Mike Forcier on Tate and Transfers
I hate breaking news, or debunking things (see Sam McGuffie transfer), so I don't know what's going to happen with Tate. I spoke to his Dad, and here's some quotes from our conversation. He was adamant that Tate is not transferring. These can all be found on my twitter page, too.
"As Tate's father, and someone who would advise him, a transfer isn't something I want to be a part of. Sometimes you think, man, do they want him there, but we don't think that's the situation. Rich Rodriguez has also been straight with us."
"Tate knows Michigan is the biggest and best stage out there. I know he has mixed emotions, but this is in his blood."
"He was feeling a little like a caged animal on the sidelines. He knew the cameras were on him, and that they were looking for an emotional reaction, so he was trying to hide his face with the towel. He was not pouting. The cameras kept prodding, and egging him on, so he got upset about it."
"This is a good growing experience. The way I see it, it's a long season. You saw today that they're going to need two quarterbacks. The Big Ten schedule is a tough schedule."
"We knew some disciplinary actions were coming down the pipe, so we kind of saw some things that others didn't. Not everyone knows and sees everything that goes on on the inside."
"This is like a boxing match, and the advice I give him is ride it out baby, ride it out. Those who stay will be champions."
"I talked to him after the game briefly, and I think we're ok. All I want to do is think positive of this. Tomorrow is a new day for him."
"I really think Rich Rodriguez is trying to make a true leader out of him on and off the field. Again, no one sees everything that goes on inside. Tate is a competitive, emotional kid that was having mixed emotions. He was happy as hell that they won, but upset he couldn't be in the game."
September 5th, 2010 at 12:40 AM ^
egg them on to victory!
September 5th, 2010 at 12:13 AM ^
September 5th, 2010 at 1:01 AM ^
This can be as hard on RR as Forcier. RR can't please everybody. He's got to make decisions that he feels are best for Michigan. As of now he's got Robinson #1, Gardner #2, Forcier #3. But things can get volatile and change in a heartbeat. It would be wise for Forcier to stick it out and support his teammates. It would also be best for Michigan if Forcier stays.
September 5th, 2010 at 8:53 AM ^
September 5th, 2010 at 1:15 AM ^
Nice to see Tate with his teammates during the post-game time in front of the student section in Tim's Video addition. I think that he plays at least part of the game next week.
September 5th, 2010 at 2:12 AM ^
Not if Shoelace can get near 400 yds. of offense nxt week. ND's defense is average at best so their is no reason to not believe that DR cant duplicate or come near these numbers again.
September 5th, 2010 at 1:34 AM ^
September 5th, 2010 at 6:57 AM ^
AP???? Since when is Tom, or Brian, selling content from this site to the Associated Press???? ANd if even if he/they did, where's the credit???
This is unreal.... worthy of a lawsuit. Seriously.
September 5th, 2010 at 7:19 AM ^
That direct quote was also on Larry Lage's (AP Writer) twitter feed. Tom does great work, but he's hardly the only person with a telephone.
September 5th, 2010 at 2:27 AM ^
This is going to seem harsh, so I apologize if it seems too judgmental. It's hard for me to say this, because I think Tate is a solid QB who did some great things in his freshman year, but here are my thoughts:
1. The sideline bench+towels routine seemed like an attempt to draw media attention to himself, not the opposite. I give him enough credit to understand that the best way to avoid drama would be to hang close to the coaches on the sideline and observe the plays/calls. I think he manipulated things, perhaps demonstrating the very core issue that concerns RR and staff: focus on himself rather than the team.
2. DRob showed Tate why he is currently the starting QB. He was a zone read threat, made some good throws, and didn't turn the ball over.
3. It would suck to lose him, because then there is probably no way DG can redshirt.
4. I bet Tate was going a little crazy seeing the O line really control things. Last year, he rarely had the protection and blocking that DRob was given today. Any QB would relish that chance. Great job by the big uglies!
5. Tate can see what hard work yields. I know he lost some quality off-season training due to the shoulder rehab, but clearly the team expects him to get back in the saddle, commit 100%, and be more selfless.
6. It's hard for every one of these guys to be on the sideline. Tate needs to understand that every player was high school dominant, highly sought after and fiercely competitive. He needs to translate that into productive energy for the team rather than requiring of the team.
September 5th, 2010 at 3:58 AM ^
Agree w/#4, especially
The o line looked really good, TF didn't have that kind of blocking last year, except maybe when Molk was still in.
September 5th, 2010 at 8:35 AM ^
It's toast.
It would suck to lose him, because then there is probably no way DG can redshirt.
As I understand it, there is no wiggle room. If you play at all, you can't redshirt (unless it's medical).
I think the whole point of Rich's putting Gardner in for those two plays was to burn the redshirt and end all the speculation, especially sending a message to Tate -- Devin is not going to redshirt, so the #2 spot is not yours by default -- you'll have to earn it. If Denard had been out for more than one series, I think we would have seen Tate, but the message would still have been sent. Last year was last year, this year is this year.
September 5th, 2010 at 9:44 AM ^
Tate showed greatness at the beginning of last year, for four games, but then we lost the rest. So, it's not as if he came off a winning season, and his expectations to start would be somewhat justified. He looked like a true freshman last year almost as much as he looked like the next coming. Maybe being on the cover of SI in week 3 was his downfall. I hope he can ground himself soon, and rejoin the efforts.
September 5th, 2010 at 12:12 PM ^
It's not burned, yet. As an example, a (cough, ahem) hammy injury before the Big 10 season could save his eligibility, unless he has seen too much of the field.
Who knows, though? RR has been a straight shooter, and he knows. DG may be seriously pushing for time, and given his ridiculous potential, RR may want him to see the field this year so that he can better compete for the starting role next year. If we start winning, every spread QB in the nation is going to be hoping for those schollies, so Michigan should be able to reload the position at the 5-star freakish level.
Whatever it ends up being, winning sooner rather than later is all that matters.
September 5th, 2010 at 2:14 AM ^
Respect to Mr. Forcier. Sounds like a level headed dude, glad he's such a strong influence in Tate's life. Hopefully this gets worked out, Tate gets his head on straight, and stays.
I still don't think what Tate did was good, but, the camera's prodding him like that probably made the situation worse, so I'm willing to give him some benefit of the doubt. Shame on the media, trying to stir the pot like that.
September 5th, 2010 at 2:17 AM ^
I just find it ironic that Tate's biggest cheerleader last year was DR. But at least it seemed on the broadcast that whenever Shoelace did great things in the game Tate wasn't there to return the favor.
September 5th, 2010 at 6:34 AM ^
To be fair to Forcier, though, Robinson sucked last year. If Robinson sulked on the sideline simply because Rich Rodriguez wasn't allowing him to go out there and throw interceptions at an unbelievable rate, then that would have been really childish.
Forcier was standing on the sideline with his teammates for most of the game. It wasn't until after Gardner was inserted that Forcier retired to the bench. He was frustrated that he went from 12-game starter to third-stringer. It would be great if he were a cheerleader, but I can't really blame him for being disappointed. He still shouldn't have sat on the bench with towels over his head/face, but still....
September 5th, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^
Agreed. There just gets to be a point where you have to allow the athletes to be real people. It is beyond awesome that Denard is as jolly as he seems, but it shouldn't be an indictment of Tate that he was a little unhappy with how things turned out.
September 5th, 2010 at 9:34 PM ^
Going over and ploping yourself on the bench in frustration might have been a perfectly natural response, albeit a sulky, self-pitying one, but it put him in the position of being caught on ABC...for like two minutes. Getting all emo like that he probably wanted someone to notice how unfairly he was being treated. He got noticed all right. By the national media TV crew and now he is sulking on ABC. Not cool. Not the way to get out of the dog house.
September 5th, 2010 at 1:31 PM ^
One of the biggest highlights shown over and over is the chest bump between Tate and Robinson after the Robinson TD at the Western game.
What really astounds me is how no one is really focusing on the coaching decision to burn a redshirt on Devin, and put him in for only a couple plays. Everyone instantly thinks this is because Tate must be worse, rather than Coach Rodriguez wanting to have Devin get real game experience as early as possible.
What happened to all the people predicting Devin to be the #1? Why are we shifting to believing, "oh yeah Tate has a crappy attitude that's the only explanation"
From what I saw on the field, it seemed clear Robinson was going to shake it off, just like Molk did, and get back in after 1 or 2 plays. Coach Rodriguez saw that the weakness of UConn was defending a strong run QB. That was a perfect time to try Devin over Tate. Not because of attitude or experience, but fit and style. I also noticed that Devin didn't really do that well, but at least didn't do so poorly that Denard couldn't come back and keep the offense going.
I'm not saying there isn't some attitude problem with Tate, just that the media, and clearly fans, are going to take small details and create the story they want to believe from them. Rather than just watch the games and see what happens.
Like watching ND practice all week to defend against Denard, and then wish on their lucky charms that Tate had transferred as they watch him unlease an unlimited supply of slot ninjas on those leprechauns.
unless of course that's what they are expecting Michigan to do...
September 5th, 2010 at 2:25 AM ^
let's assume for a moment that there ARE some behind the scenes reasons why Tate didn't play (primarily because his dad said there was) but in my fantasy world of college football, what if RR (The Mad Scientist) is saving Tate for the ND game and is playing some serious mind games with Brian Kelly? Have ND prepare for DR and DG and then put Tate in there to completely throw off their game plan for the 1st half and possibly for the duration.
Yeah nevermind, that read even stupider than it sounded in my head. But it'd be cool if did happen.
It would make it impossible for teams to fully and properly prepare for all 3 qbs each week - DR primary rusher with a cannon, DG balanced and TF primary passer with some wheels. That would be a DC's nightmare.
Sorry - I'm in my post game glow still and loving the "W" today.
September 5th, 2010 at 3:17 AM ^
forcier has plenty of examples in michigan history to draw on. griese is a good example - but so is scott dreisbach, who pretty much shot his wad in his first game against virginia, and eventually lost his starting job first to injury, and then to tom brady. IIRC dreisbach eventually handled it well. it might even be a good thing if driesbach took it upon himself to contact forcier and share his insight about the situation.
September 5th, 2010 at 3:53 AM ^
Actually, Drieisbach lost his job to Griese (though Brady was there and thought he should have started). Dreisbach did handle it well, asking to play on special teams. I think I remember his getting applause for his last home game against Wisconsin when he was on for a kickoff. Also, though not drafted, he was on an NFL roster for a time, at which time there were six Michigan QBs in the NFL (Harbaugh, Brady, Griese, Grbac, Collins, and Dreisbach).
September 5th, 2010 at 11:32 AM ^
Dreisbach battled injury after injury, just unlucky stuff. And, no, Brady was not in the equation in 1997, which was the overlap of all three. I don't know how Brady could have thought he was ready to start that early... He struggled enough in 1998.
September 5th, 2010 at 3:37 AM ^
pot references? when DG came in i said to no one in particular, "tate must really be in the dog house." a seemingly intelligent, sober michigan fan in the row ahead of me turned and gestured as if smoking a joint.
i have no problem with toking a little reefer, but it certainly could have negative effects on your football performance. and if its at the point where your coach knows about it that certainly warrants "disciplinary actions" and a spot behind a true frosh, at least for game 1. it would be best if this could remain an internal issue, but on a college campus its pretty hard to keep news like that under wraps.
i'm no troll trying to spread bullshit. it just seems a little too plausible from the california kid. i haven't even seen the footage of him "pouting," but clearly something is up. again i wish this could be handled strictly between tate and the staff, but with all the rumors going around someone has to be straight about it, and i'm counting on mgoblog to provide.
September 5th, 2010 at 4:38 AM ^
I find it amazing that Rothstein can report what he did and then after seeing the video posted on this site, edits the column by removing the sentence about Tate being the third person leaving the field. Is that how it works? You write a report and then when something is proved false then you retract that part of the story and expect that the community will believe the rest of the story is still 100% accurate. What kind of Mitch Albom-ish reporting is that? Don't let the facts get in the way of a negative report to try to steal the thunder from a good win by the UofM football team. Unfortunately, from reading the comments over at annarbor.com the community seems to be quick to accept the story as 100% accurate. Then, the editor edits the article to include mention of Tom's interview with Mike Forcier. And I see that Carty crawled out from whatever rock he was hiding under and is posting on the NYT Quad blog and is more than happy to pump out his buddy's at least partially incorrect story.
Anyway, thank you to those of you here who help to get the full story out there. And as far as Tate if he wants to quit then he can quit as far as I am concerned. I just hope that at some point he grows up and doesn't regret quitting in the face of adversity.
September 5th, 2010 at 1:56 PM ^
And this is why we don't go to the MSM anymore to get our news, but to blogs like this one that do what used to be called journalism. Rothstein was trying only to inflame, not to inform.
September 5th, 2010 at 7:44 AM ^
Not that we see this progress often, but maybe Gardner is simply ahead of Forcier. If Denard improved so much during the offseason, maybe Gardner improved enough from the spring to be ahead of Forcier, who likely did not improve at all.
There's so much unnecessary drama here. If Gardner simply beat out Forcier, then maybe Forcier should wait for the season to be over and transfer. it wouldn't be wise to transfer now because if Gardner is needed he's a true freshman, so there is still a chance Forcier can play, though not unless Denard gets injured. No one will blame him if Denard is clearly established at the end of the year, Gardner progresses (which he will) and he transfers as a result.
September 5th, 2010 at 12:02 PM ^
After all the words written about how challenging it is to have a true freshman QB (for example, see the chart Brian posted a few days ago comparing Forcier to ~15 other QBs, which placed Forcier just behind Henne), I think it is very well established that true freshmen, no matter how physically talented, just don't know the offense and college game well enough to be very successful. Successful in spurts, and maybe even most of certain games - but not consistent. Consistency (see 19-22 passing, no INTs) makes the offense tick.
We would be lucky if Gardner this year was as good as Forcier last year, b/c you never know with a true freshman, and as we saw last year, that level of QB is not quite enough (esp. with our defense, notwithstanding yesterday).
From this knowledge, and the cryptic quotes from RR and Mr. Forcier (e.g., "we kind of saw some things that others didn't. Not everyone knows and sees everything that goes on on the inside.") it definitely must be RR is trying to send a message that Forcier still has to earn his way back for playing time (i.e., 2nd string and spot duty, assuming Denard keeps playing anywhere close to where he did against UConn).
If Denard (crosses fingers against this) has to be out for any significant amount of time, Gardner does not give UM a better chance to win than Tate. However, RR is clearly considering other, non-playing factors, which hopefully can be remedied through hard-work and personal growth, b/c it's likely we're going to need another QB, if only for a quarter or a game or two this year, and hopefully Tate can be that guy after doing whatever he needs to do.
September 5th, 2010 at 7:52 AM ^
Look, there is one thing I know for certain...I wish every father had the reason and logic of Mr. Forcier. Tate will be fine. He is a kid, and kids react like...well, kids. Whether he was pouting or not is irrelevent.
It came down to one simple quote from Mr. Forcier: Those who stay will be champions.
September 5th, 2010 at 9:24 AM ^
September 5th, 2010 at 9:26 PM ^
Exactly. Nailed it. If he did not want camera shoved in his face he should have been in the middle of the group of his team mates celebrating like everyone else. Instead he was by himself going emo on the bench.
September 5th, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^
Chris Perry was going to transfer also. He was whining to his mother about his playing time, and she almost gave in, as she latter said in an article, and then she said something like this to herself "if I let him quit, and move on right now, how is he ever going to grow up and be a man" It sounds like Mr. Tate is having the same thougts, based on his comments....lets hope so.
September 5th, 2010 at 10:01 AM ^
So, let me get this right - We run all over UConn, Denard looks awsome, the Defense holds up, the flyovers were cool (though the B25 was awfully fucking low!), and we get a decisive win in a game that people were worried about.
So the Board spends the next morning basking in the glory, right? I mean right?
No, it appears that we will actually spend the morning worrying about whether Tate will transfer AFTER TomVH reports that there is no indication that he will. What in the the holy name of Bo is going on here? Have we become such a bunch of beaten puppies that we look for bad news? I guess I know what 97.1 is going to talk about next week, but do we have to?
(Yes, I know that I didn't have to read or post here. I am trying to make a point.)
September 5th, 2010 at 1:16 PM ^
He started it by telling the only reporter he talked to after the game, "All you need to know is I'm out." That's it -- nothing else. Unequivocal and incendiary. His father has to step in and clean up the mess. If anyone wonders why he's not starting, just look at that. It's a petulant, immature, bullshit thing to say, no matter how frustrated you are.
It's also part of growing up, so let's cut him some slack -- just don't blame anyone but Tate for the extent of the brouhaha.
September 5th, 2010 at 1:35 PM ^
but I think the point of the comment you are replying to is why we are discussing this?
And I'm discussing it because I'm hoping that my statements help people realize we should drop it.
But that's also a pretty petulant, immature and bullshit thing to post.
what the hell am I thinking?
September 5th, 2010 at 4:16 PM ^
because that's what they do.
But you and I wouldn't have been, except maybe in some short-lived MGoBoard thread. Brian certainly wouldn't have had it on the front page. Nor would Tate's father have been talking to TomVH, Adam Rittenberg, the AP reporter, and probably a dozen others.
September 5th, 2010 at 3:47 PM ^
I didn't hear the quote as I was at the game. But, yeah, Tate needs to learn to ignore the media better. I also heard that the reporters went right over to him after the game. Obvisously, they were looking for something to report. A statement of, "Great game, I happy we won. See ya!" would have been much, much better.
But still, we, as a fan base, seem to be looking for bad news. We just won a game that, if you project out the schedule, we kinda needed to have. We also looked really, really good. I tuned on the computer in the morning and it's all about will Tate transfer or not. Yeesh, enough. Let's just enjoy some good news for awhile without wondering what will happen at the end of the year.
September 5th, 2010 at 11:33 AM ^
A point of clarification. In the first half, Tate had the headphones on and was signaling in plays. That's the job of the third string QB. So it was no big shock to him that we didn't go in when Denard when down. With Denard out, Tate became the second string. Jack Kennedy then put on the headphones and Tate was warming up.
Jack Kennedy kept the headphones the rest of the game, my guess is the coaches wanted him to get some time signaling plays since he may need to it again this season. At that point all Tate could do is watch, with TV cameras poking in his face. If it were me I would want to deck a camera man. Instead, he put a towel around his face. Not the best option, but a whgole lot better than belting someone.
Thanks to TomVH for an excellent job. Tate will stay, Tate will play, and at some point he and we will be very glad he's here.
September 5th, 2010 at 11:35 PM ^
Are you sure about Tate having the headphones on and signaling in plays? I didn't see it on TV, but from my vantage in section 22 right behind the bench, I never saw Tate sending in plays. I'd almost 100% certain Kennedy was doing it the entire game.
September 5th, 2010 at 4:44 PM ^
In light of Mike Forcier's interview, is it possible that Tate chose his words poorly and meant something along the lines of, "All you need to know is I'm out" [of the lineup or this game]? It was pretty clear that DG isn't a better QB than Tate at this point (too raw, true freshman, whatever) so I have to think RR had something in mind.
Also, is it possible that the wind factors in since Tate isn't a threat to run and UConn doesn't have to worry about him passing due to the wind.
Or, mind games with ND and Tate sees significant time in South Bend...
Who knows? My point is there are alternative takes on this and we should withhold judgment until comprehension sets in.
September 5th, 2010 at 5:42 PM ^
Even though that's what I first thought it probably meant, and Rothstein had distorted it. But his father didn't say Tate misspoke or was misunderstood. According to Rittenberg, with regard to the infamous quote, "Mike Forcier said Tate was just frustrated after the game."
September 5th, 2010 at 5:39 PM ^
I think Tate probably meant what you suggested - that he's out of the lineup. I also agree with you that Tate is better than DG, and that RichRod had something in mind by keeping Tate out of the game.
However, I think that RichRod had in mind is to teach Tate a lesson. See, for example, Mike Forcier's comment about disciplinary action.
I don't think RichRod is keeping Tate out in order to mess with ND. Quite frankly, we aren't good enough to be messing around like that. I think the idea of "hiding" stuff is overblown, and RichRod would probably agree: if we play with focus and max effort, then we'll probably win. No need to play mind games.
September 5th, 2010 at 8:40 PM ^
...likes TomVH's work:
KwameKilpatrick Uh ohhhhh, @TomVH interview with Tate Forcier's dad makes @mikerothstein's 'Tate leaving??' column look retarded on arrival
September 5th, 2010 at 10:37 PM ^
I hope Tate does well, he is a good QB. I watched him with his towel over his head all by himself on the bench. My first thought was.....Tom Brady should give him a call.....that might help to put this in perspective. I am fully confident that RR will play him if he is the best man for the job.
September 6th, 2010 at 12:03 PM ^
"get on the same page", ala Braylon and Lloyd.
Really really good things happened once they were reading the same thing.
September 6th, 2010 at 8:08 PM ^
"....the advice I give him is ride it out baby, ride it out. Those who stay will be champions."
What Denard showed Saturday was special, but what Tate showed in the fourth quarter of the first 5 games of his freshman season was also special, and we need two quarterbacks.
I'm not giving up on Tate yet and I'm glad to see his dad's trying to help him keep his head screwed on straight. He needs to work his ass off and be ready when the time comes.
September 7th, 2010 at 1:26 AM ^
September 7th, 2010 at 5:48 PM ^
A couple of things.
1st, I have looked all over for someone to say this, but could Tate have been saying 'I'm out' in response to their request for an interview, as in 'I'm out of here and am not talking to anyone.'? This was how I took it. Yes, he is a bit immature, but was most surely pissed off at not playing and wasn't in the mood to talk to reporters. He just chose the wrong words to explain he wasn't going to give any interviews. He went on to snub fans, etc. The article was written to stir up controversy and the author should be embarrased as a writer considering he didn't even have his facts straight on where Tate was immediately following the game. I agree with someone who said that this is terrible reporting. I like Michigan football and basketball and would love a job covering the teams. I have a degree and can watch games on the sidelines and then embelish what I am not sure of, do I get the job?
2nd- On Gardner's redshirt. If you think Rich Rod is 'saving' anyone, you are sadly mistaken. That is not a slight on him, as all coaches do it. He needs to win, and win now, more than most other coaches. He has way less room for 'saving' good players. It happens more than you think. Coaches need to win. Who knows what will happen with the 3 over the next 3 years. All we know is they need to win now, and if Gardner was playing well in camp, and competing, that means he can help this team and will play, redshirt and extra year be damned. This is big business and players careers are moved about like puppets all the time, especially with multimillion dollar coaches who can be fired for a couple 7-5/8-4 seasons....
Comments