the yakety sax 6 play they got us on the board.
Peppers at 10, which seems low.
the yakety sax 6 play they got us on the board.
I don't think there is any question- there is no way Bellomy could have made that play. But, I support the idea that we don't need to beat the kid up any more.
Hoke's epic "injury trolling" continues.
Right, because it's impossible for quarterbacks to get injured.
Just ask Denard Robinson. And Steve Threet. And Chad Henne. And Drew Henson.
Apparently not all of us are quite so smart (response to inthebluelot).
IF Hoke is using an injury to take the heat off of someone, it is not Borges-- even if you think he deserves the heat (debatable), even if Hoke thinks he deserves the heat (doubtful), I am pretty sure Hoke feels Al is a grown man and can deal with the heat himself.
More likely, he would be protecting his player, who is, afterall, still a teenager. A move which makes me admire Hoke all the more.
I saw this in the press conference, and to me it seemed like a good way to explain why Gardner was the obvious starter without basically admitting, "Russell was a tire fire."
Just a suspicion, but the timing made it seem a bit strange to me.
Actually, what was said in the postgame presser was that Bellomy had a "situation."
A reporter followed up and asked Hoke what Bellomy's "situation" was and he said he didn't want to talk about it.
The fact that he could've simply dismissed it just as easily by saying Bellomy was injure and had a "boo boo," yet he didn't do that, kind of leads me to believe it wasn't injury related.
Denard could have gone. We need a backup quarterback and a starter for next year and I think we saw about enough of Bellomy to know that he is not it. I think this was Gardner's audition for second team QB for the remainder of season and starter next year. It was an impression audition and I think it is safe to say he got the part.
Well, it depends on what you mean by pressure. I tend to think that people complaining about Borges on the internet is not pressure.
Michigan is coming off a remarkably successful season last year, is in line for its second successful recruiting class in a row, has a 5-star QB coming in next year, is still in consideration for the B1G championship, and the "pressure" is coming because when our star QB went down, the backup did not play well.
No, I do not think Al Borges is feeling the pressure.
And you were including yourself, it might help to spell "Al Borges" correctly any one of the 4 or 5 times you mention him in this thread.
It's not Birgess, Borgess or firealborgess.com. (Though if we see that last one online we'll know who created it).
This staff has never been honest about injuries, and there's no reason they would start now.
This isn't necessarily a criticism, as they're perfectly entitled to tell the media whatever, but it's just an observation.
The bit about Denard starting last Saturday erases any credibility on the subject of injuries and two-deep rosters. Complete misinformation. Now, if the idea is to mislead our opponents and to disrupt their pre-game preparation, or to cover for internal team matters in a way that suits Brady Hoke, so be it. But I am not going to pretend that what Hoke says means anything anymore. At least not on the subject of injuries and where players are on the two-deep.
If it suits Brady Hoke, it suits Michigan. They are one in the same and he's not worried about anything besides the success of the Michigan team when he speaks. We had our three years of the super coach who had to be everybody's smooth operator and the smartest guy in the room. It was a disaster.
As an action and results guy, he'd probably caution us to give meaning to the product he is in charge of taking the field and the quality of men who emerge from his program. I doubt he'd care if any of us give any weight to his meanderings to the media about subjects which aren't their business in the first place.
If it suits Brady Hoke, it suits Michigan. They are one in the same
I'd rather not get into the REAL reason this pisses me off outside of being "one AND the same," but you completely missed the point of Section 1's phrase. Every coach has their way of handling this.
I didn't say, "shame on Brady Hoke." All that I asserted was that whatever his reason(s) -- and there could be some strategic/team morale reasons for misleading in the press -- what we now know, from more than one occasion, is that what Brady Hoke says about injuries and players' status is meaningless. Who knows if it will be true or not?
I'd rather hear Magnus tell me about an unsubstantiated rumor, than read what Brady Hoke says in an interview. Because Magnus' rumors are far more likely to be informative than Hoke's press conferences. I'm not poking fun at Magnus. I'm being quite serious.
I wouldn't make a big deal about it, but for the point that Hoke is thought to be such a great and effective personality in dealing with the press and being the public face of the team. Meanwhile, Hoke's predecessor, whom I don't ever recall making a deliberately misleading public statement, was thought to be such a tactless rube in being the public face of the team.
Winning has a funny way of making a coach right, I suppose.
I'm impressed by how smoothly you can turn every thread into a Section 1 special. This thread is about a backup QB who had nothing to do with RichRod, and yet here we are with Hoke/RR comparisons.
Any chance that you want to throw in some Free Press or politics to really go all in on this one?
How it was Nate Volk who brought up Rich Rod IN RESPONSE to a Section 1 post.
I find a lot of Section 1's posts obnoxious, too, but he's definitely right that it's always the RR critics who start stuff.
That's fair. Antagonistic, snarky comment to Section 1 (mostly) retracted.
If only all of the antagonistic, snarky [and misplaced] comments to Section 1 could be so easily and efficiently retracted. Plus one for you in any event.
What's wrong with the Hoke/RR comparisons? We've compared every other coach throughout the years to the one who came before.
RR has won everywhere he's coached, including in Arizona and that will come back to haunt U of M. They will be known as the one place who wouldn't back up a guy who did it by the book, told the truth, and took the heat.
Hoke and all of us enjoyed last year because of RR and you know it.
You people who have an opinion and voice it and then turn around and tell others what they can discuss and shouldn't discuss really need to reexamine yourselves!
Because you have, by NCAA rules, 20 hours to practice a week. If Minnesota is spending a few extra reps game planning their D for two quarterbacks because Hoke is known to be a lying SOB wrt injuries, it's a competitive advantage. Granted, the difference in our offense isn't that great between Denard and Devin, but still (Not sure they could rule out Bellomy starting either though).
how long have you been a fan or watching the games?
Hoke is winning with THAT masterminds players.
Losing with all THAT talent!!!
There were rumors floating around during the week that Bellomy was injured, so it's not like the coaches just made this up in the last 24 hours.
But it's very possible that they made it up earlier in the week.
One of my favorite characteristics of Hoke (and Carr, for that matter) is his unrelenting public support for his players. It's very rare that he criticizes one of his player's play in public, and he says a lot of things along the lines of "we have a lot of confidence in... Bellomy / Gibbons / etc." If the coaches decided that Bellomy isn't ready and Gardner is the better option, then claiming that Bellomy is hurt is a way to give yourself the greatest win probability (Gardner plays) while maintaining that public confidence in Bellomy (who couldn't play b/c "injured" rather than "not good enough"). If Bellomy's not hurt, he obviously knows what's going on, but I'd imagine that message is a lot easier to take privately from your coaches than from your coaches and the entire Michigan fan base.
But if Bellomy is not hurt, wouldn't they want to put him in instead of JDK for the last drive? Any time he can have leading the offense, even if it's just giving the ball to a RB, is needed. I don't think Hoke would keep him sidelined in that situation just to save face for Bellomy.
and there's absolutely no chance that the coaching staff started the rumors!
Nebraska, at least they should be responsible for not being responsible in preparing the backup QBs in emergence situation. Had Borges used simpler schemes for Bellomy, things might have been different.
Simple schemes or not, Bellomy can't get the job done. Not right now. He had simple throws early, and he didn't hit them. Michigan couldn't run the ball, so the game was on Bellomy's shoulders. That was a certain loss once Denard got hurt.
That was a certain loss once Denard got hurt...and Gardner was only prepped for WR.
Personally, I very much doubt that Gardner would have been able to win that game in Lincoln had he been called on even if he had been taking the 2nd string QB reps for weeks. I'm not even sure UM would have won had Denard been healthy the entire game.
Nebraska has shown a propensity for erasing deficits this season (17 to Wisco in Lincoln, 12 in Evanston and 10 in E. Lansing) and UM didn't even have a lead in the game. I think we are just going to have to acknowledge that UN is pretty good this year. They are MUCH better than I thought they were going to be.
You might be right, but I would at least liked to have seen the outcome with Gardner at QB. A lot of the prssure Nebraska was applying would not have been successful with a mobile QB.
your opinion that his conjecture is conjecture...........is conjecture!
I look at it this way. Should the coaches have figured out by the time of the Nebraska game that DG is a much better QB than Russell Bellomy? Absolutely. And I'm sure they did.
But, in case you haven't noticed, our WR corps. has also been struggling all season--as a result of which, our opponents have often been able to render us one-dimensional. We help ourselves at WR by playing DG there.
So, put yourself in the staff's shoes headed into the Nebraska game. We have Denard, who had never missed significant time to that point in his career, ready to play QB. Now, let's assume though that the coaches know he has an elbow issue and there's a decent chance he'll be injured in the game. We can either prepare DG to play WR, where he will definitely be needed, or we can prepare him to be the backup QB, where he might be needed (and for how much of the game, we don't know either). Realisitcally there is probably not enough time to prepare DG for both positions.
Based on DG's historic performance at QB, chances are we don't beat Nebraska if Denard goes out early anyway--even if DG spends the whole week preparing to back up Denard. Therefore, prepping DG to play WR and gambling that Denard gets through the game is probably the smartest play. It's at least a defensible decision. The coaches have to take those kinds of risks because we don't have historical levels of depth. Sometimes the chips fall your way, sometimes they don't.
And of course, we don't know how much of this information the coaches actually had in advance anyway. Did they realize Denard's elbow thing was bad enough to keep him out a whole half-plus? Did they realize DG was capable of playing like he did that last three quarters against Minn? Did they realize Bellomy would perform that poorly if he had to go in?
It's too bad we lost to Nebraska, but there's no sense pointing fingers at anybody.
To be fair his line couldn't block, his receivers didn't help him when he did make the throws (and he did make some good throws), his backs didn't make plays (like you said), he wasn't being prepared for it in practice, and the only other significant game time he had seen was against Alabama, the number 1 team in the country and the #2 pass defense in the country. On the other hand, he is the quarterback and it was up to him to play well.
is for the position.
And him at qb wasn't the only position not playing up to expectations.
Yay, we have people on this message board who can quote meaningless catchphrases used by Coach Hoke!
I think they had a backup QB developed and ready, but for some reason he continued to play at WR against Nebraska...
There was some talk on the live blog that Bellomy should come in to get some good feeling going. That made sense to me, so when they put in Kennedy I was a little puzzled. To be sure, that's not proof of anything, but maybe that explains why Denard suited up and why Kennedy came in.
Going forward I'm fading anything BH says on injuries.
I agree with your last point (about not taking anything this staff says about injuries very seriously), and I think that's a good thing.
If they think that keeping injury information quiet gives them an advantage, I'm more than happy to live in suspense for a few more days before seeing who's in there on Saturdays.
that maybe Kennedy was put in because:
a-he's a senior
b-the game was in hand
c-probably won't have another game in hand the rest of his SENIOR yr to allow him to actually play.
Injured or not, Gardner won the backup job yesterday. Barring some injury or huge setback Gardner has to be the favorite to win the starting qb job next year.
For those of you clamoring for Shane to be your qb on year one, that's just not going to happen. Especially under an old school coach like Hoke.
we have true freshmen playing all over the place this year. if morris proves he's good enough, he plays. it's as simple as that. the best guys should play.
Agreed. The best will play, but for all of Shane's potential, he's hardly a polished QB at this point. It's not like he lit up his high school competition every game. I expect him to become a good college QB, but not as a true freshman.
Tate Forcier got off to a fast start as a Freshman, reeling off four wins in a row and then going to OT in East Lansing, in large part because he had been an early enrollee. I think it is a very big deal if you are a QB, to early enroll. That's a lot of practice time, including the spring game.
I can't recall what happened with Chad Henne. Was he an e.e.?
Going way back, I remember what a shock it was, when the decision was made to start Rick Leach. The guy he replaced, Mark Elzinga, was a very good upper classman. It was a big surprise, for a guy who had only been on campus for a few weeks.
Chad Henne wasn't even first string until Matt Gutierrez turned up hurt (I forget, what was it?) right before the first game of the year. That was a rather memorable morning, with word of Henne's start zipping through the tailgates west of the Stadium.
Henne, and for that matter Rick Leach, disprove the assertion earlier in the thread that Morris won't start because an "old-fashioned" coach is coaching. The best player will play.
It is simply the fact that the best available player next year will be the senior playmaker Devin Gardner. But if Morris beats him in practice, Morris will be the starter.
Than the offense that Bo and his staff ran. No comparison. Had Gutierrez not been hurt Henne would not have seen the field except in garbage time. When they started Henne the coaching staff stated that they had greatly "simplified" the offense. In Henne's 2nd season the coaches were able to return to the "full" offense. If Morris proves more effective in the Borges offense than Gardner, or Bellomy then he will start. Based on Borges's own comments on the learning curve for "any" QB in the first year I predict a red short for Shane.
Was peeing blood all week, didn't practice much at all
(didn't hear it from me)
His ego certainly took a blow
Somebody made this same comment as the first post in this thread...
...and it is now deleted.
Deleted? Why? Is it wrong to assume that he may have been a little mentally shaky in practice after that game? He is a freshman after all...
Glad to here that, I was a little worried after last week they just dropped him down to fourth string. Not really but I felt bad for him.
If Gardner continues to get better into next season will be an overall better QB than Denard...His height helps he see over the line better, he is more accurate than denard down the field, and he seems to have a been feel for taking off when there is nothing there instead of only designed runs!
Yes and no, he's a totally different quarterback, and we shouldnt make judgements or expectations based on one performance
Against Minnesota, in fact.
Then again, making (positive) judgments about Devin now seems no less ridiculous than making (negative) judgments after a couple of spring games and a few snaps last year. I always found the "no one here is allowed to discuss whether Devin might be a better QB than Denard" thing annoying. My own view is that I don't have enough information on Devin to know, but it's a message board, so what's the harm in discussing?
Your position is a completely reasonable one, but my issue with these discussions has always been that few people are willing to stop at "we just do not have enough information".
Rather, they insist on drawing conclusions based on whatever limited data exists. I suppose there is no real harm in that, but it is not all that productive either.
I hope that with the increase in numbers of offensive linemen on scholarship that the spring game is once again an actual game. I would really be interested in seeing Gardner and Bellomy play and see where they are after spring practice.
But honestly, what IS productive on a message board? Nothing we say on these boards has any productive value to them. That's why we go to them while we should be working!
Yeah, productive was a poor word choice on my part. Interesting would have been a better one. There have been some genuinely interesting speculation and infomation thrown out here from time to time and some thoughtful debates. But not going all psychotic over the same limited info.
But yes, that is the internets.
Strong statement. Too small a sample size to say anything for sure, IMO. But even if DG develops into a better passer, not sure DG could ever be the playmaker Denard is even if he had 4 more years to develop at that position at Michigan
Sure, if you define "playmaker" as "runner." But if it includes plays like the TD pass to Dileo, that's another story. I'm not sure Denard would have made that play. For a guy as agile as he is, he's made surprisingly few unscripted TD passes.
I define it as making a play when you need one. As an OSU fan, I know all too well how Denard is in elite company in this category. And I don't just mean breaking long runs. We've all seen Denard make a bug time throw against much better opponents than Minnesota. The game against Michigan State this year comes to mind as his most recent game breaking pass.
Denard is the best player at the position, but under varying definitions you seem to be correct. Devin isn't as fast as Denard, but his feel for the pocket and ability to judge whether to take off running or whether to make a pass downfield seems much better than Denard. If Denard ran from the pocket as much as Devin he would be terrifying to defenses, but that is not how he plays.
FWIW Devin does the "scramble around and heave it" well, but some of the stuff that worked against Minnesota won't work against more talented teams.
Day light savings time hasn't effected the time stamp on comments does anyone know why? Or if it will change?
Incorrect. You're just seeing into the future. Don't tell me how it goes. I love surprises.
While we've all learned better than to fully trust anything Brady Hoke says about injuries I don't really feel deceived in this case. It was well known and documented that Gardner was getting the majority of snaps at QB this week while Denard recovered. Whether or not Russ is actually injured didn't really occur to me as being urgent until Jack Kennedy went in to help run out the clock. At that point I would guess that Bellomy does have a very real injury of some kind becuase I don't see why you wouldn't trust the guy to hand off four times in a row. *shrug*
I'm guessing that Denard was okayed to play on Saturday (thus he was dressed, etc) but that the plan was to keep him out unless absolutely necessary. Like most injuries nerve conditions recover more with time and the risk of further injuring Denard's throwing arm when you're going to win either way is silly. My guess is that if the offense remained stagnant or Gardner got hurt, then we might've seen Denard... I would hope that the plan is similar for Northwestern and Iowa as well because a healthy Denard against ohio is a beautiful thing.
There's no question in my mind that Denard Robinson remains the #1 QB here. His feet help cover up a lot of our blocking issues and his passing game is on par with Devin's. Minnesota caveats abound and stuff... That being said I think Devin is the heir apparent at QB and will probably make a brilliant 'transition' QB between the spread offense we've run with Dilithium and the vertical passing schemes we'll being installing soon. He's mobile enough to buy time and grab a touchdown here and there. He's tall enough to have great field vision and he's strong enough to heave the ball 50+ yards down field. Defenses don't have to play his legs the way they have Denards, but if our recieving core holds up their end things should be okay in 2013.
Ssshhhhhh......don't tell anyone.
Kennedy's a senior and bellomy is not.
Probably best, last chance to get him on field.
You guys are fucking ridiculous.
What does Hoke, Borges or ANYONE have to gain by lying about this injury?
It doesn't change the fact that the kid played like SHIT vs. Nebraska. It happened, we move on.
It doesn't take any heat off of Bellomy, Borges or Hoke. Injured or not, Bellomy was awful, and if he was THAT hurt he wouldn't have played vs. Nebraska and wouldn't have travelled to Minnesota. So it is what it is, why does their have to be a motive or a lie?
Lastly, if the coaches were trying to take the heat off of Bellomy, they'd let the topic die and fade away. You wouldn't bring up an injury (true or not) and bring even more attention to the kid if the goal is to take heat off of him.
Lastly, if the coaches were trying to take the heat off of Bellomy, they'd let the topic die and fade away.
The topic won't "die and fade away" on its own, particularly with Gardner starting against Minnesota and Kennedy coming in later in the game.
Call me naive -- or stupid as was done in a thread several weeks ago -- but I'm inclined to trust the coaches. I'd stake the integrity of Coach Hoke against anyone's on this board, including mine.
Are the coaches perfect? No. Are they intentionally dishonest? Categorically no.
Not entirely relevant but I was wondering if anyone knew what scout released about devin gardners eligibility? I saw it on twitter but didn't see the details.
I was wondering why they still had DG in on the next to last possession, as I thought it would be a good time to get Bellomy some game experience. Then, when they put Kennedy in for the last possession, I thought "what the hell?". So, an injury makes sense to me.
It makes sense considering they went with Kennedy rather than Bellomy late in the game. It would have been a perfect time to get Bellomy back out there to gain a little confidence against Minnesota, but they went with Jack instead.
and I don't think I have a right as a Michigan graduate and fan to know the inside skinny on who's injured and who's not.
Section 1 is absolutely right here: "Winning has a funny way of making a coach right."
Bo was legendarily paranoid and frequently downright dickish when it came to outsiders trying to glean info about the inner workings of the team during the season, an attitude that his successors maintained with such rigor that the term "Fort Schembechler" came about. But since Bo won many more games than he lost, there was no real squawking. If RR had a similar winning percentage, his lack of guile in public relations would be seen as charming country naiveté.
If we'd gone 8-5 last year with losses to ND, OSU, and VaTech—all of which were very tight games—the heat on Hoke this year would be appreciably greater. He got himself a huge amount of insulation with that 11-2 record.
...............insulation from RR's talent!
1. Bellomy didn't really have much of a chance. I am betting he wouldn't have looked nearly as bad against Mini-soda.
2. I like the return of "The Fort." I like "coach-speak." I like limited access to players for those "impartial" newspaper writers. Carty's "expose" was bad, and the freep hatchet job was worse. I am glad that Hoke can mislead the MSM with a straight face. Let them be real journalists for a change.
3. I'm happy that Michigan appears to have a viable option behind Denard for the rest of the year. You never know how long it takes a "boo-boo" to heal. Also, Devin is a better pocket passer because he can see over the line of scrimmage. I wouldn't mind seeing both play in a game, just to see what the other team does.
Bellomy would have looked terrible against minnesota too. There was an unblocked defender on nearly every play and Devin did a phenomenal job of evading and throwing good passes. There's no way in hell that Bellomy pulls that off. Secondly, the wrs have consistently dropped Bellomy's passes. That's probably because they float for so long. Devin Gardner is 100x the qb that Bellomy is right now. All the Bellomy fans need to suck it up right now.
Call me crazy but sometimes I have wondered if the wrong guy didn't switch to receiver. Coming in Denard was the obvious QB but with how the offense has run and how everything has turned out I wonder if DG may not have been the better QB choice with Denard doing ninja-like things. I don't know, I just watch the guy Saturday do some really good things without hardly practicing. This is all in hindsight obviously as the decision pre-season/Al Borges was obvious but I think it's an interesting question.
I don't know. I'd have to think that if Denard was told that he'd be switching to WR that he may have jumped to the pros rather than sticking around for another year.
I'm just going to say that if you judged Nick Sheridan exclusively off his performance vs Minnesota, you'd not have an accurate baseline of how good he was (obviously Gardner is way better than Sheridan, but still).
The problem with that idea is DR earned his spot at QB. He came here to play QB, he stayed here to play QB (about as huge a coup for Hoke as any recruit to date - given the timing) and he did the work where others balked - he bought in and led. Both DG and DR are standup guys, but DR prior to Borges was on pace to historical records (and still is for some.) You can't switch a guy to WR when he's potentially the best rushing QB the game has ever seen...ever.
Clearly DG is a better fit for Borges - but that is more a statement of the problem IMO as it is an interesting question.
Your comment does make me wonder (as does Bellomy's ability to chase down P.J. Smith at the 4 yard line saving a TD - keeping the game within reach late (that showed character and speed - the guy can play))... whether Bellomy could have switched to WR...he certainly wouldn't have hurt the production of the unit as whole. I think he could play over others seeing time on the field.
To say DG is a better fit at QB ultimately just says to me that Borges is a one way street. You win with people. I think Hoke understands that well and is getting the most from his staff and the players he prepares in practice. I also think he'd admit the DG to WR move was wrong in hindsight but that's just not what good coaches do.
Slow down. Gardner played one game. Against Minnesota. And you are ready to annoint him starting QB based on this alone?
(well, you did ask us to say it)
from Jack Kennedy as our QB
When we see JDK and Rey together on the field again they gonna drop 100 on somebody
Think about how that would go down with the team. Bellomy himself would never live it down. The truth would leak. May be minor, but he's got some injury.
Pooped his pants. Hoke and company now have to rebuild the goo that once was Bellomy's confidence.