Starting Sheridan
First time diary entry... go easy.
I can't help but feel like Sheridan really does seem to be in the mix and that RR is sincere when he indicates he really doesn't know who the #1 is yet.
I've seen Brian's Sheridan=Death so many times, it's hard not to have it plugged into my brain as fact, but...
If Sheridan does start or gets significant PT against WMU it would say less about the competition between the two candidates than about RRs confidence in the offense overall.
Assume Tate is more capable of making big plays and that some of those big plays will be the kind that go the wrong way. Nick on the other hand is less capable of good big plays, and I would argue bad big plays too. With a lot of good execution all around, the QB position becomes less critical and Sheridan-like mediocrity is OK.
You gotta believe Nick will be a better QB than he was last year. He's a student of the game, he's got another year of reps and knowledge and coaching under his belt, and, biggest thing: in the "countdown" videos on the U site he actually looks confident in interviews, athletic in drills and spiral-producing with his throws. In other words, “walk-on” doesn’t come to mind anymore.
So, am I predicting Sheridan will get substantial PT against WMU? Well, yes, I am and not just inconsequential PT. And it won't be because he's a better weapon but because there are a lot of much better players around him, especially the ones in front of him, and because I suspect Tate could probably gain from a little of the humility that comes from having to reflect on QB play in the bighouse vicariously.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:12 PM ^
Important point:
Rich Rodriguez knows more than you do. That's why you're on the internet in your underpants at 1 on a Tuesday, while he's getting aid millions of dollars to coach a college football team.
If Sheridan starts the first game (or any game, for that matter), it's because he gives Michigan the best chance to win. If you disagree, well, I guess you know more than the guy who sees him play every day.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:17 PM ^
+1 for being a voice of reason.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:20 PM ^
I am wearing pants at 1 on Tuesdays, thank you very much.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:34 PM ^
Screw Casual Fridays. Commando Tuesdays rule.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:17 PM ^
you are clearly one of the horsemen of the apocalypse.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:24 PM ^
I agree with the premise of your diary. Although I’m sure Tate will start, I’m becoming a big fan of Sheridan. He will make major contributions this year. We can and will win games with him at some point. I just want to remind people of Brain Griese’s career here. For the first four years -- until the Ohio State and Alabama games of his fourth year – he was utterly awful. Painful to watch. He almost didn’t return for his 5th year. And the rest is history.
August 13th, 2009 at 5:20 AM ^
I hope this is sarcasm. If Tate isn't the future guy and Sheridan is, then we've got huge problems.
August 13th, 2009 at 4:31 PM ^
can you read?
August 11th, 2009 at 1:40 PM ^
yeah he looked great in the spring game. i remember that beautiful sunny day watching a quarterback in a michigan uniform run play after play like he knew what he was doing. i also remember seeing the third team defense and checking my player roster every few minutes to get the names of the unfamiliar numbers on the jerseys.
sheridan never looked as comfortable last season as forcier did in the spring game, but i still think game experience matters a lot.
i doubt forcier starts against wmu. either way, i think forcier and sheridan get equal time in the first game.
i too look forward to the bright forcier future. i just don't think it is here yet.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:39 PM ^
In that case there is really nothing that could convince you that Forcier should start. But here are a few.
1) Sheridan played terrible last season.
2) Forcier took almost all the snaps with the starters during the spring.
3) Forcier looked outstanding in the spring game, and made plays that Sheridan couldn't have.
4) Sheridan played in the spring game the year before and played terrible against the same competition.
5) Sheridan was never recruited by a single D1 school.
6) Forcier was highly recruited and has had a quarterback coach since he was 4.
If Forcier doesn't have enough pure talent and experience (spring and years of personal coaching)to beat out Sheridan now, he doesn't have a very bright future because he's probably not that good.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:40 PM ^
Sheridan is the man. He always did his best and took all the pain like a man. Im sorry but Sheridan is so damn likeable and hard working that entertaining the idea of him starting is easy, last season and all. Just let the best guy play.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:50 PM ^
If sheridan starts any games not because of injury I forsee my fall being just like last year... Locking myself in my room affraid to watch games with anybody and drinking by myself on saturdays. Really, who wants to drink alone?
August 11th, 2009 at 2:00 PM ^
The spread offense only works if the defense is forced to allocate a full time defender to trail the QB.
Though Sheridan may be faster than he once was...HE LACKS QUICKNESS. He cannot get through a hole and blast downfield. No defense has to worry about him blowing past them.
He also lacks arm-strength and accuracy.
Remember the Northwestern loss? Sheridan: 8/29, 61 yds, 0 TDs; 10 rushes, 35 yds. Less than 100 yds of offense from the QB. Want some more this coming season?
Unless Tate is a complete bust, he is starting.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:42 PM ^
The spread was modelled after the run and shoot. Scott Fucking Mitchell made a Pro Bowl one year in that offense, and he couldn't move any better than Threet did.
The spread works better if the D has to cover the QB, but it still works if they don't, too.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:15 PM ^
I don't doubt that he'll be improved this season, but I'd be shocked if Sheridan starts over a healthy Forcier. His upside is just too low.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:30 PM ^
Wow, I'm a little overwhelmed by the volume of commentary on this. Clearly, I'm not the only one with nothing to do on my company's PC.
Regardless of whether Sheridan is mediocre or bad (I never actually said "good") or, for that matter, Tate is isn't more than the very shiny object we saw on selected bits of film from spring, this post was more intended to be about Rodriguez' mindset.
So, I'll try to say it again: if Sheridan plays, could it be in part because Rich believes he's got a good offensive TEAM? And wouldn't that indication alone, be encouraging? If he thinks he's still got roughage to work with on offense then he'll just say WTF and use Tate or even Denard -- because they're shiny -- and let the chips fall.
The best comment I saw on this line of thinking came from Tim. Thanks Tim, here's what you wrote:
Important point:
Rich Rodriguez knows more than you do. That's why you're on the internet in your underpants at 1 on a Tuesday, while he's getting aid millions of dollars to coach a college football team.
If Sheridan starts the first game (or any game, for that matter), it's because he gives Michigan the best chance to win. If you disagree, well, I guess you know more than the guy who sees him play every day.
August 13th, 2009 at 5:25 AM ^
Um, no, what happened to Oregon when Dixon got hurt? Epic Fail, that's what. This offense, or any offense really, needs a competent QB. That is not an accurate description of Sheridan.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:44 PM ^
I'll be the first to admit that any time Sheridan got the call to play last year, I couldn't run to the cooler or fridge quick enough for another beer or 12.
But that was then, and this is now.
If Sheridan sees playing time, I'd give my left one to see him haul the team downfield for a score on his first series. And the next series. And the one after that, too. I've frankly grown tired of the DEATH tag heaped upon Nick, deserved or not. It'd be great to see him shut that down.
Don't be surprised to see Sheridan play, perhaps start. I'm as excited as any of you about the great reports on Tate, and I'm just as eager to see him play sooner rather than later. But it's one thing to excel at practice, quite another to do it in front of 110,000 of the now-hungriest fans on the planet.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:13 PM ^
Exactly how many left nuts do you have?
August 13th, 2009 at 1:43 AM ^
2 or 3, I think. I bought some pills off a late-nite info-mercial. Oh wait... those pills were suppose to clean out the 25 lbs of shit gunked up in my intestines. Never mind.
(Sorry. Best I could do at this hour.)
August 13th, 2009 at 5:29 AM ^
Except I'd bet money that Sheridan isn't capable of that. A QB with even a little competency wouldn't perform as badly as he did last year. I just don't get the, he's got more experience line of reasoning. He had experience by the end of last season, didn't see much improvement. Exactly what kind of experience in the off season is better than the game time experience that he gained throughout last season?
I'm sure he's a great kid, but he's not going to be the starter. I wouldn't rule out a snap or two at the beginning of the season, but he'll quickly be replaced. However, I don't really believe he'll even take a meaningful snap.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:08 PM ^
So here it is, opening day. Western kicks off and we get the ball on our 35 yard line (please no fumble). Tate and Sheridan are both standing next to RR and it's .......... Sheridan that trots out to the huddle. What will your personal reaction be to seeing Sheridan as the starter?
For me it would depend on whether or not I'm at home or in the stands. I tend to be more supportive of the team when in the stands and try not to boo our players. At home I'd probably start by screaming "#&*!$#$!!!" at the tv and then move on to "%^#@*&!%^#^@!!!!!".
August 11th, 2009 at 4:43 PM ^
I would be sick to my stomach if Sheridan came out because that means either
A) Tate/Denard aren't ready to start progressing as a starter in Rich Rod's offense, prolonging our futility.
or (assuming neither will ever become a starter, which would nullify point A)
B) We will be starting a freshman in 2010 (a year in which I hoped we would be back to relevancy) or Sheridan will be the starter for 2009 and 2010, which is bad news because (no matter how good of a guy he is) he just isn't a D1 quarterback and that's why he wasn't recruited as one.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:34 PM ^
Unless Tate Forcier and Denard are HUGE busts and Sheridan turns into a QB that resembles a D1 prospect, then I don't want to see him on the field.
Assuming one of the Tate/Denard combo aren't busts and look like they could be serviceable in the future, then I don't think its good to see Sheridan, even if Sheridan might make slightly less mistakes or play slightly better (which I think is highly unlikely anyway.)
Now before you neg me listen to my reasoning. At some point we need to start moving forward with this team. Unless we plan on starting ANOTHER freshman next year in Gardner or Cornelius Jones, it's going to be Denard, Tate, or Sheridan starting against UConn. Therefore I think that unless somehow Sheridan is WAY better than Tate, we need to start the QB that has the most upside moving into the future. It seems pretty obvious that Nick Sheridan is not going to be a long-term answer over the next couple of years for this team if we have aspirations to be any good.
Therefore, given Tate and Denard aren't both truly incompetent, one of them should start because they have the most upside and give us the best chance at significantly improving our offense in the future.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:19 PM ^
In my mind's eye, the argument is overwhelming to support Tate as Michigan's starting QB throughout the upcoming season. However, the OP brings a perspective that nobody (sic) has really raised yet: first play of the game/season, even if you're likely going with the true frosh in the long run, as a head coach do you ease him in or do you throw him into the fire?
I mean, Nick Sheridan isn't exactly a gift from God as a football player, but the guy has a year of experience and some confidence; he knows his offensive unit, and he knows the playbook. He'd be an adequate QB to start games, let Tate see and digest the defensive looks of each team from the sidelines for a bit, and get that necessary game-day perspective before taking legitimate snaps.
The bottom-line is this: there are very few pressure professions that follow the rule of resume over experience. Law firms don't take the new associate and put him on their highest profile trial on day one, regardless of credentials. You get warmed up to it.
Tate's gonna play, and he's gonna play a lot, and I'm 90% sure he's our majority snap-taker for the whole of the season. I just wouldn't be surprised to see him get coached on the side-lines during the first quarter/half/whathaveyou before his number is called in games. It's not 2008 anymore, Michigan's run-game is going to be its strength, and Sheridan is an improved player. Seeing him start wouldn't give me fits. Not seeing Tate taking majority snaps, however, would bother me.
If 2009 is going to be a turn-around season, there's no need to crush the soul of the kid that should ultimately become your starting QB. You want Tate to be a position to succeed, and I think he should see the playing field from the sidelines for a bit, with Coach Smith or Rod in his ear, before he's asked to run the offense.
August 12th, 2009 at 4:40 AM ^
And people seem to forget that Sheridan was basically a freshman last year, heving never played a down of college football before that (IIRC).
August 13th, 2009 at 5:32 AM ^
Even a freshmen plays better than the wretched performance last year.
August 11th, 2009 at 7:08 PM ^
Good in practice does not mean good in real game situation... lots of mental issues, just like the stock market you can pretend trade, but when your using real money, then the pressure is on...
Also did not Sheridan impress in pre seasonlast year?
Either this blog or Varsity blue compared Sheridans throwing ability to that of a shot putter, last year?
Coach Rod is being kind and true... the position is open , but soon to close. Sheridan might start to be true to Sheridan but next series will be tates... one disaster season is one too many.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:49 PM ^
I'd give the finger to anyone that would boo Sheridan. Seems to me he fought like hell all year. Getting back up isn't easy, I know. If he's the man then I'm gonna cheer him on.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:12 PM ^
The guy was all-conference honorable mention in high school.
If the other QBs on this team this year or last can't convince RR that they're better than an all-conference honorable mention, then that's not Sheridan's fault.
Go Nick!
August 12th, 2009 at 12:35 AM ^
And that win against the Minne$ota LOLphers is why Nick Sheridan will be placed in the pantheon of Michigan heroes.
Fuckin' Geauxfurs.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:08 PM ^
September 13, 1975. First game of the season. Bo starts a freshman at quarterback against Wisconsin, in Madison. Rick Leach rushes 8 times for 30 yards, passes 10 times, with 2 completions for 34 yards and 1 touchdown plus 3 interceptions. Michigan wins 23-6. Michigan finishes the year 8-2-2.
If Tate starts, and I suspect he will, we as loyal Michigan fans need to be prepared for both the good news and the bad. Rick Leach was a great Michigan player and won a lot of games, but his first outing was not pretty.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:21 PM ^
On Rodriguez's resume, yet people are dismissing Sheridan based on LAST YEAR, without giving him the benefit that he could progress?
I don't get it. If we are supposed to believe that Rodriguez is capable of making his programs better after his first season, why then are we not willing to grant that Sheridan can benefit furing his second season with Rodriguez and Co.?
Sheridan will never light it up, that much is clear. But would he be capable of managing the offense and limiting mistakes? Won't he be surrounded by a better OL, receivers and running backs?
That old sense of entitlement seems to be rearing its ugly head here. Sheridan has worked as hard as anybody, broke his leg this past spring, and is back; he didn't quit the team and he is a damn likeable kid who can provide leadership and stability if called upon.
August 13th, 2009 at 5:33 AM ^
That's just it, he didn't progress.
August 13th, 2009 at 6:38 AM ^
I'm not saying that Sheridan deserves to play "just because" of all the warm fuzzies surrounding him. Hey, if he stinks, then keep him on the bench.
But people seem to be discounting that he could have improved with an entire year in the system--which is what I'm saying. And the bad-mouthing of a Michigan player is what I don't like. He doesn;t deserve it. People seem to act as if Sheridan purposely sabotaged the season last year. He was thrust into a role even he probably never dreamed would happen.
I like the kid's guts and class. I'm not so quick to judge the season as doomed if he has to play a lot.
August 15th, 2009 at 1:36 AM ^
I also never said I didn't like the kid. I said he's not a good QB and there's plenty of evidence to support this statement. I liked Carr as a person too, but that doesn't mean I wasn't glad he retired. There is a difference between expressing an opinion about whether a player should start or not and how you feel about that player as a person. People need to stop conflating the two. Also, -8, really? This system is seriously flawed when I can get a negative score for an opinion.
August 12th, 2009 at 7:25 AM ^
WRITTEN LIKE THE OLD PROGRAM DRAGNET...JUST THE FACTS MAAM"
Dont compare Sheridan to other Michigan quarter backs, compare him to Pryor(Ohio State), the penn state quarter back, Juice Williams (fighting illini), now is this what you want, would a 6 and 6 season be a victory?...
Remember Lincoln canned generals till he found a winner, Grant was like a bulldozer...
One poster wrote Sheridan is likeable, is that relevant?
He broke his leg, (actually a very small bone) does that mean he should start?
Hes trying real hard, meaningless if he cannot deliver the goods.
Sense of entitlement? contradictory because Sheridan landed on his rear last year(im a rapper), does that give him rights to do it again? Maybe we should change nick to RUDY
ABD AFTER A FEW YEARS REMAKE THE MOVIE AND ALL SHARE IN THE PROFITS, BECAUSE WE ALL cheered RUDY...rudy....RUDY!
August 12th, 2009 at 11:48 AM ^
I agree with the OP that if RRod says Sheridan is in the mix, it is very likely that he is fully in the mix. However, I disagree with the notion that Sheridan is less prone to mistakes. His (lack of..) skill set will pretty much create "mistakes" for him, not allowing him to make plays, despite how much longer he has been with the offense. Missing the spring also definitely hurt him and gave Forcier the chance to "catch up" with him in the offense.
Despite this, I would want him starting if he is truly the best option now, because at this point, we should be trying to win as much as we can after what happened last year. The future is very important, but another "disaster season" could cause enough anger in the general fanbase to put RRod on the hotseat, which most people here would not want.
August 12th, 2009 at 12:37 PM ^
and he did poorly even for freshman standards, standards A D1 guy with the expectation to be 'the man' at a program like Michigan must have. He doesn't have the tools to be 'the man' on the D1 level, at least not here. As was mentioned earlier-it's all been mentioned before, nothing new here-he might be faster than he was last year but he doesn't have the 'quicks' that are needed by a QB in our offense. Also, if you saw his passes on the 'Shaky Jake' video of the qb's practicing, clearly he doesn't possess the arm strength necessary to make most of the throws. Tate throws significantly harder and as to his accuracy nothing more needs to be added. Barring injury, Tate is going to see like 90% of the minutes. I think if the WVU game turns out to be a blow out we will see Nick, but we will probably see an equal amount of Denard as well; I like Nick and his Moxie but he is neared the peak of his potential and Tate and Denard both have a higher ceiling then him.
August 12th, 2009 at 5:33 PM ^
I hope they do not make a reality show out of that title.
August 13th, 2009 at 11:09 AM ^
I feel like Sheridan's arm strength crippled the offense last year. It shrank the field, and led to bad duck throws while backpedaling when he got into trouble. I don't want to see him out there this year except in case of emergency.
Also, I would like to remind everyone that this will likely be a rebuilding year no matter what from Michigan standards. If our goals is to win some national championships, let's have the QB of the future (with the clearly superior physical tools) taking snaps instead of the physically overmatched walk-on that frightens us all to death.
Comments