Mailbag: QB Is Not The Major Problem, Revenue Increases, Oregon's Thing
[Bryan Fuller]
Quarterback is not the only difference.
Brian,
Something you may not wish to address in season but in watching this team I had this thought:
Solid run defense, inconsistent pass defense, an offensive line with talent struggling to gel, solid backs, receivers and tight ends. Hmmm, sounds like 9 or 10 wins from Carr again. What is missing is a solid, low turnover, accurate, quarterback. Completely unfair?
Thanks
Dunder
Cumong man, that's completely unfair. You're comparing this offensive line to those featuring Jake Long or a half-dozen other NFL players, with zero freshmen of any variety on them unless they're Hutchinson-level talents. The backs don't make the right cuts and almost never make yards on their own. The tight ends are not good right now except for Butt, and Butt is still working his way back from an ACL tear.
There's no part of this team not subject to mental breakdowns that are hard to accept four years in. This includes quarterback, but since it seems like any QB under Hoke goes backwards it all ends in the same place.
BUT IS HE BETTER THAN A WISTFUL ORANGUTAN?
Brian,
In the wake of the ND game i have found my anger directed more at Dave Brandon than anything for whatever various and stupid reasons. The conventional wisdom seems to be, "hey, but revenues are increasing so, even though football is terrible and the stadium experience is horrible, Dave Brandon is great at growing the business." I think that is non-sense. I looked at revenues from 2002 through 2013 (graphs and numbers in attached spreadsheet) and the trendline attached to the revenue data shows Brandon has not out performed Bill Martin. Growth in revenue looks very on trend from Martin's tenure.
If you look at Michigan's AD revenue from 2005 versus some other athletic departments (texas, OSU, florida, Alabama, Oklahoma) our athletic department hasnt outperformed them either. Those five ADs revenue increased 84% from 2005 til 2013, Michigan's increased...83%.
Look, the data i gathered isn't perfect, I don't love the way USA today presented the 2005-2013 data. I've sort of cobbled together the 2002-2004 data from U-M budgets. The way i have presented the data is somewhat problematic (i should index 2005 to 100 then see the changes from there), but I don't think it changes the overall picture.
The point is I am really bothered with the conventional wisdom saying Brandon is doing really well increasing revenue. He is merely riding a wave that started long before here was hired and affects all of college football. Raising ticket prices doesn't make you a business genius. He gets zero credit for increased television revenues, which are the two overwhelming drivers of the whole enterprise.
These are things I am sure you are aware of but i have not seem them articulated on the blog.
Go Blue!
Nate
It should also be noted that the portion of the surge from 2009 to 2011 not due to increased BTN payouts was largely the luxury boxes coming online. Michigan offered them for cheap the first year and then increased the price to the regular level in year two.
So even if you are measuring Michigan athletic department success by revenue—a completely bonkers thing to do—Brandon is completely average in this department while being literally the worst AD in the country at public relations. A wistful orangutan could have been Michigan's athletic director since 2010 and revenue would still be way up. And students would love him!
[After the JUMP: Manning plausible as a CB coach over time? Mysterious red clad team-thing. Where to go in the event of an apocalypse. (The real apocalypse, not bad football.)]
Hi Brian,
There's been lots of talk about coaching issues, from the head coach to individual position coaches. Do coaches get better over time? Do they adapt to new concepts, become better playcallers, become better blitzers, etc.? For example, is Roy Manning a great coach who is new to cornerbacks and needs reps in his new gig to become competent and then good? Or will Roy Manning never be a good CBs coach because he hasn’t played the position and there are things you can only learn by playing the position?
Best,
Stephen Bowie
Manning certainly could become a good CBs coach in time. You see guys flip from one position to others plenty early in their career. Some guys even go from defensive coaches to the other side of the ball—Rich Rodriguez was a defensive back. So it's not out of the question.
Making him a CB coach right before a drastic shift in your defensive philosophy is going to get a cocked eyebrow when it really, really does not work out, as it hasn't. But at least Jourdan Lewis is playing well?
Hi Brian et al,
Not that it's really relevant to anything, but I was wondering if you noticed that blotch of fans adorned in red in the southwest corner of the stadium, about halfway up. There must have been 30-40 of them all uniformly wearing red. It seemed like they sat there as statues do, and then left in unison with about 10 minutes left in the game.
Any idea what that was all about?
Thought you might know.
Best,
Ryan
That was the Fairfield lacrosse team, which was in town to play Michigan and stuck around to watch the football game.
Brian,
Longtime read and great blog. I like UM's tradition uniforms and not a big fan of Oregon or Maryland craziness, but a recent "conversation" offered a different view.
My son (8) and nephews (8 and 11) are really into sports. I asked one of them (who's really into football) who his favorite team is? Answer: Oregon. Why? They have the coolest uniforms - it's all "swag" (the kids term for bright colored tees, shorts, socks - and they HAVE to be UnderArmour or Nike, no Adidas or Reebok) color. I saw some link on your blog mentioned the disadvantage of being Adidas, but didn't have to read. Anyway, hooking kids early like this surely can't hurt a program. BTW - we're in the Chicago area, where ND and B1G alum rein supreme. Didn't matter to these kids.
When I flipped on the Boiler/Sparty game on I thought it was some sort of Oregon/MSU rematch when I saw their unis.
Chris
Oregon's marketing works for Oregon. They should do what they do; they had no identity before they became the truck-bed digital-clock-with-wings swagmasters. It makes sense for Oregon.
But if you look at most places that have an identity, they don't do this stuff. The NFL outright prohibits frequent uniform changes and their throwback uniforms actually have to be throwbacks. Meanwhile, alternate uniforms for the college football old guard are either nonexistent or rare and subtle: Texas, USC, Oklahoma, Alabama, Penn State… IIRC these teams have almost never deployed alternates. It is a viable alternative to be you as hard as you can be you.
Michigan's got a thing. Hit up a poll about the best uniforms in college football—hell, in sports—and Michigan's home blues will be high up the list, often #1. They should emphasize their thing, because I've yet to see an alternate uniform that looks as good as the real McCoy.
I asked this question on a thread on the board but I thought I'd asked you directly. Maybe you could shed some light for me.
I know he's been around UofM since Mo, and I'm sure he understands the whole "Michigan Man" thing and what Bo meant to this program, but I'm just sitting here watching the weekend highlights of the different Michigan schools and I see Thomas Rawls. I know he's playing MAC schools and what not but why all of a sudden is Rawls breaking off 121...155...220...229 and 270 now that he is at CMU? When he was even given the chance to be on the field, this guy couldn't find a hole to run through for Michigan.
Another guy, Mike Cox, couldn't make his way on the field either. Then he played his last year for UMASS, put together a good enough season to get a look from the pros and now has been playing for the Giants, off and on the practice squad, since he graduated.
Put that with how we haven't had a great running back here since Mike Hart and I wonder if Coach Jackson is really not what he used to be or was he ever that good of a coach? Don't get me wrong I love the quotes over the years you've had had fun with (Jackson talking up recruits), but what keeps him here? Is he that good of a recruiter?
Do you want to see him retained assuming Hoke is canned? Thanks for any insight you can shed on this.
-RuebenRileyonRye
I don't know what it is about Fred Jackson that makes him unkillable but I do know that when the zombie apocalypse happens I'm driving to his house and pledging my fealty to to him.
As far as your question, yeah it's looking like he's hung around long past the point at which he's an asset. Tailback performance has been general dismal since Hart's departure and development just about impossible to see in anyone aside from Chris Perry. Meanwhile, the guys Michigan has gone out and recruited have been disappointments since Hart. Drake Johnson can't see the field at all even after Green got knocked out; he was a total flier with an EMU offer before Michigan stepped in for some reason. That Rawls and Cox have performed after leaving is another strike.
There would appear to be no reason to retain him in the event of a changeover, especially with Ty Wheatley and Mike Hart waiting in the wings. But keep him in the athletic department so it survives nuclear war.
October 16th, 2014 at 12:09 PM ^
#WistfulOrangutan4AD
October 16th, 2014 at 12:35 PM ^
would be a great band name. The first album could be titled Fealty to Fred Jackson.
October 16th, 2014 at 12:19 PM ^
As it happens, USC is breaking out some alternate chrome helmets this weekend.
http://www.conquestchronicles.com/2014/10/15/6985611/usc-reveals-new-me…
I will never, ever understand why schools with iconic, instantly-recognizable uniforms are willing to screw with them in exchange for what can only be marginal revenue. Michigan, Notre Dame, now USC. The hell?
October 16th, 2014 at 12:28 PM ^
I don't think it's mostly about revenue. It's a way to get part of that Oregon swag excitement from the fans and players/recruits. Young people (myself included) like to see the unique uniforms. We've all seen how pumped the players get when the coach reveals the special uniforms the team is going to wear for whatever game. Players and recruits love it, and, at the very least, it gives fans something to talk about (even if they somehow land on terrible bumblebee uniforms).
October 16th, 2014 at 12:14 PM ^
Is that first email for real? What about this team reminds him of any of Carr's 9- or 10-win teams? His descriptions are meaningless.
The ire towards Gardner comes from the same place as the ire towards Denard, and I don't think I'll ever understand it. For most of Hoke's tenure, the QB has been the only thing keeping the team's head above water, not the central point of failure.
October 16th, 2014 at 12:23 PM ^
I've had conversations about Devin that ended with me sadly concluding that there is a straight-up racial element. Granted, these are older folks, but still, its' 2014! I was hesistant to write that, because it sounds bad and might start a flame war, but it's my honest experience (disclosure: I am a privelidged white dude). I mean, look at that letter! You can basically break it down to "if only we were playing Henne/Navarre/Brady like in the good ol' days, things would be fine!"
October 16th, 2014 at 12:51 PM ^
October 16th, 2014 at 1:20 PM ^
I used to think the discussion was about race, and to some it probably still is. But lots of the complaints I hear would have been made about guys like Manziel just as much. There is this mindset among a part of the fanbase that QBs should be throwing rockets to giants, and when they don't people freak out and think it isn't football anymore. It isn't so much that Devin or Denard are a different color that annoys many people; it's that they are meh passers who run around and don't "stand tall" in the pocket. Most other fanbases have come accept this new model as the one you want, but there is an old guard element here that is loudly resisting. And that doesn't mean you can't lodge real, viable complaints against Gardner as a QB; he has his flaws and those are not all due to coaching and bad luck. But the complaints seem louder and more pointed for players like him than QBs in the past.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:31 PM ^
+1 And I think you can add to that the fact that Denard's and Devin's teams have, for the most part, gotten their butts kicked, with the exception of 2011. Devin could throw three picks a game, but he would be more beloved if the team was winning 9 or 10 games a year. Not saying its right. But I think its an element. If 5-0 Brady Hoke called that timeout with one second left in the half, we might think "What is that big ole loveable goofball doing?" Maybe we'd give him a nickname like "Mad Hatter". But when 2-3 Brady Hoke calls that timeout, I think "What is that stupid fat &^%# doing?"
October 16th, 2014 at 6:38 PM ^
There's truth to that. Winning makes lots of these problems go away, but the fanbase has also become much more vitriolic since Carr left and the team finally had a downturn for the first time in most fans' lives. Heck, people were killing Morris when he played against Minny until the injury, and he's about as classic QB as you can expect.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^
Much of the disappointment with both Denard and Devin stems from the fact that they have not played better each year. There was a chart a week or two ago that showed how Denard regressed each year, but his second and third years were after Hoke arrived and tried (along with Borges) to get him to do things other than the things at which he excelled. The same seems to be true with Devin. At the beginning of this season, a lot of fans (me included) were thinking how great it would be to have a fifth year senior QB. But, Devin was more effective at the tail end of the 2012 season than he has ever been since (apart from individual game explosions were he has been unbelievably good).
A coach is supposed to plan his team around the skill sets of his players and to help those players develop. It has never appeared to me that the offensive coaches have ever attempted to do those two things. Instead, they have tried to get Denard and Devin to run the kind of offense they want to run. In the end, the blame for that has to fall on Hoke.
October 16th, 2014 at 4:48 PM ^
Michigan has been getting beat by mobile qb's since Ricky Foggy. You would think that some point, people would realize that if you can't beat em, join em.
October 16th, 2014 at 6:40 PM ^
Yeah, but a big part of those struggles was on the defense. The sense with UM offenses for the longest time was that they kept pumping out NFL-level players at so many positions so it was a bit of scheme and a bit of the time-honored "not trying hard enough".
October 17th, 2014 at 10:52 AM ^
I was quite happy with Henne.But that's an argument I don't think will ever be solved. That said, I love DG, I respect him more because of his struggles.
I remember going into 2013 I was thrilled because I thought we could finally, legitimately, become multidimensional because it seemed like DG had a hell of an arm as well as killer legs. DR was awesome, and fun to watch, but the pucker factor every time he dropped back was killing me.
Then, as he said, 2013 happened. But still, through 3 OC's and 3 systems, despite nasty, painful injuries, and constant questions about him he's about to get his Masters from a great school, has never bailed or phoned it in, and is a huge supporter of the team.
What happened to his career is a shame, and IMHO not his fault. But the fact that he took those opportunities, despite the challanges, and made the most of them without ever becoming bitter speaks volumes about his character to me.
James Winston may be a better QB. I'd love to have DG has my neighbor.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:22 PM ^
Apparently the "good ol' days" encompass about 20 years ago onwards. They seem to forget that Bo generally favored an option attack - you know, with quarterbacks who could run - until much, much later in his career.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:59 PM ^
I'm glad you pointed this out. Every time the RR fiasco is brought I have to point out the PR disaster that was his opening press conference as mentioned in Bacon's book.
RR needed to come in and say "My coach was Don Nehland who was one of Bo's top assistant coaches. He brought Bo's philosophies to WV where my ideas on the game of football were born. I want to bring Michigan back to the days of Ricky Leach and Dennis Franklin. I want a fast attacking defense that Bo favored, the kind that could shut down Bo Jackson with a 1,000 little bee stings."
You were really correct until the end. Bo didn't change late in his career. Bo has had all sorts of qb's but he had Michael Taylor last and he was a run 1st qb. It's interesting that for as stubborn as people thought Bo was he was actually pretty flexible with his offensive system. While it always had a strong run game, Bo had many different styles of offense that he fit to his qb's strengths(hmmm seems like an interesting concept). When he got an actual NFL level QB like Harbaugh he actually allowed for like a real passing game..
October 16th, 2014 at 2:25 PM ^
Glad you (and others here) have mentioned that. Bo seems to be remembered as being more inflexible than I think he actually was - it was the perception. Then he'd do something like fake the PAT and go for 2 on OSU and people would go nuts, that it was so unexpected.
Well maybe it was unexpected. But it was Bo!
October 16th, 2014 at 2:06 PM ^
Elvis Grbac was the first of the true pro-type pocket passers. Even Harbaugh, who set the high-water marks for passing stats under Bo, ran a lot of option.
October 16th, 2014 at 2:15 PM ^
Wangler to be a QB that sat in the pocket and didn't run much.
October 16th, 2014 at 4:03 PM ^
After he got his knee blown up.
October 16th, 2014 at 10:23 PM ^
never was a running QB--even before Lawrence Taylor took him down.
October 16th, 2014 at 8:54 PM ^
Elvis stepping into that game when Taylor went down and the offense moving the ball. That staff had that that back up qb ready to go and the team able to handle the change.
Telling...
October 16th, 2014 at 6:51 PM ^
I think people remember Bo running the option, but that was (a) a very conventional offense in CFB at that time, and (b) the game itself was so different then than now that it is hard to compare them in terms of acceptance. I think the corrolary now would be Michigan running an "NFL"-passing spread, with 3-4 WRs and lots of shotgun. That's kinda the offense Nuss seems to want to run.
October 16th, 2014 at 2:05 PM ^
Anyone who watched the ND game couldn't make that argument. Golson was efficient, polished, and ready for the big stage. Gardner, for a number of reasons that have been debated exhaustively here, was not. I don't think any of those reasons was race.
Edit: My reply was to the argument that DG was not a good QB because of race.
October 16th, 2014 at 2:41 PM ^
Curious why this post is being negged. Do you think race was a factor or that DG wasn't ready for the big stage? If you think he was ready, you watched a different game than I did.
October 16th, 2014 at 8:54 PM ^
Yes, DG played poorly against ND as did the entire team, but somehow he is the only one you point out as not ready for the big stage? Well, DG certainly was ready for the big stage when he played ND and OSU in 2013. Did he forget how? Or was there more going on?
It is your over-emphasis on just DG's bad game that implicitly supports the inference that race plays a factor in criticism of Gardner. So, to answer your query: yes.
October 17th, 2014 at 12:41 PM ^
October 16th, 2014 at 12:27 PM ^
Devin Gardner 2013:
YPA: 8.6
Yards: 2960
Completetion percentage: 60.3%
TD/INT: 21-11
Chad Henne (best season, 06):
YPA: 7.6
Yards: 2508
Completion percentage: 61.9%
TD/INT: 22-8
So, almost identical (or better) numbers for Gardner, yet he was torn apart last year. Henne gets praised as probably the best UM qb since Henson.
I wonder what noticeable characteristic would cause one of these two to get blasted and called incompetent while the other one recieves praise.....something about Gardner (and Denard) that hasn't generally been true of UM QB's in the last 40 years...
October 16th, 2014 at 12:41 PM ^
For showing up with actual numbers 2 minutes after I posted.
October 16th, 2014 at 2:11 PM ^
That is really interesting. And yet, Henne's team was ranked and won more than they lost, while Gardner's been stuck behind overwhelmed O-lines. What this tells me is that Devin is talented enough to grind out decent numbers with less talent supporting him.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:07 PM ^
Isolate numbers for just the losses and I bet Gardner's numbers look much worse. Or, alternatively, take out the 2 best and 2 worst games of each season and see how the middle 8 games stack up against each other.
Obviously, isolating losses would lead to some confirmation bias. However, while I'm not arguing that there may be a small element in the M community whose criticism of Gardner originates at least in part due to skin color, I would like to believe that most of the criticism Gardner takes is purely football-based.
I'm not saying the football-based criticism is entirely fair given the difference in staffs each dealt with, but the eyeball test says Henne was a better QB in 2006 than Gardner was in 2013. I don't think race is a material part of the criticism.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:42 PM ^
I did each of their stats in losses as well as with their two best and worst games by QB rating excised out. Admittedly not a perfefct estimate of performance, but it seemed a fair way to do it.
Henne in Losses in 06 (@OSU, USC (Rose Bowl): 47/76 (61.8%) 576 yds 4 TD/1Int 7.58 YPA
Gardner in Losses in 13 (@PSU, @MSU, Neb, @Iowa, OSU) 92/155 (59.4%) 1195 yds 10 TD/3 Int 7.71 YPA
Henne in "middle 9" (excludes Minn, IU for good, CMU, NW for bad)
164/265 (61.9%) 1836 yds 16 TD 7 INT (6.93 YPA)
Gardner in "middle 8" (excludes Minn, IU for good, Uconn/Iowa for bad)
150/248 (60.5%) 2027 yds 16 TD 9 INT (8.17 YPA)
The fact is Gardner's bad decisions are very memorable, but overall he was very good last year almost any way you slice it up. The coaching malpractice of this staff with respect to his development is criminal and a fireable offense in and of itself.
And that's not considering Gardner's athletic ability advantage. Considering the difference in talent on offense (Generously WR = equal, but RB and OL for 06 >>>>>>> Rb and OL for 13), it's absolutely infuriating that Gardner got as much criticism for his play last year as he did. The only Michigan QB to get more unfair criticsm in my lifetime was John Navarre and after that's it's not even close
October 20th, 2014 at 2:47 PM ^
It's almost laughable. What the above poster did that none of you attempted is provided real statistics that showed Gardner has been as good as Henne. You then go on to say, without so much as looking at any statistics, that saying Gardner is as good as Henne is ridiculous and it doesn't pass the eyeball test. What eyeball test? The one people are talking about here (the racism one)? If you don't want to seem racist maybe you should provide some support rather than just throwing out a hypothesis that is based on nothing and can be construed as racist.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:07 PM ^
base it on a solid factual foundation.
Firstly, John Navarre was subjected to far more abuse than Gardner ever has. Far more and it isn't even close. Then there is Denard, a demigod who receives far more love than Chad "I won a Big Ten as a true frosh" Henne. I mean, I love Denard and all that he stands for, but Henne won a conference title, something Denard never did. He is deserving of more praise than he gets.
Secondly, Gardner was flat out awful vs MSU and on the road. Granted, his teammates share the blame for that, but Henne never imploded like Gardner did at UCONN and MSU.
I wonder how long you have followed UM football or paid much attention to it because your apparent ignorance of how Navarre was treated is a massive flaw in your argument. Denard Robinson has received more love as an UM QB than any since Harbaugh. Not even Brian Griese got much love. Tom Brady was harsly criticized here and was part of a QB hokey pokey while at UM.
I understand your desire to defend Gardner, but your argument is poor because it is almost entirely ignorant of QBs who played before 2004.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:53 PM ^
Henne never had to play behind these olines...
October 16th, 2014 at 2:31 PM ^
Andre10 would have you believe that the one thing diferent "about Gardner (and Denard) that hasn't generally been true of UM QB's in the last 40 years," is their race. The more obviously different thing is the W-L record and the OL after Hoke and Funk got control of it.
October 16th, 2014 at 4:33 PM ^
Gardner puts up equal/slightly better numbers despite the train wreck around him. Yet people wanted to replace him with Morris, despite there being nothing to demonstrate that Morris would be ready. Now why is that?
October 16th, 2014 at 4:43 PM ^
The same reason people called for Denard to replace Tate when Tate fell below perfection? The same reason Sparty fans are calling for Cook to be replaced?
October 16th, 2014 at 2:38 PM ^
Then there is Denard, a demigod who receives far more love than Chad "I won a Big Ten as a true frosh" Henne
Oh, shut up. The 2004 team won a share of the title. Chad Henne didn't single-handedly whip a title out of his ass. Henne also never won a BCS bowl OR beat Ohio State, so your argument is both irrelevant AND stupid.
I love Denard and all that he stands for
No, you don't. You absolutely hate Denard and what he represents. No current poster has nearly as much uncontrollable rage towards Rich Rodriguez as you possess. After Arizona beat Oregon, the very first thing you did was start a thread bitching about how much Rich Rod sucks and that game doesn't mean anything. Do you honestly expect anyone to take you seriously on this topic?
October 16th, 2014 at 3:48 PM ^
I've re-read SQuattro's comment again and fail to see how it warrants such a snarky and inflamatory response. Perhaps there's something brewing b/w you two but the creators of this blog have stressed their goals of informed and respectable exchanges. I can't downvote yet but I'm hoping others will step in and do it. I enjoy reading comments here every bit as much as the posts themselves but this garbage destroys the entire purpose of this.
October 16th, 2014 at 4:03 PM ^
It's a track record thing.
Maybe you should put in some effort and actually try to find the thread I referenced, if it still exists. Hint: it's utterly embarrassing for Quattro.
Also, at the heavy risk of sounding condescending, I realize that the goals of this blog involve productive discourse. However, if you're going to spend any amount of time on an internet forum, you're going to need a thick skin.
October 16th, 2014 at 5:10 PM ^
So it's a "track record" issue you have with Quattro and that's fine. Don't turn your ire to me now. It has nothing to do with thickness of skin, but rather simply an appropriate level of discourse and keeping the blog enjoyable for all to read. While my MGpoints reflect little comment time, I've been following this blog for years and just recently stepped in to vent a bit re: Brandon. I've read plenty of what you've said as well as Quattro, and he's said some things I've disagreed with as well. What's raised some concern is the "racism" allegations suddenly floating thru here and appears be utterly unwarranted and unproven in my opinion. I think that was Quattro's point and to which I agree. It will likely take Brian stepping in and putting the kibosh on that stupidity. For the most part, the exchanges on here are productive and entertaining. I enjoy a verbal dust-up as much as the next commenter when it's warranted.
October 16th, 2014 at 5:17 PM ^
My issue with Quattro had nothing to do with the "racism" stuff (which wasn't really what I intended to reference with my OP, ironically) and everything to do with the fact that he goes out of his way to take shits on Rich Rod when we've all moved on past that.
October 16th, 2014 at 4:09 PM ^
I remember being in the Big House when Navarre went down against Iowa. The fans cheered when he didn't get up. The most disgusting display I've ever witnessed. And the last home game I've gone to.
October 16th, 2014 at 4:42 PM ^
First, no, John Navarre didn't get as much crap as Gardner gets. He definitely got a lot (and it was definitely out of proportion given that he lead the team to back to back 10-3 seasons) but while people grumbled when he struggled it never approached anything serious except when Drew Henson was on the team.
Second, while everyone loves Denard, many people who love him trip over themselves to qualify that love with "well he may not have been a good passer, but...", questioning his ability to actually be a QB.
Here are Denard's passing stats from 2010, when he had a real QB coach.
YPA: 8.8
Yards: 2,570
Completion Percentage: 62.5%
TD/INT: 18/11
Also pretty comperable to Henne, except Denard also did this
1702 yards rushing, 6.6 yards per attempt, 14 TDS
But Denard was the one who was/is criticized as a terrible passer, not Henne.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:09 PM ^
I think that primary thing that keeps Gardner from being listed along with the "greats" (other than the obvious lack of wins) is the number of interceptions he's thrown. With the stats that you displayed above, Henne threw 8 picks, Gardner threw 11. While that might not seem significant, it's about 35% higher.
In addition, it's the WAY that he throws them. Remember that inexplicable INT against ND last year? Well the INT against PSU last weekend looked almost as bad. It's not like he's throwing picks deep into coverage. It seems like a lot of picks are being thrown because he's simply not paying attention (or at least making knee-jerk reactions).
Personally, I'll always be proud of Gardner as a Michigan QB. He was a complete warrior against OSU last year. He's made some would-be tacklers look silly along the way. It's just the picks.....and the way he throws them......that will separate him from the others.
October 16th, 2014 at 2:06 PM ^
The other difference is that Henne was 4-0 vs MSU, 2-2 vs ND and although 0-4 vs OSU was involved in some extremely exciting games that ultimately wound up being disappointing losses. The 42-39 loss in 2006 the day after Bo died is still one of the most heartbreaking losses I ever witnessed. The team was 36-14 during his 4 years, which is a little better than its been since, which also helped Henne. Even at that, he also received a great deal of criticism.
October 16th, 2014 at 1:12 PM ^
October 16th, 2014 at 2:53 PM ^
Henne gets praised as probably the best UM qb since Henson.
Which means "Probably better than Navarre," since Big John was the only starting QB in between them.
Comments