot of overweight guys who didn't have the stamina to play four quarters at full speed. That meant playing three firs tears and tow second years at a position in which a player generally needs two years before he is ready for prime time.
Dartmouth's Pierre is better than both of them. Injuries last season prevented him from turning out some big numbers.
Varga is an absolute beast. Garrett had been injured until last year, and managed to rush for almost 1,000 yards behind was was by far the youngest, lightest and least experienced OL in the league. If Garrett was running behind Dartmouth's huge OL he would have rushed for 1,500 yards. I was also impressed by Pierre, but all of this is pretty subjective. All I can say is that I think Garrett is a terrific back and I'm glad he wears the light blue.
let's see if the taller, leaner underclassmen from last year's poor "O" line get stronger and play better this year. I predict 6 (six) wins
I can tell you two things for sure. Mangurian doesn't care what the rest of the coaches in the league think. Why should he, he's been at the highest level of this game for a long time, he has a plan. Secondly he doesn't feel he owes you an explanation, especially if you have such a close relationship with the rest of the coaches in"our" league.the only "reporter" who hasn't spoken directly with Mangurian is you jake, why is that? He seems to talk with everyone else. As for yelling in the parking lot, that didnt happen, but it's a good story. I was there, were you?
You're beginning to embarrass yourself with these sycophantic posts regarding Mangurian. I'll continue to publish your posts as I do for everyone, but the fact that you're anonymous and I'm not already puts me on such a higher level than you that it's laughable you would even challenge me.
Be a fan, that's fine. So am I. But the jury is out on him among the adults. We were 2-5 in the league last year, (thanks to a miracle win over Yale), and lost a game 69-0.
That's not a record that justifies arrogance at any level.
And Magurian absolutely did get right in the face of a fan after the Penn game because that fan had the terrible gall to openly say we lost a game that we had in the bag. It was an embarrassing moment for everyone involved, especially Mangurian. I suppose defending him by denying it happened is one way to go, but if you are a true friend, I'd take him aside and insist he embarrassed himself and advise he not do it again.
And I love how even the SLIGHTEST question of the coach's strategy elicits this kind of nastiness. It's amazing really. No one over the age of 5 realistically questions my support for the team and even for Mangurian. I want him, not just the team -HIM- to succeed. But I'd like to get some explanation for his strategy on weight, not because I'm OWED anything, but because I'm curious. It seems like a grand new idea. It's interesting. If it succeeds, I selfishly would like to be among the first outsiders to document it. All of the above is patently clear to any rational adult, but apparently not to you. Sadly.
WOF: I hear Mike Gerst is transferring to Penn State.
Coaching is a tough job. So,if a coach loses a heartbreaker cut him some slack if he isn't all cuddly to a fan who tells him that he blew it.
Thanks Jake, PSU? Do you know if he plans to play football there?
Also, I agree with you, anyone who is courageous enough to post a strong opinion should also have the balls to also use their name, or at the very least a nickname, so we know who is talking...
I really want Mangurian to succeed but I agree that his personality is sometimes "odd". If he wins nobody will care and I hope he wins big!!!
The oldlion is right. Coaching is a tough job involving thousands of this and thats so it is important that we cut our coaching staff some slack if something seems not just right. We need to keep in mind that last year was Coach Mangurian's first as head coach at Columbia. All first year coaches have a lot to learn even they are seasoned veterans like Mangurian. Clearly, Mangurian did just that and he is coming into his second year with knowledge and information he didn't have before about every aspect of Columbia Football. This means that he knows much more about the players, the facilities, recruiting, publicitiy, communications, etc., etc. Obviously, he is trying to build a winning program at Columbia which involves doing all of those things better than the other Ivy League coaches. I am encouraged, as you are, by the promised additional publicity starting next week. That alone makes me very optimistic about Columbia Football as the lack of publicity has seriously hurt us for years. Hopefully, the much needed dissemination of information about the players will end our mutual frustration as devoted Columbia football fans of not knowing anything much about the players, the coaches and their strategies. As you suggested, Jake, publicity and communications, institutional and personal, are the keys to any coach building a successful college athletic program.
Well said Lionrock.
Getting back to the offensive line, I'd offer a couple of observations. First, taller linemen have been on the scene at CU for a number of years now. Wilson made a point of getting bigger guys who could carry more weight. In fact the football roster, some years, has had more 6'5"+ guys than the basketball roster and line size that compares well to the competition. And Ward was 6'6"+, selected at one point by the league's other coaches as All-Ivy. So, choosing to go with a taller line likely was not the issue. Second, the only coach held over from Wilson's staff is the O-line coach, the highly experienced Argast, so coaching likely was solid. It appears, then, that the line issue, a weakness for several years, has been neither coaching nor size. It's the toughest part of the team to put together, but others do it. So what has been missing to make the O-line gel?
Footwork, agility and strength are needed in an OL. Having five 300 pounders in and of itself doesn't make sure a good OL if they can't get out of their own way. Our best lineman in the last ten years was Jeff Adams, who was also a very athletic guy. So there is no "great experiment" going on here. The simple fact is that Coach M doesn't want fat guys who can't play and has decided to work with guys who have some athletic ability and the frames to add both size and muscle.
It's really pretty simple. Coach M was starting over on the offensive linemen, having them lose fat last year and now rebuild their bodies the right way. While he may subscribe to the Broncos' theory of somewhat smaller linemen, playing with woefully undersized (in terms of weight) linemen wasn't his intent. Since last year they've been building up with better weight, and the manhandling they experienced at times last year was probably terrific incentive during the offseason.
That makes sense. Maybe we'll hear that from the Coach himself very soon.
Post a Comment