October 21st, 2012 at 3:34 PM ^
it is,
The risk on that squad is higher; no one who has ever played on the "suicide squad" would dispute this.
October 21st, 2012 at 1:35 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 1:47 PM ^
good coaching.
October 21st, 2012 at 1:39 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 4:43 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 1:39 PM ^
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
October 21st, 2012 at 1:49 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 2:14 PM ^
None of those guys induce the kind of attention/fear that Denard Robinson does.
October 21st, 2012 at 2:37 PM ^
he made his presence known.
October 21st, 2012 at 1:55 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 2:38 PM ^
opponent perhaps?
October 21st, 2012 at 1:56 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 1:59 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 2:39 PM ^
someone asks Hoke this question.
October 21st, 2012 at 2:02 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 2:12 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 2:40 PM ^
still excited.
October 21st, 2012 at 2:20 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 2:59 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 2:38 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 2:57 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 3:07 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 3:09 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 3:20 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 9:12 PM ^
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...
October 21st, 2012 at 2:43 PM ^
...based on hypotheticals and speculations. Especially after a great win.
October 21st, 2012 at 2:55 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 2:58 PM ^
if they do it again in the next game. Then if there is a return, we will know.
October 21st, 2012 at 3:01 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 3:13 PM ^
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
October 21st, 2012 at 3:39 PM ^
I dunno how my drunk ass noticed AND took a pic, but hey Michigan Difference I guess
October 21st, 2012 at 9:15 PM ^
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.
October 22nd, 2012 at 12:37 PM ^
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.
October 22nd, 2012 at 8:06 PM ^
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.
October 22nd, 2012 at 8:14 PM ^
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).
October 23rd, 2012 at 8:57 AM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 3:19 PM ^
You guys act as if teams would actually kick off to Denard Robinson.
October 21st, 2012 at 3:41 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 4:11 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 4:15 PM ^
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).
October 21st, 2012 at 4:49 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 6:44 PM ^
October 21st, 2012 at 8:18 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 10:36 PM ^
-didn't the best running back for MSU return the opening kickoff? Just sayin...
October 21st, 2012 at 8:35 PM ^
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.
October 21st, 2012 at 8:38 PM ^
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.