How is this different than what every DC has ever wanted to do against Denard? You act like Saban oppened everyone's eyes, which is ridiculous.
How is this different than what every DC has ever wanted to do against Denard? You act like Saban oppened everyone's eyes, which is ridiculous.
Then when Denard somehow does throw a good pass it's dropped. Like a cruel joke. I don't wanna even talk about roundtree anymore.
I dont know how you saw different receiver looks last night. No, seriously, I wanted to see what receivers were doing downfield but abc sucks and only shows you the backfield, the line of scimmage and maybe 3 yards behind the d-line. You literally cannot see what Denard's throwing at until the cameras get there, which incidentally is also when the ball does. (Been a bitch of mine for years)
Excellent post. Michigan had one legitimate offensive playmaker coming into the game and Alabama defended accordingly.
Brian tells me what to think of this (no offense Brian). I can't get over all the Vincent Smith tonight. It pretty much reaffirms what I thought of Borges last year.
Fitz was out. Rawls was getting caught behind the line of scrimmage. Seems like no hope, he went with the veteran. I would've liked to see more Denard runs, just not killing him, but there seemed like few options at RB. That said, I was dismayed at Smith getting hounded consistently.
Remember how people blamed Carr for leaving the program with no talent? How many sure lock NFL players are on this roster from RR? Lewon is deffitentlly the only high pick. If Michigan goes on to win the B10 or even wins 9 games these coaches have done a great job. I will say this about Borges, he had no problem running the zone read against Nebraska and Ohio last year. I'm hoping he will run more of the zone read in B10 play. However, The zone read isn't going to work against Bama. That's why I'm not a fan of that offense unless you play in a weak conference and can't recruit elite offensive lineman. Even Auburn has dumped the spread for a pro style offense and they just won a BCS title with the zone read. They had a 250 pound QB that is going to be a pro bowler named Cam Newton. Michigan will start producing NFL caliber players on offense in the near future. I still like the direction of the offense.
Agree that this squad is weaker than we will be in future years because of the transition from Rod to Hoke. And while I think Hoke had a heck of a lot more to work with last year than did Rod in 2008, this staff has done an excellent job in managing the transition and deserves a ton of credit.
But the spread can work against a defense like Alabama's. Cam Newton and Auburn proved that in the Iron Bowl a few years ago.
Denard is a bad passer (surprise!). Remember last year when he completed 55% of his passes and threw 15 picks? Borges called plays that were there. Players have to make the plays. Toussaint screwed over his teammates by getting suspended, and Thomas Rawls/Vincent Smith aren't on Toussaint's level, obviously. This game was all on Denard's shoulders, and it just didn't work out.
Well maybe the offense was on Denard's shoulders, but unless he was going to play defense too I don't think the result would have been any different. Alabama ran all over Michigan's D.
Yeah, just the offense, obviously. The defense needed to play the game of their lives, because even if Denard played very well, the offense wasn't going to score 35+ points.
There were open receivers and Robinson missed them. I think Borges may have over-estimated Denard's improvement over the offseason.
We do not have the playmakers to compete yet.
Maybe Alabama is really good.
You know, this is an element of last night I've been thinking about more and more.
What if what we saw last night was not so much bad Michigan, but the first game of Alabama's march to another NC? What if Alabama is simply the best team in the land?
I'm very serious ... what weaknesses were evident in Alabama? I don't see any weaknesses. In fact, given McCarren's maturation, this year's Alabama might be better overall than last year's.
Two weeks from now ... Alabama goes to Arkansas. If Alabama dominates them like they dominated us ... then what we witnessed last night might well simply be the opening salvo of another 12-0 run by Alabama.
I think they can still be taken advantage of in the passing game, we just weren't able to connect enough to do that.
Basically we all knew Michigan would have to execute perfectly and get some luck to beat a much more talented team, and we didn't do that. Im glad at least Borges took what the D gave him - a healthy denard.
Yeah. A really good QB and recievers who hold on to the ball will put up at least 28 pts on Alabama. If that's enough to win against the Alabama D is another question.
Exactly. Most of those early throws were pretty close, but into really tight windows.
how we crushed Rich Rod for not being ble to adapt to the personal he had, but for AL it is okay. His play calling has been subject in all of the LAST THREE LOSSES. go look at the tapes.
So, by this, you mean the loss to MSU when Fitz didn't play any but two downs and Denard threw a pick-six to seal it, Iowa where we got jobbed by the refs, an this game where we got outplayed by - SURPRISE - a better team? Quit fucking complaining about a total of 3 losses in two years. Seriously, this is the shit that I hate about Michigan fans. We overachieved last year and have played ONE GAME this year. Fuck.
It cracks me up that people who post on this board somehow seem to think that they know better gameplans than the man who does it for a living and works with the personnel full-time. Good lord. I'm as pissed at the delay-run calls, too, but when your QB has a 6'6" DB bull-rushing him and his receivers are dropping the balls that even get close, what do you expect? This could have been a closer game had our WRs not had the dropsies and ha we not lost our starting: CB, TE and RB for essentially the whole game. Get off Borges' nuts until you can think level-headed and realize we just played the most talented team in the country.
Maybe people are being overly critical. But you are nuts if you don't see problems with that gameplan
And you are nuts if you don't see how Alabama's defense, filled with talent, was lining up. Do you really think Saban didn't know, until proven otherwise, that Denard's legs were Michigan's only offensive threat?
Ah, I see.
So because you think your opponent has prepared for your "only offensive threat," you dont use it. Brilliant strategy.
I guess my problem with the playcalling tonight wasn't the lack of Denard runs. Really, my issue was with all of the "denard-bombs" or attempted passes >20 yards. We all know Denard is inaccurate, but Borges kept looking for the big-play. More often than not this did not connect. My feeling is that Borges did NOT believe we could sustain long drives against Bama and was looking for quick strikes. I found this to be the most disappointing; it usually ended with our D having to come back into the game early.
Meh, I still like Borges. Maybe he just brainfarted most of the night in playcalling but I stil see us having a 9 win season, which would be very respectable given the difficulty of our schedule
I, like the rest of us on this blog watched the embarrassment last night, and I must say I was shocked at the sheer manhandling on both sides of the ball. We can all get on here and blame Borges, Denard, etc.... At the end of the day we must look at the opposition, the NFL factory we all call Alabama like it or not!! has been in place for several years Sabans system works because he gets the players that fit that system!Their O-line could start any NFL team today, and as far Borges name one offensive cord. In the country that couldve taken this team to victory last night so anyone hating on the coaching staff, the team,each other on this thread are obviously bandwagon riders when we win we are beast but if we lose then we suck!!! Let's be realistic we had a great first season under Hoke and this year who knows but this is for sure as we recruit Our style of players we will start adding hardware to the trophy case!! So let's stop the blah blah and let's win a B1G Championship!!
You mean he didn't game plan to run our most valuable player into the strength of Alabama's gamelan? Nail him to the wall! In all seriousness, Borges probably planned to throw a lot because of what Denard looked like in practice. The short screens were pretty effective and the long ones ended up, well pretty much like they always do. But it was 21-0 midway through the first quarter with Denard dinged up, so it's not like he had much of a chance to adjust.
Borges has to install his own offense, but he is doing it with spread personnel. I would like to see a hybrid, but it makes no sense for Borges to stray too far from what he is going to be doing. He has to install his offense anyway, so it might as well be now.
When you change systems and coaching staffs, shit happens. That's football. You can't fully judge Hoke or Borges until they have their first class of their own seniors.
I still think exactly what I thought earlier this week: Michigan loses to Alabama, loses one conference game, and finishes 12-2 when they win the Rose Bowl. I will continue to think that way until it becomes mathematically impossible.
This is the way I take Al's play calling.
He has things he wants to do (basically, run a passing spread).
He has things he knows worked well last year (run Denard from shotgun).
Given any amount of time off, he reverts to the former, as it is his nature. Perhaps the long off-season, plus a bunch of practices, lets him convince himself "hey, Denard can do this!".
But then Alabama happens.
Denard will be back to running more in the coming weeks, because Al is not stupid, and frankly all future QBs won't be Denard. So not too much to worry about methinks...
I'm not sure why anyone needs to defend Borges. Michigan didn't lose because they had a poor offensive gameplan. Michigan lost because Alabama was better at every single position on the field. I don't think that's really even that debatable. Why that is the case may be up for some debate: Hoke not having his guys in place, Borges not being able to run his system, poor RR recruiting, poor Carr recruiting, Saban death star fully in place and operational, Bama oversigning, etc. All those variables contributed to a mismatch on paper and on the field. There is no shame in losing to that team. They are damn good and Michigan is still emerging from the darkest time in its football existence. We take our lumps and move on as a fanbase. The team takes its lumps and learns from them.
Our punter and KO specialist were better. By far.
someone tell me why the fuk we kep going after the best CB Dee millner
Amen!! On to next week and air force
I tend to agree with the OP - thinking about this in time and space, it may be a couple years before we can really fully evaluate Al Borges fully utilizing his system here at Michigan. Some of the pieces are here, more are coming. What Borges has been able to do to date, however, has been pretty good overall and speaks positively about his abilities.
He's already shown himself to be a solid, creative OC by adapting personnel suited for a totally different offenseto his own as well as adapting his own thinking to suit certain personnel. Having said that, if the limitation of all this - combined with the lack of your best RB for that game - still manage what would statistically be an average performance against Alabama's run defense and a better than average peformance against their pass defense (comparing to 2011 opponents), then I won't worry about this too much in the grand scheme.
If the Alabama game was a benchmark for the offense, then in some important regards, we have reason to believe we'll be just fine from here onwards. They'll learn a lot from this game and make adjustments, but there's no reason to change any of the predictions for this team yet.
You have one of the best offensive weapons in the country, but instead of playing to his strengths you run him out there seemingly only to prove that he can make NFL throws now? I think Borges is a really smart guy but he seems very stubborn. I'm excited for the future but there is no point in even starting Denard at QB if your intent is to utilize him like that (note that this does NOT equate to me saying Denard should be benched, which he absolutely should not be)
He doesn't seem stubborn to me at all. He clearly prefers more stuff under center, but he obviously eschewed that during the second half of last year and for virtually the entire Alabama game because Denard is more comfortable from shotgun.
Is he capable of making mistakes? Sure. But no matter what Borges did last night, it wasn't going to work well enough. Not with Alabama's defense, our middling receiver corps, and missing our starting running back.
This was a championship level team with deep talent and we were missing some critical talent for most of the night. Could we have done better? Definitely. After Countess went out and it was clear the defense was completely outmatched, it seemed like Borges decided to take the safe(r) route. Likely he didn't run Denard because he didn't think it would be worth risking it and the box was consistently stacked. Fine, I can respect that decision--in the long run that is probably the right thing to do.
What I don't understand is Borges not even trying more of those short passes and bubble screens that we know Denard can usually hit, and which certainly had a much better chance of being effective than "Devin Smith" smashes up the middle. I do think it was the right call to keep testing those deep routes. Those are the only reason we got any points on this team and I think Bama underestimated Denard's arm strength. Denard designed runs probably could have gotten us more yards, but I don't have a lot of faith we would have scored with them and it could have resulted in our starting qb being injured for ND. I'm more worried about our D.
In defense of Al Borges:
1. One team scored more than us against Bama all last year.
2. We are a running team that could not run block against a superior defense.
3. I'm glad he didn't run Denard that much when he had a hurt shoulder, and later a hurt back. Our players were getting physically mauled by that defense, and we have three total scholarships quarterbacks.
4. If you thought we were a national championship contender, you just got your wakeup call. This is what it looks like when consistent top 3 recruiting classes go up against ones anywhere from 10-30 (the RR years) when elite coaching is a factor.
Honestly I think we're all grasping at straws to make us feel somewhat better after an embarassment so here's mine.....Denard had very comparable numbers to McCarron. 11-26 for 200 1 Td 2 Ints to 11-21 for 199 2 tds. Musburger said something that struck me. He mentioned McCarron "managed" the offense all game long and didnt turn the ball over. He reminds me of the Ravens back in the day with Dilfer. "Don't screw it up for the Defense" essentially. We are comparing last year to one game so far... against the #1 D, the defending National Champs, etc. Another fun stat...UM fared better than LSU in the NC game by not only crossing the 50 yd line but also scoring 2x. Hell Bama may not give up 2 more tds all year.
Alabama will give up more touchdowns if/when they face a better passing attack. Their coverage was not particularly stellar, and their pass rush wasn't out of this world, either. Denard side-stepped the rush a couple times, but he often had lots of time to throw the ball.
I haven't posted in any of these threads yet, but if anyone blames anything other than "Alabama had better players than us" either didn't watch the game or is an idiot.
Take both QBs out of the game. Bama got 6-8 yards every time they ran the ball. We got 0-2 yards. That's about the difference right there.
Borges was and is in a tough spot with Denard. Denard is an amazing athlete and a great person but has his flaws at QB - Mainly accuracy and decision making. Borges basically needed to simplify the passing game enough to make sure that Denard could make some reads and not throw 5 picks against an NFL caliber defense, which made the passing game predictable and ineffective. Borges also couldnt realistically run Denard into the teeth of that defense - He would have been seriously injured.
I dont understand how people can say that we would have had more success running Denard - What holes did you see in that defense? They knew he couldnt pass well enough to be a threat and had 11 guys waiting to take his head off if he ever crossed the line of scrimmage.
All in all, Michigan played with heart and was just physically outmatched. We need more talent on the roster - Specifically the upper classmen. The good news is that talent is coming in spades starting with the current Freshmen class and continuing on!
and get Denard hit more often?
You run Denard as many times as necessary in the last game versus Ohio.
You run Denard 20 times in mid season showdowns versus MSU & Nebraska.
You don't get him hurt in an OOC game that you have little chance of winning. We were dominated on the line. Denard didn't see much space on the few carries that Borges called.
To those who are complaining that Borges didn't run Denard enough: did you see any lanes that Denard didn't exploit? Do you think that running Denard into that wall of a front seven would have accomplished anything other than getting Denard killed?
The bottom line is that we played the deepest, most talented team in the country, and we lost because we're not anywhere near their level talent-wise. Anyone who blames Borges for that is just looking for a scapegoat.
the general consensus was that Alabama was the better team, and that for Michigan to be successful it would have to take advantage of the relative inexperience of the Alabama defense.
I was officiating a wedding in the middle of nowhere so i didn't get to watch the game, but i gather that what inexperience Alabama showed was in the secondary. Therefore, Michigan's best chance was to take advantage of that for either yardage and/or to force Alabama out of stacking the box. It also appears that Borges attempted that but the execution wasn't good enough to make Alabama adjust, opening up other facets of the game.
If there's only one chink in the dragon's armor, you've only got one shot to slay it. Miss and you get roasted. Next week is another game.
but remember this was the guy that was raving about Thomas Rawls from day 1 of camp this August and we saw six rushes from him. I've noticed from last season that Borges seems to get frustrated with a gameplan if there isn't immediate results.
Michigan could not have won the game with any gameplan but Borges failed. Denard Robinsons skill set was not utilized properly and in fact his weaknesses were highlighted in this gameplan. Robinson needs to have a short and quick passing game which targets the outside of the defense rather than sitting in the pocket and trying to throw downfield repeatedly. Its simply not his skill set. Borges just reverts back to what he prefers offensively rather than what has been successful. Hopefully this will be the last time he needs a reminder. If there is one thing im frustrated with is 160 pound V. Smith running the ball up the middle! I remember RR did the same thing.