Thoughts on not seeing Denard enter the game in any capacity (minus Tate's good game, of course)?
appeasing many by going in at RB and getting dropped for a loss.
Nice asshole response. If there's anyone getting dropped for a loss it sure as hell isn't Robinson. 53 carries for 287 yds (5.4 ypc). Obviously the kid needs to work on the passing game, but not letting him see the field at all today in some capacity is certainly worth discussing on here.
Scroll down to Michigan's rushing stats:
I don't get what you're trying to explain. All I was pointing out is that Robinson is almost always an upgrade to our rushing attack, although that is usually offset by his liabilities as a thrower. But it's still worth a debate as to why he isn't mixed in at times, primarily to run.
I think you're just interpreting "dropped for a loss" to mean something colloquial other than "he rushed the ball for a loss of yards"
I was just pointing out that Denard got in the game at RB and got tackled for a loss. I was also taking a shot at the people that think Denard would be sweet at RB at this point in time in his career.
is very athletically gifted, and truly, at least I believe, very tempting to use in a lot of different circumstances. But I believe that he may be a walking fumble right now. As fast as he may be, if he is human turnover that he appears to be it is not worth the risk. Maybe he should carry the football to class like in The Program. Alright, I have to go, I need to go rent The Program.
my response is more for the "OMG WHY ISNT RR PUTTING DENARD AT RB OR SLOT!?!?!!? crowd. I think Denard is a hell of a QB for what he is being asked to do. Come in at the QB spot and pick up 5 yards a carry with the box stacked and hit short routes.
I just don't see the running style that would allow him to take a hand off, make a quick cut and use vision to find holes right now. He dances around a lot more than a good RB should, but it works for him as a QB.
I still think DR will be a good QB. But he wouldn't be a good RB at this time. Maybe in the future.
might have something to do with 4 ints in 22 pass attempts versus tate's 5 ints in 217 pass attempts...
i really don't know what to make of Denard/ Rich's usage of Denard. i've said before that I think Denard's our best offensive weapon, but he's also proven to be a huge liability. I would like to think they can find a way to incorporate him in the game plan - he gains solid yardage even when teams know he's running - but i guess either he can't catch a ball to save his life (thereby limiting the whole feed-him-the-ball-wherever-you-can-in-space thing) or he's just not mentally ready to be a full-time asset to the offense.
i would say though, that with 2 tough games left, I'd like to see no holds barred when it comes to offensive gameplanning. put your weapons out there and gamble a bit. i have a sad feeling that if we go out there and just try to execute our normal gameplan, these last 2 games could look a lot like the Penn St game - we try hard, but are totally manhandled.
Not until OSU. Then, I agree with you. I really hope that RR has a lot of Tate/Denard packages and some plays we haven't seen ready for OSU.
Good god man, we're 5-7 and about to miss a bowl for the second year!
We've won exactly 1 B10 road game in 2 years. A coach even remotely concerned about his and the team's future isn't saving anything for The Game at this point. It's time to make a bowl or start watching recruits question their commitment.
If Florida starts pushing hard for DG do you think missing a bowl again and having a 1 game improvement over the last 2 years helps us keep him?
I'm happy with whatever personnel were responsible
about where carlos brown was minus a handful of carries
Well they said he had tendinitis, although he didn't look hurt when he got some carries.
If it weren't for the tendinitis, the lateral would have been backward.
He got the ball once or twice and that's about it.
Look folks, he came here because he wanted to try to be a QB. Other schools wanted him to play corner. We got him because we told him he would have a chance to be a QB.
It's a shame to have him sitting on the sidelines with the kind of speed he has, but he has to learn the passing game. He's obviously got serious physical tools but he's gotta learn the passing offense and stop throwing INT's. Tate played reasonably well yesterday and it's clear he's our best option at QB right now.
Last year Magnus (IIRC) was posting daily about how Brandon Minor needed to get the rock. I remember personally thinking he was an idiot at the time, given his similar turnover rate (about five fumbles in what seemed like twenty touches). Minor Rage happened and we're passed it, crying for him to be in on every goal line situation. I think eventually Robinson will be a part of the offense in some capacity, but until he is, I'm not going to worry about it.
You remember correctly.
I'm fine with Denard entering the game. He just shouldn't be allowed to throw downfield. I can deal with his fumbles more than I can deal with his interceptions.
"I don't get what you're trying to explain. All I was pointing out is that Robinson is almost always an upgrade to our rushing attack, although that is usually offset by his liabilities as a thrower. But it's still worth a debate as to why he isn't mixed in at times, primarily to run."
How the fuck was I negged 6 times for that post... Fucking stupid
People around here neg for stupid reasons. If they don't like your avatar, if you misspell a word, if you complain about MGoPoints... It's best just to ignore it and keep posting like normal, because you'll probably get negged for this comment now, too.
Probably has something to do with the fact that you began your first post responding to someone else with "nice asshole response."
I'm not saying it's fair, but folks here will take stuff like that out on your later posts too. Even for days and weeks after the fact. Good luck.
Ha you're probably right. Just wasn't sure why I got negged for trying to be respectful and provide some insight, probably would've been best to ignore it
Denard is a turnover MACHINE!!!!!!!! Half of his drives at QB end in a turnover. Its a joke he isn't ready to be a full-time QB. I think everyone knows that.
but I also appreciate Tate being able to spend the day in the game without interruption and getting the snaps. We need to win that sixth game and I don't see Tate playing as a setback to that goal. He needs the snaps, he's a mid freshman/sophomore and he's is still working out the kinks, ie holding the ball too long, bad reads etc. I think that is the horse we need to ride to the end of the season, with Denard coming in at appropriate times in the OSU game for 'trick plays'. Denard has made some progress this year and come next year he will make more; I see Devin getting a redshirt and Denard solidifying his place as the 2nd string qb with him coming in on occassion-with more impact-for plays next year.
The problem wasn't the offense. Tate was playing well, no reason to put in Denard. If it ain't broke don't fix it type of situation.
When your offense puts up 36 points with a missed field goal and the ball turned over on downs inside the twenty yard line, you don't need to tinker with it.