D Rob turnovers? what to do at this point

Submitted by tomhagan on

At this point, playing D Rob is more of a liability than it is an asset. He has become, for lack of a better word... a Turnover Machine.

Now, the kid is a great kid, tries hard and has a lot of talent... please dont get me wrong, Im not criticizing him or his ability...but he is a freshman and is very very raw.

At this point, ruling out a position switch which would make no sense....what would you like to see going forward at the QB position?:

* Tate 100% of the time unless way ahead or way behind.
* Tate most of the snaps with Denard in only on special packages.
* Tate and Denard on the same odd mix that they are in now
* Tate and Denard in there at the same time with Denard as a hybrid-slot nija type
* Denard returning some punts in addition to something else?

MCalibur

October 25th, 2009 at 2:44 AM ^

Love ya Tom, but, while I'd like to see Denard get better, you're posing unnecessary choices. Of the choices posed I guess 2 is what I'd prefer, but how does DRob get better if its not 2.5 or 3?

Does DRob play defense? Is he supposed to catch balls that are thrown while he's on the sideline? Did you notice Tate's "success"? Did you know DRob's INT came against an illegal defense (12 men)?

Blame him if you want, but that is not necessary. Pass Defense is our biggest problem.

And yes, our QBs can do a lot better than they are currently doing.

section44

October 25th, 2009 at 11:32 AM ^

run a little wildcat with him, great. But he will waste away and have his athleticism wasted if he stays at qb full time.

Next year you have Tate and pray he doesnt get hurt. Nick and DG fight for backup. Hope that DG doesnt have to see the field for any reason.

Move DRob after the season.

jawz

October 25th, 2009 at 2:40 PM ^

you honestly think that its not his fault
so how is it not his fault... 12 man or not he still threw it into double coverage. even if the defense it bad he put them in situations to do even worse turning the ball over and puting penn state in a better position to score. And fumbling the ball on our side of the field
do you also think its not his fault throwing 4 or 5 int on 19 bass attempts overthrowign recievers or not hitting the ones that are open (last drive iowa game)

MCalibur

October 25th, 2009 at 6:46 PM ^

Dude, you're missing my greater point which is that Denard Robinson is not the reason we lost the games we've lost. Benching him wont change the results we're seeing. Thats my point.

tpilews

October 25th, 2009 at 9:00 PM ^

I agree with what you are saying, but I think a lot of people here will agree that Denard is being misused. UM and Denard will be better served getting him the ball with a head of steam and open field in which the only decision he needs to make is how severely he's going to break that DBs ankle. I wanna see DR streaking down the sideline while Tate tosses him the ball.

Hoken's Heroes

October 25th, 2009 at 8:48 AM ^

It appears that everything that can go wrong is going wrong right now. But, you are right. This team is in the RR's hands. We can bitch and complain all we want but ultimately there's nothing we can do. So I am right with you that the coaches will do what they have to. If that's not good enough then RR and his staff will go looking for new jobs.

tomhagan

October 25th, 2009 at 2:57 AM ^

Im not "blaming" him...but clearly he is not ready to play. Please dont misunderstand that.

So I suppose you guys think that they should continue to play him in that role so he will 'get better'?

MCalibur

October 25th, 2009 at 3:12 AM ^

It sucks, but yes. We need Drob to develop under fire. I actually think he's getting better but his mistakes are are totally in your face and that makes them egregious. I wish our defense could absorb his mistakes but they cant.

Tate has struggled for damn near a month. I think Tate is good, but he's not flawless. Should we bench him? Hell, while we're at it lets bench Webb, Ezeh, Williams, Kevin Grady, Moosman, and anyone else who's screwed up.

DRob has a lot of areas he can improve on, but so does Tate. Benching Drob does not beat MSU, Iowa, or Penn St.

MLAWyer

October 25th, 2009 at 3:27 PM ^

I'm not sure your reply makes sense. If we had a better alternative than Ezeh, Williams, or Moosman, I would say that yes, we should bench them. If you have a better player on your bench, you play them and I think that is the case with Forcier/Robinson right now. You only let people make learning mistakes on the field if you don't have someone better.

In response to the main thread - I don't think you necessarily need to completely bench Robinson, but we are not using him effectively right now. I don't think that going drive by drive is our best option. When it's third and long, Robinson needs to come off the field. That's not to say we shouldn't let Robinson pass - he needs to develop his throwing skills - but let him pass off of play action or in situations where the defense if coming up to defend his run. To be honest, I don't know what the down and distance was on his interception yesterday, but it's obvious that he has struggled when teams know he is going to pass. I believe this is how Florida used Tebow as a freshman - situationally, not for full drives. For anyone who watched the Jets-Fins two weeks ago, the Dolphins used wildcat on first and second down on several drives, but then they went back to Henne if they were in an obvious passing down. We need to put Robinson in the best situation to succeed.

HelloHeisman91

October 25th, 2009 at 2:59 AM ^

"At this point, ruling out a position switch which would make no sense....what would you like to see going forward at the QB position?:"

Should we try to find a different position for every other true freshman 2 months into their careers? At this point, considering our QB depth, a position switch makes no sense. We have to give this kid a chance to develop. Unfortunately for us he is doing it on the field in the Big House instead of on the practice field with a redshirt because of our lack of depth.

Tater

October 25th, 2009 at 3:41 AM ^

...and the only way that's going to happen is by playing. We are seeing what happens with a seventy percent Forcier right now. If the unthinkable happens, and Forcier can't play, DRob has to be good enough to that we aren't stuck watching the future head coach try to play QB again.

DRob has only been on campus since what, June? He'll get better. Sometimes watching a young team grow can be painful; yesterday was one of those times. DRob is able to play reasonably well against teams that are lower on the food chain, but can't quite handle it against teams that really speed up his perception of the game.

In an ideal world, at least for UM fans, Forcier wouldn't have been injured, and UM is 7-1 or so. Sadly, it hasn't worked out that way. And this is why we need DRob to stay at QB even after Devin Gardner arrives on campus: depth.

As the saying goes, "stuff happens." That includes Forcier's injury. I would rather have seen what would have happened with a healthy Forcier, but this is still a lot more fun than last season.

Big Shot

October 25th, 2009 at 3:45 AM ^

Option 2

I think we should go back to using him the way we did early on. Instead of playing Denard for an entire series, we should bring him in for a play or two at a time as a change of pace guy.

Thorin

October 25th, 2009 at 7:33 AM ^

Option 6?

2 1/4 cups all-purpose flour
1 teaspoon baking soda
1 teaspoon salt
1 cup (2 sticks) butter, softened
3/4 cup granulated sugar
3/4 cup packed brown sugar
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
2 large eggs
2 cups chocolate chips
1 cup chopped nuts

Delicious cookies + cold milk = what turnovers?

Mirasola

October 25th, 2009 at 7:35 AM ^

I like that there are sensible comments about this here. I agree with most that we still need to be playing Denard as we have been to give him experience. Tate hasn't exactly been playing well the last few weeks, but people fail to acknowledge this because they see turnover after turnover from Denard and just remember the Tate heroics in the first few games.

During the game, I was arguing with a man and his son for nearly a whole quarter because:

1. They were seriously trying to argue that we should be contending for a national title this year "if it weren't for Rich Rod".
2. They claimed we are not still in the process of rebuilding.
3. They think Denard is horrible and should be moved to receiver.

So frustrating to argue with the fairweather fans that criticize immediately after some tough losses. My favorite was when someone else sitting next to me blamed Rich Rod for the Brown fumble following the blocked punt. Apparently Rodriguez coaches the tailbacks to fumble the ball?

AceCubbie

October 25th, 2009 at 8:47 AM ^

Serious question (not designed to be an attack on D-Rob):

What percentage of D-Rob led drives end in a turnover? It feels like it's over 50%, especially if Delaware State is excluded.

Bocheezu

October 25th, 2009 at 9:31 AM ^

If you consider drives that he led as ones where Tate didn't ever touch the ball, I come up with

Western: 3 drives, 0 turnovers, 1 TD
ND: 0-0-0
EMU: 3-2-1
IU: 2-1-1
MSU: 1-0-0
Iowa: 2-1-1
DSU: 4-1-3
PSU: 2-2-0

DSU excluded you get 13 drives, 6 turnovers, 4 TD.

jmblue

October 25th, 2009 at 12:21 PM ^

And the turnovers are consistently coming in obvious passing situations, when he (like a lot of young QBs) is trying so hard to make a play that he's either forcing passes into coverage or when scrambling, fighting for extra yardage that isn't there and getting stripped. He'll learn down the road that it's better for the team to just throw it away or go down on contact, but he's not there yet.

Maize and Blue…

October 25th, 2009 at 9:26 AM ^

Koger catches the damn ball on the pass before. I do remember saying to the guy next to me at the game that I would feel a lot more comfortable with Tate in on third on long and bingo a pick. IMHO Denard is a little slow in making the decision to throw the ball and was even late on the two TD passes against DSU.
As for his fumbles, they are usually when he's fighting for extra yardage. Just needs better ball security which can be taught.

chitownblue2

October 25th, 2009 at 9:33 AM ^

The fumbles suck, but we've seen players go through spates of severe fumbling to all of a sudden become sure-handed - like Brandon Minor last year. I'm not sure they're just not bad luck. The picks clearly are a sign of something - he's not making great reads.

The problem, and why he's playing, is that, if you haven't noticed, Tate's played pretty poorly himself in the past few weeks. Aside from the first drive of the game, Michigan actually moved the ball more effectively with Robinson at QB than with Tate (of course, both those drives ended with turnovers). Robinson is coming into the game because Tate is doing things like completing 3 of 15 passes, and Rodriguez tries to find something that will work.

The odd thing with Robinson is that 3 of his picks now have come immediately after he has a pretty good throw dropped. Immediately after Odoms dropped a great throw, he threw a pick, then yesterday, immediately after Koger dropped not a great throw, but one that hit him in the hands, he throws a pick. I think that when he's in on third and long, he feels like he needs to make a play, and he makes a poor decision - if Koger had caught that pass, we wouldn't have been there.

chitownblue2

October 25th, 2009 at 9:48 AM ^

I'm not sure what "watching the receivers all season" does to give your opinion more credibility. I've watched football for years and years - it wasn't a great throw, but it was certainly catchable.

bronxblue

October 25th, 2009 at 9:46 AM ^

They need to play Robinson at QB whenever possible, and he should stay there for at least one more season. If after next year it is clear that he'll be the third option, then maybe you split him out like Percy Harvin and find a way to integrate him into the offense at another position, or maybe switch him to D if the DB depth is lacking. Right now, though, Robinson needs to keep getting reps at QB, and he really has not played that badly. Sure he's had some bad turnovers, but he has also been effective at time running the ground part of the offense, and the number of drops he's experienced given the number of attempts is staggering. I still fully expect DR to switch positions at some point, but doing so now would hurt the QB depth without adding much to whatever position he moved to.

hypomodern

October 25th, 2009 at 10:01 AM ^

A position switch is really not worth debating at this point, given that he is nearly the best quarterback on the team, and certainly not any worse than the second best. We've got to have at least one option that isn't Nick Sheridan--who is courageous, but not going to get the job done--at QB. This option will have to be either Tate or Denard.

His mistakes have been more costly than Tate's so far, but c'mon: they're both freshmen, and both freshmen from warm weather states that are having a hard time with this cold, crappy weather :). I suspect both of these problems will get better.

We need wide receivers to step up and help 'em out: Henne had Avant and Braylon. Who do Tate and Denard have?

HartAttack20

October 25th, 2009 at 10:06 AM ^

RR needs to stick with Tate now. I like what DRob can do, but the turnovers are killing this team as of late. Rich needs to put in players that are going to hold on to the ball. The team has to eliminate these huge mistakes they are making. Snaps out of the endzone, fumbles, interceptions, drive-killing penalties. It has to stop or we will have trouble winning any more games this season.

chitownblue2

October 25th, 2009 at 10:15 AM ^

Just remember that Robinson is getting on the field because Tate turns the ball over a fair amount himself, and does things like "3 of his last 15" in the past 2 games, takes delay of game penalties, and spikes the ball to kill the clock on 3rd and goal.

I'm not trying to praise one over the other - they've both been poor. And this is not unexpected - they are true freshman QB's, few of which riotously succeed in their first years. What I'm trying to say is that it's not as if RR is pulling an effective starter for Robinson.

MGoViso

October 25th, 2009 at 10:27 AM ^

I really hate to offer this up, but I keep hearing from students at U-M that after Tate became a campus celebrity, he started drinking and partying pretty heavy--somebody even suggested his head wasn't quite clear for the MSU game.
Has anybody else heard these (yes very shady and unfounded) rumors? Is the team together Friday nights before a game?

Garvie Craw

October 25th, 2009 at 11:11 AM ^

He's not claiming to be a journalist. He said he heard it and wondered if anyone else heard it too. It's a board, not the NY Times. It's not like he was "reporting" something. He even called them shady and unfounded rumors. He doesn't work for the blog. This isn't sacred space here.

Garvie Craw

October 25th, 2009 at 11:58 AM ^

A question was asked with a qualifier that said the poster had no direct knowledge of the situation. Unfortunately, someone posting a comment on a blog has no obligation to journalistic standards. If someone says they heard something, I don't automatically assume it's true or untrue. I just take it for what it is - a rumor. Forcier has become a very public figure. He had his own website during his recruitment. I believe he has a Facebook account. He is the quarterback at a major college. He can't be protected from rumors anymore than you or I can be. What would you have said if the poster said he witnessed Forcier drunk the night before a game? Would you have believed him? Would you have scolded him and called him a liar? I don't know what anyone can do about this sort of thing.