Denard and Special Teams

Submitted by Robbie Moore on

I realize that Denard is our only real QB backup at this point in time, but I really would like to see him running back punts and kickoffs next year. After seeing the Lions scorched on the second half kickoff last Sunday by Johnny Knox, I think Denard's route to the NFL is as a return man. Speed is everything there. Denard isn't big enough or have a powerful enough arm to make the NFL at quarterback. So maybe RichRod can convince him that the Devin Hester route is his best chance

aMAIZEN slot ninja

October 5th, 2009 at 10:15 PM ^

i do think eventually Denard will make the switch to either a slot ninja or CB once we get depth at the QB, but i dont even know if that will be next year. DG and CJ will both be freshman next year and we have seen Tate vulnerable to getting beat up a bit. Do we really want a true freshman coming in when you have Denard available in his second year in the offense? Tate is a different type of freshman QB. He was coached his whole life to be a QB which has led to his success at Michigan, something that CJ and DG havent had.

I do think that we will see Denard in a new role his junior year after we get some depth and security at QB.

Go Blue!

Blueisgood

October 5th, 2009 at 10:15 PM ^

Don't really think we'll be seeing denard returning kicks and punts next year, unless D. Gardner is amazingly good. What I'm hoping is Drob progresses enough to challenge tate by next year. This will mean that we have 2 very capable QB's in case "it" happens.

speakeasy

October 5th, 2009 at 10:16 PM ^

I agree that if Denard makes it to the NFL, which is a huge IF given his tender experience of only 5 college games, it will not be as a QB.
That being said, RichRod's job is not to create the most attractive NFL prospects, it is to beat the hell out of everybody that Michigan plays. If it is to the benefit of Michigan, and the risks outweigh the rewards of Denard returning kicks and punts (which it is not IMO), then yea, go for it. But as he is our only reasonable backup QB, I'd like to see him as far from special teams as possible, unless he sneaks in as a holder for a fake FG and turns it 35 yds for a touchdown.

ohio-michiganfan

October 5th, 2009 at 10:24 PM ^

What I have seen out of Denard is that he has plenty of arm strength. I know he has not thrown the deep ball much but he seems to have plenty of zip on the ball. The accuracy and decision making is not there yet. He might not be tall enough but I think that height while important is a little bit overated. I think they should keep him where he is at least until next year. If DG goes above him on the depth chart then yes he could be moved around and he would still be there incase of an emergency.

jg2112

October 5th, 2009 at 10:29 PM ^

it had been more than 60 hours since we had one of these posts where we wanted our backup QB to be playing special teams.

In your scenario Devin Gardner is one play from burning his redshirt. No thanks.

Jeff

October 5th, 2009 at 11:55 PM ^

While I am in agreement with the general consensus that Robinson should not be on special teams next year, technically Gardner is TWO plays from burning his redshirt. Tate and Denard both have to get hurt for Gardner's redshirt to come off.

Aside: am I the only one who wishes redshirted players wore red shirts on the sideline and then they had to take them off when they go in the game? Then the head coach ceremonially lights the red shirt on fire. Perhaps this bonfire would be reserved for those cases where the player goes in for special teams or garbage time minutes.

MichiganStudent

October 5th, 2009 at 11:37 PM ^

Thats my hope as well. Plus, you could do some pretty good trick plays with Denard and Tate on the field as Juniors/Seniors. I envision a reverse to Denard that he throws back across the field to Tate being led by a couple of blockers. Something like the Navarre scamper at Minnesota.

blau16

October 5th, 2009 at 10:41 PM ^

D-Rob on Special Teams seems like a lot of risk for me. However, I definitely expected to see a few more sets involving both Robinson and Forcier on the field. That duo scares me, let alone opposing defenses. Anyone else crossing their fingers for this?

Robbie Moore

October 5th, 2009 at 10:56 PM ^

If Denard goes on the play in the NFL, it will be as a Devin Hester clone. I realize that prudence dictates we not risk a QB, certainly not this year. But I'll hold on and see what Devin Gardner is like before carrying on a movement for Denard to return kicks. Thought the thought makes me drool.

david from wyoming

October 5th, 2009 at 11:02 PM ^

This type of argument was made for Pat White also and he is a QB in the pros now. It might not be the most likely path to the NFL for Denard, but it is possible.

If you are just looking for speed, keep your fingers crossed for Witty to make it on the team next year.

Magnus

October 5th, 2009 at 11:15 PM ^

Maybe it's not relevant, but Pat White completed 57% of his passes for 8 TDs and 5 INTs, along with a 132.41 PER as a freshman in 2005.

Denard has obviously had very little playing time, but I'd say he's well behind in the throwing department. I think he's 4-11 for 57 yards and 2 picks or something like that.

MichiganStudent

October 5th, 2009 at 11:41 PM ^

Exactly, the Denard and Pat White comparisons do not really hold any value. Pat White was set up for success by having a red shirt year and being the exclusive QB, Denard has neither of those luxuries.

If I had to guess, Denard would enter the NFL as a slot receiver, return man, and wildcat QB. I suppose thats similar to Randle El.

Magnus

October 5th, 2009 at 11:12 PM ^

You could be Mel Kiper for all I know, but...

...okay, random poster with the Groucho Marx and John Lennon avatar and 148 MGoPoints - consider your words marked. I'm sure we will be flocking back to this post in 3 or 4 years when Denard departs from Michigan.

Giff4484

October 5th, 2009 at 11:13 PM ^

Year what I would like to see is a punt return for us that doesn't involve Matthews and a fair catch... Maybe we would have won last week if we picked up + yards on a punt return? I know that wasn't our problem but man our punt return yardage has to be the worst in D1.

Blue in Yarmouth

October 6th, 2009 at 7:55 AM ^

Let me just say that I would much rather see fair catches than some of the fiasco's we witnessed last year on punt returns. Sure a good punt return is nice, but for every one of those we saw last year we also saw a fumble. I think this year we are simply concentrating on hanging on to the ball to give our offense a chance to make the plays. I, for one, am fine with that strategy.

PurpleStuff

October 5th, 2009 at 11:18 PM ^

Stonum has looked really good returning kickoffs, and with the decrease in opportunities for punt returns that Brian mentioned on the front page combined with last year's debaucle just catching them, I'm totally satisfied with Matthews making a fair catch on every punt.

I just don't see where the payoff is that would justify the risk of injury to our backup QB.

Tater

October 5th, 2009 at 11:24 PM ^

Why on earth would anyone even think of playing Denard anywhere but QB right now? Forcier is still hurt, and UM is one hit away from having to play its number two QB. Does anyone here really want to see SheriDEATH get into the game when the outcome is in question?

ijohnb

October 6th, 2009 at 9:28 AM ^

The kind of speed that can't just be sitting on the sideline as our "backup QB." He is getting reps at QB and will likely soon be equipped to run a vanilla version of the offense and would only become more proficient if he gets significant game action due to a Forcier injury. But why does that mean that he is our "backup QB" and nothing more. He has no greater chance of being injured in the slot than he does as QB in garbage time. RR has no problem playing freshman all over the field. Run some plays for this guy man. He can still be our backup QB, he can just be a backup QB with 10 rushing/receiving touchdowns.

Tater

October 5th, 2009 at 11:35 PM ^

One of the commenters to this post made a very good point: IT IS NOT RR'S JOB TO TRAIN PLAYERS FOR THE NFL; IT IS HIS JOB TO WIN FOOTBALL GAMES AT UM. It is a delicate balance: doing what is best for the team while also doing what is best for the "kids," which is the promise every coach makes to the parents of recruits. RR has done and is doing a great job of providing the balance and perspective needed to execute this "balancing act."

So, what is best for UM and for Denard Robinson? DRob, like Tate Forcier, is too short to play QB in the NFL. My belief is that DRob will end up like Anquain Boldin, playing QB for a couple of years until the depth chart fills up, and then moving to an "NFL training position" for his last year or two. That way, UM wins and DRob wins.

david from wyoming

October 5th, 2009 at 11:37 PM ^

Tate, Denard and Jeff Garcia are all listed at 6-0 (based on the first page I found for each). Whoops, there goes that idea.

Robbie Moore

October 6th, 2009 at 8:21 AM ^

The argument is how Denard is best used in the last half of his Michigan career. My thought is that Denard, given his virtually unmatched speed, is a potentially unique asset as a return man. And I, for one, would like to see some explosive special teams play where we operate with a short field (unlike, say, us against MSU last Saturday?). Agreed, RichRod's job is to win games, not set guys up for NFL careers. Though doing that does help recruiting, right? And a great return game helps win games, right?

Also, I suspect Denard will never be Pat White because Tate and then Devin will likely be the better QB's. I may be wrong. But as my friend Magnus suggests, perhaps the world will flock back to this posting three years hence to find out.

jabberwock

October 5th, 2009 at 11:38 PM ^

It's been mentioned before but, Tate is NOT a normal freshman QB. He's talented, and he's been "hyper-coached" or whatever you want to call it, plus he enrolled early.

MOST freshman QBs resemble D rob (except for the awesome speed).
It's a complex offense to learn, and he has to split his time with the other QBs (especially Tate).
He'll get it eventually, let him learn.

Rich Rod has only stated this about 100 times to the press; D-rob is a QB until he and his coach decide otherwise, and he's going to need just about all the focus he can muster to learn the playbook, execute, and be ready when we need him.

pwnwulf

October 6th, 2009 at 5:59 AM ^

Will be a good QB in the future, maybe by the end of this year. Moving him to a new position just delays the maturity process of learning the system. He can throw and run like the wind and I expect to see both him and Tate in on the same plays. I really think they are saving something for the ohio state game and plan on some trickery in that game. Look at Marlon Jackson he was a subpar corner in his freshman year, then he got a lot better in his sophomore year. Then because of lack of depth they moved him to safety his junior year and it was a disaster because he hadn't learned that position. Moving players usually is not a good idea and I think they need to leave him at a very close second string QB.

Magnus

October 6th, 2009 at 8:17 AM ^

What have you seen that makes you think Denard could be a good QB by the end of this year? I'm not saying he won't be in the future, but not this year. He can't make proper reads, can't handle snaps well, hasn't thrown a good deep ball, throws short stuff 100 mph...