Devin Gardner's Role
I posted this under another post but I think it deserves its own. I'm not angry at all about his situation, but hoping to elicit some opinions on how we are handling his development and future because I am a bit confused.
I was a bit surprised to see no sign of Devin Gardner warming up on the sidelines when Denard went down (I know Tate had been warming up before the injury). In fact, I can't remember his name coming up on the telecast nor any mention of him on this board after the game (except a quick shout out from RR in the post-game press conference). It seems that RR has decided to make Tate the #2 QB. I'm fine with this and I think his experience and ability make him a very good back up.
But now, what is Devin Gardner's role on this team? To be a third string, not play, and have no Red Shirt? I cannot remember a top echelon QB recruit who ended up as the 3rd string and lost that year of eligibility. Can you?
The justification for not RS him this year was that he would get valuable experience, or was in fact better than Tate at #2 as a true Freshman. Is that still the case? Do people still buy that?
My main concern is that his place in this program lacks any definition except that he will be the presumptive starter in 3 years (and will only have 1 year to play). Of course, in a football program it's all about working hard and earning time, but I think that maybe we could have handled this a bit better. I think DG has amazing potential, probably the best passer of our 3 QBs. I hope that we didn't waste this season for him.
What are people's thoughts?
October 17th, 2010 at 3:04 PM ^
I feel you are over analyzing this, and just need to let the coach's coach.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:00 PM ^
The Devin Gardner situation is dumb.
Unless they come up with a fake injury or illness to pretend that he has (and therefore get a medical redshirt), then it was ridiculous to play him against UConn.
Those are my thoughts.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:08 PM ^
I just showed this to my husband. It's been a running argument the last 2 nights and now I can say "Magnus agrees with me".
October 17th, 2010 at 3:12 PM ^
You're a smart woman.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:55 PM ^
Solving football related domestic disputes since 2010!
October 17th, 2010 at 3:09 PM ^
Maybe someone can correct me on this, but wouldn't a medical redshirt also preclude him from practicing the rest of the year? I'm not sure that's something we want.
I do agree that burning his redshirt was dumb.
October 17th, 2010 at 8:53 PM ^
That can't be the case, since medical redshirts aren't applied for until after the season is over.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:36 PM ^
October 17th, 2010 at 5:40 PM ^
You didn't watch the UConn game, so I'm not sure why your opinion on what should or should not have been done in the UConn game is relevant.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:20 PM ^
You like perpetuating lies, don't you? I've told you this before, and I'll point it out again, although you'll still probably choose to ignore facts.
I openly stated that I missed the first 1.5 quarters of the UConn game due to having a job. I have watched every snap of every game since then. Missing 1.5 quarters of a game does not preclude me from having valid opinions about how the entire season plays out.
Stop lying.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:55 PM ^
I agree, we had a dream situation with Tate having 12 starts and being our back up to let Devin RS. Many coaches will kill for that depth. The only thing I can think of is RR promised DG no Red Shirt.
October 18th, 2010 at 2:07 PM ^
and if Michigan applies for and gets a medical redshirt for Gardner at the end of this year, then the coaches' handling of gardner this year was neither "dumb," nor "ridiculous."
Beyond that, we can't say for sure how the reality or the expectation of actual playing time affected our three QB's. There may be things that are happening in practice that are important, that we cannot see and which are not apparent to those watching games on Saturdays.
So the Gardner situation may be "dumb," or it may be "smart." Either one. And it's so hard to choose.
Those are my thoughts.
October 18th, 2010 at 2:11 PM ^
At the same time, if Gardner sits for the rest of the year, and if Michigan applies for and gets a medical redshirt for Gardner at the end of this year, then the coaches' handling of gardner this year was neither "dumb," nor "ridiculous."
Maybe not. Maybe instead of "dumb" or "ridiculous" it's a huge gamble and/or completely disingenuous.
None of those qualities are admirable.
October 18th, 2010 at 2:25 PM ^
My position is that we don't know for sure, and therefore we can't say something as conclusively judgmental as calling the Michigan coaches "dumb" or "ridiculous."
You, on the other hand, contend that you do know enough, right now, and that you can safely make that pronouncement, before the season is even over and before we even know whether any application will be made for a Gardner redshirt in 2010, or 2011, or beyond.
Congratulations to you on your superior knowledge and insight.
October 18th, 2010 at 2:34 PM ^
I'm sorry. I'll reserve judgment until December 2014. I didn't know I wasn't allowed to have an opinion until then.
Anyway, whether or not the entire situation has played out yet, Gardner's redshirt WAS burned in those first few games. Even if the coaches are counting on a medical redshirt, like I said, that's a huge gamble...and if they don't get it, then they've screwed themselves out of possibly having Devin Gardner for a fifth year.
So yeah. It was dumb. I'm sure of it. I guess they might be able to weasel a medical redshirt out of the whole ordeal, but like I said, that would be completely unorthodox, a huge [and unnecessary] gamble, and potentially unethical and disingenuous. Even if they do get a medical redshirt this season, I still won't agree with the decision to play him against UConn (and other teams).
October 17th, 2010 at 3:01 PM ^
I definitely would not call Gardner a better passer than Tate right now, but i do agree it kinda feels like we definitely should have redshirted him
October 17th, 2010 at 3:07 PM ^
natural ability as a passer -- considering his arm strength, size and mechanics.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:16 PM ^
Gardner lacks that decision making and mechanics at this early stage of his development. It's not a knock on Devin. Tate is just more fundamentally sound, at passing the ball right now. Give Devin another year to develop, before comparing him.
October 18th, 2010 at 9:28 AM ^
October 18th, 2010 at 2:41 PM ^
Srs,ly?
October 17th, 2010 at 3:03 PM ^
It was a discipline thing, basically. Kind of a shitty sacrifice to make (2014 Devin) to punish Tate for his summer, but the message did seem to get through. Plus I feel a little hypocritical going on about how we're focusing too much on discipline.
Hopefully one of the next two years he can get it.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:05 PM ^
They could always just redshirt him next year couldn't they?
October 17th, 2010 at 3:10 PM ^
It's rare that anyone redshirts beyond their freshman year, unless it's due to injury.
So yeah, it's possible. But unlikely.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:44 PM ^
I think there's a good chance that Tate is better than Devin next year. If that turns out to be true, then it would be pretty natural for Devin to red shirt. Rarely do we need a 3rd QB.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:14 PM ^
Virginia Tech tried to redshirt Tyrod Taylor his sophomore year when they had Sean Glenon it didn't workout there because Glenon was inconsistent and they didn't have another choice I could see Michigan doing that next year because Denard will be better and Tate is Solid back up and or starter.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:14 PM ^
Virginia Tech tried to redshirt Tyrod Taylor his sophomore year when they had Sean Glenon it didn't workout there because Glenon was inconsistent and they didn't have another choice I could see Michigan doing that next year because Denard will be better and Tate is Solid back up and or starter.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:09 PM ^
This offense is predicated on a mobile quarterback, and mobile quarterbacks tend to take lots of hits especially with the way we use them. We NEED to have at least 3 competent QB's that can run the offense. His role right now is to be ready in case any of the guys above him get hurt, which we've seen throughout the year can happen.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:15 PM ^
I'm sure those snaps against BGSU, UConn, and UMass will make him a viable option down the stretch against Wisconsin and OSU.
In case you couldn't tell, the above sentence was sarcasm.
If our top two QBs get hurt, THEN you burn the redshirt and hope Gardner can do something miraculous. Until then, you leave him on the bench.
(And don't give me the excuse that both Forcier and Robinson got hurt in the BGSU game, because Jack Kennedy could have played and still won that game.)
October 17th, 2010 at 3:19 PM ^
Ha ok, I never said that burning his redshirt was a good idea, the OP simply asked what his role is on the team, and I simply gave an answer.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:43 PM ^
Before yesterday, Bowling Green was the only game in which Gardner saw meaningful action. (You couldn't draw any conclusions from his extremely brief appearances vs. UConn and Notre Dame.) Against Bowling Green, Forcier was clearly the better QB. That was the game when Tate passed Gardner on the depth chart. Gardner has not seen the field since.
The open question is: why? If they actually believed that Gardner was the 2nd-best QB, then that is all the reason needed for playing him, even if Tate subsequently picked up the pace. If they played Gardner only to “send Tate a message,” then it goes down as one of the dumbest burns of a redshirt—ever.
A medical redshirt is still technically possible, provided he doesn’t play again this year. But a medical redshirt requires an actual injury or illness. Teams have been known to “invent” injuries, with a compliant doctor signing off on whatever the team needs them to say. Michigan is not exactly in a position to be playing fast & loose with the rules, even if “everybody does it.”
October 17th, 2010 at 3:51 PM ^
October 17th, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^
Anybody that watched Gardner play in high school will tell you the kid needed to redshirt. I'm not sure how a couple plays vs UCONN and a one vs ND is going to help DG if DRob goes down. He may be a better runner than Tate and he fits the RR mold of a run/pass QB but to burn his redshirt for a couple of garbage plays was foolish.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:23 PM ^
I'm okay with sacrificing a year down the road if the coaches think that DG can contribute now. It's not like we won't have other QBs to back him up down the road.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:25 PM ^
If the coaches think he can contribute now, then he should be helping us win games.
He's not.
So obviously the coaches don't think he can help.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:15 PM ^
What if Denard and Tate get hurt in the last 5 games and Devin comes in and is a factor in getting a win. Does your viewpoint change? The experience he got in those games could be the difference in a game.
I agree with your thought on whole, just saying.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:04 PM ^
No, because I'm not convinced that one snap against UConn, one snap against Notre Dame, and several plays against BGSU prepares him any better for facing a Big Ten opponent than practicing against Michigan's defense. I realize Michigan's defense is horrible, but so was BGSU's, which is the only team he played against extensively.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:17 PM ^
Magnus knows his crap and doesn't like this idea of wasting a red-shirt. I don't think many sane people do. We're all sane. Therefore, this seems like a bad Idea to us.
However, while wasting the RS is undesirable, DG still has the opportunity to medical RS. I think he'll do that. Reasons stated above:
1.) he hasn't played since Tate came back and this allows him to RS.
2.) It's stupid not to RS him.
3.) Everyone else is doing it. It's not that hard. <--assumption there.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:22 PM ^
I've heard nothing from UM suggesting that DG will redshirt.
I posted this OP for the precise reason that we have heard basically NOTHING about DG from the coaches and I thought it was a bit odd. I'm glad Magnus agreed with me and helped point out this issue.
Again, I don't think he's going to RS. RR wants all his weapons available for the next 2 years - his make or break years.
October 18th, 2010 at 10:45 AM ^
I think in order for them to grant you a medical redshirt, something has to actually be wrong with you. I mean I didn't confer with Magnus or anything, but the name kind of suggests that.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:48 PM ^
Why does everyone act as if Magnus is the second coming of Monte Kiffin?
October 17th, 2010 at 6:01 PM ^
Look at his points, man.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:30 PM ^
dont look at the points total to see who has cred. Frequently, the posters with massive points have padded their totals with lots of meaningless posts ("You go girl!" is one of my favorites......have seen it posted by five different 1000+ point people)
hell, I had hundreds of negpoints during Brian's fascination with World Cup soccer for asking what it was doing as featured content on MGoBlog.........and for saying I saw Tate falling to third string.
Points is just an artifiicial traffic builder, enabling Brian to reap bigger ad dollars. dont confuse it with credibility.
October 18th, 2010 at 10:25 AM ^
That went right on over your head there, pal.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:59 PM ^
If the coaches are even considering the possibility of requesting a medical redshirt after the season, shouldn't his name be on the injury report?
October 17th, 2010 at 7:05 PM ^
Why don't any reporters ever ask RR about Devin Gardner's status? Let's hear it from the coach (no offense to any one here)
October 17th, 2010 at 8:38 PM ^
All over our first five opponents the coaches probably thought Devin could help and this is the make or break year for them. Now, don't murder me here, but if someone besides Rich Rod is leading our team out of the tunnel next year Devin will most likely be the starter and his experience will be valuable (although probably not more than another year of eligibility). Let's say it's Harbaugh, again this is just a hypothetical, he would love to have Devin under center. Gardner compares very favorably to Andrew Luck in terms of size and ability with even more mobility. One would have to believe that if Rich Rod rides off into the sunset, remember don't hate me, Dave Brandon will opt for a coach with a more "traditional" (pro-style) offense and Devin is the only guy on our roster than can really excell in a play action, read progression, take hits in the pocket kind of offense.
October 17th, 2010 at 8:47 PM ^
Everyone I know that is involved with the program said that Devin straight up beat out Forcier in the summer. At the time, Gardner was the second best QB on the team. It's that simple.
If Tate has really turned it around, then there's a good chance that Gardner may be able to redshirt next year. But when it comes down to it, the players that work hard and perform in practice have earned the right to be on the field.
Unless someone was at all the practices or has sources that contradict my sources, you have to trust the coaches on this one.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:01 PM ^
The mods at Rivals said toward the end of August that Forcier had passed up Gardner once again.
Even if the two were neck-and-neck, Forcier should have been the #2. The coaches can't honestly have felt that a freshman would be a better backup than a 12-game starter.
October 18th, 2010 at 8:43 AM ^
Two factors lead to Devin getting the nod
1. It was also said that Forcier didn't work hard during the offseason while Gardner did. It was apparent that Forcier had an attidude/work ethic issue this off season.
2. With the high probability that the quarterback may get injured in this offense, you have to have three available quarterbacks which kept the coaches from being able to redshirt Devin from the start.
Therefore, when Denard went down and it came time to give the playing time to another quarterback, the coaches gave it to the player who had earned it. I think that it was the right call. Additionally, it seems as if Forcier has definitely learned his lesson and is better for it.
October 18th, 2010 at 9:37 AM ^
We don't necessarily NEED three quarterbacks. We only need three if the first two get hurt. And so far that hasn't happened, except in the BGSU game where one of the walk-on backups could have done just fine.