You sure about that Tim?
"Brandon Herron and Craig Roh are neck-and-neck to be Stevie Brown's backup at the Spinner-ish position"
Every time Rich Rodriguez meets with the media, he is inundated with a thousand questions about the quarterback situation. Today was no different. Rodriguez reiterated all three quarterbacks will see some time in the opener, and the schemes may be slightly different for each signal-caller. "We have an idea in mind as far as what plays each guy runs well, which ones they execute well," he said. Denard Robinson and Nick Sheridan are unlikely to have the same portions of the playbook available to them. As far as playing time, there's nothing set in stone yet, but the staff plans to use each QB in meaningful minutes—for the first time in Rodriguez's coaching career.
While performance on the field will play a role, the staff isn't going to be quick to hook an unproductive quarterback. "It's not going to be pulling in and out based on just one play or how well they play on one play," Rodriguez said. "There could be a guy in one play then out, but it wouldn't be a constant thing."
Clearly, Rodriguez doesn't buy into the adage "If you have two quarterbacks, you have none." [Editor's note: adage says nothing about three.]
The team's first chance to play in the Big House comes this Friday. "It's not really a full scrimmage because it's not live... Getting accustomed to the stadium, where they stand on the sidelines and all that, we'll do that Friday afternoon."
You sure about that Tim?
"Brandon Herron and Craig Roh are neck-and-neck to be Stevie Brown's backup at the Spinner-ish position"
confused about this statement. I thought that Herron was playing the quick and Roh was the backup (to Herron.) Unless he's saying that if Stevie Brown were injured or needed a rest, then one of those two players would fill in for him at SSLB.
those two would be the primary backups to Stevie Brown at the "we're not calling it Spinner its SSLB" and we'd have JB Fitzgerald just hanging out on the bench.
on second thought, you're right, my scenario doesn't sound correct either. Also, I don't like the name "spinner" because it reminds me of the Drew and Mike reference of the same name.
I believe the presumtive starters have been:
Brown at the S/LB position
Herron at the LB/DE position
Ezeh and Mouton playing traditional LB positions
Graham at a traditional DE position
Martin at NT
Van Bergen at a DE/DT position
Presumably smaller guys than Herron and Roh are the back-ups (or potential starters) at the S/LB position.
1. I thought Roh and Herron were at a different position than Brown in which Herron was the leader.
2. This walk-on kicker, what year in school is he? How close is it b/w him and Gibbons?
3. This post by Tim appears in my "recent posts" tracker. Does this mean the problem where I only get Brian's stories in there was fixed?
Looks like Olesnavage is a 5th year senior
Appreciate that info. It'd be nice if he won the job and Gibbons could spend some time seasoning his kicking. It's not comforting to have a true frosh kicking FGs to me.
I don't think we should care who wins the job, but rather that the guy who does win it can kick the ball through the uprights.
that Roh and Herron are #1 and #2 to start at that position (the quick). because if they are backing up Stevie Brown we'll be talking about Craig Roh trying to cover an opposing slot down field. yikes.
Yeh I think you are right.
I think he meant that Hawthorne and Jones are neck and neck to back up Stevie Brown at the "Spinner" and that Roh is pushing Herron at the Quick.
This was at least what they said on Scout regarding the same press conference.
I'd like to ask Tim or Brian to make the depth chart by class slightly more position specific if possible.
I think you should write a diary that tells everyone that you were right all along. I believe that people would then respond with congratulations for being correct.
Oh, and make sure you mention something about Fellatio. That seems to go over real well.
maybe you said something dumb before, but i just gave you +1.
I have also made posts the past two weeks saying that I actually believe what coach Rod says about the qb situation.
Sometimes, people on this blog get too excited about the stories in their heads.
So the whole Sheridan playing meaningful minutes thing wasn't a false alarm?
Are you TheKnowledge too? Still waiting for Sarkisan?
you have a quarterback party! Wooooo!
The fact that there is what sounds like a legitimate 3-way competition at quarterback is pretty scary.
Hey, remember when everybody got mad at the AP for saying Michigan would play three quarterbacks? That was funny.
Wrong pictures attached to this post. Those were from the other day IIRC.
Does "holding on to the ball better" mean like 10% better? or like 100% better?
Hopefully, like 1000% better.
That's all. I just wish he wasn't a liar.
this season. Last year conditioned me to read the following bullet in "Practice Notes" - • Wide Receiver Darryl Stonum. stretched out and caught a diving 37-yard pass from QB Nick Sheridan. during a situational scrimmage. - to mean, "HOLY CRAP, SHERIDAN, STOP OVER THROWING OUR WRS!" rather than "nice grab, Darryl."
I predict Sheridan to start 1st Q, Tate 2nd Q, DR 3rd Q. I see the fear of starting a freshman QB. This may be OK for Western but the experimenting should end before the ND game.
I really, really don't want Sheridan starting. I realize that he is a nice guy that has a good work ethic but he has no talent at all.
He's a walk on and tried his best. I could see if you were complaining about a 5 star playing poorly, but he's not.
I'm a nice guy with a good work ethic, but I don't deserve to start at QB at Michigan.
There are some things in life that require more than being a nice guy with a good work ethic. I'ts a little Darwinian, but that's the way it is.
I think Coach Rod is basically trying to say that the QB race will continue all season...Either that or he's blowing a lot of smoke - and I'm not totally convinced that that's not true...I think he doesn't want any of them to feel settled in the position as the starter. I also think that he's taking a long view of the season and that he'll risk the downsides of having three guys play against Western for the upside of having three guys with experience/in game shape as he heads into the Big Ten schedule...I remember Bo talking about one of the reasons he scheduled tough non-conference games was that, even if they lost, it got the team ready for the Big Ten season.
FWIW, I think most people are reading the “3 QB rotation” discussion backwards. The immediate reaction seems to be “neither frosh is very good and Nick Sheridan may be our best choice”, which, frankly based on last year, may not bode well, and tends to induce panic.
However, the real “take” may be just the opposite. Robinson and Forcier may both be doing very well. The coaching staff could be having a tough time deciding who is going to be better, or more importantly, who is going to be better by mid season/season’s end. Forcier may have the edge in experience now but Robinson could be seen as having more potential w/ more practice. The coaches may not yet know who is going to be better (which does NOT necessarily mean they both aren’t “good”) and they can’t afford to have either get discouraged or think they are out of the race (and gawd forbid, transfer or something).
Likewise, R2 can’t just ignore Sheridan and leave him out of the conversation entirely (ala Dave Cone). Sheridan did play hard last year and managed to lead us to a win over Minnesota. If either of the frosh gets injured, Sheridan’s one player away from starting again. The staff can’t afford to completely discard Sheridan’s contribution when they may need him to play at some point.
At the end of the day, what else is R2 supposed to say right now? That Forcier is #1? And tell Robinson he’s #2? Tell Sheridan “thanks for the effort” and just drop his name from the discussion like he was Dave Cone?
Right now the only thing R2 can say is that he has 3 viable QBs, that he wants to see all 3 of them play, and that he doesn’t know who will end up being the starter. To say anything else would cause more problems w/ the team than it would solve amongst the jittery alumni.
and as I said in a post the other day, I think this is actually the right thing to do for Western. The only way to test the two freshman is with live action, and if Sheridan has truly improved so much, I trust RR to discern that and play him. I'm not concerned at all about it and won't cringe when Sheridan is in the game (though I will watch between my fingers).
how else can RR play this thing? I don't think any DIA college coach would name a true freshman the #1 guy in fall camp ahead of an upperclassman QB with meaningful PT. Sheridan seems like a smart guy. You have to assume that he has learned a lot over the past year and many mistakes he made last year probably (hopefully) won't be repeated. No, he doesn't have the natural gifts that Tate and DR have but he does have experience. And for a program in search of consistency at QB, experience is extremely valuable.
He needs to see Tate and DR take some snaps on game days, on third and long plays while the outcome of the game is in the balance, in hostile environments with deafening crowd noise, etc. He has no idea how they'll perform in pressure cooker situations. RR has at least some data points with Sheridan in these situations. And the data points many times signaled death, but again, Nick likely learned valuable lessons.
I think we just have to accept the fact that our choices at quarterback are Death and two Freshmen who, while clearly talented and full of potential, are still Freshmen.
They can make all of the throws, reads and 56 yard touchdown scampers they want in practice but until they're in the game in front of 110,000+ people with another team on the other side of the field there's still the distinct possibility - however unlikely we hope it may be - that our Freshmen turn out to be Threet/Sheridan circa last year.
I'm just going to sit back, trust Rich Rod to tinker with things until they work, hope that Michigan finds a combination that will generate points, and then pray we do it in time to finish out the Western game with a win.
I'm actually kind of looking forward to it.
Remind me to read your post every day until about mid-September.
Death and two Freshmen -- sad, but true.
I also see some truth to the idea that RR has no choice given that Sheridan saw significant playing time last year and the other two are true freshman.
Still, I would be much happier if either Forcier or Robinson was named the starter immediately before game time with the idea that the other would see significant playing time if the situation warranted. The fact that Sheridan is in the mix means that neither Forcier nor Robinson are as good right now as I hoped. Sheridan could have the biggest off-season improvement in the history of college football and he would STILL be worse than I was hoping Forcier and Robinson would be right now.
If this game is fun to watch, meaning the percentage of time I spend screaming at the TV or weeping in stunned silence is less than 75% of the game, it will be a success. We know what's coming down the line, as we've seen it at RR's other stops in his career... right now we just gotta be patient. Enjoy the slightly lower expectations while they last, because soon enough we'll have to gnaw at our fingernails every game because we're expected to win.
open up the offense and allow each QB to focus on certain plays, especially early in the season. I hope that when the QB issue is settled, Michigan has at least 2 guys that can get the job done. Will be great to see Denard and Tate on the field. Would not be surprised if Sheridan did start the Western game. Can anyone imagine what the crowds reaction will be when Tate and Denard enter the game? I think the crowd would be more forgiving if Sheridan started the game then came into the game replacing one of the freshmen qbs.
Devil's Advocate Mode ON:
We're used to different packages for defenses depending on down and distance, opponent tendencies, etc. Offenses always have different formations and personnel based on the same elements. Of course, in those formations the OL and QB are usually the constants.
Well, if you have 'em, why *not* feature QB's with different skill sets? Sure, you'd love to have 1 QB who can do it all and do it well. But if you don't, why not use each to his best ability? While defenses can prep for the packages run by each QB, it is much more complicated for them to prep for multiple QB's than it is for them to prep for a single QB with a limited repertoire (again, the ideal is one QB who can do everything, but we don't have that).
For example, imagine ideal QB can run 75 play/formation combinations. Imagine non-ideal QB can run maybe 25 play/formation combinations. But if you have 3 QB's, the defense still has to prep for all 75 combinations because each quarterback can run his own set of 25. Now, on each play the defense can narrow down its consideration set to only 25 based on who the QB is, but it still means the defense has a lot more work to do. No more easy prep where MSU can basically know the offense better than our own team.
Typical complaints about multiple QB's include missing out on a consistent rhythm and leadership. But in college football, isn't the coach more of a leader than the player? Isn't, for Rodriguez, the offense the rhythm, not the quarterback? Center-QB exchange is also a problem with multiple QB's, but that's not really an issue with the shotgun formation.
Of course, we think we all know what Forcier and Robinson bring to the table. What does Sheridan bring besides 'experience'? I don't know. One possibility is that Sheridan is a better fit for ball control ground game, and may be the toughest of the three QB's to bring down in short-yardage zone read situations. OK, I'm reaching.
Devil's Advocate Mode OFF
My concern would be that the Defense would be tipped off as to potential plays by the QB that is in the game. In obvious passing situations, putting a better passer in the game is not really a tip off. But, if you put the better runner in the game on, say, first down, the defense may figure that out.
Really don't get the panic over the fact that Sheridan might get some PT vs. WMU.
Yes, yes, I know he was awful last year, but, he's had a year in the system, has no doubt improved, and looks like he's in better physical shape.
Not making any pronouncements or guarantees here - but I wouldn't be surprised or upset if he started vs. WMU. Forcier and Robinson, while very very talented, are still 18 year old kids, and nerves might kick in. Thus, even if Sheridan only plays the first series or 2, just until the freshmen have a chance to let it soak in and calm down, and Forcier and Robinson played the rest of the game, it might be worthwhile to have him start.
Now, if Sheridan starts against ND, OTOH, I'd be concerned.
If anything, what concerned me most about this post is that Gibbons hasn't been able to beat out a walk-on... Yes, I know he's a freshman, but still, this guy was one of the most highly touted kickers last year, and we brought him in and gave him a scholie b/c the coaches believe he's talented. If he was sitting behind an uppreclassman scholarship kicker, that'd be one thing, but a walk-on? I don't know if this is cause for concern or not a big deal, I just figured it was a given that he'd be our kicker.
and obviously I haven't seen practices, but I'd love to know what Sheridan is better at then Forcier. I get Robinson being a better runner then probably either of them so you get Robinson in there to utilize his quickness and running ability.
So Sheridan has probably made strides and is probably pretty comfortable with the offense but...to me the whole key with Forcier and Robinson is getting them reps in the game and getting them experience. They aren't going to get any experience sitting on the bench.
Does this mean Sheridan has a legit chance to win the job and be the starter for the majority of the season? I'm guessing yes?? Why else would you take valuable game time away from Forcier and Robinson?
Maybe the offense really can work with a slow runner who cannot pass for more than 10 yards? Sheridan actually looked okay at times when all he tried to do was complete the short pass (as long as receivers were open and no defensive rushers were anywhere in the backfield). Maybe Sheridan is now making perfect decisions and can now pass 15 yards down the field? And Forcier makes some bad decisions which means Sheridan is still in the mix?
Like I said before, this has to mean that Forcier is not nearly as good right now as I was hoping he would be. It will be interesting.
that all this talk about using three QB's no matter how they perform is just to keep these guys competing to the best of their ability. Tate is the man, and Denard is behind him. Then, I still think Jack Kennedy is better than Sheridan. My left ball sack is better than Nick. Sorry, but if he starts the game I will be really disapointed. Go look at his stats from last year -- actually spare yourself a bad flashback and help me pray to never see this guy take a snap again. Even if he is twice as good as last year, he is still terrible.
I realize that he knows the offense better, because he has had more time to learn it. The difference is that he has no ability to translate this knowledge into making him better than Tate. Nick is just a guy who should have never seen the field, and if there wasn't a crazy change in the whole philosophy/players/staff we wouldn't even be talking about him right now.
All the snaps that they give to Nick will be time that Tate or maybe Denard loses. Important lessons that you need to grow through will be lost on this walk on. You cannot convince me that Nick Sheridan is a good QB. I really didn't want to just hate on Nick, but no one is talking about the importance of naming a leader and sticking with him.
The whole quote about having no QB's if you have two is an adage because it's true. Name one adage that is complete crap. The reason these sayings stick around is that they are what people have experienced over and over again. The team needs to know who their leader is and get behind him. He needs to get the most reps every day, and they need to do everything they can to give him the best chance of success. If they put Nick out there I will of course root for him, and hope that he plays well. I just don't get it at all. How can you watch this guy play QB and come to the conclusion that he is a Michigan QB???
Whatever happened to Vlad starting at safety? Did Williams and Woolfolk start to perform better or did his play diminish (probably a combination of the two)?