My first thought is some kind of decoy, but then I thought about having your qb out their where the other teams players basically have a free shot at him and i got a little nervous.
Denard on kick return
Accident/injury waiting to happen
They showed it on TV too. I think MSU actually called a timeout because of it, but my memory isn't good due to all the celebrating!
it was at the start of the 2nd half...ball got kicked out of the endzone so nothing really happened
You're thinking of Wile's field goal. I liked that, too. MSU didn't realize (or at least it seemed this way) Wile was on long kicks, so, assuming it was some sort of trick, they called a timeout and went from a blocking formation to a safe formation. I especially liked this because the trajectory of the kick seemed pretty low, and had they known he was just out there to kick it they would have had a good chance to block.
When I saw Wile come out I just had a feeling it would be good based on his performance in HS. Longest field goal since 2009. Kids got a leg. Nice to see Hoke using him for kick-offs, punts and now FGs
Wile's FG would have been good from 55.
of a lateral too.
Why did no one bring this up in the press conference so that Hoke could give a non-answer to it?
made me laugh.
My guess is that they would have used him as a decoy on a fake reverse.
And it's no more dangerous to have him out there doing that than it is to have him out there on an offensive snap running the ball.
especially if he does not get the rock.
The fake reverse seems plausible. Something like this I would imagine
needs moar pixels
lost their QB several years ago when he was out on the KO team.
Its stupid and don't even pretend you would not be livid he had been injured for the season on that play.
If Denard was a decoy on a fake reverse there's really very little bad that could happen. He would be away from the play, and nobody would hit him. If he was taking a reverse then he could get hurt, but the chance would be no greater than on a normal QB run. I really doubt he was just in there to block.
If there's no risk of getting hurt as a fake reverse decoy, it wasn't a very good fake.
I wouldn't have been livid. Dennis Dixon tore his ACL several years ago (when he was on pace to win the Heisman and a national championship). What was he doing? Dropping back to pass.
People get hurt in the game of football.
Except you don't risk your QB, who the entire offense depends upon, for a chance at a long kick return. If he gets hurt operating as a QB, so be it, but it's not necessary to put him in this position.
Stanton was a regular on kick coverage - MSU actually expected him to make tackles when he was out there.
I'm pretty sure Denard was out there as a decoy - a bit of gamesmanship to mess with their kicker. I don't think we seriously expected him to do a lot of blocking.
Yeah, but when you're playing the dirtiest team in the conference, why take the risk of Denard getting hit by a Sparty running full speed, whose only purpose is to take #16's head off?
a good point too. I wonder if Hoke will answer this mystery.
But being out there for a kick return is more dangerous than not being out there for a kick return... pretty sure that was the point.
Being out there for offense is more dangerous than not being out there for offense, too.
Maybe we should just wrap him in bubble wrap and then tape him to the bench. I bet he'd be just fine there.
Have you seen how often players run into the bench area during plays? We should keep him in the locker room.
Do you know how slippery shower floors can be? Put him in bubble wrap in a well-padded room.
I think people are overreacting. I know how important Denard is. But while a ship in the harbor is safe, that's not what ships are built for.
So if I understand your analogy right, we must find a ship in a harbor to stash Denard?
What if MSU schedules a game on the ship as some sort of publicity stunt?
It's just State. Where's the threat?
"while a ship in the harbor is safe" -- Not withstanding 12/7/1941.
It's a quote from the 1920's.
Last time I checked, DR was pretty crucial to our offensive game plan, but not our kick return game.
this is true. Maybe a decoy.
My point being that Magnus's point is only valid if Denard is equally important to both our kick return performance and our offensive performance, which is clearly not the case... so why risk the majority of our offensive game plan by putting him out there on special teams? Think Blake Countess, but x 10.
depends if a fake reverse results in a TD or large gain. I see both sides.
Last time I checked, we won yesterday's game on the strength of special teams and defense.
altogether due to the disproportionate number of injuries that occur on the play.
I bet Blake Countess would disagree with this statement, as I do.
Oh, that's right - I forgot. Guys can't get injured on defense. Just ask Raymon Taylor.
Special teams plays a massively important role in a game. Especially in a game with 2 great defenses, gunners have a big role in determining field position
It's not more dangerous? The kicking team has 50 yards to wind up and wreck people. They are all but canceling the kickoff because it breaks people into pieces.
They're not winding up for 50 yards to hit a guy on reverse fake. They're winding up for 50 yards to hit returners and blockers.
Read my entire post.
If the return team had any way of knowing that he wouldn't get the ball on the reverse, there would be no point in running it. Point being, just because he doesn't get the ball, doesn't mean we won't get hit
I have never seen a guy fake a reverse on a kick return and get crushed by a coverage guy. It doesn't happen. Nobody expects the 11 kickoff guys to run toward Denard. The reverse is a play designed to make people hesitate and get out of their lanes.
Look, if everyone's going to assume that Denard was going to get crushed even if he was just faking a reverse, then we're not going to get anywhere. You can go on being silly and believing things that are untrue.
I'm telling you, it doesn't happen. If it does, it's such a small percentage of the time that he probably has the same likelihood of getting struck by lightning.
Yeah, but its State.
They could just as easily take a shot at him on offense as they can on special teams. Like I said, let's just wrap him in bubble wrap and keep him on the sideline to prevent him from getting a boo-boo...
The risk on that squad is higher; no one who has ever played on the "suicide squad" would dispute this.
Just one more thing for opposing teams to worry.
Hoke would find out how fast fans can turn.
Even though he was the backup QB, Drew Stanton sustained a serious knee injury while playing on ST in the 2003 Alamo Bowl against Nebraska, and had to undergo reconstructive knee surgery. There has been plenty of LOL around here over the years about John L. Smith's decision to play Stanton on ST, and deservedly so.
You could make the argument that the danger of Denard suffering an injury returning a kick isn't any greater than running the ball from scrimmage, but one difference is that if the kick goes to another return guy and Denard is running upfield looking to throw a block, it's extremely easy to get blindsided by a gunner looking to lay a big hit on him.
Hoke would find out how fast fans can turn.
And you know what Hoke would say? "While it's very unfortunate how the play turned out, we are going to do our best as coaches to try to win every game." He's not so thin-skinned as to be fazed by a little criticism.
You guys kidding me? Remember how everyone blew their stack when they realized Countess was lost for the season on punt return converage vs Bama? What if that happened to Denard
When you have guys like Norfleet, Dileo and Gallon to handle stuff like that.
None of those guys induce the kind of attention/fear that Denard Robinson does.
he made his presence known.
I think it would make sense if you put Denard on kick return at the end of a game or half when you needed to work some magic to get back in a game... but I can't think of a reason why you do that when they did.
He was also on punt coverage in the 3rd quarter
To me, the risk vs reward is bad on this decision. What are you going to gain from him being out there? Now what can you lose if he gets hurt?
That argument doesn't hold during his normal particpation in the game, since being a running QB is 'what he does'. Participating in the suicide / kamikazee jungle that is special teams is just too risky.
someone asks Hoke this question.
I'd be one of the first in line at Ann Arbor Torch & Pitchfork for the angry mob to storm the coaches' homes. And I'm sure I wouldn't be alone. Bottom line, we have enough good kick returners back there that we don't need to risk this with Denard.
Calm the fuck down!
We rammed Denard into the interior of State's defensive line probably 15 times, but putting him on ONE kick return (for which he was probably a decoy) is somehow witchcraft?
And i know some of you are saying, "well, he's our best offensive option, so you have to use him." But if that's the case, why would we leave him on the sideline for a situation in which the coaches think he can help? I get that Denard is important. But leaving any arrows in the quiver in a game like that is stupid.
this year about their thoughts on the new kickoff rules. I was expecting an answer from them along the lines of "well, this is football and they're turning into a pansy game". Instead, they said in agreement that kickoffs are "the most dangerous play in football" where guys accelerate at incredible speeds at each other and where the risk of injury is great.
They were all for the rule changes, so I went to the next logical step and asked if they should just eliminate kickoffs and they said that would be fine with them. I argued that football was dangerous and perhaps more harmful at the line of scrimmage when it comes to CTE, but they said that kickoffs weren't integral to the game and the risk of injury outweighed any benefit it added.
Then again both Woodson and Howard returned kicks and were fine...
If Denard were to get injured (fingers crossed) on a typical offense play...... Well, that is football. But on special teams? That's just poor decision making. I remember Tyrone Wheatley being injured on punt return. Hurt his shoulder & wasn't the same the rest of the year.
I remember when Charles Woodson got hurt on punt return. Oh wait - no, I don't. I also remember Desmond Howard's career ending on a punt return. Oh wait - no, I don't remember that, either.
Denard wasn't set to be a return man. He was in a position to block. Same as Wheatley. I concede if he were to return, could add a different look. But don't ask him to do something he isn't accustomed or built to do.
If you really think they sent Denard out there to block for Norfleet, then...well...you're wrong. There's nothing else I can say.
There was exactly zero chance Denard was going to throw a block. The only two possibilities were that Denard would (a) fake the reverse, which poses as much risk as running out to the mailbox, or (b) he actually takes a reverse, which poses about as much risk as an average running play*
*I know kickoff returns are more dangerous than regular plays, but people aren't gunning like 50-yard missiles toward the reverse guy, and the forced change of direction tends to eliminate the dangerous momentum.
No, I will hazzard there is zero chance Denard was asked to block. That said, Denard for better or worse has not shied away from physical play when he doesn't have the ball...
Seems to me that regularly having Denard on kick returns would be too risky, but I've thought for awhile that we should try having him out there in an emergency situation. Like, say for ND's last kickoff at the UTL game: down 3, 30 seconds to play, we need to make things happen FAST. That kick, of course, was a touchback (not a bad outcome for us, IMO - 20 yards, no time off the clock), but if it had been in play in that type of situation I think it'd be worth the risk to have our fastest, best open field runner out there.
if they do it again in the next game. Then if there is a return, we will know.
I have no problem with this and actually like it. Something else for coaches to worry about and if he's going to get hurt the probability is much more likely on offense like Magnus and others have said here. We complain when we don't utilize him enough and then complain when we do something else to get him involved. Make up your minds people! Also the people bitching about Countess getting hurt on ST need to watch more football. Starters are on ST all over college football AND in the NFL. I'm a Bears fan and starters play ST here every year and it is one of the reasons that it is always a strength of the Bears. You play to win the game, if injuries happen they happen. It's football.
Nice catch I didn't see this during the game. personally I'd like to see him back there sometimes. Maybe not every kick off but when we need something to get us going I think he could definetely help us out back there
I dunno how my drunk ass noticed AND took a pic, but hey Michigan Difference I guess
I'd like him to have one or two big returns to sit in his portfolio for the draft and possibly a catch or two at slot. I don't think they would show materially different skills, but I could see that direct demonstration helping some on the fence drafting staff at the next level.
couldn't have missed it unless they were in the bathroom, because the announcers and cameraman explicitly pointed it out for all to see. I'd imagine at the game it'd be easy to miss though.
my prior post was downvoted for trolling. Can someone please explain what I said or did that earned that downvote? I dont get the board's voting sometimes. If I'm doing something wrong I'd like to know what so I don't get downvotes, I'm trying to be the best contributor I can be, so help would be appreciated.
Looking at "Users by MGoPoints", there are about 3,300 users able to moderate any given post; this leads to some ridiculous moderating at times. There was nothing wrong with your post there, IMO, and I upvoted it back to one.
Just a heads up, and I doubt it will happen with what you asked here, but a lot of people will neg posts complaining or even asking about negs (not saying your question was neg-worthy or that you complained, just trying to get some info out there).
I appreciate you letting me know. Ironically, when I came on here this morning, your post had also been downvoted to 0-trolling as well. I have since voted you back up to 1 as well.
You guys act as if teams would actually kick off to Denard Robinson.
It appears that he was playing up so it would be a deterrent to kicking short to avoid Norfleet.
Why wouldn't you want to kick to the starting quarterback? It gives you a huge opportunity to knock him out of the game.
Even if they did kick it to him, if Denard were out there to fake a reverse, he probably would have caught the ball and got it to the returner somehow. Either way, the ball was likely going to whomever they wanted to return it (likely Norfleet).
no one else saw this and just thought, "Oh-- what a good way to make sure MSU just boots it and doesn't try anything tricky like a suprise onsides?" Of course, I am not sure if he was actually in position for that, but I though it was as simple as that. I didn't put too much thought into it though.
Actually Dennis Dixon got hurt in spaces on a read option trying to make a cut. http://m.youtube.com/index?&desktop_uri=%2F#/watch?v=PzpOEdUdoM4
But Denard on kick return doesn't brother me one bit. If the coaching stuff feels comfortable with I'm fine
Some of you need to really grow a pair and stop sounding like whining babies with all that "what if."
No one was asking Denard to start returning kicks...if he can help out by acting as a decoy, so be it. It's football. Charles Woodson was our BEST player and he returned kicks...he also played offense.
Denard wasn't returning anything, some of you acting like if he pulled a hammy running in a half circle and taking a fake handoff from Norfleet that "WolverineNation" would've gone crazy. But him running into 6'6 300 lb DTs all game is perfectly fine.
Sack up. Our coaches know what they're doing and they're not going to put our quarterback in danger or harms way.
-didn't the best running back for MSU return the opening kickoff? Just sayin...
I was thinking that it had to be a musical city miracle type of play. In a game of such familiarity, I would have thought that UM would have been more creative in playcalling, but I didn't see much of that. Maybe this was their one shot at "mixing it up" for a lack of a better term with the hope it was a returnable kick.
Or maybe they were crazy enough to let Denard run the ball on special teams looking for a big play. If so, I question the point of Norfleet returning kicks then.