denard and his passing abilities

Submitted by dundee on

i've been reading a few posts about people who have gone to mich. practices who have been commenting and DR's passing abilities and how well he is doing. most of the time(if not all) how well he is doing is followed or preceded by "I really wasn't expecting him to be that good or accurate". So what i wanna know from someone who has seen some of the practices. is DR "that" good at his passing skills or was the expectation of his passing skills so low that just about anything positive was good.
thanks for taking the time to read my first post.

likwid

August 24th, 2009 at 12:08 AM ^

the expectations for Denard's arm weren't high, I think most people expected their to be a very sizable and noticeable difference between Forcier's ability to throw and Robinson's ability to throw.

I think that the gap between the two has proved narrower than expected and this is mainly due to Robinson's higher-than-expected passing ability.

I do think that Denard Robinson lacks a lot of the things that Forcier possesses as a passer -- refined mechanics, quick release, tight spiral, extreme accuracy -- I think that his arm strength and accuracy are closer to Tate's then were initially anticipated. This is a testament to Denard's ability, in my opinion.

Quail2theVict0r

August 24th, 2009 at 12:41 AM ^

The major difference between Forcier and Robinson in passing is that Forcier's throwing ability is FAR more refined than Robinson. A lot of people at the practices are saying that one of the major differences is this:

Robinson will be able to hit WR's with his passing ability, he needs better mechanics and he throws a wild ball here or there that sails over the receiver. Robinson is kind of like an unpolished diamond - with a little work he will be great. But overall he's a pretty decent passer and CAN make all the throws Forcier makes. - side note - The reason Robinson will play is because of his natural speed, you just can't teach stuff like that.

The difference

Forcier is able the thread balls through coverage and he's able to hit receivers consistently in stride - THAT is the major difference. In this type of offense you need to do this because it allows the athlete to think about making a play rather than adjusting to the ball.

Forcier, IMO, will get the start because of this. It's all about consistency at this stage - Robinson will get his snaps for sure - but you need a guy that can make those types of plays.

To put that in perspective if you have a bubble screen to Odoms on the sideline and he's going full speed - Forcier hits him and he keeps going. Robinson hits him just fine but it's a little high at his head or a little low either way Odoms has to slow down while he adjusts to the ball.

chitownblue2

August 24th, 2009 at 10:40 AM ^

I'm sorry, but basing player evaluations on highlight reels is a pretty shaky thing, IMO. That means that you've reached your conclusion on roughly 5 minutes of tape, half of which Denard is running, and half of which is over a year old. Out of curiousity, are you a coach?

Rush N Attack

August 24th, 2009 at 11:13 AM ^

If you have Comcast, FCS replays a lot of Florida High School football games.

Last week alone, I watched Deerfield Beach v. Aquinas, Seminole v. Miami Northwestern, and Miami Booker T. Washington v. Miami Northwestern. They also replayed all of the MHSAA finals games.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but not everyone on this board bases their opinions solely off of highlight reels. And yes, I'm full aware that the person you were replying to was.

The King of Belch

August 24th, 2009 at 4:01 AM ^

Game day will be the real test. Usually the guy with the better mechanics, who looks more polished, and who has had the better career in high school (not to mention having been here six months longer) will be more likely to remain that way, or closer, when he is playing for keeps.

You see the same guys and same schemes every day in practice, you get to know how and who will react. During the games, things break down, you don't know the other team and what it wants to do, they blitz or throw different looks at you: what happens?

Younger players often revert to what made them successful at the previous level; with Denard it may be his feet, he may have been able to force things and get away with it, and his athleticism and speed helped bail him out. The upgrade in game day speed from not just the high school level, but from practice as well, will be confusing and eye opening for both he and Forcier.

In Tate's case, how will he handle things? What form does he revert to? Better mechanics, field vision, better feel for the passing portion of the spread, and better overall quarterback instincts MAY BE what keeps him ahead of Denard, at least for now. Being here for spring practice and summer drills is, at this stage of their development, exponentially more beneficial for Tate. I'm sure he has developed a better relationship with receivers and a comfort level that Denard will take longer to achieve.

And if we are worried about Tate's physical stature, how about Denard's? He is even smaller than Tate (IIRC).

I feel you go with who you are more comfortable with over the long haul--with Sheridan and Forcier there is NO reason to rush Denard in at QB. Excitement is great. But there are other options to use Denard and let him have this year to grow into the position a little bit more.

StephenRKass

August 24th, 2009 at 10:14 AM ^

So much is determined on the field of play. Games determine much more than the practice field. I could not agree more about the statement that pressure causes players to revert to natural tendencies. If the right tendencies are deeply programmed, such that a QB doesn't have to "think" but simply reacts, you are set.

IIRC, Brady talked about how he checks off instinctively . . . if he had to think about it, he would be too slow.

Speaking of Brady, he is an excellent example of why I would prefer to have a QB who can consistently and quickly hit receivers in stride without adjustments on the part of the receiver. Now, the jury is out on whether Tate or DR is the one who can do this. If DR could manage to do this well, it would be incredible. My concern with DR is his stature. I simply think a QB with a height between 6'3" and 6'6" is going to be able to see the field of play significantly more clearly. Maybe he will be the exception.

Blue in Yarmouth

August 24th, 2009 at 8:06 AM ^

as to who is better or what the reasons for people being so excited about Denard are but I will just say I am very excited to hear that people are happy with his throwing ability. I am a fan of the pair of them but really want to see Denard play and play well this year. Good for him if all this praise is warranted!

petered0518

August 24th, 2009 at 8:57 AM ^

As in the Dundees from the Office? Maybe I am just seeing Office references in everything when that wasn't really the intention.

It is a good question, though. I find this time of year so frustrating because we all desperately want indication about how good the team really is, and you really can't tell when the only team you are playing is yourself.

As much as we have heard that Denard looks good, I have a hard time believing he has the same passing abilities as Tate. It just wouldn't make sense that a track star could pass as well as a guy who has been training to be a quarterback his whole life.

But who knows? If they somehow come to equal footing in the passing game then Denard is most likely your starter.

The King of Belch

August 24th, 2009 at 9:14 AM ^

But more importantly, Denard played two positions on the football team: cornerback and quarterback. How much time did he have to practice defense? And how much game prep was devoted to defense?

This is in contrast to the much talked about quarterback grooming of Tate, who concentrated all his efforts on one position.

I believe this is a "right now" situation, and most likel, right now Tate is the guy. Especially, IMO, on game day.

With time and coaching, Denard will challenge him, no doubt.

The King of Belch

August 24th, 2009 at 7:26 PM ^

I did wonder if Tate played another position, and almost pu the wonderful disclaimer (IIRC) after that statement.

But I will take your "I think..." as somewhat less than convincing evidence that he did play defense in high school. Really, unless you KNOW, then don't tell me my argument doesn't work.

dundee

August 24th, 2009 at 10:40 AM ^

no sorry, not Dundee from the office. i attended Dundee grade school in Dundee, Mich. (obviously) 2nd-5th grade. when i moved to Toledo, Oh and went to school there i always kept talking about the great school in Dundee,Mich. so pretty soon my friends started calling me Dundee. by the way this was also a few years before crocadile dundee came out.

victors2000

August 24th, 2009 at 9:34 AM ^

I just like writing on the blog, hehe! From his highlight video of his high school days, he clearly has an arm as strong if not stronger then Tate; if he can get his mechanics down, he will be a good if not better QB than Tate, IMO.
He's quick in all aspects we would desire: quick footed, quick thinking, quick release. Unlike Feagin, his head is screwed on right and he is mentally prepared to take the field against Western. As far as I am concerned, I am completely satisfied in our version of Pat White and his progress so far.

chitownblue2

August 24th, 2009 at 10:09 AM ^

Everyone needs to remember this:

Most of us have seen roughly 90 seconds of Robinson playing, and maybe about 35 minutes of Tate playing.

In other words, nobody here knows a fucking thing.

StephenRKass

August 24th, 2009 at 10:19 AM ^

One other thought: I'm not sure how much we'll be able to tell in play against a directional school. Playing against severe defensive pressure, speed, and a strong secondary, is something vastly different than beating up on Western, Eastern, or even the Big ten bottom feeders.

OT: Cubs or White Sox or neither?

chitownblue2

August 24th, 2009 at 10:34 AM ^

Well, I think we'll learn something because all anyone has seen of Denard, really, are a handful of highlights. I think many people developed a mental picture of what his game was based on reading a high school stat line, and not contextualizing the stats. For instance:

The oft-quoted "47% completion" number comes from a website (http://www.maxpreps.com/athletes/JPGDGEe32kuLRNn6xgBatQ/football-fall-0…) that only took stats from 4 of the 12 games he played last year. Others claim that he's not a great rusher - as he only ran for 420 yards - the source of that is Scout, and they claim he rushed for over 800 yards in the same fucking paragraph. So who knows?

Most haven't watched them play enough to know how Deerfield's and Scripps' offenses compared (what sort of throws was Denard making vs. Tate?). Myself, I cheer for Denard, because I feel like he was written off due to fans believing they knoew who he was based on flimsy evidence - look at the tagline Brian has on this site. All of a sudden, he actually shows up in practice, and it's at least no longer a foregone conclusion that Tate is a 4-year starter anymore.

FWIW, I'm a Mets fan. I'm from CT originally, moved to Chicago.

chitownblue2

August 24th, 2009 at 10:59 AM ^

I'd be lying if I said that at least part of it wasn't based on him being the "underdog", if you will. And I'd be lying if I said at least one other part of it wasn't an eagerness to see the amateur coaches who think they know a thing about QB mechanics STFU.

But the largest reason why I root for Denard is because there's something about his game that is, for lack of a better word, sexy. He's exciting. It's hard for me to get excited about a kid who's biggest praise thus far is that he's "fundamentally sound" - how excited does THAT get you? I think Denard has it in him to be a game-breaker, and I think Tate has it in him to be an effective game-manager. Do I know who's actually better? Of course not - I'm not a coach, and unlike many here, I don't pretend to me.

StephenRKass

August 24th, 2009 at 1:51 PM ^

This is exactly why I am not yet on the Denard bandwagon. iirc, several years ago there were many Brady haters and Henson lovers. If Brady is just a "game manager," then give me a game manager every day.

I continue to be concerned about Denard's height, and ability to see receivers downfield.

Lumpers

August 24th, 2009 at 6:08 PM ^

So let me get this straight....because Denard is not a 6'3"-6'6" pocket passer you are concerned...

He's a playmaker, plain and simple....as a kid I watched dennis franklin and rick leach play qb in an option/
Triple option offense. They were both about 5'10" to 6'tall. They won about
90% of their games as starters. I will take it.

Doug Flutie/Drew Brees, other 6' or shorter qb's that seemed to
See down the field pretty well, even though they were vertically challenged.

If the hype is true from practice, we have a second coming of pat white on
Our hands and he is even faster.... I will take this any day of the week.

How many times over the last 20 yrs have you cringed when you saw a mobile qb
Embarrass our D? For a change its nice to see us doing it to the competition.
Sure Denard needs seasoning and will be used in a change of pace role. But
As his passing improves, look out....

Let's lose the stereotype and see who the playmakers are.. I think we are very
Fortunate to have tate and denard available to us and it caues a shitload of
Prep issues for defenses each week.

Coach Rod knows what he is doing and I can't wait to see it unfold this
Season....sure we will have some bumps along the way, but the future looks
Very bright....even if the starting qb's are 6'1" and 5'10", respectively.

Let's remember this is college, not pro football and Denard is going to
Be an ESPN highlight reel....

victors2000

August 24th, 2009 at 11:36 AM ^

Denard might be the ultimate meaning for the word, "Intangible"; He's got what it takes. He didn't have the best passing stats or the best running stats, but he did lead his team to victories against some of the best teams in Florida as well as the nation.

MichiganStudent

August 24th, 2009 at 10:38 AM ^

I wouldn't be dissing the directional schools and the Big Ten bottom dwellers just yet. We could lose to those teams and become a Big Ten bottom dweller this year.